Rhianydd Clement

Call 2019


Photo of Rhianydd Clement


Rhianydd prosecutes and defends in both the Crown and Magistrates’ Courts. She has experience dealing with a variety of offences including violence, dishonesty, driving, sexual offences, drugs and breaches of court orders.

She also has a growing practise in extradition proceedings representing the requested person.

Rhianydd has represented many Defendants with complex mental health difficulties and has experience defending in a trial of the act where a Defendant has been found unfit to plead.

As part of her criminal practice, Rhianydd has dealt with several Defendants that have previously been made subject to a sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP). She understands the additional considerations that arise for these Defendants when accused or convicted of further offences. She has represented these Defendants where they have been charged with new offences and at Parole Board Hearings.

She has developed a reputation as a thorough, confident and approachable advocate. Her legal research skills have been commended and she does not shy away from a complex legal argument.

Rhianydd was called to the Bar in 2019. She became a tenant of Exchange Chambers in January 2023 following the successful completion of her criminal pupillage.

Prior to coming to the Bar, Rhianydd studied Law at The University of Liverpool before completing the bar course at the University of Law in Leeds.


R v JK – Represented a Defendant in an RSPCA prosecution that fell to be sentenced for Animal Cruelty following the death of his cat and injury to a second cat. Successfully mitigated to avoid an immediate custodial sentence and a sentence of 18 weeks’ suspended for 18 months was imposed. Also successfully argued against the indefinite imposition of a disqualification under s.34 Animal Welfare Act 2006 and instead an order for 10 years was imposed.

R v VJ – Represented a Lithuanian national in a trial for Production of Cannabis after he was found in a property with cannabis grows across two rooms. The jury returned a unanimous not guilty verdict in less than 2 hours.

R v JW – Successfully opposed the imposition of a Football Banning Order for a Defendant that fell to be sentenced for possession of cocaine at a football stadium.

R v MH – Represented a Defendant that fell to be sentenced for Arson Reckless Endangerment of Life, having started a fire outside his ex-partners home whilst she was inside. The Court had been considering a starting point for sentence of 4 years’ custody, but remarked that due to a “helpful mitigation note provided by defence counsel” they could step back from this and the sentence imposed was 28 months’ custody.

R v RG – Represented the Appellant in an appeal against conviction from the Magistrates’ Court to the Crown Court. A defence statement was served in order to seek disclosure from the Crown, following which a section 8 application was made. The enquiries as a result of the s.8 application led to the Crown offering no evidence.

R v MM – Prosecuted an appeal against conviction from the Magistrates’ Court to the Crown Court. The case concerned allegations of domestic violence, namely Assault by Beating, Criminal Damage and Threats to Kill perpetrated by a husband against his wife. The complainant was a hostile witness, refusing to answer questions. Despite this, the appeal was unsuccessful and the Court found all allegations proved.

R v GB – Represented the Defendant that fell to be sentenced for three counts of Possession with Intent to Supply Class A and Class B drugs. A sentence of 16 months’ custody suspended for 18 months was imposed following “extensive and detailed mitigation” on the Sentencing Guidelines on the Imposition of Community and Custodial Sentences.

R v GK – Prosecuted a sentence involving several non-dwelling burglary and related offences across three separate cases involving the same Defendant. Produced a detailed opening note for sentence addressing the chronology of proceedings, credit for plea, as well as the time the Defendant had spent on qualifying curfew in relation to each offence. The note received compliments from both opposing counsel and the sentencing judge.

IPP Cases

R v AA – Representing a Defendant charged with Assault by Beating of an Emergency Worker in relation to an assault against prison staff whilst he was a serving prisoner. The Defendant was previously made subject to an IPP sentence and had been recalled on this sentence. This case involved considerations regarding the impact on any conviction, particularly for violence, on an IPP sentence.