Anne-Marie Nicholls

Senior Associate

After qualifying as a solicitor in 2002 Anne-Marie started her career in criminal defence working as a solicitor advocate until 2004 when she began working for the Crown Prosecution Service.

She initially started working in the Magistrates’ Court unit before progressing to more serious crimes such as Death by Dangerous Driving and Murder on the Crown Court Unit.

For the last 7 years her work was as a specialist prosecutor on the Rape and Sexual Offences Unit (RASSO) dealing with a wide range of such cases including Child Sexual Exploitation and Historic Sexual Abuse and indecent images.

Anne-Marie was the Area Lead on cases involving Domestic Violence for 10 years and she began work as a pre-charge lawyer in 2006 when the charging scheme commenced.

She has 17 years of experience in pre-charge advice and preparation and an extensive knowledge of the legislation involving complex, historic cases.

Anne-Marie has experience in representing young people and neurodivergent individuals.

Testimonials

“May I take this opportunity to thank you for your assistance in this matter. A special thanks once again to Anne Marie for her professionalism, not forgetting the Sunday night email when I needed it most, her accurate advice and generally her ability to reduce my stress. If you were not a solicitor you’d make an ace counsellor.”
“I wanted to thank you for everything you have done to help and support his case. Without your brilliant report I don’t know where he would be. We are so glad that we had you dealing with the case as you have been so kind and understanding. I knew from our first meeting that we had the best person
“I know XX is a very relieved man today and understands how fortunate he is to have had you on his side.”
“When you need the absolute best. You need Olliers.”

Case studies

2026 R v PA: Indecent Images of Children and Possession of a Paedophile Manual – Suspended Sentence

We were instructed by PA at the pre-charge stage of the investigation prior to the outcome of the police examination of the client’s devices.

At that stage if images were to be found and few in number the possibility of diversion is an option worth fighting for. We had reason to believe that there would be images found for which the client’s offending behaviour could pass the custody threshold.

We therefore prepared extensive mitigation for the client to include mental and physical health diagnoses, personal and historical struggles and family circumstances. We instructed a clinical and forensic psychologist to complete psychological assessment and to prepare a report identifying potential links between ADHD, mental ill-health and offending.

We took advice from a Forensic Analyst regarding the potential issues with the prosecution evidence, and we obtained a full set of medical records detailing the client’s serious health considerations.

Most importantly we presented the significant rehabilitative steps taken by the client both prior and during instruction. Anticipating that images would be found and charges sought we wanted to put the client in the best possible position should the case lead to the Crown Court, which it ultimately did.

The police examination of the client’s devices resulted in charges for all categories of Indecent Images and a fairly obscure charge of Possession of a Paedophile Manual. The latter charge had not been presented to the court for sentence on many occasions and even the judge had not previously encountered it in his numerous cases before the court.

Defending counsel advised it as being relatively untested with no sentencing guidelines to assist the court; however, advised that it was at the lower end of the offence.

As there was a very real risk of the client receiving a custodial sentence in this case we hoped that the judge would consider, alongside all of the above mentioned materials, that the client presented a low risk to the public due to having strong personal mitigation, already being in the process of rehabilitation and the gap between offending behaviour now being considerable due to the delay in the case investigation. The client having committed no further offences post arrest and with the support and recommendation of probation that a non-custodial sentence could be managed.

The client was prompted to seek help following his arrest. He consulted his GP and was prescribed medication to manage his anxiety and to treat his depression. He completed the Lucy Faithful programme and was working with a therapist at the time of his psychological assessment. He joined Sex Addicts Anonymous and was committed to abstaining from pornography. The client progressed to mentoring other SAA members within his local group as he became more experienced.

Accordingly the judge found sufficient justification for any risk by the client to be managed within the community, and he therefore felt able to suspend a 12 month term of imprisonment for 12 months.

This is a case which demonstrates that comprehensive defence representations against charge may not always result in diversion but can never be said to be a waste of time or resources.

2026 R v N: Rape – No Further Action

We were instructed by our client to engage with the police at the pre-charge stage of the police investigation to deal with an allegation of rape made in the summer of 2024.

This was a difficult case in that the two parties were not personally connected and known to each other in a distant professional capacity only. The motive for the allegation being made is therefore unknown and can only be surmised.

The two parties met at a charitable networking event and spent the evening socialising at a series of different bars in the locality which ended up at the complainant’s hotel room.

Some sexual activity took place which the client empathically and consistently maintained, was consensual.

However, the complainant gave a detailed account to the police of overbearing behaviour from the client which escalated to the point that he raped her in her hotel room.

We provided the police with a full break down of the evening and how the client’s account could be corroborated by CCTV footage, uber transportation, train information and possible witnesses.

Our suggested lines of enquiry therefore included urgent steps to obtain CCTV footage from the bars visited by the complaint and our client that night and the CCTV footage from the public route to each one.

The complainant had told the police that she felt intimidated and vulnerable from the very outset of the meeting with the client at the charity event early evening. However, she stayed in his company alone for hours after until the early morning when at any time she could have left of her own free will.

The police were also asked to speak to another work colleague against whom she had made a sexual allegation (which amounted to no police action) as this was relevant to her credibility.

The client’s account was unchanged throughout the course of a very thorough investigation and the police ultimately accepted that there was insufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of a conviction.

