Matthew Claughton

We have the experience. We love showcasing our experience. Our content always try and make it educational and have authority and be trusted content. And we encourage staff to contribute content [music] because it’s good for them. It’s good for their careers. It’s good to showcase their knowledge and it benefits the firm as well. So, we work hard on that. It’s that calmness, the level of confidence and the ability to reset and go through things methodically that’s really quite important. We make sure we match the right clients with the right lawyers to deal with problems as they arrive. On today’s Legally Speaking podcast, I’m delighted to be joined by Matthew Claughton. Matthew is the managing director of Olliers Solicitors, one of the UK’s leading Criminal defence firms. Since taking full control of the business in 2018, he’s helped steer Olliers through a major period of growth, quadrupling turnover, strengthening its reputation in privately funded criminal defence, and building a firm widely recognised for its expertise in pre-charge engagement, serious crime, fraud, regulatory work, and crisis management.

He is ranked as a leading partner by the Legal 500, has been recognised as the Legal 500 Northern Powerhouse Criminal Lawyer of the Year, and is widely regarded as one of the standout names in high-stakes criminal defence.

But this conversation is more than the rankings and results. It’s about what it really takes to be an outstanding criminal defence firm today: how to build a practice around preventing charges, not just winning at trial; how to lead through growth without losing standards; and what it takes to stay independent, ambitious, and trusted in one of the most pressured areas of legal practice.

So, a very big warm welcome to the show, Matthew.

Matthew: Hi, you okay?

Interviewer: Very much so. Very much looking forward to today’s discussion, but we’ve got a couple of quick-fire icebreaker questions before we get into it. Firstly, what is your favourite beverage, and what is your preferred choice of footwear on a typical workday?

Matthew: Okay. Beverage in the morning, it’s always a coffee. But at the end of a week, on a nice hot summer day, it’s got to be maybe a lager at the end of the garden. So, it depends. It depends whether you’re in the morning or at the end of the week.

Interviewer: There we go. And on your footwear?

Matthew: Rob, I don’t know what it is. I don’t know. It’s kind of a brougey thing. It’s comfortable, so that’s what I wear. And I’m also really…

Appreciating the commitment to taking the shoe off to show our audience as well. Thank you. That is going above and beyond. Not everyone has managed to do that.

But before we go down that rabbit hole, another quick-fire question. What’s one piece of legal tech or everyday tech that you’re now relying on that you would have thought would have been impossible to dream of using many years ago?

Matthew: Well, you’ve got to remember how old I am when I started. So, I started in the ’80s. We had no computers. It was typewriters, not a fax machine or anything like that. We were contacted by the police by pagers.

So, the big thing for me in my career was the arrival of the mobile phone. I probably had one quite early on — I think around about 1990 — and it meant that you could be contacted by the police in the middle of the night without them having to go to the pager and so on. So, that’s the big one for me.

Interviewer: Yeah, absolutely. And for me, it’s how I run everything now off my mobile phone — the smartphone. There was no internet, but at least you were contactable.

Matthew: Yeah, absolutely.

Interviewer: And I guess that leads nicely to the start of your career. Would you mind telling us a bit about your background and career journey, and what drew you to criminal defence work?

Matthew: I passed my degree in 1985. I didn’t really know what to do. I wasn’t enrolled on a solicitor’s qualification course or the Law Society finals, so I decided to take a year out.

I became an advice worker and worked at a Citizens Advice Bureau. I got good at it. I got good at listening to people’s problems, diagnosing them, and delivering an answer. I also used to represent claimants at benefits tribunals, and I realised I could make a difference for my clients.

I was only 21 or 22, and it gave me a lot of confidence. So, I decided to do my solicitor’s exams and then qualify as a solicitor.

I went from not really knowing what to do with my law degree to realising I wanted to work with people. It was about individual clients. It wasn’t necessarily about, for example, contracts or conveyancing or anything like that. It had to be client-focused, where I really felt I could make a difference for an individual.

Interviewer: Yeah, absolutely. And you have done that. I mean, an incredible career, which we’re going to talk more about.

