News

Stint on the sex offenders register for City lawyer who racially and sexually assaulted woman at Christmas party

By on
39

He also poured beer over his victim’s head and called her an “Australian slut”

lead1

A high-flying City solicitor, who earlier this month was found guilty of racially aggravated assault and sexual assault, has today been handed a 12-month community order.

Following sentencing at Wimbledon Magistrates, Alastair Main will have to complete 200 hours of unpaid work. His name will be placed on the sex offenders register for five years.

Main — who has reportedly been sacked from his previous job as legal counsel at London-based asset management firm Schroders — also risks being struck off. A spokesperson for the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) told Legal Cheek today:

We are aware [Main’s conviction] and now the court case is concluded, we will seek all relevant information before deciding on the appropriate action.

Main, 35, was accused of pouring a beer over a 27-year-old woman at the London Rowing Club’s 2015 Christmas party in Putney. He was also said to have called her an “Australian slut”.

At trial, the court heard how Maine followed the young woman into the ladies’ toilets, lifted up her skirt and repeatedly slapped her. After “storming out” of the restrooms, he continued to pursue his unnamed victim before apparently giving her another slap on the bum.

The Ashurst-trained lawyer — who accepted that he had followed the woman, but only because he wanted to apologise for pouring beer on her — maintained that the bum slap was “cheeky”. He accepted calling her “a slut” but insisted that the incident was not racially motivated.

Admitted as a solicitor in October 2007, Main was found guilty of aggravated assault and sexual assault earlier this month. He had, until today, been on unconditional bail while pre-sentencing reports were prepared.

Ordering Main to cough up £1,000 in costs and an £85 victim surcharge, Judge Barnes today told him:

I take into account that you have lost your job and cannot work in your chosen sector in future and the impact on your reputation, your family, friends and the public.

The judge said money could not recompense behaviour like this, and that the victim “would like to leave this all behind” and has “moved on”.

Main, whose legal career now lies in tatters, is also subject to a five-year restraining order that prevents him from contacting the victim.

For all the latest news, features, events and jobs, sign up to Legal Cheek’s weekly newsletter here.

39 Comments

Anonymous

Good riddance.

(19)(0)

Anonymous

First the Honourable, the Lord Harley, and now Baron von Schroders’ lawyer. The Aristocracy and their attorneys are being caned and the profession is going to Hell in a handcart … like the USA, I guess

(2)(0)

Lawyer

5 year restraining order. Cool. I remember when it was hard to get more than a month’s restraining order. Can you get a life time restraining order?

(3)(0)

Felicitas

Yep. Indefinite restraining orders are not uncommon.

(4)(0)

Anonymous

In fact, they are exceedingly rare in my experiance. They should be uncommon, unless you let the CPS get away with it. And they will, negligently, try to do so. The order must be necessary and proportionate, while not impossible, it is highly unlikely that an indefinite order can be that.

(2)(0)

Sigh

This is what makes the sex offenders register a joke. Morons like this are put in the same categories of rapists and paedos.

If I was a paedo and people found out I was on the sex offenders register, I’d just say I got drunk and grabbed a woman’s boobs at a party, and then we can all laugh how stupid the system is while no-one bats an eyelid at me talking to children.

That’s how bad this system is. It actually trivialises the sex offenders register and makes people and children far less safe as a result.

At the very least have two different registers for inappropriate touching and child rape FFS!

(46)(5)

Barrister

I know what you’re getting at, but he felt he had the right to lift up a woman’s skirt and touch her. It’s right that this behavior also leads to inclusion on the register. It happens too often and his attempt to dismiss it as “cheeky” shows he clearly thought it was ok.

(15)(3)

Anonymous

So put him on some kind of “gropers register” so everyone can be aware exactly what threat he poses?

Putting him on the same register as people who forcibly penetrate children is obscene and makes a mockery of the whole system.

(14)(3)

Essex Bint

Exactly. It was offensive behaviour and he had no right to do what he did but this is really out of proportion – had he gone to a bar, drunk three bottles of scotch and driven home (without a licence and insurance) and killed someone, he would have gotten off much lighter!

(2)(2)

Barrister

I get your point but I disagree. The attempt to dismiss it as “cheeky” behavior suggests that he does not understand that he’s no right to lift women’s clothing and touch them without their consent. Sadly it is likely that without this case the same thing may have happened on another drunken night out with the lads.

