Mr Baxter is a specialist criminal practitioner who joined Chambers in March 2016 following a successful completion of his pupillage under the supervision of Mr Martin Reid. He is instructed by the Prosecution and Defence as a Leading Junior, Led Junior and Junior Alone in serious criminal cases.
Recent cases have included murder, drugs conspiracies and complex financial crime – see notable cases below.
Mr Baxter understands the importance of client care and prides himself in being an approachable advocate who is determined to provide the best possible result for his client. He is accustomed to dealing with document heavy cases and taking cases at short notice. He is happy to advise both his lay and professional clients throughout all stages of the proceedings and uses modern technology to present cases to the jury in the most efficient way.
Mr Baxter has been instructed in cases involving vulnerable witnesses/defendants, including cases requiring the use of ABE interviews and issues of fitness to plead/stand trial and is experienced in dealing with cases involving expert evidence including telephonic, forensic, medical and accountancy.
Mr Baxter also has a keen interest in POCA/confiscation proceedings having appeared in a number of interim hearings, final disposals and acting for third-party individuals affected by the proceedings. He is also instructed in regulatory, disciplinary and licensing matters including taxi, security industry and firearms licensing appeals.
Outside of the law Jamie has an interest in football, rugby and darts.
Appointments / Memberships
CPS Level 3 Prosecutor
CPS Level 3 Specialist Fraud Panel Advocate
CPS Serious Crime Panel Advocate
Specialist Regulatory Advocate – List C
Member of the Northern Circuit
Member of the Criminal Bar Association
Areas of Practice
Described as having an ‘engaging and authoritative manner’ Mr Baxter has quickly established himself a busy and diverse Crown Court practice and is instructed by both the Prosecution and Defence in equal measure.
He has been a Level 3 CPS advocate for a number of years already and is authorised to prosecute cases arising out of Operation Venetic (Encrochat cases).
Mr Baxter has appeared in numerous trials in the Crown Court, many of which made regional and national news, including:
- Homicide – murder, manslaughter and attempted murder.
- Causing death by dangerous driving and careless driving
- Drugs: Possession with intent to supply Class A & B drugs (including conspiracy), conveying prohibited articles into prison and production offences;
- Firearms & Offensive Weapons: Including conspiracies to sell/transfer firearms, possession of firearms and explosives, possession of ammunition and threatening with a bladed article;
- Modern Slavery: Offences requiring persons to perform forced/compulsory labour and human trafficking.
- OAPA offences: Section 18, Section 20 and Section 47 assaults and an offence under Section 29 (throwing corrosive fluid on a person with intent to do grievous bodily harm);
- Theft Act offences: Burglary (including conspiracy to burgle), robbery, handling stolen goods and aggravated vehicle taking;
- Sexual offences: Including inciting a child to engage in sexual activity, sexual assault and outraging public decency;
- Fraud/Financial: Revenue (income tax and VAT) and non-revenue fraud offences, money laundering and possessing criminal property;
- Miscellaneous: Conspiracy to cause explosions, misuse of computers act offences, violent disorder, affray, threats to kill, escape, perverting the course of justice, contempt of court and dangerous driving; and
- POCA: All stages including arguments as to benefit, available amount, third party interests, hidden assets and final hearings.
Murder / Homicide
- R v AF: Led Junior for the prosecution of the murder of man following a party with a knife. Convicted after trial.
- R v CH: Led Junior for the prosecution in respect of a gang-related shooting. The defendant was extradited to face trial under the new legislation and was said to be a secondary party to the shooting. Convicted after trial.
- R v BG: Led Junior for the defence representing a man accused of the murder and wounding two others with intend when his car collided with a motorbike. Acquitted after trial.
- R v TK: Led Junior for the defence representing a man accused of the joint-enterprise murder of a man at a taxi rank in Liverpool. TK was ultimately acquitted of both murder and manslaughter and convicted of a section 47 assault.
- R v AC: Junior Alone prosecuting a defendant accused of causing the death of an 11 year old girl by dangerous driving. Convicted after trial.
Drugs and Weapons Offences
- Op.Malaga 1 – Junior alone prosecuting a multi-handed conspiracy to sell/transfer firearms and possessing firearms with intent to endanger life arising out of Encrochat and surveillance
- Op.Malaga 2 – Junior alone prosecuting a multi-handed conspiracy to possess firearms and grenades linked to a drug dealing enterprise in Manchester.
- Op.Geladi – Led Junior for the prosecution in a case multi-handed conspiracy involving the robbery of 20kg of class A drugs between rival drug gangs in Manchester and Liverpool. The case involved the Encrochat and cell site expert evidence.
