Report comment

Accepting his medical condition at face value and the "no innate criminality" observation, you could possibly understand the distinction between his crime and a solicitor convicted of say a dishonesty offence. However, what if he believed that a Defendant he was prosecuting may be acquitted and go on to commit further serous crime? By his thought process, would he go and stab that Defendant in the head as well? Would he burn down his office because he viewed the entire CPS as inadequate?

The derisory costs order compared to those made against solicitors in private practice who appear before the SDT (take for example Richard Harbord who was recently ordered to pay £9,500 costs for not having disclosed an ongoing sexual relationship with a client after the SRA advice line twice told him that he could continue to act as long as he gave impartial advice) suggests that there's one rule for them and one for the rest of us.