Why criminal defence for you, though? It’s obviously one of the most intense and high-pressure areas of the profession. What made you want to particularly specialise within that career area?

Matthew: I think there’s something in me that’s interested in the area. So, I definitely had an interest in crime.

Then, when I started going to a police station, I just thought it was so exciting being in a police station, being in a prison, being in the cells, and being in the courts. That, to me, was really exciting.

You put those things together, and then add to that the fact that you really can make a difference to someone’s life. It’s not anyone else — you’re on your own at the police station. You’re on your own, and it’s for you to make that difference.

When that individual has the might of the state bearing down on them and you’re the one person that they have to go to, that’s a huge responsibility, but it’s also a privilege to be in that position.

All those factors combined for me. By the time I finished my training, there was only one thing I wanted to do, and that was crime.

Interviewer: Yeah, absolutely. And as I say, you’ve done so much incredible work over the years, but you’ve also said that you understand the pressure faced by individuals under criminal investigation or indeed prosecution.

For listeners who may not have been close to that world, and you’ve lived it, what is the emotional reality for clients in those first moments when they realise they are going under investigation?

Matthew: Well, I think it’s probably most intense for the one in custody because they’ve been arrested, sometimes for something really serious. They’ve been in a cell. They’ve asked for a lawyer. The lawyer’s on the way, but maybe the police say, “We’re not ready yet. It’s going to be some time before we need you to come down.”

When they see you, you are the first person they see who is on their side — and the only person at that point. I think you see people then really at their most vulnerable.

That is when your job kicks in. Not only are you going to put them at ease, you’re also then going to give them the

Legal advice that’s going to put them in the best possible position to deal with what they’re up against. And sometimes it could be something that could lead to a life sentence. A life sentence — so that’s your worst-case scenario for these people.

Interviewer: And that’s exactly what I was going to say. This is life-changing stuff. So, back to your point about the responsibility and pressure, but also the privilege for you to hopefully do your absolute best, I’m sure is something that most of our listeners will resonate with throughout this discussion.

You have said that the most effective criminal lawyer is one who prevents their client from being charged. I think that is such a strong line. Can you perhaps unpack that a bit for us in terms of pre-charge engagement — what that actually means in practice and why you believe it is where the best criminal defence work actually often happens?

Matthew: What I would say is that the best day’s work isn’t necessarily securing an acquittal at court. I mean, there are times when that’s what you have to do.

But far better is the day when you can ring your client up and say, “Your case is being NFAd, which means no further action, which means it’s over.”

And that’s a client on the end of the phone really trying to digest it: “Do you mean it’s over? Do you mean it’s actually over?”

And look, I’m going to email you and explain it to you properly, but I wanted to ring you first so that you knew as soon as possible. It is definitely over. You have got your life back.

That, to me, is where we can have the best impact, and it’s one of the things that sets us apart from other firms.

The last thing you want is for someone to be arrested and then released under investigation, whether that’s on bail or not, and asked to come back to the police station in three months’ time. Then that gets extended for another three months, and another three months, and all they’re doing is relying on the police.

They probably think sometimes, “Well, I didn’t do anything. I’m innocent. Therefore, I won’t be prosecuted.” But the danger there is that they are sleepwalking into a prosecution.

My position, or stance, on this is: no, this is the time when you don’t forget about the police interview that took place yesterday, which was harrowing enough. Now go on the front foot, seek legal advice, and look to instruct a lawyer who will be proactive in preventing you being prosecuted.

This is pre-charge representation. It’s not just the police interview, but representing the client through to a decision being made.

It’s where the lawyer and the legal team will go on the front foot, look to engage with the police — that can be formally, through pre-charge engagement, or informally. Let them know that you are there. Let them know that they will be hearing a lot more from you.

During the stage of pre-charge representation and pre-charge engagement with the police, you can tease out weaknesses in a prosecution case. You can direct lines of inquiry. You can provide them with material that may be relevant to the investigation, certainly anything that would point away from your client’s guilt.

