Appeal Dismissed: Stalking Solicitor Fails in Bid to Overturn Conviction

A solicitor has failed in a bid to have his stalking conviction overturned on appeal.

Andrew Jonathan Milne, 64, principal of City law firm Andrew Milne & Company, was convicted earlier this year of stalking blogger and court observer Daniel Cloake.

Having been sentenced, Milne immediately announced his intention to appeal the decision of District Judge (Magistrates' Court) Lisa Towell.

The matter was eventually listed for a week-long appeal hearing at Snaresbrook Crown Court in October 2026. As explained in my earlier article, these hearings involve a complete rehearing of the Magistrates' Court trial.

The mantis-like lawyer, who clearly has an unhealthy obsession with Mr Cloake, stuck to the defence offered in the Magistrates' Court - namely that roles were reversed and it was actually Mr Cloake who was infatuated with him.

The appeal bench, led by HHJ Timothy Greene, was unpersuaded by Milne's version of events. This afternoon it announced its decision to dismiss Milne's appeal.

Despite the hearing having taken place in open court, I am going to refrain from reporting the more salacious aspects of Milne's defence. Suffice to say his tawdry account, which wouldn't be out of place in a top-shelf magazine, stood in stark contrast to that of Mr Cloake.

Rejecting Milne's evidence in the strongest possible terms, HHJ Greene said: "In every respect where their accounts differed we preferred the evidence of Mr Cloake to the evidence of Mr Milne."

In a damning appraisal of the lawyer's performance in the witness box, the judge added: "We are in no doubt that Mr Milne repeatedly lied in his evidence to us."

The upshot is that Milne remains convicted of stalking.

In practical terms he has no further avenues of appeal.

Appeal by way of case stated to the Divisional Court, whilst theoretically possible, is limited to cases where the Crown Court (acting as an appeal court) has made an error of law or acted outside its jurisdiction.

Milne simply not liking the decision, which I'm sure will be the case, is not sufficient grounds for further appeal.

That said, I am sure he will be looking for any reason, however trivial or tenuous, to call into question the decision of the appeal bench.

Now time for the Solicitors Regulation Authority to do its thing and show a bit of backbone.

Update (9/11/26): There is now additional reporting of this in the Law Society Gazette.

Creating articles can be thirsty work:

If you have found this article informative then you can show your appreciation by buying a coffee.