A barrister accused of getting a judge’s permission to appear remotely at a trial due to her mother’s ill health when it also enabled her to attend a murder trial at a different court has denied misconduct.
Saleema Mahmood, called in 1999, faces 12 charges of professional misconduct before the Bar Tribunal & Adjudication Service.
Mahmood was in Birmingham set No 5 Chambers for 11 years before moving to London set Libertas Chambers just before she is alleged to have simultaneously appeared in two separate criminal trials, one at Stafford and the other in Nottingham. The Bar Standards Board alleges this was possible only because Mahmood was given permission to attend the Nottingham trial remotely by CVP because her mother was in hospital.
Mahmood is alleged to have improperly taken advantage of the permission given to attend the Nottingham trial remotely to attend the Stafford trial in person, of concealing her participation in the Stafford trial from the court in Nottingham, and by absenting herself from each case failing to act in the best interests of her clients.
The BSB claims Mahmood’s conduct lacked integrity and amounted to professional misconduct.
Mahmood denies the allegations against her or that she acted dishonestly. She argues the request for her to attend the Nottingham trial by CVP was not made by her but as a suggestion by the prosecution for days when the evidence in the trial did not concern her client.
Read more
Harpreet Sandhu KC told the five-person disciplinary panel he had a conversation with Mahmood in the robing room at Stafford Crown Court. He said: ‘She told me the judge in Nottingham had released her to do the Stafford trial because the evidence did not relate to her client.' He described these circumstances as 'unusual' but said he had no reason to question it until it became clear that her explanation to him 'was not the account she gave in Nottingham'.
Asked why he had not challenged Mahmood, Sandhu said: ‘It seemed to me based on what she had told me in Stafford and others in Nottingham that she may have misled one or the other. Putting it bluntly, had I spoken to Saleema Mahmood I was not confident I would receive a straight answer to the inconsistency. It seemed to me to be obvious that she was lying to somebody.’
The hearing continues.
