Hewson, who gives her status at Bar Council as “career break”, is expected to deny charges against her: tbtas.org.uk/wp-content/upl…
The tribunal has begun.
BSB counsel says that by doing so Hewson was disparaging of both another barrister and of the BSB and its regulatory process.
Tribunal chairman asks whether Barbara Hewson was disparaging of the BSB because it had previously formally warned her about her conduct.
BSB counsel describes Hewson’s tweets as “wholly inappropriate”.
Hewson appealed the ruling, partly on the basis of “freedom of speech”, but she lost, tribunal hears.
In response to a question by the tribunal chairman, BSB counsel confirms that Hewson had no quarrel with the daughter – only her mother
BSB counsel says that the BSB, as usual, is neutral on the issue of sanction.
But the chairman says that this will probably not do.
b) “persistent conduct over a lengthy period of time”
c) “undermining of profession in eyes of public” (root of “Core Duty 5”)
d) “previous finding on similar breaches”.
There was a single warning, Barbara Hewson’s tribunal hears again.
He says that he will talk about “where it all went wrong for this barrister, as it plainly did.”
She became “increasingly isolated personally and professionally”, for example no longer being part of a chambers.
“It strikes at the very heart of the regulatory process, of the legal process,” he says.
He states the issue for the tribunal: “Is suspension sufficient, or is disbarment necessary?”
Hewson’s counsel said that the blog was the product of a “lucid and eloquent, but muddled mind”.
Hewson “was not functioning properly,” he adds.
The offending tweets were read by fewer than half a dozen people, and probably mainly by the “protaganists”, he says.
“This is a tragedy. This is a genuine tragedy.”
As a loss for an answer, the reply to the tribunal is: “Well, I wouldn’t.”
“The mere fact it is used does not mean that is acceptable.”
This, for example, meant that Sarah Phillimore did not have to give evidence to this tribunal, he points out.
The reply is that he does not know, but, pressed from the side by Barbara Hewson, he says that he believes that there may be an example of that.
So, Hewson’s legal team will be urgently searching for the C-bomb tonight.
“She has belatedly got the point about how a member of the Bar should disport themselves,” he says.
He tells tribunal: “My client has been intemperate and inappropriate,” but, he claims, her actions were less serious than those attacks.
But he is pleading mitigation for the “tsunami of abuse” that he says was unleashed by the Spiked article.
But he wants the panel to consider the impact that it had on her as a woman living alone, including death and rape threats.
“She was driven out of chambers. I make no criticism of the chambers even if others might – even if Ms Hewson might.”
He compares attacks on Barbara Hewson to those on female MPs.