This process would typically culminate in representations against charge, in which you will argue — or we will argue — that there should not be a prosecution because the charging standard contained within the Code for Crown Prosecutors

has not been met, either because there is not a realistic prospect of a conviction, or a prosecution is not in the public interest. On that basis, the case should be NFA — no further action.

The skill is to put the investigator — sorry, the prosecutor — in the position of a Crown Court litigator preparing the case for trial and thinking, “We’ve got no chance here. This would not lead to a conviction.”

You have to get them to think: imagine this case a year or two down the line before the Crown Court and get them to realise that this case would end with a not-guilty verdict.

Once you’ve done that, your job is done, because they should take the view: “There’s not a realistic prospect of a conviction here. Let’s move on to the next case.”

That’s fantastic for your client. That’s the main objective. They get their life back. They get to breathe. They get to think about other things. They get to enjoy their family. They get to do everything that everyone else can do.

But it’s also good for the system because it means the wrong cases aren’t going before the courts, and the criminal justice system can focus on stronger cases that should be prosecuted.

So, that’s what we do. It’s one thing that really sets us apart from other firms, and we’re very, very good at it.

Interviewer: Absolutely fantastic at it. And I love two things about that.

Firstly, it’s the proactive nature that you’re suggesting there — actually going out there and being proactive and managing this as best as possible.

Secondly, the fact that you pick up the phone. It’s that human connection. Anyone could just send an email, but they’re not a number. You genuinely care for your client. You’re going to follow up in writing, because perhaps it might be overwhelming on that call, but you’re taking the time to actually tell them and build that connection with your client and say, “Look, we’re here for you and wanted to let you know firsthand from me.”

I really like that, and that’s clearly why the firm has gone really successfully well.

Let’s talk about the formidable reputation the firm has built for being proactive with that pre-charge work, and indeed trying to stop matters before they escalate.

What, in your opinion, separates a defence team that is genuinely good at this from one that’s just reacting and simply moving along with the process? What do you think separates good from great?

Matthew: You have to look at the case and look for the way through it, so that you can see a way through it. That’s the way we train our staff.

Look to pick out the weaknesses in the prosecution case. Take on board the material that a client is able to provide you with — the exculpatory material. Work towards engagement with the police, and then start joining all the dots together.

Put the pieces into representations, and also put yourself in a position because our pre-charge lawyers are also Crown Court litigators. They prepare and represent people in the Crown Court.

Imagine the case in the Crown Court, and then interwoven into that is really expert knowledge of the role of a defendant’s lawyer, as well as an expert knowledge of the role of the Crown prosecutor and what test they’re supposed to apply.

All that ultimately goes into representation against charge, to explain why they shouldn’t be prosecuted. That’s the key to it.

It’s also — and I’m not sure whether your question would address this point — about having that high level of empathy and understanding of your client’s predicament and the instructions they’re giving us.

Let’s face it, these clients choose us. They choose us because they’ve got a story to tell. They want to come to us because they believe we will get their point across and that there’s an outcome that they desire.

These are clients who really do want to work with us and have a lot of input to give us. These aren’t the ones who are burying their heads in the sand. These clients are up for it, and they’re up for the fight.

Interviewer: Yeah. And as I say, you’ve done incredible work, it has to be said. You talk about empathy there. One thing I want to talk about now is judgment.

We talked a little bit at the beginning of the conversation around technology and the mobile phone and how that’s come in. We’re in a world of AI now. I’m quite positive about AI — it can do a lot of the work. People can shout about it and say it can’t, but there are certain things that are really important that AI can’t do at the moment, where the lawyer should be focusing more of their time: the judgment, the risk balancing, and that side of things.

You deal with very serious criminal allegations, fraud, regulatory work, professional discipline, crisis management, and the whole range of matters.

In those types of cases, how do you balance the legal analysis, the client management, but also that commercial judgment when everything can probably feel quite urgent and high risk? Talk us a bit more about your view on that.

Matthew: Yeah, I see what you mean. There may be urgent elements to a case, but you’ve always got to retain that sense of calm. You can’t allow a client’s anxiety to affect your judgment or affect the steps that you’re going to take.

