Two magistrates sanctioned over separate car park incidents

Two magistrates have been sanctioned for misconduct over separate car park issues - one of which led to an altercation and the other to a court session being interrupted.

Magistrate Shirley Holmes, who said she was ‘provoked’ during an argument in a supermarket car park, was issued with a formal warning for misconduct. Holmes received a conditional caution in April 2025 following an ‘altercation’ with a member of the public. During the incident, she removed an individual's Bluetooth headset and threw it into their car.

Holmes took full responsibility for her actions and said she was ‘sincerely regretful’ and, at the time of the altercation, was experiencing ‘challenges’ in her personal life, a spokesperson for the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office said.

The JCIO added: ‘However [Holmes] stated that she was provoked after the individual made remarks which she considered to be misogynistic, during an argument in which the individual had falsely accused her of misusing the car park.’

Mr Justice Keehan, on behalf of the lady chief justice, and the lord chancellor found Holmes’ actions posed a risk of reputational damage to the magistracy. Taking into consideration her acceptance of responsibility, the mitigating circumstances, her remorse and that there were no prior findings of misconduct, Holmes was issued with a formal warning for misconduct.

Magistrate Alfred Bean was issued with formal advice for misconduct after members of court staff complained about interactions they had with him after he had encountered difficulties parking at court one morning.

One of the two complainants reported Bean had ‘interrupted a court session to complain about the lack of parking in a loud, rude and bullying manner’ while the other complaint described being subjected to an ‘aggressive’ rant by Bean in which he ‘spoke over them in a raised voice’. Both reported Bean ‘stating he would leave court if the issue occurred again in future’. 

In mitigation, Bean ‘explained the stress caused by the parking situation, as well as his personal circumstances’. He denied shouting or being aggressive but admitted his voice ‘may have been slightly raised due to his stress and frustration’ and said he had been unaware court was in session.

The JCIO said: ‘He expressed regret about his behaviour, which had fallen below his usual standards, and stated that he did not intend to be rude or disrespectful. He added that he had attempted to apologise soon after but was told not to contact the complainants. He highlighted his 12-year unblemished conduct record and ongoing commitment to his role as a magistrate.’

Bean was found to have not been ‘sufficiently circumspect in his conduct and should have remained calm and professional, despite his frustation’. 

A JCIO spokesperson added: ‘[It was found] that interrupting a court session, albeit unintentionally, and ranting at staff in a raised voice, was unacceptable.’

Mr Justice Keehan, on behalf of the lady chief justice, and with the lord chancellor’s agreement issued Bean with formal advice for misconduct.

Sanctions for misconduct by judicial officer-holders are, in order of severity, formal advice, formal warning, reprimand and removal from office.