Keen to be Mean
September 23, 2007 by VM
How some Circuits do ‘ave ‘em. After Petey’s negotiations with Addleshaws were played out in public it appeared that Manchester had contributed the most spectacularly bizzarre judicial moment of the century thus far. However, only a few months on, Sheffield has come up with its own contender.
His Honour Judge Roger Keen QC has been smacked by the Court of Appeal for refusing to allow an accused to change his underpants. Keen QC apparently believes that clean underpants are an impediment to honesty because the unfortunate accused was finally allowed a change after he had given evidence.
Upset by what he considered to be timewasting on the first day, Keen withdrew bail, as a result of which the accused spent three days in a police cell without even a shower. Giving evidence in his own defence he promptly burst into tears: which the Judge presumably considered a result. The jury convicted him and Keen imposed three years for handling some car radios and having £17,000 in cash.
Astonishingly, the Court of Appeal did not even consider the submission that Keen’s summing-up omitted reference to the defence case. Instead, they quashed the conviciton on the basis of Keen’s behaviour, remarking, accurately in my view, that “the exchanges between judge and counsel, especially on the first day, betray a rudeness and discourtesy of which the judge should be ashamed” and describing the Judge’s conduct regarding the change of clothing as “brutal”.
Dear Diary, my research has established that Judge Keen is an habitual offender. Known in Sheffield as “Clever C–t Keen” for reasons which I am told are more to do with alliteration and the Judge’s opinion of himself than accuracy, previous idiocies apparently include sending a barrister to change because his shirt was not predominantly white in colour. The story is told that as Judge Keen lay dying, he raised his head from his pillow and whispered to his wife, “Darling, there is something I must tell you. I am afraid I slept with your sister.” Mrs Keen (a positive angel) replied, “Don’t worry Roger, just rest”. The Judge raised his head again; “I cannot. I must tell you that I also slept with your best friend.” Mrs Keen responded “Don’t worry Roger; it doesn’t matter”. Again the Judge’s head was raised, “and I also slept with your mother”. Said Mrs Keen, “Roger, I know. Why do you think I poisoned you?”
On this ocassion, Keen’s antics persuaded their Lordships that the trial was unfair. The question is whether anyone now appearing in front of CCK can ever expect a fair trial? Perhaps it is time for His Honour to exit pursued by a bear.
VM - can’t find the judgment. Saw all the news reports. Hat Tip for picking this up. Is there a copy of the judgment of the CA anywhere on the net. Tried Google / Court service… usual stuff.
On the basis of the news report - and your comment on this matter - It is worth looking into the issue of His Honour’s behaviour.
Good post… if I may say so. I am interested in following up on this.
If Ruthie could send me a link to the judgment by email?
[...] Ruthie’s Law has a detailed comment on this case. This is well worth reading. [...]
this week’s crimeline posts a link to the press report, no sign of the judgment as yet