You always have to reset and go through it methodically, even if there’s a level of urgency to it.

The client often needs to understand that as well. That can be quite an interesting challenge because the client may have different ideas about how to resolve the situation.

Ultimately, it’s for them to understand that we have the experience, and it’s about achieving the right outcome. Sometimes they have to be a little bit patient.

So, it’s that calmness, the level of confidence, and the ability to reset and go through things methodically that’s really important.

We can normally — and I think this is really important — make sure we match the right clients with the right lawyers to deal with problems as they arise. That’s quite an important element of it.

Interviewer: That was where I was going to go next, actually. How do you do that? How do you make sure that you’re able to match what’s needed? What’s the trick to ensuring that seamless process for all involved?

Matthew: Okay. Well, we’ve got 30 solicitors, so that’s a good starting point, and a lot of firms simply can’t do that.

Within criminal defence work, there are specialist areas. You may have a lawyer who will deal with fraud or serious crime and not represent someone, for example, on an allegation of a sexual offence. But they will be very good in those other areas.

So, we can normally match the expertise perfectly. But in addition to that, we often think, “This is a particular temperament — a client with a particular temperament that would be well suited to the calm nature of this particular lawyer.”

You can match them in terms of the type of criminal defence or the type of allegation, but also the personality.

Because of that, I think we can get the right lawyer for the right client and the right case every time.

Interviewer: And the numbers prove that. I mean, the success story of the firm since taking 100% control, I think, in 2018 — correct me if I’m wrong, but the

Interviewer: The firm has tripled turnover and strengthened its market position, which is fantastic.

Matthew: You know, I think it might have quadrupled turnover. It might be closer to quadrupling, and it really has gone up quite a lot in that period. I think by the time we get to July of this year, it might be times four. It’s really, really good.

Interviewer: So, what did you see that needed to change when you took over, and what key decisions have really helped drive that growth to perhaps inspire other law firm leaders out there?

Matthew: Okay. So, in 2018, one of my colleagues — we were a similar age, around about 53 or 54 — said that he wanted to leave. He was going to cash out, if you like, as one of the partners.

Another one said, “I thought I was going before you.” And I said, “That’s okay, but if you let me take over…”

I said this to the three of them: “Then you can all go. Two of you can stay physically, the one who wants to leave can leave, and then I will have control.”

Then it was possible for me to say, “This is what I want to do.” I worked really hard at the core focus of what we were going to do.

That was: we’re great at serious crime, we’re great at fraud work, and we are really good at pre-charge work. That was an area I really, really wanted to develop.

I also realised that there had been a lack of recruitment over recent years. If these guys were leaving and essentially cashing out, I needed something at the end of it.

So, one of the other areas of focus was a strong youth policy — and that’s exactly what I called it. We still have that core focus now: being really, really strong on a youth policy so that we have continuity when I got a bit older, which of course I’m getting there now.

Interviewer: No, you’re still a spring chicken.

Matthew: So, that was crucial. There was no point me staggering over the finishing line as I paid out my former partners and shareholders, and then having a firm that withered on the vine during that period.

It was crucial that we had a thriving firm for me as I got into my 60s and beyond.

So, that was the idea.

And in addition to core focus — I’m losing track of the question here, Robert. Stop me if I’m going off.

Interviewer: No, not at all. It’s the journey, isn’t it? It’s the story.

Matthew: So, we had the focus, but we also wanted to make sure — and I say “we”, it’s kind of me, but I was talking to other people — that the values were right.

It all had to be about the client and ethics, and also being a byword for excellence. So, that was client service.

Those are still our values, along with one or two others, but that’s it. It was all about getting that right.

When we talk about focus, it’s not looking at an opportunity to recruit someone who isn’t into these areas of work, someone who might have a geographical issue or isn’t convenient to us, and things like that.

It’s not taking on opportunities that don’t fit. You always go back to your focus: “Is this what we’re about?”

“No.”

“Well, we’re not doing that.”

That’s how I set it out in 2018, and we’ve remained quite rigid with that since, despite what’s happened since then.

