District Judge Wendy Lloyd seems to have made an intentional ‘wrong judgement‘ out of what can only be seen as ‘in spite’.
It must be awful for a judge to sit there, high and mighty, all important and ‘supposedly’ knowledgeable of the crime being heard (to ensure a fair hearing), only to find that the layman prosecutor actually has a better understanding of the law in question!
When a private prosecution was brought before DJ Lloyd by a member of the public (litigant in person), seeking an application for a court summons for a person who had committed an act of malicious communications, Judge Wend Lloyd stupidly said the crime was ‘out of time‘.
DJ Judge Wendy Lloyd fell at the first hurdle and did not even know the legislation about the crime she was reviewing!
When the ‘layman’ prosecutor politely informed DJ Judge Wendy Lloyd that she was incorrect, and that the crime was in fact an ‘either way’ offence with no time limit, she argued (like a spoilt child) that it was out of time. Flushed at being gazumped by a mere cretin of a civilian, DJ Lloyd continued to angrily argue that it was out of time, not knowing that she was about to look a ‘bit of a fool’.
When pushed by the layman prosecutor as to the legislation and the date in which it became ‘indictable’, she reluctantly ‘retired’ to the Judges Chambers as advised by her legal adviser, 10 minutes later, the layman prosecutor was called back before the judge who then sheepishly was told that he was correct, BUT, Judge Wendy Lloyd then changed her mind said the crime “did not have a realistic prospect of conviction“…
Gazumped again, DJ Wend Lloyd appears to use the “realistic prospect of conviction” test which is part of the CPS full code test, (read about it here) it is not to be used by a Judge, and most certainly not in a private prosecution which has nothing to do with the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) who use this test, and has no such threshold test in a private prosecution case!
Judge Wendy Lloyd, twice in one hearing makes stupid & wrong judicial decisions. She stood by her second decision even though it was totally wrong and the layman prosecutor was denied justice by DJ Wendy Lloyd who, in this case, did not have an understanding of the law for which she was making decision! (note: maybe there is an ulterior motive as a more recent application for the same summons was rejected for a different and more bizarre reason by a different judge….coming soon)
With UK Judges are not above the law. They still must apply the law as written, yes, they do interpret it in different ways but not blatantly making the law up as they see fit which appears to be what DJ Lloyd did.
An application under the FOI has been made to discover if there are any credible conflicts of interest between the judiciary and the defendant.
Have your say, please leave a comment below.