Toby Wilbraham, criminal defence & regulatory solicitor

Toby is a highly experienced solicitor having been at Olliers for in excess of 20 years.  He works as a litigator as well as an advocate in the Magistrates’ Court, Crown Court and Court of Appeal. Due to his experience he also advises clients, who were initially represented by other firms, as to whether they could successfully appeal the result of their cases.

Toby has worked on a wide variety of serious cases ranging from historical sex offences to conspiracy to supply drugs. These include a number of unusual cases including a recent FBI/NCA investigation into global drug dealing on the Silk Road website accessible only via the ‘darknet’. Toby prides himself on his meticulous preparation of cases and has been described as a ‘safe pair of hands’ striving to represent his clients to the best of his ability.

Toby specialises in dealing with cases involving a cyber/internet element including dark web allegations, hacking, cyber terrorism, revenge porn and indecent images. Click here to read more.

Toby is also highly experienced in dealing with regulatory offences representing clients in areas including Food Safety and Hygiene, Trade Marks, Fire Safety,  Copyright and Design Breaches, General Product Safety Regulations (GPSR), Health & Safety and Environmental Damage.  

Toby is a member of the Association of Regulatory & Disciplinary Lawyers.

Criminal Law and Forensics

Toby has a particular specialism in cases involving forensic evidence and has significant experience of challenging such evidence successfully. Toby has written a number of articles highlighting the problems in outsourcing forensic science services.

A Ticking Time Bomb?

Potential Appeals Following Randox Irregularities

Toby in the Media

In 2021 Toby was quoted in the Guardian reflecting on the 10 year anniversary of the 2011 riots. Read more.

In 2012 Toby worked on cases relating to the Manchester Riots and was interviewed on Radio 5 live, Radio Manchester, Granada Reports and BBC news. He also contributed to the joint Guardian/ LSE report into the causes of the riots.

Toby was interviewed on BBC Manchester in relation to stop and search statistics in 2015.


I am delighted to drop you a note with a comment on the recent work that you have done on my father’s case.

I am convinced that the work that has been done at the pre-charge stage was the difference between the matter proceeding and not. You did a detailed review of the matter and worked on it to ensure that necessary work was carried out as speedily as possible. You also did a brilliant job with managing all of the personalities involved in the case.

Your expertise was very much appreciated as was your professionalism. I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend your services to others. I know that pre-charge work is a somewhat niche area but as far as I am concerned it was the best way to proceed from day one to ensure we got the outcome we wanted.

All the best and thanks again.”

Client’s daughter, April 2021

“I would like to say thank you for the professional yet personable service that you have provided. You represented me in the exact way that I wanted which allowed me to get the best result possible. I believe that the outcome was fair and the magistrates were very understanding of the circumstances I am in. I will be forever in your debt. Thanks again and stay safe.”

Client, January 2021

“From the moment I needed legal advice Toby and Olliers were a reassuring and reliable presence. Toby was always at the other end of the phone when I needed him to give sound legal advice and help calm my worries. This not only came in the form of their counsel but also in giving a fair price for their work and going above and beyond what I could have hoped for for the fees I paid them.Thanks to them I got a fantastic result and can get on with my life.”

From MC Manchester, May 2020

Cases of note

Pre-charge Representation

  • R v JC– An individual investigated for historic sex allegations alleged to have taken place between him and his girlfriend when they were both underage. We liaised with the client and the Police and provided evidence which suggested that she may not be a credible witness. Ultimately he was not prosecuted for any offence.
  • R v CO – An individual investigated for allegedly raping his partner in a domestic context. There was evidence to suggest that the allegations were malicious. We liaised with the client and Police. Ultimately he was not prosecuted for any offence.
  • R v JH – An individual investigated for allegedly raping his partner in a domestic context. The allegations arose in the context of family proceedings where the complainant was contesting custody of their child. We were able to uncover evidence which suggested that the allegation could be malicious and designed to assist her in the family proceedings case. Ultimately he was not prosecuted for any offence.

Indecent Images

  • R v RJ – An individual prosecuted for possession of IIOC (indecent images of children) and breaching a SHPO. This was his third prosecution for similar offences and he had been given a prison sentence for the last set of offences. I liaised with him and his family and gave sensible advice as to how he should approach the case and deal with relevant agencies. As a consequence we were able to persuade the sentencing Judge to impose a suspended sentence with a requirement for a treatment course.