We’ve had lockdown, we have a culture of working from home, we’ve had the arrival of AI, but we’ve stuck to that core focus and those core values, and they’ve held us in good stead.

Interviewer: You talked earlier about training, and you mentioned recruitment. Obviously, I’ve been running a legal recruitment business for over a decade now, so I’m passionate about this — specifically lawyers, enhancing their careers, finding the right roles, and having more enriched careers.

When you’re hiring senior criminal defence talent, or indeed any talent, what are the non-negotiables beyond technical ability? Is it judgment, temperament, client care, or something else?

Matthew: I think we look at the track record of the lawyer. Then we spend a lot of time talking to them and asking: do we think they’d be a good fit for the firm?

Is it absolutely obvious that they care about clients? A client is not a commodity. A client is not just a sum of money.

It has to be: do they care about the clients, and do they care about the quality of the work that they can deliver? Will they fit into and share the core values of Olliers?

The core focus is less important because we decided the focus, and they would be speaking to us because it was part of our focus. But would they align with our values? I think that’s the key thing.

That’s half our recruitment.

The other half is the youngsters who join us, and that’s part of our youth policy. These are people that we will train up.

At the moment, a significant number of them have joined from our intern scheme because we place a huge amount of emphasis on attracting young entrants to the profession — and I don’t just mean the legal profession, and I don’t just mean Olliers, I mean the criminal defence profession.

Every year, we have a series of week-long intern programmes. That’s eight people for eight weeks, one week each.

We’ve been doing that since 2019 or 2020. This aligns with the new world.

We’ve recruited about 10 trainees from that programme. Last year, we had five trainees with us. There will be more at the end of this year. Some qualified last year, and we’ve got two at the moment.

In my time, I’ve had over 50 trainees, so that’s a big thing.

Once they are training with us, we work really hard on making them as complete a criminal lawyer as possible, as soon as possible.

You can’t substitute experience — there’s no substitute for experience — but we work really hard on skilling up our lawyers.

We have some fantastic accreditations that we deliver. A couple of them are industry first, internal accreditations.

The Law Society does a brilliant police station accreditation. It also does a good Magistrates’ Court advocacy accreditation.

But we specialise in pre-charge work, so where the Law Society doesn’t deliver one, we created our own that mirrors the police station accreditation.

It means you have to pass exams, submit portfolios, shadow someone, and then be monitored. We get them to a good level of being accredited to deal with this area of work.

We introduced that about three or four years ago. Then, a couple of years ago, we introduced Crown Court accreditation.

Again, that means our lawyers are accredited internally to represent people in the Crown Court.

When you look at those four accreditations, they’re covering, to a high standard, the main bases of criminal defence work. Nothing on appeals, but it’s good, really, really good, that. And then we added to it a client care accreditation last year.

The next thing is an AI accreditation, but that’s going to be annual because that changes so rapidly now.

So, we really work hard on bringing our youngsters on, and I think that youth policy is a really strong selling point for the firm.

Interviewer: Yeah, absolutely. And I love that you’re proactive again as well in terms of: if you don’t see it, create it.

I love that you genuinely care about bringing in people who are aligned with your values, not just necessarily the best talent, but actually asking: are they going to be the right fit? Are they going to genuinely care? Are they going to be right for our clients and the reputation that we’ve built?

Because you’re building a very specialist firm with an excellent reputation, and you’re seeing the results.

A lot of firms talk about growth, but not all of them actually go on to achieve growth — even more so in recent times with competition. You’re seeing more and more firms merge, go bust, whatever it might be.

So, how have you kept Olliers independent, specialist, and ambitious without diluting what the firm really stood for in the first place?

Matthew: We have our focus, we have our values. The last value is independence, and it’s being a great independent law firm.

It means that I don’t think you can take your values with you if you’re swallowed up by a bigger firm, because those values would then be determined by the bigger firm.

That was the key to it.

It wasn’t about making the firm hugely profitable. That came from the focus and the values. It came from the professionalism with which we should run our cases.

It came from decisions like having a client acceptance policy on publicly funded work.

