BRITAIN’S MOST OUTSPOKEN JUDGE HAS FOUND HIMSELF I

BRITAIN’S MOST OUTSPOKEN JUDGE HAS FOUND HIMSELF IN A PICKLE

AGAIN WHEN HE WAS GIVEN A WIGGING BY AN APPEAL COURT JUDGE IN LONDON

TODAY THURSDAY.

JUDGE JAMES PICKLES, WHOSE COMMENTS ABOUT PROSTITUTION ON

BBC RADIO GOT HIM A TICKING OFF FROM THE LORD CHANCELLOR, WAS GIVEN A

DRESSING DOWN BY LORD JUSTICE MAY FOR HIS DEPLORABLE COMMENTS MADE

DURING A THEFT TRIAL.

DEREK HARRIS, , PLEADED GUILTY TO TWO OFFENCES OF BURLGARY

AND ASKED FOR ANOTHER TEN COUNTS OF BURGLARY TO BE TAKEN INTO

CONSIDERATION WHEN HE APPEARED AT LEEDS CROWN COURT ON FEBRUARY 18

THIS YEAR.

BUT AS DEFENCE COUNSEL MR TIMOTHY HIRST MADE HIS MITIGATING

SPEECH THE LEARNED JUDGE INTERUPTED ‘SIX OF SEVEN TIMES WITH

DENIGRATORY AND OFFENSIVE COMMENTS.

‘

AT ONE POINT HE ASKED IF HARRIS WAS SANE AND THEN DESCRIBED

HIM AS ‘STUPID AND LACKING IN COMMONSENSE AND LOGIC’.

ON ANOTHER OCCASION HE SAID THAT PART OF HARRIS’ PROBLEM WAS

CAUSED BY ‘HIS OWN GREED AND A FEELING OF CONFIDENCE THAT BEING A

FIRST TIME OFFENDER HE WOULD BE LET OFF’.

MR HIRST DESCRIBED THE JUDGE’S INTERRUPTIONS AS AN

‘HARANGUING’ AND SAID THAT THE SENTENCE OF 21 MONTHS WAS ‘MANIFESTLY
EXCESSIVE, BEARING IN MIND HARRIS’ AGE AND THAT THIS WAS THE FIRST
TIME HE HAD APPEARED BEFORE A COURT TO BE SENTENCED FOR OFFENCES.

‘

MF

CENTRAL/PICKLES.

.

.

2

MR HIRST ADMITTED THAT THE OFFENCES ‘MERITED A CUSTODIAL

SENTENCE’ THOUGH HE ADDED THAT IT SHOULD BE LONG ENOUGH TO TEACH
HIM A LESSON, BUT SHORT ENOUGH NOT TO LEAVE HARRIS IN THE COMPANY OF

MORE HARDENED CRIMINALS.

‘
HARRIS, OF MORSDALE LANE, LEEDS, HAD HAD A SUBSTANTIAL

NUMBER OF FAMILY PROBLEMS PRIOR TO THE OFFENCES, AND ‘THE JUDGE

FAILED TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES CONCERNING THIS YOUNG

MAN’S ADOLESCENCE,’ MR HIRST SAID.

IN HIS JUDGMENT, LORD JUSTICE MAY SAID, ‘THIS IS A SERIOUS
CASE AND IT CLEARLY MERITED AN IMMEDIATE CUSTODIAL SENTENCE.

‘
BUT HE WENT ON TO FIERCELY CONDEMN JUDGE PICKLES’ BEHAVIOUR

DURING THE TRIAL, WHICH HE SAID WAS ‘TO BE DEPLORED’.

‘THE LEARNED JUDGE SHOULD NOT DESCEND INTO THE ARENA IN THIS

WAY.

HE NEED NOT HAVE MADE THE DENIGRATORY AND OFFENSIVE COMMENTS.

‘
LORD JUSTICE MAY ADDED THAT THE JUDGE HAD A DUTY TO LISTEN

TO THE ARGUMENT PUT FORWARD TO HIM ‘EVEN THOUGH HE MAY NOT THINK IT

IS STRONG, HE SHOULD ALLOW IT TO BE PRESENTED.

‘HIS DUTY IS TO LISTEN TO ANYTHING RELEVANT AND HE SHOULD

NOT BY HIS CONDUCT DEPRIVE THE DEFENDANT THROUGH HIS COUNSEL, OF

PUTTING FORWARD ALTERNATIVES TO A CUSTODIAL SENTENCE.

‘WE HOPE TO HEAR OF NO FURTHER CASE IN WHICH THIS LEARNED
JUDGE PRECLUDES LEARNED COUNSEL FROM PUTTING FORWARD ANY RELEVANT
SUBMISSIONS HE MIGHT WISH.

‘
THE APPEAL JUDGE CONCLUDED BY SAYING THAT ’21 MONTHS YOUTH
CUSTODY WAS TOO LONG IN ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES’ AND A SENTENCE OF 12
MONTHS YOUTH CUSTODY WAS SUBSTITUTED.

ENDS