  • R v A – Represented a businessman at Bury Magistrates who was prosecuted for handling stolen goods after being supplied with York Stone in seemingly suspicious circumstances. If convicted the case would have had an adverse effect on his business. He was acquitted after trial.
  • R v B – Represented a man accused of assaulting his wife. The CPS attempted to proceed with the allegation based solely on the 999 call to the Police. The case was dismissed after a successful legal argument to exclude the evidence.
  • R v C – Represented a client for murder at Manchester Crown Court. He had handed himself in to a local police Station and stated he had witnessed a friend murder someone. When interviewed he also accepted helping him dispose of the body, under duress. Although he was charged with murder the jury accepted his account and acquitted him.
  • R v D – Represented a client for murdering his wife at Manchester Crown Court. He was alleged to have strangled her following an argument after she stated she was leaving him. After looking into potential diminished responsibility defences the client pleaded guilty getting a life sentence with a minimum tariff of 11 years.
  • R v E – Represented a client for murder at Manchester Crown Court. He was accused of dousing his sister with petrol and setting her on fire. The case was complex looking into potential mental health defences and various forensic issues.
  • R v F – Represented a client for gross negligence manslaughter at Manchester Crown Court. She had attended a party during which her sister had stabbed her boyfriend in the leg. The client then told people not to call an ambulance which led to the victim dying due to blood loss.
  • R v G – Represented a husband and wife charged with murder and conspiracy to pervert the course of justice following a large scale disturbance where the victim was killed with a machete.
  • R v H – Represented a client involved in a large scale drugs conspiracy where she was alleged to have assisted her partner meet a drugs courier to convey large amounts os Class A drugs to a Manchester based organised crime group.
  • R v I – Represented a client for a large scale fraud ( Over £1 million) whereby his company was alleged to have been selling a misleading service to a large amount of customers.


  • R v J – Represented a businessman at Manchester Crown Court for trading standards offences. He was prosecuted for selling children’s chairs on ebay which didn’t pass the necessary safety standards and also used trademarked logos.
  • R v K – Represented a man alleged to have been involved in manufacturing and selling counterfeit goods in the Cheetham Hill District of Manchester. The case was dropped against him after negotiations with the Prosecuting authority and co-defendants.
  • R v L – Represented a client at the Police Station for allegations of unlicensed pharmaceutical drug importation and sales, and money laundering. The client and her partner were alleged to be responsible for importing generic Viagra from India and selling it through various companies on ebay. This was a complex case involving large amounts of financial and transactional records.
  • R v M – Represented a client at Court who was prosecuted for unauthorised treatment of waste at his waste management plant.

Money Laundering / Proceeds of Crime

  • R v N – Represented a client in POCA proceedings whereby the initial benefit figure was alleged to have been £75,000. By obtaining work receipts and confirmation of International money transfers I was able to reduce the amount to £19,000.
  • R v O – Represented a client in POCA proceedings following armed robbery allegations. I was able to break the joint liability presumption for the benefit figure reducing the overall benefit figure. I also was able to account for a large amount of cash that was alleged to have been ‘hidden assets’ by the CPS thereby reducing his overall liability.
  • R v P – Represented a client following s22 proceedings where the CPS came back 10 years after a confiscation order was made, having frozen his assets. I was able to reduce the total amount the CPS suggested was owed by him after negotiation with the CPS

Computer misuse

  • R v Q – Represented a client at the Police Station and Court for involvement in a large scale global drug dealing group linked to the ‘dark web’ and notorious website ‘The Silk Road’. The client was a student at Manchester University at the time of his arrest that followed the arrest of the creator of the website Ross Ulbricht in America by the FBI. The National Crime Agency (NCA) led the investigation in this Country which involved evidence obtained from the FBI in America.
  • R v R – Represented a client allegedly involved in ‘MiLeNNiuM’ group. MiLLeNNiuM was alleged to have had early access to a number of films and posted them on a member only access forum illegally. This led to an alleged fraud in the region of £1,500,000.
  • R v S – Represented a client who was alleged to have interfered with websites shopping cart by altering values reducing cost for purchase.
  • R v T – represented a client at the Police Station who was alleged to have been trading Class A and Class C drugs over the ‘Dark Web’. Ultimately the client was only charged with possession of Class C drugs and received a financial penalty at court. 


  • R v U – Represented a woman at Manchester Magistrates Court after she was prosecuted for driving with excess alcohol. She argued ‘special reasons’ that her drinks had been spoked by a friend unbeknown to her leading to the excess alcohol reading. The Magistrates accepted the argument and did not ban her from driving.
  • R v V – Represented a client at the Crown Court who was charged with s20 wounding following an incident with a neighbour. He was acquitted after trial.
  • R v W – Represented a client who admitted possession with intent to supply class A drugs after having supplied ecstasy to 2 girls in a night club who were subsequently hospitalised. The Court was successfully persuaded to impose a suspended sentence due to the mitigation put forward.
  • R v X – Represented a client at the Crown Court for possession with intent to supply cocaine. The Police raided his mothers house and found a bad containing a large amount of cocaine. His mother stated that the drugs were his and the bad containing the drugs had his fingerprint on them. He was acquitted after trial.
  • R v Y – Represented a client for attempted robbery at Chester Crown Court. The complainant suggested that he confronted her in the street and tried to steal her handbag. He stated that she had owed him a debt and he spoke to her demanding his money back. He was acquitted after trial
  • R v Z – Represented a client at Stafford Crown Court charged with a dwelling burglary. The evidence was based on DNA that the Prosecution suggested showed a link between him and the scene of the crime. We queried the DNA evidence and once this was reviewed it was found to be inaccurate and eventually no evidence was offered against him and he was found not guilty.

Contact Toby

196 Deansgate, Manchester, M3 3WF
07714 680532