SEXUAL MISCONDUCT AND DISTRESS

NEWS

PUBLISHER'S HOME PAGE | From British Courts

by Helen Gavaghan at Bradford Crown Court

Name of defendant removed 28th September, 2016 by Helen Gavaghan to comply with my understanding of The Rehabilitation of Offenders' Act 1974. I am speculating as to how long it might take to remove distributed files from caches. Names are also (repeat also) removed as of 30th September, 2016 from items when they are moved from the website into issues of Science, People & Politics. The publisher maintains a record of original stories as published contemporaneously, including names, which can be obtained by those named, or their legal representative, from the publisher at a cost of £3.50 plus VAT, plus post and packaging. The VAT is because the service is a publishing service. My websites are spidered regularly by the British Library for non-print legal deposit. I have no control over when that happens, thus names in the news reports may not yet have been removed from the story at the time my website is spidered, and that version will be accessible in the British Library reading rooms. HG

9th June, 2016
By unanimous verdicts a jury earlier this afternoon found Mr [] guilty of two criminal counts involving sexual misconduct, and not guilty of a third. The case was heard at Bradford Crown Court.

Mr [] is a white, middle-aged man in a stressful and unusually isolating profession. That profession was not mentioned by defence, prosecution or judge during their summings up as having relevance to the offences.

Ms Chloe Fairley, for the defence, asked for a presentence report. That and a psychiatric report are to be ready for 29th June, when Mr [] must again appear in Court. Until then, said His Honour Judge Hatton, the trial judge, Mr [] may make no contact with the two women who made the complaints.

During the trial Mr [] denied touching one of the women in the manner the Crown defined as sexual assault. He further denied intent to cause alarm or distress to the second, though the Court heard evidence that distress and alarm was the result of Mr []'s deliberate and admitted action.

Mr David McGonigal of Broadway House Chambers presented the Crown's case. Defence Counsel, Ms Fairley, is with New Park Court Chambers.

While summing up the judge clarified the nature of the charges, and the elements which must all be present and proven if the jury is to reach a guilty verdict.

The jury retired yesterday afternoon, and resumed deliberations this morning, returning with their verdict at 2.20 pm.

The judge thanked the jury for their service.

Helen Gavaghan, 9th June, 2016, Bradford Crown Court.

Judge Hatton is, in fact, His Honour Judge Hatton QC. The correction to the unintentional discourtesy was made 10th June. I had in mind judge, not QC, as I was typing.

See also:
Alcohol dependence destroys a career, leading to misjudgement and a victim's distress
http://www.gavaghancommunications.com/cr_23.html

Transfer of this story to Science, People & Politics is postponed until November. Valid XHTML 1.0 Transitional Valid CSS!

*
*