Clare is a professional misconduct and criminal law executive based in Thompsons' Manchester office which covers the entire north west area from south Cumbria to north Wales.
Clare undertakes professional misconduct work for members of the Royal College of Midwives, British Dietetic Association, Chartered Society of Physiotherapists and UNISON. She has successfully represented members in both interim order hearings as well as full hearings before the Nursing and Midwifery Council and the Health and Care Professions Council.
In terms of criminal law, Clare represents clients who are required to attend police stations to be interviewed by the police, NHS Counter Fraud investigators and the Independent Police Complaints Commission. She prepares cases from the police station investigation through to trial at the Crown Court. She has a large case load of mainly Crown Court cases involving serious sexual offences, complex fraud, serious assaults and gross negligence manslaughter.
She is the first Thompsons employee to be awarded a bursary from the Thompsons Foundation to undertake her training contract which she completes in 2017.
Clare's Case Experience
R v Jarratt (2016)
A school secretary in North Wales was accused of stealing money from the school. After Clare uncovered evidence that undermined the Criminal Prosecution Service’s (CPS) case, her client was acquitted.
R v Prince (2016)
Clare represented a paramedic who was accused of assaulting a police officer in the execution of his duty. Clare’s client was acquitted after the CPS offered no evidence and is currently seeking advice in respect of a claim for wrongful arrest.
R v Evans & Roberts (2016)
A teacher and teaching assistant were accused of the neglect of a number of pupils. The CPS offered no evidence at an early stage in the case and after Clare lodged applications to dismiss the charges, her clients were acquitted.
R v Swarbrick (2014)
A prison officer was accused of not safeguarding a prisoner who later committed suicide. Defence Counsel made a successful application part way through the trial that there was no case to answer on the basis that the CPS could not prove their case. Her client was acquitted.