• Application 11682-2017

• Admitted 1996

• Hearing 31 October 2017

• Reasons 20 November 2017

The SDT ordered that the respondent should be struck off the roll.

By virtue of his convictions on 3 March 2017 and 11 January 2017 in the Crown Court of making indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs of child; possession of extreme pornographic images (act of intercourse/oral sex with a dead/alive animal); distributing indecent photograph of child; three counts of possession of indecent photograph/pseudo-photograph for distribution; possession of class A and B drugs and supplying class A drugs, the respondent had breached principles 1, 2 and 6 of the SRA Principles 2011.

The respondent did not dispute the convictions. He had not lodged any appeal against conviction or sentence. His convictions stood.

It was suggested that the respondent’s medication had caused him to act irrationally. If the respondent appealed the convictions successfully it would be open to him to revert to the SDT (under rule 21(5)) and apply for its finding to be revoked.

The SDT had considered the evidence and the submissions for the applicant and the representations by the respondent and a family member. It found the allegations proved on the evidence to the required standard.

The respondent was ordered to pay costs of £1,880.