For example, the days of representing a shoplifter who may have committed an offence in Hull — we can’t do that on a publicly funded basis. We can’t represent the burglar in Leeds either.

We really had to trim down what we were prepared to accept on a publicly funded basis, on the basis that they would be just as well, if not better, represented by a local lawyer who had the time to deal with them.

Not one who has travelled at huge expense, with little remuneration, and needs to get back to the office. It’s far better that they are with a local lawyer.

So, that client acceptance policy was a really important element of it.

In terms of the pre-charge work, for example, most of that is privately funded. A significant proportion of our post-charge work is privately funded.

There was a switch away from being a legal aid law firm. At the beginning of my career, 99% of our work was legally aided. Even 15 years ago, there was still a very high percentage of legally aided work.

Now, we’re probably close to 80% privately funded in terms of the work we do.

That shift to some extent looked after itself. The success we had with cases meant that we were able to attract more and more work.

We also really look after our branding and our online presence is really, really strong.

We love showcasing our experience and our content. We always try to make it educational, have authority, and provide trusted content.

That’s the way we always try to apply what we do.

We encourage staff to contribute content because it’s good for them, it’s good for their careers, it’s good to showcase their knowledge, and it benefits the firm as well.

So, we work hard on that. It’s been really helpful commercially.

The interesting thing — and I don’t want to take you away from your questions by going on for too long — but the interesting thing this year was the impact of AI and answer engines rather than search engines. In fact, depending on what terminology we want to use, but that was interesting this year, and I’m more than happy to expand upon that.

Interviewer: Yeah, I think it’s very wise to do that given the world that we’re in. So, tell us more.

Matthew: We have someone who has worked with us for many years on, let’s call it, search engine optimisation. For the last two or three years, he wanted to make sure that we didn’t lose out as a result of answer engines and the arrival — not the arrival, but people searching through ChatGPT and so on, and the others. We took a view on it, which was basically: if we continue with what we’re doing, we’re probably doing the right thing because our content has authority.

It’s really good quality content, but we weren’t sure.

We realised that the work we were doing before 2025 was probably even more optimised for answer engines than it was for search engines.

So, if I can give you an example, we do an awful lot of pre-charge work, as you know.

A competitor might, on their page, say something like: “We can represent you for pre-charge work.” Another competitor might have a webpage specifically about pre-charge work.

Whereas what we have is a content hub, or a cluster, which is great for the user experience, but it’s also really, really good for the machine — the answer engine.

On our pre-charge work cluster, we have a fantastic page. It has embedded video content, a huge amount of frequently asked questions, and loads and loads of case studies showing how we can effectively represent someone at the pre-charge stage.

But here’s the thing: it also has widgets on the side with all the articles and blogs relevant to the pre-charge stage of the case.

There are about 25 different articles or blogs all on the subject of pre-charge, and embedded into that content, at least 12 of them have videos included.

That’s about 40,000 words in total. It’s a huge amount of content.

You hear the term, “You’ve got to win the battle for the answer,” or “You’ve got to be the answer.”

What that really means is that when someone asks a question, the answer engine might say: “We got this bit of the answer from Olliers. We got this bit from Olliers. We might have got this bit from the Crown Prosecution Service.”

Then the supplemental question for the potential client might be about Olliers. The answer engine starts to talk about Olliers, and then we get the client. The client comes to us.

So, we’ve gone from being one of the top three firms recommended by Google or search engines, to being the recommended firm and part of the answer provided by AI, or an answer engine — whatever terminology you want to use for it.

Becoming the answer in 2025 was significantly about becoming the answer — not all the time, but as frequently as you could in the areas that you chose.

Another really good example is in relation to — the correct term is homicide, but let’s call it murder and manslaughter.

That has a similar amount of content and a similar amount of embedded video.

We’ll talk about what is diminished responsibility, what is self-defence, what is a conspiracy, what is a joint enterprise, what happens in the first few days during a murder investigation, what the position is regarding bail in a murder investigation, post-mortems — what are they? Can you have a second post-mortem?

It’s just a huge resource.

The client can’t be left in any doubt as to the level of expertise.

