Power imbalance
A senior criminal barrister has been disbarred after a disciplinary tribunal found he sexually harassed a junior colleague who had only recently completed her pupillage.
Kevin James Barry, formerly head of the criminal department at his chambers, admitted three counts of professional misconduct concerning his behaviour towards the junior barrister, known as Person A, at two social events in 2018. These took place at the Rosewood Hotel bar and at a chambers silks party.
The tribunal heard that he placed his hand on Person A’s upper thigh beneath her dress and “edged it upwards towards her groin”, and also touched her hair while making comments about it “which were of a sexual nature”. At the chambers silks party, he again behaved inappropriately by placing “his hand on her bottom” for a couple of seconds while standing next to her.
Publishing its full reasons this week, the bar disciplinary tribunal said Barry “must have appreciated that he was in a position of power and importance” to the junior colleague, who had no work of her own and relied on chambers for her income. She told the panel she did not want to upset someone who had an ability to impact her career, “both within chambers and externally”.
The tribunal, chaired by His Honour Martyn Zeidman KC, said Barry’s extensive criminal practice made the misconduct “all the worse”. It noted that sexual offences formed a significant part of his work and that the “concept of consent was well known to him”.
Despite admitting the charges, Barry continued to assert that he believed Person A was consenting at the time. He accepted that this was not a reasonable belief and said his judgement may have been affected by alcohol. The tribunal also found that he ignored requests from her to stop.
It accepted that the junior barrister suffered anxiety, fear and longer term effects on her wellbeing and career. She reported discomfort when touched by others, flashbacks, and becoming more withdrawn in the months afterwards.
Barry had also been reprimanded and fined £3,000 in 2019 for “unwanted sexual conduct” towards his then-pupil, a previous disciplinary finding that the tribunal regarded as a significant aggravating factor.
Barry pointed to his remorse, therapy, charitable work and the difficult personal consequences of the case, with one character witness describing him as “a broken person”. The tribunal acknowledged he had reduced his alcohol intake, but expressed concern that he had not maintained total abstinence.
However, it rejected submissions that a suspension would be adequate. Quoting sanctions guidance, the panel said disbarment is reserved for cases where public protection or confidence in the profession requires removal from practice.
“In our view, this is clearly such a case. We are sure that a suspension would not be sufficient,” it concluded.
A spokesperson for the Bar Standards Board said:
“We would like to thank the individual who came forward and we recognise the courage it takes to make reports about behaviour like this. The Bar Standards Board treats all such allegations seriously and will take action where necessary. We are committed to ensuring that such behaviour is not tolerated at the Bar. Mr Barry’s actions were serious and incompatible with membership of the Bar and this is reflected in the decision of the tribunal to disbar Mr Barry.”
The decision remains open to appeal.
(
(
