Ellen Wright

Year of call:

2017

Education:

2017 - BPP London, BPTC (Very Competent)

2014 - Teesside University LLM (Distinction)

2013 - Teesside University LLB (First Class Honours)

Career:

2020 - Tenant at Trinity Chambers

2018 - Tenant at 15 New Bridge Street Chambers

2017 - Pupil at 15 New Bridge Street Chambers

Appointments:

2021 - Present - Elected Bar Council Representative

2021 - Present - Crown Prosecution Service Panel Advocate, Grade 3

Memberships:

2020 - Present - North Eastern Circuit

2017 - Present - Criminal Bar Association

2017 - Present - Young Fraud Lawyers Association

Awards:

CBA Bursary for Excellence in Advocacy

The Rachel Lawrence Prize

Inner Temple Exhibitioner

The Ian Pennock Award for Excellence in Law

Rising Star, 2023 – 2024

Rising Star, 2022 - 2023

Ellen has a busy criminal practice acting as both a led junior and junior alone and regularly appears in the Crown Court on a wide range of matters. Ellen has represented clients charged with a variety of offences including historic sexual allegations, rape, arson, fraud, robbery, GBH, witness intimidation and the supply of drugs. She has extensive experience as a trial advocate including cases involving the cross-examination of children and vulnerable people and matters involving high page counts and complex expert evidence.

Ellen is also accustomed to dealing with all manner of criminal and quasi-criminal orders including Serious Crime Prevention Orders, Sexual Risk Orders, Sexual Harm Prevention Orders, Freezing/Forfeiture Orders and Criminal Behaviour Orders.

Notable cases:

R v NS (2023): Successfully prosecuted a senior resource worker at Middlesbrough Council indicted with five counts of fraud by abuse of position after misusing a credit card belonging to the Council. This case involved a high number of transactions and was complicated by efforts the Defendant made to blame others for the use of the card.

R v IC (2023): Represented a defendant who accidentally shot a man walking his dog whilst clearing rabbits from farmland with a magazine-fed self-loading rifle. The defendant was charged with section 20 wounding and the trial involved complex evidence from firearms experts regarding bullet trajectory, ricochet and the properties and adjustment of rifle scopes.

R v EH (2022): Secured the acquittal of a defendant indicted with arson being reckless as to whether life was endangered following a hotel fire which endangered the lives of around 100 people and was described by an experienced fire expert as the most severe he had seen in his career. This case involved detailed expert evidence regarding fire flashover, false fire patterns, causation and the location origin of the fire.

R v SC & JH (2022): Prosecuted a GBH case involving an unprovoked attack on a member of the public which resulted in life-changing injuries. This case involved careful assessment of CCTV footage as the victim of the assault was unable to recall what had happened to him.

R v AB (2021): Represented a defendant in POCA proceedings following his conviction for conspiracy to supply Class A drugs. At trial, (which involved significant PII issues owing to the evidence of a supergrass) the defendant was labelled “the poster boy for unexplained wealth” by the Prosecution. These POCA proceedings were particularly complex due to the number of assets held by the defendant, predominantly in property. Many of the assets were covered in part by bridging loans and so substantial care was required in calculating the true nature of the available amount attributable to the defendant.

R v CE (2021): Instructed as a led junior in a six-handed murder trial lasting nine weeks. The Defendant’s telephone evidence was of particular importance and a full download of the telephone was obtained and reviewed in order to produce a detailed phone schedule which was put before the Jury.

R v E (2021): Successfully prosecuted multiple counts of outraging public decency following the commission of ‘upskirting’ offences in Eldon Square, Newcastle. The trial lasted six days and required the presentation of complex expert evidence regarding phone capabilities.

R v M (2020): Acquittal of Defendant who was indicted with the theft of high value construction pallets in a trial lasting five days and involving GPS data, lengthy video footage and multiple witnesses.

R v HS (2019): Represented a 12-year-old boy charged with robbery and possession of a bladed article in a four-handed trial in the Youth Court lasting five days. This case required particular care as all the defendants had special educational needs and all the witnesses the Crown sought to rely upon were under the age of 13.

R v C (2018): Represented Defendant convicted of his second offence of possessing an offensive weapon (machete) at sentence and successfully excluded a drill rap video as evidence of gang involvement.