Naomi is an intelligent and persuasive advocate who commands the confidence of courts, and clients, at a level way beyond her year of call. Fearless in her commitment to her clients’ interests, Naomi is a formidable presence in the courtroom. Unafraid of pushing back or making bold submissions, her advocacy has already led to outstanding results in the Crown Court, earning her recognition from several judges. She is quickly establishing herself as being a persuasive mitigator.

Prior to her call to the Bar, Naomi was a Crown Court Clerk in Manchester, providing her with a unique insight into court operations and exposure to a great number of advocacy styles. This experience, combined with the respect she has cultivated within the legal community, allows her to effectively leverage this knowledge for her clients’ benefit. Naomi comes to the Bar after an extensive fifteen-year career in various sectors—including hospitality, recruitment, insurance, and a leading national solicitor’s firm— which has enriched her understanding of diverse client backgrounds. Her voluntary work with homeless charities and Support Through Court further enhances her skills and commitment to justice.

Extremely client-friendly, Naomi strikes a balance between empathy and straightforward, robust advice. Proudly state-educated and well-versed in mental health and cognitive disorders, she connects deeply with her clients, enabling her to be an effective mouthpiece for them. Down to earth in conference yet eloquent in court, she fosters trust and makes clients feel heard.

As an incisive tactician, Naomi demonstrates legal creativity, enabling her to navigate complex issues and identify often overlooked resolutions. In her defence work, her attention to detail and commitment to disclosure enables her to achieve extremely favourable results for clients. She has handled a broad spectrum of criminal cases in both crown and magistrates’ courts, showcasing her ability to manage serious and complex matters, including multi-handed fraud, robbery, and large-scale drug conspiracies.

Naomi has a particular interest in drug and youth offences, achieving notable success in securing suspended sentences for those convicted of drug offences. She has completed specialised youth justice training and aims to build upon her academic background in drill music, gang membership, and their use in criminal proceedings.

In addition to her criminal practice, Naomi frequently undertakes private motoring cases in the Magistrates’ Courts and has represented the Information Commissioner’s Office, local councils, the Insolvency Service, and the National Probation Service. Naomi has gained wide-ranging experience across Chambers’ practice areas and invites instructions in all core specialisms.

Naomi completed pupillage in September 2024 under the expert supervision of Rebecca Filletti.

Outside of her legal work, Naomi enjoys outdoor pursuits in the Peak District, following Manchester United, and playing chess.

Notable Cases:

Drug Offences

• R v ED (2025) – Manchester Crown Court: Represented an up-and-coming Manchester rapper at sentence for drug offences. Naomi utilised the statistics on “Stop and Search” from the Home Office briefing paper of 2020 to advance that his experience as young black man did constitute difficult personal circumstances, and that the effect of his interactions with police had a profound effect upon him and led to a negative view of police and authority. This mitigation was accepted by the Judge and resulted in a sentence of 28 months’ imprisonment.
• R v GR (2025) – Manchester Crown Court: Secured a 12-month suspended sentence for a vulnerable client who was arrested at Manchester Airport for importing over 42kg of cannabis from Thailand.
• R v BAB (2024) – Manchester Crown Court: Secured a suspended sentence for a teenager arrested at Manchester Airport for importing over 25kg of cannabis from Thailand. Through focused and impassioned submissions, which highlighted the racial disparity in sentences for these offences, she was able to persuade the Judge to suspend the sentence.
• R v AM (2024) – Minshull Street Crown Court: Secured a 12-month custodial sentence for a young client arrested at Manchester Airport for importing over 17kg of cannabis from Canada. Naomi’s robust submissions persuaded the judge to find that the client did not play a significant role, as argued by the Crown.
• R v LH (2024) – Bolton Crown Court: Represented a young defendant who had pleaded guilty to multiple offences of being concerned in the supply of Class A drugs, involving a drugs line. Despite the client having entered a basis of plea, which had been accepted by the Crown, at sentence the Crown sought to state that its acceptance was a mistake, and provided an algorithm on the amount of drugs the police say that the drugs line was involved in which placed the offending in a significantly more serious category on the guidelines. Naomi made robust submissions both at the sentence and the preliminary hearings resulting in a sentence of 28 months’ imprisonment, with the Judge noting in their remarks that Naomi’s submissions were the most persuasive they had heard in some time.