- Op.Holly 1 & 2 – Junior alone prosecuting a multi-handed conspiracy to possess firearms and grenades linked to a drug dealing enterprise in Manchester.
- Op.Supercharger – Leading Junior in an 11 defendant conspiracy to supply Class A drugs using dedicated flare/bulk graft lines.
- Op.Byron – Junior alone prosecuting a multi-handed conspiracies arising out of Encrochat and surveillance evidence.
- R v DA – Junior alone prosecuting an Encrochat case involving c.30kgs of cocaine. Convicted after trial. The case involved issues of reliability and continuity of the data, along with attribution. Convicted after trial and sentenced to 20 years imprisonment.
- Op.Kodak: Representing a Merseyside based defendant as part of a 5kg (category 1) conspiracy to supply Class A drugs to Bournemouth as well as possession of a disguised firearm. Case made national news and involved a large amount of surveillance and telephone evidence/billing. Following a successful Newton hearing the defendant’s role, and sentence, was significantly reduced.
- Op.Earnest: Representing a female alleged to be involved in a County Lines drugs conspiracy in Carlisle alleged to be acting as a street dealer. Acquitted after trial.
- Op.Bugbear: Representing a Merseyside based defendant as part of an allegation of conspiracy to supply Class A drugs. The case involves issue surrounding forensic evidence. The Defendant was acquitted following a successful submission of no case to answer.
- R v AC – Instructed to prosecute two defendants for conveying prohibited articles into prison (drugs and telephones) using drones. The case involved expert evidence in relation to GPRS data obtained from the devices.
- Op.Master – Led Junior for the prosecution involving allegations of conspiracy to require workers to perform forced/compulsory labour in car washes and human trafficking. Convictions after trial.
- R v LW: Junior Alone defending a young woman accused of attempting to murder her best friend and best friend’s partner.
- Op.Brent – Led Junior for the defence representing the principal defendant in an allegation of conspiracy to rob and wounding with intent whereby the defendant was alleged to have arranged for his neighbour to be shot by associates. The defendant was acquitted after trial.
- Op.Sydney – Led Junior for the defence in a case lasting 3 months. First on the indictment whereby the allegation was conspiracy to cause explosions in order to steal from ATM machines. The case involved in excess of 10,000 pages of evidence and was heavily reliant on telephone and attribution evidence between conspirators. The case also involved an argument of autrefois acquit.
- Op.Kirkhill – Led Junior for the prosecution in eight trials relating to large scale public disorder outside St Georges Hall, Liverpool in February 2016. A total of 56 defendants were convicted who were affiliated to extreme left and right wing organisations.
- R v BW – Instructed to defend in a S.18 trial whereby the allegation was a slash to the face with a Stanley Knife following an earlier robbery.
Fraud/ Proceeds of Crime
- R v PK – Led Junior for the defence in a complex HMRC tax and VAT fraud investigation. Total value in excess of £5.5million.
- Op.Yulan – Led Junior for the principal defendant in an alleged fraudulent pension liberation scheme. Value in excess of £5million. This is a contract case due to the amount of evidence, complexity of the legal / regulatory framework and length of trial.
- Op.Burnbank – Prosecuted a nine-handed POCA final hearing following a trial for conspiracy to import and supply Class A drugs. Benefit figures ranged up to £400,000.
- Op.Globelake – Junior alone prosecuting a multi-handed POCA hearing following convictions for fraud. Benefit figures were in excess of £500,000 and the case involved arguments as to hidden assets and the application of the assumptions.
- Op.Manzini – Led junior for the prosecution in a multi-handed fraud trial relating to the theft of mail followed by numerous fraudulent applications for credit cards/personal loans. Value in excess of £100,000.
- Op.Java – Represented a young male for sentence following guilty pleas to 10 offences contrary to the misuse of computers act following an extensive investigation by the cyber crime unit. Offences involved complex issues of DOS and DDOS attacks by the use of a stressor, which the Defendant would sell, causing an overload of traffic on servers and temporary incapacitation. Over 200,000 attacks took place. Sentenced to 2 years suspended for 18 months.
- R v JW – representing a man accused of casting a destructive substance with intent to cause GBH (spitting Mercury) at a police officer contrary to S.29 OAPA 1861. Successful acquittal after a 4 day trial.
- R v LM – Defending in a shoplifting case which involved the defence of non-insane automatism brought about by the Defendants diabetes. Following legal arguments and expert evidence, the case was ultimately dropped against the Defendant.