Natasha has experience of advocacy in other jurisdictions, having completed pupillage training in Trinidad and Tobago, West Indies. In what is a fused profession, she has a keen awareness of the needs of her professional clients. Overall her experience ensures versatility, attention to detail and high quality work in all aspects of her practice.
Pursuant to her longstanding interest in civil liberties Natasha has undertaken a variety of work within human rights organisations including an internship at the Public Interest Litigation Clinic, Kansas City, Missouri to assist with the representation of those on death row. She has also drafted submissions for the Privy Council (led junior).
R v H  EWCA Crim 3281 – Court of Appeal. Positive direction to the jury is required when discrepancy arises between an unsigned defence case statement and oral evidence. “In this case whilst we applaud the persistence [of] which Miss Sammy … and although we had considerable doubts as to whether she was right at the outset of this appeal, her persistence has persuaded us that she was.” Lord Justice Moses, paragraph 11 of judgement.
R v UO (2013) – Seven count indictment alleging child abuse spanning 2 years. Leave to appeal against sentence granted on the basis that the sentencing judge had failed to give effect to the principle of totality when he sentenced the defendant to 56 months (8 months for each of the 7 offences).
R v N– This defendant only acquitted of conspiracy to rob lone females in Mayfair, London of rolex watches and chanel handbags whereby females were dragged to the ground and choked. Cell site expert and intermediary. Multi handed case.
R v S – Defendant acquitted of robbery (submission of no case to answer) and aggravated vehicle taking (unanimous acquittal by jury).
R v C – Grievous bodily harm with intent arising from a large scale fight outside of nightclub involving defendant allegedly stamping on and kicking at victims head repeatedly.
R v M – Burglary arising from London Riots 2012. Case dependant on cell site evidence. Successful submission of no case to answer.
R v W – Defendant acquitted of obstructing a police officer while exercising powers under section 23 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.
R v B – Multiple theft from shop offences. Successfully argued at trial that the defendant was not guilty by reason of insanity. Involved expert evidence from consultant psychiatrist.
R v S – Possession of false identity document with intent.
R v H – Domestic sexual assault. Concurrent Children Act family proceedings and third party disclosure issues. Drafted skeleton arguments for the civil courts to obtain disclosure of concurrent Family Court proceedings on the basis of material inconsistencies made by the complainant in witness statements filed in the family proceedings compared to the criminal proceedings. Prosecution offered no evidence following abuse of process argument.
Fraud and Financial Regulation
DWP v D – Individual accused of making numerous applications for crisis loans via telephone application system using multiple false identities. Involved voice recognition expert.
R v J – Forgery of medical prescription forms
R v M – Multi handed conspiracy to defraud. Allegation concerned defendant setting up bogus company and defrauding customers by altering cheques received from £8 to £80. Over ninety victims identified.
R v W (Central Criminal Court) – Make/supply an article for use in fraud. Represented Santander Bank Employee who had supplied of customer bank details – http://www.courtnewsuk.co.uk/?news_id=31044
International Civil Liberties
The State of Trinidad and Tobago v RT – drafted grounds of appeal for the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
Proceeds of Crime
R v M – Confiscation proceedings instituted by the crown to recover £55,000 arising from conspiracy to defraud. Crown accepted skeleton argument prepared and submissions made in relation to apportionment between co-defendants.