Solicitor jailed for 21 years over sex offences struck off


Norwich Crown Court: Conviction in September 2017

A solicitor has been struck off after being jailed for 21 years for sexual offences, in which he used his professional status to hide his actions.

Glen Bartlett, 61, was convicted in September 2017 at Norwich Crown Court of 10 counts of buggery (involving Person A) and two counts of indecent assault on a male (Person B).

In addition to his sentence, he was ordered to be placed on the barring list by the Disclosure and Barring Service and to sign the Sex Offenders Register indefinitely.

Bartlett, who qualified in 1981, continues to assert his innocence and told the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) that, though he accepted he would be struck off, if his efforts to overturn the convictions were successful, he reserved his right to apply to have his name restored to the roll.

The SDT recorded that Person A was 10 when Bartlett began to abuse him sexually, and 11 when the buggering began and continued frequently for the next four years. Bartlett was 12 years older.

It said: “The respondent [Bartlett] had cynically groomed Person A. The respondent’s campaign of abuse was carefully planned and in breach of the trust reposed in the respondent charged with Person A’s care when babysitting and when he was to clean the respondent’s car or play squash with him.

“The judge found that, because the respondent was well thought of within the family and training to become a solicitor, other adults did not question the time he spent with Person A…

“As time passed, the respondent reminded Person A of [his] status as a solicitor, leaving him with the enduring impression that the respondent’s word would be accepted over his, both within the family and beyond.”

Her Honour Judge Moore found that Bartlett had indecently assaulted Person B on an occasion when he was aged 14 or 15, and on another occasion when Person B was obliged to share a room with him on holiday.

The SDT said: “The judge had made findings as to the adverse effect that the respondent’s behaviour had had on both Person A and Person B.

“She had also found that the respondent had used his position as a trainee solicitor and subsequently as a solicitor to both hide his actions and to prevent Person A from speaking out.”

There was, the SDT concluded, “no other possible sanction” than to strike Bartlett off.




Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Reports

No larger firm can ignore the demands of innovation – that was the clear message from our most recent roundtable: “The law firm of the future”, sponsored by LexisNexis Enterprise Solutions. It comes in many forms, predominantly but not just technology, and is not simply a case of automating process. Expertise and process are not mutually exclusive.

Blog

16 November 2018

Transparency is about a lot more than just price

The transparency agenda is much more than the figures you put on your website; it all comes back to communication, the root of so many lawyers’ problems if you look at the types of complaint that go to the Legal Ombudsman.

Read More