News

Barrister who claimed Nazis wanted to nuke Queen at Olympics is found guilty

By on
53

Michael Shrimpton facing jail for communicating false information, as previous conviction for possession of indecent images of children is revealed

shrimpton-rings

This afternoon at Southwark Crown Court a jury has found ex-Tanfield Chambers barrister and immigration judge Michael Shrimpton guilty of making a bomb hoax before the 2012 Olympics.

The nine men and three women took more than six hours to come to their majority 11-1 verdict.

Shrimpton, who still holds a valid practising certificate, is now facing jail as he awaits sentencing on 6 February. In the meantime he has been granted bail and will undergo a psychiatric examination.

In the wake of the decision, it can be reported that Shrimpton holds a previous conviction for possession of indecent images of children. An attempt by the barrister to appeal the conviction — which came about after police found the images on a memory stick in his house during a search — failed last month. During the case at Aylesbury Crown Court, Shrimpton claimed that secret service agents planted the images on his computer memory stick in a plot to discredit him.

He was sentenced earlier this year to a three year supervision order and a five year Sexual Offences Prevention Order for the crime.

In brief, the bizarre facts of the bomb hoax case were that Shrimpton called up the Ministry of Defence before the 2012 Olympics to announce that a nuclear weapon had been stolen from sunken Russian submarine the Kursk, smuggled into the UK by a group affiliated with World War Two Nazis and was being stored in preparation for an attack on the Queen at the Olympics.

At Southwark Crown Court today, Judge Alistair McCreath QC said:

“The sentence that I pass upon you will have to reflect that gravity of the conduct of which you have been convicted.

“But if, as may be the case, there is some underlying reason for it, then it seems to me important that I be informed of that underlying reason and I am therefore minded to order that you undergo psychiatric examination.”

Legal Cheek has previously brought to a wider audience Shrimpton’s assertion that missing Malaysian flight MH370 was shot down by a Chinese missile and his claim that Madeleine McCann was “murdered on the orders of German Intelligence”.

53 Comments

Fiat Justitia (with bald tyres)

I recall laughing at him a lot here. Does that count as relentless pursuit? When the thread was closed, I decided to move on with life.

(1)(0)

Fiat Justitia (with bald tyres)

Shrimpton doesn’t appear on the BSB register. If he is elsewhere on the site, my search SKILLZ is well rubbish innit.

(1)(0)

Sue R Pipe

That’s because the BSB is doing its job.

(0)(1)

Fiat Justitia (with bald tyres)

One of the tabloids refers to the dude as an ex barrister, but, unless he fell on his sword, you would expect a disbarment to be posted on the website.

(1)(0)

Fiat Justitia (with bald tyres)

On the conviction itself, the jury may well have been incredibly pissed off by Shrimpton, as he is insufferably pompous and bumptious, but he probably genuinely believes his own nonsense, so it is hard to see how the prosecution was sound. The CPS asked for him to have his bumps felt earlier on, but he declined, and couldn’t be forced to go and see Dr Melfi.

(3)(0)

Sue R Pipe

“Insufferably pompous and bumptious”

Keep up the good work FJ.

BTW you didn’t just laugh at Blacker, you e-mailed the SRA about him too.

(0)(2)

Fiat Justitia (with bald tyres)

I don’t recall doing that. If I did, they never replied.

(0)(0)

Sue R Pipe

They did reply. You shared the reply.

(0)(0)

Fiat Justitia (with bald tyres)

Dementia has me in its power (or maybe gin). What did they say? Yesterday is a blur, last month a vanished country.

(0)(0)

Sue R Pipe

You quoted them verbatim.

Shame if you have dementia. Have your bumps felt and they will tell you.

(0)(0)

Fiat Justitia (with bald tyres)

Too late, dragged off to the Home for the Prematurely Bewildered by kind men in white coats.

(0)(0)

Sue R Pipe

Check your e-mails, you should find the exchange in there.

(0)(0)

Fiat Justitia (with bald tyres)

I just did, but no joy. I must have deleted it. BTW, if Blacker ever does sue, and I doubt that he will, I do a bit of libel, so I can write “bollocks” in red pen in the margin of yer pleadings pro bono publico.

(0)(0)

Sue R Pipe

The SRA say this:-
“….our records indicate Dr Alan Blacker has been employed as an In
house Solicitor for the Joint Armed Forces Legal Advocacy Service,
Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) ID562550, since 7 September 2011.
The organisation is listed on our records as a Registered Charity and
therefore we regulate the solicitor not the organisation.”

(0)(0)

anonymous n

Some (but not all, obviously) readers may discern a subtle distinction between making enquiries of the regulator and setting up a trolling website.

(3)(0)

Sue R Pipe

Thank you anonymous n.

Feel free to read the content and learn the truth.

The SRA is investigating far more than poxy swimming badges.

(0)(3)

anonymous n

A more persuasive argument might have been one that addressed the relevant points rather than changing the subject.

(3)(0)

CumLaudly

In order to be guilty of the offence under section 51(2), the defendant must have known or believed that the information which he communicated was false. The jury must therefore have concluded that Shrimpton either knew the information which he communicated was false or believed it to be false.

Having read some of Shrimpton’s internet writings (and his defence statement), I’m not so sure that he did know or believe the information to be false. After all, this is a bloke who thinks that the President of the European Commission “selected [Madeleine McCann] for kidnap and sexual abuse” (defence statement, paragraph 18).

(0)(0)

Fiat Justitia (with bald tyres)

I agree. The guy is a fruitloop, and appears to belive all of the utter codswallop that he writes and says. He appears to live in a Walter Mitty world in which he is an intelligence insider, rather than some bloke who used to practise law from a flat in Wendover. I fail to see how the prosecution served any public interest. The child porn is quite another matter.

(2)(0)

Sandman

I assume the public interest is to punish a bomb hoaxer who was able to rely on his profession to lend himself an element of respect and credibility when making his hoax.

(0)(0)

VTESI

I don’t want to “go Daily Mail” either but the comments above about the guidelines being rubbish are spot on. Most people think that crimes like rape or pedophilia are serious and therefore have an equally serious sentence to go with it but the reality is a lot less. No wonder people don’t take such crimes seriously – this is obviously only one reason but it’s a big one.

Secondly, why wasn’t the first thing the police did was have him psych evaluated? Perhaps they don’t have the power to do that, I don’t know but my first reading of this story and that solicitor who made up litigation for 3 years is that they are obviously mentally unwell and need help rather than jail. In this case, however, it’s clearly more complicated.

(1)(0)

Fiat Justitia (with bald tyres)

He’s also a ‘kipper, a birther, believes that Ted Heath was a Nazi spy and paedo, and indeed attributes every bad thing that happens to the DVD, a Nazi spy ring that he has made up.

(0)(0)

Comments are closed.