You compare that with: “We represent people on murders. Come to us.”

It’s a one-sided competition.

Interviewer: Yeah, you’re talking my language. This is why I’ve been leaning all into content and hosting this show, and having conversations like this with people in the roles doing the work now, and really educating.

Because it is a hub. I think that’s the key thing here: you’re meeting people in a modern way where they’re going to discover you, and you’re being proactive.

I love that. And again, it comes back to your growth story, your client success story, and everything that you’re doing and sticking with clients.

I know we’ve talked a lot about client care throughout this discussion, but in criminal defence, where reputation, liberty, and livelihoods are at stake, as we’ve said, it’s really, really important.

What does excellent client care actually look like in practice?

Matthew: So, you have to be an excellent lawyer.

I’ve talked about how we train our lawyers, and I’ve talked about how we pick the right lawyer for the right client every time.

I’ve also alluded to the empathy that the lawyers have for clients, and the fact that client care is not just about getting things out on time, doing tasks, diagnosing the problem, and delivering the service.

It’s about caring — literally caring for the client — and having that level of empathy for the client.

Why did you come into the job? Why are you doing the job?

It’s not because you wanted to… it’s because you cared about the client. You cared about the outcome, and what you feel resonates with what I’m saying now and why I came into the job. And if you can align with that, then we’re winning.

That ethos and the notion of client care, as well as client service — and I’m distinguishing slightly between the two — is something that the senior lawyers in the firm really emphasise. It’s a drum that they bang. Not literally, we haven’t got drums in the office, but it’s something we talk about all the time.

We care about our clients. We care about our outcomes.

Interviewer: It’s clear, and that’s come through really well throughout the discussion. It’s authentic as well, and genuinely caring.

You’ve had growth, you’ve been prepared to make changes, you’ve continually stayed true to your values, and you really invest in your people — that’s clear.

So, from where you sit, what changes are you seeing in the way investigations are being conducted today, whether by the police, regulators, or other authorities? And how does that affect the way defence lawyers may need to prepare?

Matthew: We’re going to see an increased use of AI in the way investigating teams work and how they coordinate their activities on serious allegations.

The biggest change I saw right at the beginning of my career was the HOLMES computer — the computer system used by the police for dealing with complex murders.

It came after the shortcomings in the 1970s and ’80s of the Yorkshire Ripper investigation and the failure to investigate that properly.

I think that was huge. Investigations became much more efficient. And although that system is still the go-to, as they move away from that and place much greater emphasis on AI and being able to pull information together, I think we’re going to see changes that may be beyond what we could have expected.

We’re going to see more efficient police investigations, and I think that’s really important.

The other element is the political climate and where the emphasis is placed on criminal investigations and what offences are under investigation.

So, there’s the political side, and then of course there’s technology and criminal offences trying to keep up with technology. We’re seeing new offences emerging all the time, particularly online offences and so on.

So, to some extent you have to anticipate, but to another extent you have to be reactive because you never know what’s around the corner.

Interviewer: Never. No. And I’ve been in business and seen various things — you absolutely do not.

A practical question now for our audience, and this is just for educational purposes, not advice — just to put that disclaimer in.

If someone is listening to this and is contacted by the police, a regulator, or a professional body and fears they may be under investigation, what are the first things they should do, and what should they not do?

Matthew: One of the things they mustn’t do is engage with the investigator. They mustn’t say anything to the police.

To that extent, stay quiet. Listen. Absorb what is being said to you.

If you’re being asked to come in for questioning, absorb it, but don’t try to talk your way out of it. Remember, the police are doing their job, and that’s to investigate you.

That’s the first thing.

The second thing is to seek legal advice as soon as possible. Contact a specialist.

I think clients are becoming more informed. They’re using AI — hopefully they find Olliers as the answer — but they’re also asking far more exacting questions.

We see now that our clients are asking some really good questions. They’re setting out the problem, asking what we can do for them, and I think that’s important.

That way, you will end up with a firm that is specialised not just in criminal defence, but in relation to the particular matter you may be under investigation for.

