Bethany Baggaley

Barrister

Bethany is a specialist defence advocate who is regularly instructed as sole counsel and as a led junior. She acts across a range of serious cases including drugs (supply and importation), offences involving serious violence both in individual and group offending, and those concerning weapons including firearms. A careful approach to case preparation, together with a clear and focused manner on her feet make her an effective advocate before both judge and jury.

Not only is Bethany an effective trial advocate, her close attention to cases from the earliest stage of instruction have seen results at the pre-trial stage including abuse of process arguments and applications to dismiss for which she was specifically instructed. Bethany has obtained leave to appear and had success in the Court of Appeal. She undertakes both publicly and privately funded work cross the criminal spectrum.

Recognised for her dedicated client care, Bethany is adept at representing vulnerable individuals including children and young people, those with mental disorders and learning disabilities, and those who have been victims of violence and modern slavery. She is experienced in cases where clients and witnesses require significant adaptations to the court process.

Before joining Chambers Bethany worked for a public law firm bringing judicial reviews on behalf of clients in homeless and community care matters. She has considerable experience advising in public law matters, working with children and young people as well as disabled clients with complex medical needs. Bethany spent several years working for a hospital-based youth violence charity and is experienced in serious youth violence and so-called ‘gang violence’ issues.

Qualifications and Awards

LLB Law, University of Bristol (2018)
BPTC LLM, The University of Law, London (2019)
Inner Temple Exhibition Award (2018)
Inner Temple Duke of Edinburgh Award (2018)
Lamb Building Prize for Judicial Review (2019)

Memberships

The Honourable Society of Inner Temple
Criminal Bar Association
Women in Criminal Law

R v JJ: Led junior for first defendant alleged to have run an online Premiership football ticket touting operation targeting, in particular, Liverpool Football Club reaching inside the ticket officer.
R v MS: Led junior in a case where all three defendants were said to have attacked one another. The defendant was accused of GBH with intent (stabbing) against a co-defendant, who was in turn charged with the attempted murder of the defendant. The prosecution offered no evidence in the course of trial.
R v CC: Led junior in a multi-handed case in which the defendant charged with multiple counts of firearms and drug possession and trafficking. Acquitted of all counts.
R v PT: Defendant accused of multiple counts of domestic assault over significant period including false imprisonment. Acquitted of all counts.
R v CF: Represented female defendant with significant and long-standing mental health difficulties accused of causing GBH with intent. The defendant was accused of stabbing the complainant’s head whilst they were sleeping with scissors. Acquitted after trial.
R v AA: Defendant charged with supply of a kilogram block of cocaine. Defendant had two previous convictions for supply of class A. Acquitted after trial.
R v PS: Defendant charged with aggravated burglary, coercive and controlling behaviour, ABH and threats to kill. Acquitted on all counts after trial.
R v MC: Represented defendant with significant mental health difficulties who faced proceedings for stalking Harry Styles. Case attracted significant media attention: Press Link.
R v D: Represented a child in the Youth Court accused of conducting a knife point robbery in conjunction with adults, who faced proceedings in the Crown Court. The prosecution offered no evidence in the course of trial following a submission of no case to answer.
R v SP: Defendant accused of assault in the context of an ongoing neighbour dispute. This case had a long history in which the CPS charged and withdrew charges multiple times. This was stayed as an abuse of process on an application by the defence.
R v VT: Represented defendant who pleaded guilty to stalking her surgeon, this case attracted significant media attention: Press Link.
R v KC: Defendant faced trial on a two-count indictment of burglary and assault. A plea to assault was advanced and accepted with the defendant sentenced to a fine on the day of trial.
R v R: Represented a defendant charged with robbery in a multi-handed case. The defendant had neurodevelopmental difficulties making him particularly vulnerable. Following representations at court on the day of trial the prosecution offered no evidence.