3PB's Thomas Evans in the Court of Appeal today in the case of R v Thomson
22nd June 2018
Thomas Evans successfully appealed Mr Thomson's 18-month sentence for possession of a Samurai sword in a public place. The Court of Appeal found that the sentence imposed had been "manifestly excessive" and substituted a sentence of 12 months' imprisonment. Mr Justice Goss described Mr Evans' submissions as "cogent and economical".
Related News
-
Tom Horder, joint head of 3PB’s crime and regulatory crime team, represented VFS (Southampton) Limited, a manufacturer of custom works vehicles in their successful appeal against sentence. At first instance the company was fined £600,000 after entering an early guilty plea to an offence under s.2 of HSWA 1974. The prosecution arose from a 2018 incident on their assembly line. Instructed by Cliff Morris of law firm Paris Smith, Tom (pictured here) argued on appeal...
Continue reading -
As part of her degree, Sophie Rogers (pictured here) - a third-year LLB Law student at the University of Winchester - has just finished a six-month placement with 3PB's Crime and Regulatory Crime team in their Winchester office. This is the first such placement run by 3PB (3 Paper Buildings) and may well be one of the very first such initiatives run by a barristers chambers in the UK. Jodie Mittell KC, who co-heads 3PB's...
Continue reading -
3PB Barristers’ specialist criminal law barristers, Tom Evans and Holly Fagan, have secured acquittals for their clients (C and D), after successful submissions of no case to answer. On a summer’s evening in 2022, four young people were in a car driving around Ryde, Isle of Wight. The front seat passengers (A and B) were in possession of what looked like a semi-automatic machine gun. A and B fired ball-bearings from the gun injuring several members...
Continue reading -
3PB Barristers’ specialist criminal law barrister, Holly Fagan, has secured acquittals for her client, accused of harassing two people causing them to fear violence. Holly’s young client, A, heard that the first Complainant (C1) was spreading rumours about him and confronted her in a night club. This did not achieve anything so he tried to speak to her father (C2), who he knew, in the hope that he could help them resolve the situation. The allegations...
Continue reading
