The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has banned a former paralegal from working in the legal profession after his conviction for witness intimidation, closing off a range of roles at licensed bodies and adding a £1,350 costs order to a 27-month prison sentence.

Richard Melfi-Wroe pleaded guilty in February 2025 to two counts of witness intimidation, according to the SRA's published decision. The offences occurred between June and December 2024. During part of that period, Melfi-Wroe was employed as a paralegal in the Bolton office of national law firm Keoghs, where he had worked since May 2021 until leaving in October 2024.

The SRA's decision notice records that his conduct was intended to cause a police investigation to be "obstructed, perverted or interfered with." That is the operative language of the finding, and it anchors the regulator's conclusion that the offences struck directly at the administration of justice rather than sitting outside his professional life.

In May 2025, the criminal court sentenced Melfi-Wroe to 27 months' imprisonment. It also imposed a 20-year restraining order, which remains in force until May 2045. Media reports at the time of sentencing identified the victim as Melfi-Wroe's former partner.

The regulatory findings

The SRA found that Melfi-Wroe's conduct breached three of its core principles. The first relates to the rule of law and the proper administration of justice. The second concerns public trust and confidence in the solicitors' profession. The third is the principle of integrity.

Those findings matter because the SRA's core principles apply not only to qualified solicitors but to those working within regulated legal environments, including paralegals employed by authorised firms. A criminal conviction for conduct aimed at derailing a police investigation sits squarely within the category of behaviour the regulator treats as fundamentally incompatible with employment in the profession.

The sanction

The regulator has now imposed a section 99 disqualification order against Melfi-Wroe. The order prevents him from holding a number of roles at licensed bodies — the alternative business structures through which much of the regulated legal services market operates — including as a manager or an employee. He was also ordered to pay £1,350 in costs.

The practical effect is total exclusion. A section 99 order does not merely restrict practice as a solicitor; it blocks employment across licensed bodies in the capacities the order specifies. For a paralegal already serving a custodial sentence and subject to a restraining order running to 2045, the order consolidates his removal from the sector and creates a lasting regulatory bar that firms would encounter when checking his eligibility for any covered role.

What practitioners should take from this

For compliance officers and firms employing paralegals and other non-solicitor staff, the decision is a reminder of two points. First, the SRA's core principles bind conduct that occurs both inside and outside the workplace. Melfi-Wroe's offences were directed at a former partner and at a police investigation, not at clients or files — yet the regulator treated them as breaches of principles governing justice, public trust and integrity. Off-duty criminal conduct can end a legal services career.

Second, the timeline shows how the regulatory process tracks the criminal one. The offences ran from June to December 2024. His employment at Keoghs ended in October 2024. The guilty pleas came in February 2025, the sentence in May 2025, and the SRA's disqualification order followed with its own costs award. Firms that become aware of pending criminal proceedings against staff can expect the regulator to act once convictions are entered, and should assess their own notification and risk obligations in the interim.

The SRA's decision notice in the matter remains the definitive record of the findings and the terms of the disqualification.