Veteran lawyer who made sexual remarks is reprimanded and fined

A veteran solicitor who joked that a junior female colleague 'knows all about' having sex on a train has been ordered to pay £12,000 but avoided being struck off.

Geoffrey White made lewd comments to the probation worker including showing her an internet meme of a naked woman in court and saying that 'looks a bit like you'.

The 66-year-old criminal defence solicitor told a disciplinary tribunal that after 50 years in the courtroom, he felt 'more comfortable' there than in any other social setting, meaning he often used 'flippant humour' - but accepted he was 'foolish'.

The Solicitors Regulation Authority branded Mr White's comments as being both 'puerile' and 'derogatory' - noting that although he had 'qualified' into a culture of 'robing room banter', the world had 'moved on'.

After a disciplinary hearing, Mr White was reprimanded and ordered to pay £12,000 in costs.

The tribunal heard Mr White set up his own legal practice after qualifying in March 1993.

The woman who complained about him - identified only as Person A - worked for Sussex Probation and split her time between courts, it was heard.

She said that in May 2021, she was at Crawley Magistrates' Court in West Sussex with Mr White.

During the shift, it was heard that Mr White showed a 'meme' to a fellow solicitor and said '[(erson A) it looks a bit like you' and 'your hair looks the same'.

The picture depicted a naked woman lying down on a table at a barbecue with bottles around her - some of which were covering her breasts, it was heard.

Person A said that the picture had a caption which said something to the effect of 'if you have left your wife at the BBQ please come and get her'.

The probation officer said the solicitor to whom Mr White had shown the meme to 'chuckled' and made a comment which implied 'they thought it was funny'.

Person A said did not know how to react to the situation and found it 'all very weird', it was heard.

The interaction occurred while the court was not sitting - and it was heard that Mr White continued as usual when the magistrates returned.

The panel heard of a second allegation, which took place in July of the same year, where Mr White was representing a female defendant at the same court.

The defendant was in court for allegedly having sex on a train and while sat in the courtroom, the solicitor joked that '[Person A] knows all about that, standard probation practice'.

'She stated that Mr White's comments made her feel awkward and 'really uncomfortable because it is a totally outrageous thing to say and not at all appropriate,' the panel said.

The 'annoyed' probation worker reported his comments to her manager shortly afterwards.

It was heard that in December, Mr White approached Person A and apologised to her, telling the probation worker that 'he had just wanted to make people laugh' and got it 'catastrophically wrong'.

The Solicitors Regulation Authority said that the comments made by Mr White were 'sexual in nature' and had 'sexual connotations'.

'This was also in the context of the power imbalance between Mr White as a senior and experienced male criminal defence solicitor and Person A as a female, younger, less experienced probation officer,' they said.

It was said that Mr White's conduct was both 'unwanted' and 'offensive' to her and he failed to see how the comments might be perceived as 'inappropriate', rather than just being 'banter'.

They added: 'Mr White's comments to Person A were plainly inappropriate, could appear to be derogatory - in terms of being disrespectful and were also puerile and hurtful.'

The solicitor told the panel that he had spent his entire his career - spanning approximately 50 years - in the courtroom and felt 'more comfortable' here than in a 'normal social environment'.

Mr White accepted that he had acted 'foolishly' and said he used 'flippant humour' to deal with the day to day hostility he experienced in a magistrates' court.

'He had qualified into a culture of 'robing room banter' that made light of difficult work by relying on inappropriate humour,' the panel described.

The tribunal said that the risk of repetition was 'very low', adding: 'The profession had moved on since he started working in the law and attitudes have changed over this period.

'Attempted humour of the sort used here by Mr White was entirely misplaced, old fashioned and rooted in the distant past, having no place in a current setting.

'Solicitors must have regard to and be conscious of the impact of 'banter' when in a professional setting particularly as in this case when engaging with a more junior colleague of a different gender.'

The tribunal ordered Mr White be reprimanded and asked him to pay £12,000 in costs.