Violence/Dishonesty Offences

• R v Craig Cotton (2025) – Preston Crown Court: Represented a defendant at sentence for multiple offences of street robbery and dwelling house burglary. Naomi made thoughtful and targeted submissions that resulted in the Judge agreeing that the categorisation for some offences was lower and therefore had a lower starting point, albeit finding the defendant dangerous. The Defendant received a sentence of 10 years with an extended licence of 4 years. The case received national press coverage, see: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c87jll32yyvo
• R v MS (2025) – Manchester Crown Court: Represented a defendant who was charged with robbery and two dwelling burglaries against elderly and vulnerable victims. Through the instruction of a psychiatrist, Naomi was able advanced that the Defendant’s culpability was reduced on account of his mental disorders, or in the alternative was a mitigating factor. The defendant received a sentence of 5 years 3 months.
• R v Brian Sole (2024) – Durham Crown Court: Represented a defendant, a serving prisoner on an extended sentence, who was charged with a s.18 offence where he attacked another prisoner with a makeshift knife, in a Category A prison in which there were fitness to plead concerns. At sentence Naomi drafted a written sentencing note that involved a thorough analysis of the facts and relevant case law, to dispute the Crown’s categorisation of the offence. Through her written and oral submissions, Naomi persuaded both the Prosecution and the Court that whilst the victim received a significant injury to his throat requiring 160 stitches it was not a harm Category 1 case, and as such the starting point was vastly reduced. The Defendant received a total sentence of 6 years extended with an extended licence of 1 year.

Disclosure

• R v AW (2025) – Manchester Crown Court: Represented a defendant at trial where through written and oral submissions to the court, persuaded the Court that the Crown had fundamentally failed in their disclosure obligations. Through a careful analysis of the evidence, both served and unused, Naomi was able to apply pressure by highlighting the weaknesses of the Crown’s case, resulting in a plea to a lesser offence on the second day of the trial being accepted. The Defendant was released that day as time served.
• R v LS (2024) – Minshull Street Crown Court: Represented a defendant at trial where through an intensive review of disclosure, Naomi was able to get the Crown to not proceed with the substantive and most serious counts on the indictments. Through written submissions to the court, Naomi was able to highlight how on the Crown’s evidence several of the more serious charges were not made out, which resulted in the Crown accepting favourable pleas. The defendant received a suspended sentence order.

Indecent Images Offences

• R v PW (2024) – Bolton Crown Court: Through a comprehensive review of expert forensic reports, Naomi successfully contended that despite the presence of moving Category A images, a downward adjustment to Category C was warranted, as it more accurately reflected the defendant’s overall behaviour. She also successfully argued for a reduction of culpability due to the defendant’s mental health issues.

Airplane Offences

• R v Laura Butterworth and Another (2024) – Manchester Crown Court: Secured a community order for a client convicted of entering an aircraft when drunk, which enabled the client to continue the recruitment process with the Fire Service. The case received national press coverage, see: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/drunk-twins-grounded-manchester-flight-33736926

The Parole Board

• DB v The Parole Board (2024): Secured a direction for the release of an IPP prisoner significantly over tariff, who had previously absconded. By meticulously reviewing a 1,000-page dossier and effectively cross-examining expert witnesses, Naomi argued that the prisoner’s recent behavioural decline stemmed from a static personality disorder, not indicative of an increase in risk.
• GC v The Parole Board (2024): Secured a direction for the release of an IPP prisoner significantly over tariff who had completed no risk reduction work in custody. The case was complex and involved Court of Protection principles due to the prisoner’s mixed dementia diagnosis, meaning that he lacked capacity and required a Litigation Friend.

Education:

• 2022, University of Law, Manchester – Bar Practice Course, Very Competent, with an overall average of 85%, achieving ‘Outstanding’ in six out of eight modules, including all advocacy and litigation modules.
• 2017, University of Liverpool – LLB Law with Honours, First Class. Winner of two internal competitions and participated in the university’s legal advice clinic.

Awards:

• 2021, Queen Mother Scholarship, Middle Temple – Awarded the second-highest scholarship on first application.

Memberships:

The Northern Circuit.

The Honourable Society of the Middle Temple.

Women in Criminal Law.