It’s probably a lot easier for people now than it was a couple of years ago because they can go to an answer engine, they can go to ChatGPT or Gemini, and they can do their research.

But what you mustn’t do is simply trust the investigator — I’ll say the police, but trust the investigator — to do their job on the basis that because you haven’t done anything, you won’t be prosecuted.

Unfortunately, that is not something they should rely on.

They need to help themselves and get representation from a specialist who will look to adopt a proactive, front-footed approach to dealing with their predicament.

Interviewer: Yeah, thank you for sharing that and educating our audience.

We’ve talked about staying calm, but I just want to hammer that message home. Given how successful you’ve been, leading a firm with such a wealth of experience, the work you’re doing is incredibly high stakes.

The outcomes really matter. They can affect people’s livelihoods, families, generations of families — you name it.

What has criminal defence taught you about leadership, composure, and decision-making under pressure?

Matthew: The most important thing is that people are looking to you.

It may have been in April 2020, when we were locked down and people didn’t know if we had clients to worry about, but people had their jobs to worry about. That’s when leadership comes to the fore.

You can reassure them that there’s a plan. This is how we’re going to deal with it. This is our strategy.

That was a really good example.

But you can have a member of staff coming to you about an individual problem, about the future of the business, or anything like that.

As long as you’re calm and there’s evidence of a plan, they will get from you the reassurance and confidence they need within their working environment.

The same applies to a client in a professional environment.

They look to you, and if you are carrying the problem with a level of confidence that they can see there is a way through it, then that will put them in a far better position than they would have been if you had no solution to the problem.

So, it’s that level of calmness combined with authority and experience that colleagues will look to you for.

I think that’s probably a good answer on the leadership issue.

It relates in a similar way to a lawyer-client relationship as it does to the leader of a law firm and the work colleague relationship.

Interviewer: Yeah, sage advice, and thank you for sharing that.

Before I let you go, this has been a wonderful conversation. What advice would you give to aspiring lawyers who want to build a career in criminal defence or indeed high-stakes investigations work?

Matthew: Okay. So, aspiring lawyers — firstly, if you haven’t got a job yet, you need to get out there.

Look for firms that run intern programmes. Look for firms where you can spend time with them.

I mentioned us having eight-week-long intern programmes for eight lucky people.

We also have a meet-and-greet event for around 100 people every spring. Then, just before it’s time to go back to university, we have a full-day virtual intern programme, and last year we had about 200 people attend that.

Get to see law firms. Go to Magistrates’ Court. Speak to people. Be a bit cheeky. Speak to a lawyer. Ask them about what their job is. Ask if you can come and watch the next hearing.

Sit in court. Make yourself known to ushers and other members of court staff.

If you do that, you’re making yourself noticed.

Then follow it up. Try to approach as many firms as you can for experience. Possibly even barristers.

Connect with people on LinkedIn.

Again, just be a little bit cheeky: “Hope you don’t mind me asking this, but if you can’t give me some work experience, could you recommend anyone?”

You’d be surprised how many people are impressed by that and think, “They’re quite keen. I’m going to help them.”

They might say, “Yes, we’ll try and give you some help. You can come and spend a couple of days with me or my colleague.”

Then the CV builds up.

If you’re looking at the CV of a 20-year-old who has done two or three different placements, you think: “They’re still at it. They must be keen.”

You know they’re coming from a legitimate place, and it’s an area of interest they’re genuinely working on.

I think that’s really important for someone who is genuinely keen on a career in criminal defence.

Interviewer: Yeah. Everything you said there — plus one.

I always say: if you increase your visibility, you’ll increase your credibility.

If you get in the right spaces and places, fortune is very much in the follow-up.

And being cheeky — the answer’s always no if you’re not prepared to ask the question.

So, go out there and ask that question. You never know.

This has been an absolute masterclass, Matthew. I’ve really enjoyed it.

It just leads me to say thank you so much for joining me today on the Legally Speaking Podcast, sponsored by Cleo.

Wishing you lots of continued success with the firm and your future pursuits.

But for now, from all of us, over and out.