Clare Evans

Clare Evans
Clare Evans

View LinkedIn profile

Clare is a criminal law specialist who is instructed in significant high-profile drugs, fraud, sexual offences and violence matters involving single and multiple defendants. Clare is a recognised leading junior.

Despite her years of experience, Clare has never prosecuted a trial, she has chosen only to defend.

Clare’s experience and range spans the full spectrum of criminal offences, but she has particular experience and expertise of defending clients charged with sexual allegations: these range from single allegations of rape to multiple occasion, multiple complainant historic allegations.

She is adept at cross examining young and vulnerable witnesses, and she regularly takes part in s.28 procedures. Her warmth and approachability with clients masks her steely determination to put their cases when she is cross examining witnesses, regardless of the difficult nature of the questions.

These types of cases often involve a huge amount of background information (from family, social services, schools, medical, other agencies) and she is able to quickly and effectively identify and absorb the relevant details and data. Her ability to test and challenge experts findings, whether medical or forensic, is another of her strengths.

Representing clients who have been charged with the other most serious offences (murder, attempted murder, grievous bodily harm, possession of firearms, drugs) makes up the remainder of her busy and varied work load.

Clare is a highly respected, valued and trusted advocate who will go ‘the extra mile’ for her clients, both lay and professional.


Selected Cases (Murder / Attempted Murder)

  • R v R – junior defence counsel, domestic violence - diminished responsibility accepted.
  • R v S - junior defence counsel – Boxing day attack outside a pub. Numerous witnesses, CCTV etc.
  • R v L & 4 others – junior counsel in Albanian gangland murder trial on the South coast. After a 6 weeks trial the defendant was one of 2 defendants acquitted of all charges, ringleader received 18 years imprisonment.
  • R v P and 2 others – leading defence counsel in attempted murder, prosecution accepted s.18 on the day of trial.
  • R v N – leading defence counsel in double attempted murder, client with mental health problems, undiagnosed schizophrenia, in depth knowledge of mental health disposals. 2 x s.18 pleas accepted, s.45A MHA sentence.
  • R v W – attempted murder.

Selected Cases (Violence)

  • R v K – defence counsel in a 6 handed kidnapping, not guilty verdict.
  • R v G – defence counsel in 5 handed violent disorder, not guilty verdict.
  • R v P – defence counsel in a 3 handed affray, not guilty verdict.
  • R v P and R v K & another - both s.18 charges, both allegations of “bottling” complainants in nightclubs. Both defendants acquitted.
  • R v H – allegation of armed robbery at a petrol station, the defendant was captured on the forecourt CCTV driving his distinctive works van earlier in the day with 3 others for what the prosecution alleged as being a ‘recce’ of the premises. Not guilty verdict.

Selected Cases (Sexual Offences)

  • R v N  – rape and assault by penetration. Defendant accepted consensual sexual activity with employee at the Christmas party, she claimed to have no memory of events and denied consenting. Multiple expert reports dealing with toxicology, associated intoxication figures, causation of bruising found upon the complainant. Not guilty verdicts.
  • R v B– rape.  Defendant alleged to have been messaging the complainant who said she knew the defendant. She said she had gone to his house on the night he raped her. Extensive Facebook correspondence, defendant denied writing the messages. Not guilty verdict.
  • R v W & H – defended H in a multiple complainant’s historic sexual activity trial (earliest complaint was 40 years previously), mixed verdicts, secured a conditional discharge for H.
  •  R v P – defending in historic sex trial, male and female complainants, not guilty.
  • R v W – sexual offences involving 7-year-old complainant, cross examination over the video link using intermediary. Acquitted.
  • R v B – young man accused of rape. Multiple damning messages sent by him to others. Not guilty.
  • R v R – alleged homosexual rape, acquitted. Multiple disclosure issues and added difficulty of having a schizophrenic complainant whose symptoms meant an 18 months delay to the trial commencing.
  • R v D – mentally challenged 19-year-old charged with sexual activity with a minor. Successfully applied for the assistance of an intermediary, matter dropped before trial.
  • R v B & H – 2 schoolboys charged with oral and vaginal rape of a 15-year-old girl, acquitted.

Selected Cases (Fraud, Drugs and Misc)

  • R v A – defending in a large-scale Trading Standards prosecution of second hand car dealer; considerable documentary evidence including paper trail of advertisements, auction records, vehicle information. Successfully appealed 3 years sentence down to 2 years.
  • R v N – defending in a Slough Borough Council prosecution of a care home owner regarding misuse of a vulnerable resident’s funds. Voluminous documentary evidence relating to care home (CQC) paperwork, banking evidence for withdrawals in excess of 5 years.
  • R v B & others – junior in C&E prosecution concerning over £200 million of diverted duty and VAT. This was one of a number of nationally prosecuted diversion frauds arising from the London City Bond Warehouse. Preparation for the case involved detailed consideration of over 17,000 pages of evidence. C&E offered no evidence and formal not guilty verdicts entered as abuse argument successfully revealed the participation of an undisclosed C&E ‘mole’ involved in the facilitation of the frauds.
  • R v C & 17 others – sole counsel for female facilitator in a large drug dealing ring based on the South Coast but spread as far as Brazil. Multiple evidential sources including documentary (statements, bank accounts, tenancy agreements, money transfers) and recordings both audio and visual. Defendant pleaded guilty and received 12 years. Successfully appealed this sentence, reduced to 10 years.
  • R v S (& 2 others) – defending in ‘county lines’ possession with intent to supply class A drugs allegation – not guilty.

Professional Courses

Vulnerable witnesses, Inner Temple
Excellence in Advocacy, CBA
Annual attendance at the CBA and refresher/updater courses during the year.
Annual subscription to Criminal Law Week
Public Access qualified


Keen guitarist, drummer and pianist and all-round amateur musician, hill walking, water-skiing, netball.

Call: 1995
BA (Hons) English and Classical Studies, Queen Mary College, University of London 1990
College of Law, 1994
Professional memberships:
Inner Temple
Criminal Bar Association
South Eastern Circuit Member
BSB Registration: