Toby Wilbraham

Toby was instructed to represent BP at a pre-charge stage of the case. BP had been arrested at Manchester Airport and later interviewed at Leeds Police Station in relation to historic sexual allegations against his niece.  He was initially represented by the duty solicitor at the police station where he answered all questions denying the allegations.

When he instructed Olliers the investigation had been going on for some time and the case was due to be passed to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) for a decision. This meant that although we were unable to undertake pre-charge engagement with the police we did have an opportunity to make pre-charge-representations to the CPS.

We took detailed instructions from the client and after this were able to create a timeline of events which appeared to contradict the allegation made by the complainant. We were also able to get witness statements from other family members who lived with the client at the time of the allegations which case further doubt on the credibility of the allegation. We were also able to obtain messages from the complainant to family members which again threw doubt on the credibility of the complainant. We were also able to obtain numerous character references from people who knew the client well who were able to speak highly of him.

We forwarded this material for the CPS to consider alongside the police investigation file. After careful consideration the CPS decided not to charge the client with any offences. We believe it is likely that he would have been prosecuted without our involvement.

The case illustrates how pre-charge work can make a difference in the outcome of some cases, particularly where there is material which can be obtained that casts doubt on the credibility of the allegations. The police would not normally look into this material as part of their investigation so defence pre-charge work can obtain this material which could make a difference to the outcome.

Toby was instructed by the family of KL who had been arrested and interviewed by the Police with regards allegations of controlling and coercive behavior, rape, disclosing private photographs and threatening to disclose private photographs.

The allegations arose following the breakup of his relationship with his girlfriend. Prior to the breakup she had been living with him in an annex at the family home. She alleged that during the relationship he had been checking her phone, preventing her seeing friends, had been aggressive towards her and forcefully demanded sex from her. The complainant’s account was supported by her mother and friend.

KL had been represented by the duty solicitor in the first interview and had provided a brief pre-prepared statement denying the allegations. Olliers set about undertaking pre-charge engagement with the Police as the investigation was ongoing.

Olliers obtained significant evidence in the case, that was forwarded to the Police which included:

• Evidence from a witness who confirmed that they had seen the complainant assault a third party at the start of the relationship.
• Evidence from family members that undermined the suggestion that KL had been aggressive towards the complainant while living at the family home.
• Video evidence where the complainant was laughing at the suggestion that KL had been controlling towards her.
• Evidence that the complainant’s mother had damaged KL’s car while they were dating.
• Material suggesting that the complainant’s friend wasn’t a credible witness.
• Character references for KL.
• Witness statements that undermined the allegation that he had shared images as alleged.

The case was subsequently passed to the CPS and pre-charge representations were made to them. As a consequence of Olliers work, KL was only prosecuted for one allegation of threatening to disclose private photographs based on a brief conversation between him and the complainant recovered from TikTok. This was a huge relief to KL and his family.

CQ instructed Toby to represent him at a pre-charge stage after he was arrested and interviewed in relation to allegations of sexual assault and controlling and coercive behaviour against his ex-girlfriend who was a serving police officer. 

Toby took instructions from CQ who stated that he had been in a relationship with the complainant, but this deteriorated over time after they bought a property together. He stated that the property needed a lot of work and himself and his family did most of the renovating of the house. He stated that the complainant did little to help out and would not clear up after herself leaving discarded food containers around which he cleared up. He ended the relationship and asked her to move out. She left following an argument and subsequently made a complaint to the police. 

Toby took a number of witness statement from family members that corroborated his account. He also obtained a number of character witnesses that undermined the allegations against him. Other material was also obtained that helped his case including an email that the complainant sent to him while he was still on bail for the allegations.

A selection of this material was sent to the police as part of the pre-charge-engagement process. After reviewing the material the police felt that it significantly undermined the allegations and decided to offer no further evidence against him, bringing the matter to a quick end. 

Mr Y was arrested at Heathrow airport after coming back from holiday. He was questioned in relation to a relationship he had with Miss G that had ended several years before. 

It was alleged that Mr Y was controlling and coercive during that relationship. In particular it was alleged he had exercised control over her by pretending to be an imaginary third party who contacted Miss G and relayed sexual fantasies to her. It was further alleged that he had been controlling towards her by limiting her contact with friends and family.

Mr Y denied being controlling towards her by separating her from her family and friends. We were able to provide to the police material that suggested that the relationship was loving throughout including cards that she had written to him with loving messages, a dissertation she had written for University that included a warm tribute to him, pictures of the couple together during their relationship and other material that suggested there were no issues between them.

After reviewing the material we sent as part of pre-charge-engagement the police ultimately offered no further evidence against him and the matter was closed allowing him to move forward with his life.

TL instructed Olliers after his former girlfriend contacted the Police to allege a number of assaults against him during their relatively brief relationship. One allegation of assault was that he hit her during sex causing a broken jaw.TL worked at a high profile job and was concerned that if he was prosecuted he would lose it.

Toby Wilbraham, working with Aimee Darbyshire-Ellison undertook pre-charge work with TL. Detailed instructions were taken and a large quantity of material was collated that could be used for representations.

Pre-charge engagement was undertaken with the Police. Material was provided to the Police that showed that TL was a credible witness whereas the complainant appeared not to be. Material was provided to the Police that suggested that the allegations were not true and at the time the relationship was happy and the complainant raised no issues.

Material was also provided to the Police that suggested that the complainant had mental health issues that were relevant to the allegations and this further undermined her credibility.

As a consequence, the Police decided, at a relatively early stage, to take no further action against TL who was very relieved about this.

Toby represented AB following his arrest for a series of allegations made against him by his wife including rape, controlling and coercive behaviour and assault.

AB had been arrested and interviewed by the duty solicitor. In interview he denied the allegations and suggested that they were malicious as the couple had split up and his wife had instigated family proceedings against him.

His original solicitor had advised him to wait and do nothing but AB looked online and saw that Olliers specialised in pre-charge work. He instructed Mr Wilbraham to deal with the case. Toby initially obtained the Police Station file from the previous solicitors to see the detail of the allegations. He then took instructions from the client. He then compiled and organised a lot of information and material provided by the client including text messages, photos, videos and voice recordings.

Relevant material was then provided to the Police under pre-charge engagement protocols. This included messages that contradicted what the complainant had alleged, photos of the complainant that undermined some of the allegations and financial information that questioned her suggestion that he was financially controlling her.

As a consequence the Police ultimately dropped the case against him avoiding long drawn out and costly court proceedings.

Toby Wilbraham was instructed by the family of X to deal with an allegation sexual activity with a child. Mr Wilbraham represented Mr X at a police station in the Greater Manchester area. It transpired that the complainant had alleged a number of offences against a number of different complainants in what the Police believed may be a child grooming case.

Based on X’s instructions Mr Wilbraham advised him to put forward an account during the interview to distinguish his case from the other allegations. In the account X stated that he had met the complainant via social media and believed through the messages she had sent and the information seen on social media that she was an adult. He accepted they met and engaged in sexual activity thereafter.

The investigating officers were subsequently able to corroborate X’s account and found evidence that the complainant had stated that she was an adult to him. Accordingly, they were able to take no further action against him, much to the relief of X and his family.