Clare has expertise in cases concerning financial crime. This is set out under the Fraud and Financial Regulation Section.

Clare is also a known specialist in prosecuting and defending in cases concerning sexual allegations. As Defence Counsel, Clare increasingly represents Defendants on a privately instructed basis, concerning sexual allegations and where those accused are of good character.

Clare was instructed to defend in one of the first cases of its kind under the provisions of Section 28 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, concerning the pre-recorded cross-examination of the child witness at Kingston Crown Court. Clare is known for her ability to work closely with intermediaries, for her analysis of unused material and third party material and her ability to cross-examine the young and complainants in cases of this nature.

Clare is well versed in dealing with applications in relation to previous sexual history, made and responded to under the provisions of Section 41 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence ACT 1999. Clare keeps up to date with the law and procedure in this area by attending specialist courses.

Clare is a member of the Crown Prosecution Service specialist Rape list and is experienced in providing pre-charge advice on cases of a sexual nature including those that involve historic allegations.

Clare has also developed a specialism in prosecuting and defending lengthy and complex heavyweight criminal cases. Clare is known for her meticulous preparation and analysis. This has included cases concerning large-scale drug trafficking cases involving international elements. Clare has been instructed by the National Crime Agency concerning proceedings under Section 59 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 surrounding the issues of defective warrants.

Clare is a member of the Crown Prosecution Service Serious Crime Group and Terrorist Panel.

Some notable cases include –

R v R and another (2018) – Defence Counsel instructed to represent the first Defendant in a trial concerning allegations of historic familial sexual abuse dating back nearly twenty five years. The complainant was the niece of the Defendant and sister of the Co-Defendant. The Prosecution called evidence from other family members and friends of the complainant. The Defendant was unanimously acquitted by the jury of the allegations.

R v N (2017) – Defence Counsel instructed on a privately instructed basis, in one of the first cases concerning an allegation of Coercive and Controlling Behaviour. The Prosecution alleged that the Defendant had withheld food from his former partner, prevented her from contact with friends and controlled her finances. A not guilty verdict was entered following a successful submission of no case to answer made on behalf of the Defendant.

R v W (2016 – 2017) – Counsel instructed on a privately instructed basis to represent the Defendant at trial at the Central Criminal Court, concerning allegations of the sexual assault of a six-year-old child allegedly committed in the context of a child-minding business. Clare argued that evidence of the Achieving Best Evidence interviews with the child ought to be excluded in light of breaches of the rules in the conduct of the interviews, along with evidence adduced by way of leading questions from other Prosecution witnesses. The Court acceded to the submissions and excluded the evidence. The Prosecution offered no evidence and a not guilty verdict was entered.

R v LMF (2015 – 2017) – Counsel instructed to defend a police officer indicted with offences of assault by penetration, sexual assault and voyeurism committed after meeting the complainant through an online dating website. The case involved detailed but approved cross-examination of the complainant, a detailed analysis of disclosure and expert evidence on toxicology, as well as an application made under the provisions of Section 41 YJECA 1999.

R v S (2015 – 2016) – Counsel instructed to represent the defendant indicted with multiple allegations of rape, sexual assault and child cruelty against his natural daughter. The offences were alleged to have taken place when his daughter was between the ages of five and fourteen. The Prosecution relied on the expert opinion of a Consultant Paediatrician who examined the complainant after the complaint was made but before the ABE interview. Clare conducted a detailed and careful analysis of the Consultant’s report and evidence along with a detailed cross-examination about the medical procedure conducted by the expert and her opinion. The Defendant was acquitted of all allegations.

R v C (2014) – Counsel instructed on a privately instructed basis to defend in a case as part of the Section 28 Y.J.C.E.A 1999 pilot scheme, involving the pre-recorded cross-examination of a child witness in advance of the trial. The Defendant was acquitted by the jury of all nine counts on the Indictment that concerned allegations of the sexual abuse of the Defendant’s 9-year-old son, over the course of 4 years.

R v B (2014) – Counsel instructed to defend in a case concerning the oral and vaginal rape of the complainant, a sex worker who had attended the property at the request of the Defendant. The case also concerned an allegation of false imprisonment of the complainant where the Defendant locked the complainant in the room and threatened her with a knife.

R v R and others (2014) – Junior Counsel led by Queen’s Counsel instructed to defend in a seven-handed trial which included an allegation of murder and conspiracy to burgle. The Defendant was acquitted of murder, manslaughter and perverting the course of justice.

R v A (2013) – Counsel instructed on a privately instructed basis to defend allegations of historical and recent sexual abuse of the Defendant’s stepdaughter and daughter. The case involved the cross-examination of a child witness, which was described by the trial Judge as an exemplary example of cross-examination of a child of that age. The Defendant was acquitted.

R v N and others (2012) – Counsel instructed alone to prosecute eight defendants in a case concerning allegations of Conspiracy to Supply crack cocaine and diamorphine over a number of months, involving complex and detailed surveillance evidence.

R v N and others (2011 – 2012) – Defence Counsel instructed alone up to trial and then led, representing the first Defendant of three in a complex case concerning allegations of Conspiracy to Assist Unlawful Immigration and as originally alleged, multi-million pound money laundering. This case arose from the largest U.K.B.A and joint Police operation in 2010. Not guilty verdicts were entered on all counts after no evidence was offered, following successful applications made on behalf of the first Defendant to resist the admission of hearsay and to exclude evidence.

R v B and others (2010) – Junior Defence Counsel instructed in the multi-handed Heathrow Airport Menzies case.

R v H (2010) – Prosecution Counsel in a trial concerning multiple allegations of sexual assault of a child by an after-school care worker of a pupil in his care.

R v M (2009) – Junior Defence Counsel to Queen’s Counsel instructed in a trial concerning multiple offences of historic sexual abuse of the Defendant’s step-daughter between twenty-five and fourteen years prior to the allegation.

R v N (2009) – Junior Defence Counsel to Queen’s Counsel instructed in a complex, thirty count, multi-complainant trial involving historic allegations of familial rape and sexual abuse over a period of forty years.