Nazi bomb hoax barrister handed 12-month jail sentence

By on

Michael Shrimpton’s professional fate in the hands of bar regulator as prison term comes in wake of child pornography conviction


The barrister convicted of an Olympic Games bomb hoax has been sentenced to 12 months in jail, it was reported this afternoon, as the profession’s regulator considers his future.

Michael Shrimpton — formerly of London’s Tanfield Chambers and an immigration judge — was sentenced today by judge Alistair McCreath at Southwark Crown Court in the capital.

He was found guilty at the end of last November of making a bomb hoax at the 2012 London games, in which he maintained that crypto-Nazis wanted to blow up the Queen.

At the time, it was revealed that Shrimpton, 57, had been convicted earlier in the year at Aylesbury Crown Court of creating indecent computer images of children. He was sentenced by to a three-year supervision order and a five–year Sexual Offences Prevention Order.

At that trial, Shrimpton claimed that secret service agents planted the images on his computer memory stick in a plot to discredit him.

The Bar Standards Board maintains it suspended Shrimpton from practice following the child pornography conviction.

Today, its director of professional conduct, Sara Jagger, told Legal Cheek:

“Following Mr Shrimpton’s conviction in November last year, we immediately acted to suspend him from practising as a barrister. This suspension is still in effect.

“While we do not usually comment on individual cases, following his sentencing today and as this information is already public, we can confirm that we are investigating Mr Shrimpton in accordance with our enforcement processes.”



His “professional future”? What professional future?

Such fantasists usually get found out eventually.


Simon Greenwood

I agree that Mr Shrimpton cannot expect a “professional future”. But what of other fantasists still at large in the legal field?
I’m thinking in particular of one practising solicitor advocate with higher rights of audience, (he has been discussed on LC before!) who self-advertises (and puffs his charity) on LinkedIn, sporting a noble title, medals and decorations, an academic doctorate and several higher degrees (to none of which he has verified entitlement.) As this behaviour appears to constitute fraud in some measure, will the Law Society or the SRA/SDT investigate and take appropriate action at some point?






To whom could you possibly be referring, Mr G? Let me think…



Must be the fake Lord Harley.


Simon Greenwood

Yes, I refer to the train driver “Dr. The Right Honourable The Lord Harley of Counsel, KGCStJ”, who has an ingrained habit of lifting others’ original writings and passing them off as though written by himself.



Gosh. You make the poor guy sound like some sort of serial plagiarist. He’s not that bad, surely?



Sad to say but I think he is that bad. His LinkedIn Pulse pronouncements are, mostly, lifted from others, including articles in the Law Society Gazette.


Sue R Pipe


Sounds like a clinical forensic psychiatrist is needed for all these fantasists.

Anyone know one ?



Sounds to me like paranoid schizophrenia with classic fantastic delusions… He needs hospital treatment, not a spell in chokey…



In a classic beginner’s error, Shrimpton chose as his defence counsel (for the plea in mitigation) a guy (Clegg QC) who is only qualified as a barrister. What he needed was someone with a much broader offering of talent and expertise: someone with multiple qualifications not just in the law but also in psychological, healthcare and surveillance matters. He should have called the “A” team…


Simon Greenwood

Well, according to his profile on LinkedIn, Lord Harley (Senior Trial and Appeal Counsel Criminal 4 (highest)) holds an MSc ‘summa cum laude’ in Clinical Forensic Psychiatry from Trinity College, has been decorated over a dozen times for exemplary service in the field of emergency medicine and is currently studying a course in USA Surveillance Law at Stanford University. These things would surely have equipped him as a better defence counsel for Mr Shrimpton than Wm Clegg QC.



Possibly Mr Shrimpton sussed that Lard Harley isn’t quite all he makes out on his LinkedIn profile.



Mr Shrimpton may have been aware that LinkedIn do not police the profiles posted by its members, however implausible they are, even when complaints are made about factual inaccuracy. So very misleading claims can easily be made. Mr Shrimpton, however, is probably not representative of the kind of people who are looking for help and are taken in by such as Lard Harley. The most they would do is use ‘Find a Solicitor’, from which they would learn that X has an SRA ID, and they will then assume that X must be OK, an assumption which looks pretty questionable in the light of the recent case of Schubert Murphy.



Mr Shrimpton has unknown to you the reader , worked and canceled out many bad people from doing bad things , as he is a man of his word he refused to use and harm people who in good faith gave free of charge previous correct information months in advance of world events , he has been called a nutter insane and many other insults , but in fact he is from my personal interactions with him , a very intelligent human being trying his best in his way to change our world for the best , maybe some of you readers should go and visit him in prison , then ask your self what did I do for good in my life and what stories will I tell proudly to my grand children , when they ask why did you not help the good guys , THINK AND RESEARCH THEN COMENT


Comments are closed.