Sir Stephen Richards’s prosecution was a tragic failure and produced a series of innocent victims, say Jason Hadden and Craig Barlow
It is unusual for a prosecution to leave us with no conviction but with victims on all sides. The recent case of Sir Stephen Richards, the Court of Appeal judge, achieved this ignominious distinction and ought to represent a zenith in public dissatisfaction with the criminal justice system. Richards LJ elected for a magistrates’ court trial. He was acquitted. We think that from everyone’s point of view the prosecution was wrong and has produced a series of innocent victims. The most obvious victim in this case is Richards LJ. A relatively young, widely respected lord justice of appeal tipped to become a future law lord and perhaps even master of the rolls, he suddenly found himself catapulted into criminal proceedings, accused of being little better than a dirty old man in a mac. He was acquitted on the basis that the prosecution had not discharged the burden of proof. To an outsider this always seemed the most likely verdict. To those
