District Judge Wendy Lloyd makes malicious wrong judgement

District Judge Wendy Lloyd seems to have made an intentionally malicious ‘wrong judgement‘ out of what can only be seen as ‘out of spite‘ using her power unlawfully.

It must be embarrassing for a judge to sit there, all high and mighty, all important and supposedly ‘knowledgeable’ of the criminal offence being heard (to ensure a fair hearing and justify their fat salaries!), only to find that a layman prosecutor actually had a better understanding of the law in question!

When a private prosecution was brought before DJ Wendy 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 Wendy 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!

District Judge Wendy Lloyd

When the ‘layman’ (litigant in person) 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 Wendy Lloyd continued to angrily argue that it was out of time, not knowing that she was looking a ‘bit of a fool’ in front of other legal professionals.

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 told him he was correct, BUT, DJ Judge Wendy Lloyd then changed her mind said the crime “did not have a realistic prospect of conviction“…

Gazumped again, DJ Wend Lloyd used 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 (unless the CPS get involved which they did not)

Judge Wendy Lloyd, twice in one hearing makes malicious & wrong judicial decisions simply out of spite.  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 (or more likely intentionally misinterpreted it) for which she was making the 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)

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 Wendy Lloyd did. (and got away with it)

There is a belief that this was an underhanded tactic as the defendant had later found that Merseyside police had put false and malicious information on the PNC about him that may have influenced the justice system.

Have your say, please leave a comment below.


  1. Interesting reading especially as I have knowledge of another case where judge Wendy Loyd in my opinion made a dreadful ruling against all the evidence presented which was, to an eminent barrister, self evident. This resulted in a well respected professional losing his job.

  2. I too have knowledge of DJ Wendy Lloyd and her arrogant behaviour, bad manners, and total disregard for the evidence put before her. Once she had made her mind up there is no swaying her no matter what the evidence presented shows. She hears what she wants to hear, and has no concept of the modern age. Yes she has a blackberry ( or at least she did in 2013), but does not understand wall paper as she couldn’t understand why a picture of a defendants cat was not on her Blackberry, which she fished from her bag and waved about. She also wanted to know why girls over the age of 18 didn’t, keep there money in their SOCKS, as opposed to their bra’s,!!!! Yes DJ Lloyd, Bobby socks were a 50’s thing, girls now go out with bare legs, beautifully tanned fron their local tanning studio. Yes with this archaic way of thinking I think retirement is calling and the sooner the better, before she ruins anybody else’s life.

Leave a Reply

WordPress spam blocked by CleanTalk.