Sian has a mixed practice of criminal, professional discipline and extradition work. Sian accepts instructions across all aspects of criminal work, both prosecuting and defending. She is also instructed in the Courts Martial.

Sian has developed an extradition practice, having spent 12 months on secondment to the CPS Extradition Unit where she appeared regularly before Westminster Magistrates’ Court representing a variety of Judicial Authorities at Extradition Hearings, and acting as reviewing lawyer for a substantial caseload of Part 1 cases. Having returned to the bar, she now accepts both prosecution and defence instructions.

Sian holds the position of Grade 2 panel advocate in General Crime.

In addition, Sian has experience representing registrants before a variety of regulators and prisoners in parole hearings, including representing the Claimant in a successful Judicial Review of the Parole Board of England and Wales.

Sian also has a keen interest in employment law, stemming from both her criminal and regulatory experience, and in family law, in particular where this intersects with criminal issues and hopes to incorporate cases of this kind into her developing practice.

Prior to coming to the bar, Sian studied History and Politics at the University of Nottingham before converting to law. She has received scholarships for both the GDL and BPTC from Inner Temple, the University of Sussex and an Advocacy scholarship from BPP.

Notable cases

• R (on the application of Samuel) v Parole Board for England and Wales  [2020] EWHC 42 Admin. – Acting for the Claimant, successful Judicial Review of the Parole Board’s Decision not to release to open conditions after failing to consider the correct legal test.
• R v K (Chelmsford Crown Court) – Represented an 18-year-old who pleaded guilty to Violent Disorder and persuaded the court to impose a suspended sentence.
• CPS v C (Wellingborough Magistrates’ Court) – Secured an acquittal in an assault PC case for a client who was a serving prisoner in which five prison officers gave evidence against him at trial.
• CPS v D (Willesden Magistrates’ Court) – Achieved a sentence of a fine for a client who was convicted after trial for ABH, persuading the judge to depart from the recommendation of probation by presenting extensive mitigation.
• Parole Board v W – Secured release for recalled IPP prisoner serving for sexual activity with a child. The client had previously been recalled and served an additional 5 years over tariff.
• NMC v W – Successfully argued against registrant’s current impairment due to a past health condition and ensured substantive conditions of practice order lapsed upon expiry.