(1)(1)

Anonymous

You sound as though you’ve practised that defence…

(7)(1)

Career changer

Having worked directly with men who sexually offend (the full spectrum of offences) in a rehabilitative capacity for 6 years, I share the view that the SOR is flawed. However, there must be the recognition that nobody has any right to help themselves to another individual whatsoever. Peddling such “cheeky” behaviour as acceptable in the context of a joke or high jinks, perpetuates the kinds of attitudes that offenders adopt to justify their behaviour. The line has got to be drawn & done so clearly. It is an individual’s responsibility not to violate another. Simple really.

(5)(1)

Pantman

Surely the balance here, between the different classes of offending, is the duration upon which they are to remain on the register? I understand your point, but it’s also clear that a rapist or paedophile would additionally have a custodial sentence to explain.

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Jones Day is scouting this guy to be their next managing partner

(21)(3)

Jones Day Partner

What! I’m the next managing partner. I’ve achieved a lot more than this guy. And none of my subordinates went to the authorities, so clearly I’m playing on a different level.

(6)(1)

Lawyer

Thank you Felicitas. I have never come across an indefite restraining order. They were always time bound. Usually a month or a year at best. It would have been so useful for courts to dish out indefinite restraint orders back in the day

(0)(1)

Anonymous

I feel sorry for the guy, but if you act like an idiot you have to accept the consequences.

(3)(4)

Anonymous

Racially aggravated by calling someone Australian? I don’t understand how that is a) relating to race (as opposed to nationality) or b) demonstrating hostility to that group.

(2)(3)

Anonymous

There is no suggestion in the disclosed facts that the “racial” element was because she was Australian; based on what we’ve been told, she could have been any race. Are you suggesting that Australian people are necessarily white? I’m sure you’re not.

(1)(7)

Anonymous

No, but usually the ‘disclosed facts’ are designed to describe the criminality. I was making no assumptions about the ethnicity of the victim, merely pointing out that on the disclosed facts, there does not appear to be racial aggravation.

(0)(0)

A

Racially aggravated is an umbrella term – it includes reference to nationality

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Maybe she was native Australian i.e Aboriginal?

(0)(1)

Face like a slapped oz

What a lad

(1)(2)

Anonymous

Stupid drunken behaviour. Not sure that one starts offending in their mid-30’s unless there is a serious drink or drug problem; this chap doesn’t seem to have either.

A very silly thing to have done, but I am uncertain he will be a repeat offender and am not persuaded he should be signing onto the register for 5 years as a consequence.

(3)(2)

Anonymous

I was shocked to discover how many of my female friends have been touched or grabbed whilst on the Tube, on buses or in bars and clubs. It’s unwanted and is very upsetting. (The fact that some say it’s happened so many times that it is no longer quite so upsetting makes such conduct worse in my book). He should be on the register – he clearly thinks that doing this to a woman isn’t that big a deal.

(1)(0)

Pantman

Isn’t it just as likely that he has done this sort of thing before, and just not been caught/reported?

(0)(0)

Waltzing Matilda

This is a legal cheek comments thread right

(0)(0)

Anonymous

I’d go one further.

Sex offender’s register for morons like this, but castration for child rapists.

Discuss.

(0)(3)

Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(0)(1)

Anonymous

Why is castration for child rapist unpopular?

Why has no one argued it?

(0)(0)

Pantman

I suppose because, ultimately, we (society) believe that offenders can be rehabilitated. Or at least we should.

(0)(0)

Everybody needs good neighbours

That’s more like it

Top banta

(1)(0)

Cheeky bum slap

thanks legal cheek for this cheeky analysis of a “cheeky” bum cheek slap

(1)(1)

Lawyer

Cheeky, but not very legal

(0)(0)

Ciaran Goggins

Main is a boor and a guilty one, but what if he was innocent? Either anonymity for both sides or neither. Indeed as Ched Evans said (cont p.52)

(2)(2)

Anonymous

Is this because he is only a ‘high-flying’ solicitor? Would being a ‘top’ solicitor have earned him a more lenient sentence I wonder?

(2)(0)

Anonymous

Sure he is a “bottom” solicitor.

(3)(0)

Anonymous

Given he looks like both David and Ed Milliband at the same time he’s probably suffered enough.

(2)(0)

Anonymous

Trump

(0)(0)

Comments are closed.