A solicitor ‘repeatedly lied’ about having a sexual relationship with a legal blogger he harassed and stalked for months, a court has found.
Andrew Milne had appealed his conviction for stalking Daniel Cloake, over a six-day hearing at Snaresbrook Crown Court.
His Honour Judge Timothy Greene, sitting alongside two magistrates, today refused Milne’s appeal, saying: ’The repeated lies to the police when first questioned and the repeated lies in evidence to us, leave us in no doubt that Mr Milne knew full well that his course of conduct amounted to harassment.’
The court heard that Cloake had reported through his blog, Mouse in the Court, on litigation that Milne was involved in. After agreeing to Milne’s request to go for lunch during one of these hearings in March 2024, Milne claimed in his appeal they had then embarked on a sexual relationship, with meetings taking place at a hotel on The Strand in London.
Milne, 64, also claimed that Cloake had placed a hand on his groin when they were in a lift together. The judge said this was a lie made up by Milne after he had given a statement to police, as there had been no initial mention of it.
Milne’s claim that Cloake told him what a good lover he was formed part of the solicitor’s attempt ‘to justify his own wish-fulfilling fantasies’, the judge said. He added: ‘We are certain that Mr Milne was sexually obsessed with Mr Cloake and became increasingly threatening as he realised that Mr Cloake was not going to be persuaded to have sex.’
The court had heard that Milne bombarded Cloake with messages from March to August 2024. These were littered with sexual innuendo and requests to meet in person. He also sent a gift on Cloake’s birthday and then turned up at his home, staying for nine minutes before posting a handwritten note again making sexual references and saying that the victim could lose his house if Milne opted to bring litigation against him.
Cloake had told the court that Milne ‘rolls people about like an alligator, targeting them from every angle’.
Milne had tried to argue in his appeal that if Cloake felt harassed then he would have reported the matter to the police earlier (he reported Milne after the home visit, but had previously sent regular complaints to the SRA).
The judge said Milne’s conduct was ‘so bizarre and irrational’ that the court did not believe he would have stopped even if Cloake had asked him to do so. ‘The visit to Mr Cloake’s home meant a line was crossed, but even without that visit Mr Milne had been harassing Mr Cloake for four to five months,’ added the judge.
‘Between March and August 2024 the emails became more and more explicit and threatening, and we accept Mr Cloake’s evidence that he was upset and frightened, and felt threatened.’
The court found a ‘significant contrast’ between Cloake and Milne as witnesses. The blogger responded to questions in a straightforward, calm and appropriate manner, whereas Milne’s answers were ‘often rambling’. It was noted in the judgment that Milne would often laugh at inappropriate points during proceedings and frequently repeated himself.
‘In every respect where their accounts differed, we preferred the evidence of Mr Cloake to the evidence of Mr Milne,’ said the judge. ‘We are in no doubt that Mr Milne lied repeatedly in his evidence to us. His claim that he and Mr Cloake had consensual sex on many occasions between March and August 2024 is completely incapable of belief.’
Milne, who told the court he retired from practice six months ago, had already been sentenced to a 24-month community order under which he must complete 300 hours of unpaid work and 20 days of rehabilitation. He is also subject to a seven-year restraining order not to make any contact with Cloake.
Milne is subject to ongoing disciplinary action by the SRA and has a full hearing scheduled for next year. A representative of the SRA was present in court to hear today’s judgment.
After his initial conviction, Milne was ordered to pay £850 compensation to Cloake. That was increased in the Crown court to £1,000.
Milne was also ordered to pay a further £1,300 costs.