A decision to take No Further Action was made in January 2026.

2025 R vYY : Pre-Charge Engagement Domestic Allegations – No Further Action

We were contacted by male client YY to represent him in a case involving allegations of domestic violence including controlling and coercive behaviour and assault. YY had been in a relationship for some years with the complainant XX and for a brief period of time they had lived together. There had been no instances of domestic violence throughout their relationship. As this arrangement didn’t suit either of them YY chose to purchase a house on his own but the relationship continued.

On the night of the allegation of assault both parties had been drinking to celebrate the purchase of YY’s new home. An argument broke out and the police were called. XX gave no account to the police and refused to support a prosecution; however, the police had received a witness report from a neighbour that she had been assaulted and arrested YY. On the advice of the duty solicitor, he answered police questions denying assault.

Following the police interview the officer in the case advised us that YY was also to be investigated for the offence of controlling and coercive behaviour and his mobile phone was seized in evidence. This element of the allegations seemed to come entirely from the interviewing officer in response to a throw away comment made by XX on the phone to her.

It was at this stage that YY instructed us to represent him during the pre-charge investigation. The work required on the case included taking a detailed account from XX completely refuting the allegations, obtaining an account from YY, challenging the witness report made to the police and reviewing the police interview. The investigating officer was persuaded that there was insufficient evidence for submission of the case to the CPS and that she had no case upon which to base charges. She agreed that the case was suitable for a police decision to no further action (NFA).

The impact that the case had on XX and YY was huge during the course of the investigation as YY had bail conditions of non-contact with XX; this caused particular strain on their relationship which had never been present previously.

2025 R v MM: Pre-Charge Engagement Sexual Allegations – No Further Action

The case involved a report of rape. Our client and the complainant had met for the first time during a night out where both had drunk considerable amounts of alcohol but not with each other.

At the end of the night they walked from a city centre nightclub to the accommodation of the complainant where sexual intercourse took place.

Within two days following the meeting a report of rape was made by the complainant to the police. From the limited disclosure given by the police at that time it seemed that the complainant was alleging that she had been too intoxicated to consent to the sexual activity that took place that night.

The client contacted us after his arrest and interview. We were instructed to engage with the police at the pre-charge stage of the investigation with a view to diversion from charge due to lack of supporting evidence of the allegation.

In taking a detailed account from our client and requesting CCTV evidence be seized from the nightclub to the route back to the complainant’s apartment, we were able to influence the police enquiries.

Supporting statements from witnesses who saw the complainant with our client that night were also taken and submitted with our representations.

The client’s account was that the complainant was coherent and in full control of her faculties. At no point was she incapable to consent.

The CCTV footage and witness accounts corroborated the client and this investigation was concluded in an extremely short time by the police who made the decision that there would be No Further Action in this case.

Recent Cases

2025: R v J – Allegations of sexual assault. Defence representations against resulted into further action decision.
2025: R v T – Complex case involving five complainants and allegations of rape, sexual assault, voyeurism and actual bodily harm. After 26 months, detailed representations and intense engagement resulted in a police No Further Action decision.
2024: R v B – Indecent Images of Children. Case involved an extremely vulnerable youth diagnosed with low functioning Autistic Spectrum Disorder. After representations for diversion the CPS youth panel agreed to No Further Action following positive engagement with them.
2024: R v C – Allegations of grooming and sexual assault of a child with client being a teacher. Representations of insufficient evidence resulted in No Further Action after allegations were proven to be false.
2024: R v D – Allegations of rape, voyeurism, Non-Fatal Strangulation, Actual Bodily Harm, Controlling and Coercive Behaviour. After an extensive investigation and lengthy representations, the case concluded with No Further Action.
2024: R v AA – Rape. Case concluded with No Further Action within 2 months of instruction. Engagement with the police pre-charge following witness statements and character statements being presented.
2024: R v H – Allegations of Voyeurism and Indecent Images of a Child. Successful pre-charge engagement and representations resulted in No Further Action.
2024: R v M – Young neurodivergent client. Allegations of indecent images of children and conspiracy to rape. Representations made as to the insufficiency of the evidence resulted in No Further Action.
2023: R v HC – Allegations of Rape. Very lengthy investigation which resulted in No Further Action.
2024: R v P – allegations of IIOC and Sexual Communications with a child. Some material found on client’s phone however, police agreed to NFA January 2025 after representations.
2024: R v D. Defendant admitted allegations of Stalking. Representations made as to the suitability of diversion for caution which were accepted by the police May 2025.
2024: R V L. Allegations of stalking and sexual; activity with a child. Successful pre-charge representations led to No Further Action of all charges.
2023: R v A – Rape – After detailed representations the case was speedily resolved by way of No Further Action.
2023: R v G – Controlling & Coercive Behaviour. No Further Action following pre-charge engagement, advice and representation.
2023: R v M – Indecent images of children. Young neurodivergent adult. Representations and significant engagement with relevant agencies led to No Further Action.
2023: R v S – Sexual Assault. Detailed pre-charge representations as to the weakness of the evidence resulted in No Further Action.
2023: R v C – Allegations of Controlling and Coercive Behaviour. Proven to be malicious after proactive police interview representation. Received No Further Action.
2023: R V L – Allegations of stalking and sexual activity with a child. Successful pre-charge engagement and representations led to a police No Further Action decision of all charges.