Helen qualified in 2001 and practised in the field of criminal defence work before leaving private practice to teach the Legal Practice Course between 2005-2008. She then returned to her practice in 2005 where she brought her close analytical skills to the role that she now undertakes as a magistrates court advocate and Crown Court litigator.
Helen represents clients before the magistrate’s court and in police stations providing clear and valuable legal advice to those accused of committing crimes. Using her extensive knowledge of the law gained as a practitioner and as a teacher she prepares cases for trial before the Crown Court, ensuring that the barristers and advocates have all the information at their fingertips to best represent their clients before Judge and Jury.
Through her knowledge and reputation Helen has developed a strong following and regularly receives recommendations through friends and family for her services.
“We received first class service from Mrs Helen Toyne. Things couldn’t have worked out any better due to her effort for me.” – JH, Jan 2020
“I would like to send you a huge thank you for supporting me through my case and playing your part in getting the final outcome. You was absolutely fantastic and thank you for believing in me. You really are incredible at your job. We got the best possible outcome for the circumstances and you made that happen. I am so happy I came to you, I’m not so sure anybody else could have pulled that off. How you made that go away without a further trial was just amazing.” – 2018
R v BB – client was accused of being part of a so called postcode gang murder. Due to Helens excellent attention to detail and preparation of the barrister for trial the client was acquitted.
R v MW – A client was accused of Child Sex Exploitation but due to her hard work a re-trial was ordered and the client was found to be not guilty.
R v LB – attempted murder. Although the client was named as the person who fired a shot into victim’s lounge he was acquitted after it was shown that there was substantial doubt that he was responsible.