Judge ticks off judge

[Pale Rider]

A judge has ticked off a judge for calling a sex offender 'a bit of a Jack the lad'.

More worryingly, the original trial judge only passed about half of what the correct sentence should have been.

Thankfully, the Court of Appeal put everything straight.

The trial judge was a recorder, which is usually a barrister who sits for a few weeks every year as a judge.

As 'trainees' they normally only get the low level thumping and thieving cases, but the backlog has meant recorders have been getting tastier cases than they would usually get.

Apart from the dumb remark, passing three years, 11 months, when it should have been seven is about as big a cock up as it's possible to make.

Made worse because this recorder has deliberately kept it under four years, which means the defendant is eligible for release after serving half.

Jacking him up to seven means he will have to serve two-thirds.

The Court of Appeal often tinkers with sentences by a year or two, but this is one of the biggest changes I've seen.

Their Lordships tend not to criticise brother judges lower down the pecking order, so the ticking off is about as serious as it gets.

No other sanction will be given to the recorder, but the reputational damage will be huge.

Many recorders have an ambition to become judges.

That promotion will at least be delayed significantly, nothing official, but it just won't happen for a long while.

He can continue to work as a barrister, but will have to put up with having the pee ripped out of him by other members of the Bar.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-66265798

 

[Bromptonaut]

Has the CoA decision been published?

Can't find it on National Archive or the Judiciary's website.

 

[AuroraSaab]

I can't find the details of the original case but this seems to be a repeat offender in his 30's, with previous sexual offending on record I think. Either incredibly naive or uncaring of the judge to dismiss his behaviour as 'Jack the lad'. You might as well call sex offending a bit of shenanigans or antics.

 

[Pale Rider]

Has the CoA decision been published?

Can't find it on National Archive or the Judiciary's website.

Friday is short appeals day at the Court of Appeal, so this case may only have been heard earlier today.

Is there a lag before cases reach the official websites?

I'm not really a user so you may know more about that than me.

I can't find the details of the original case but this seems to be a repeat offender in his 30's, with previous sexual offending on record I think. Either incredibly naive or uncaring of the judge to dismiss his behaviour as 'Jack the lad'. You might as well call sex offending a bit of shenanigans or antics.

Agreed, the remark was about as dumb as it was possible to get.

Wouldn't have been quite so bad had he got the sentence anywhere near correct.

I've seen recorders with ambitions to become judges err on the side of leniency.

Rightly or wrongly, they believe that if their cases turn up at the Court of Appeal as being too harsh it will harm their chances of promotion.

Far more cases are appealed as being too harsh than too lenient.

 

[Bromptonaut]

I suspect the Recorder's hopes of promotion to the salaried bench are, if not stopped, then at least heavily delayed.

One might think that a person hoping to progress would have been well enough read of things like 'contributory negligence' for rape to keep his thoughts to himself.

 

[newfhouse]

You might as well call sex offending a bit of shenanigans or antics.

Or child sex abuse kiddy fiddling eh, PR?

 

[Pale Rider]

Or child sex abuse kiddy fiddling eh, PR?

Oh dear, it's just universal shorthand in the courts for the myriad offences of child sexual abuse.

It indicates nothing about the offence itself, other than its type.

You may rest assured if I had my way kiddy fiddlers, sorry, child sex offenders, would get far harsher sentences than they do.

I apologise if I've offended your delicate sensibilities.

 

[Bromptonaut]

I'm not entirely comfortable with @Pale Rider's terminology but as shorthand for a range of offences I'm not going to complain too loudly; bigger fish etc,.

 

[newfhouse]

I apologise if I've offended your delicate sensibilities.

It’s nothing to do with my being delicate. How we choose to name things can elevate or diminish their importance, as you are well aware.

And it’s not an apology if you follow it with “if”. We both know this.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Or child sex abuse kiddy fiddling eh, PR?

I think it's a thoughtless and dismissive term to use, but a poster on a barely read forum is a bit different from a judge having 'You're a bit of a Jack the Lad' recorded as his/her official pronouncement on an actual individual's offending. Neither are helpful.

 

[Pale Rider]

It’s nothing to do with my being delicate. How we choose to name things can elevate or diminish their importance, as you are well aware.

It has everything to do with having a snipe at me, which is why someone or other dug out the kiddie fiddlers remark which I last made years ago, probably on the old NACA board.

Still. I'm flattered anyone can remember what I posted last week, let alone that long ago.

As regards elevating or diminishing, I've done a lot more than you to elevate child sex offending, or at least publicise it, having reported on, literally, hundreds of cases over the years.

If you weren't so obsessed with trying to dig me out, you might have learned something.

My use of the term gives a little insight into how offenders are regarded behind the scenes by those dealing with them.

Similarly, my remark that this recorder will inevitably be subject to some ribaldry when he returns to criminal work.

Presumably, you find that offensive as well.

I think it's a thoughtless and dismissive term to use, but a poster on a barely read forum is a bit different from a judge having 'You're a bit of a Jack the Lad' recorded as his/her official pronouncement on an actual individual's offending. Neither are helpful.

Absolutely, what I say doesn't matter, but my use does tell us the term is also in widespread use in the criminal justice system.

I think it's more a term of disrespect to the offender - you are not important, you are not the centre of anyone's world, in here you are just a disgusting kiddie fiddler.

'Druggie' is used around the courts in a similar way.

I saw a father get terribly upset when he overheard his son being referred to as 'just a druggie'.

That shouldn't have happened, but it does show how little interest and regard the courts have in his precious criminal son.

It also validates the old saying: if you listen at keyholes you will hear nothing good.

 

[newfhouse]

It has everything to do with having a snipe at me,

I think I’d have commented had anyone used the term but (unsurprisingly) it was you that chose to do so.

which is why someone or other dug out the kiddie fiddlers remark which I last made years ago, probably on the old NACA board.

Nine days ago on this forum.

But as @Bromptonaut says, there are bigger fish to fry.