By James Simons-
A solicitor has been fined £11,000 in costs suspended for 18 months for posting a series of offensive messages about Islam and other religions .The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal suspended Deborah Elizabeth Daniels for damaging the reputation of the profession by identifying herself as a solicitor, and behaving in a way which lacked integrity in such a public way. Ms Daniels “had greater responsibilities to act with integrity to avoid causing harm to the profession”, the disciplinary tribunal said.
Daniels shamefully used her Twitter account over a 14-month period to post offensive words and/or express hostility towards Islam, Judaism and Catholicism. She also use offensive or discriminatory words in response to a photograph of a drag artist. At all times her Twitter account publicly identified her as a solicitor. Now, her own reputation is in tartars after the ill judgment .The first tweet flagged up by the Solicitors Regulation Authority was from January 2016, when Daniels tweeted that all women ‘must carry staining pepper spray, learn self defense and do everything necessary to rid the world of Islam’.
Another tweet from her read: “not phobic because that denotes an irrational fear – our wish to demolish Islam is perfectly rational”; “every woman should crush this sexist cult”; and “the ring of steel hasn’t worked so well, put the bloody lot in a work camp and educate them or get rid”.
The 70 year old solicitor has 32 years experience in the field and is the compliance officer at West Yorkshire firm Bird and Daniels, where she is one of the two partners. The legal profession expect barristers and solicitors to conduct themselves with the utmost of dignity, and stay clear of controversial topics like religionSeveral respondents pointed out her status as a solicitor and tweeted replies with the SRA’s twitter handle included. Daniels later tweeted to individual commentators that Islam was a ‘sexist cult’. Later she suggested that Muslims be put in a work camp and ‘educate them or get rid’.
A member of the public who followed Daniels’ tweets provided a witness statement to the tribunal which expressed shocked and disappointed to discover a highly-educated professional woman should post such messages. Several other followers of her twitter account attacked her comments on twitter. Daniels submitted her witness statement out of time, providing as her reason a process of ”cumulative insight” over time which was ”difficult to articulate” Daniels admitted posting the messages and the fact they were offensive, but said frightening events in the Middle East she had read recently influenced her judgment, and not reflected on what she was saying. Daniel’s bad judgment was extended over more than one area in which sh e referred to sexual crimes committed by members of the Catholic church. She also sent offensive messages related to Judaism and retweeted someone else’s message talking about a global conspiracy to rule the world.
She told the tribunal she was not antisemitic and said her tweets were prompted by reports of killings of Palestinian children. The ruling was clear in its judgment that she had breached principle 2 and principle 6 of the Principles in that it lacked integrity and did not represent behaviour that maintains the trust the public placed in her as a solicitor and in the provision of legal services. led to adhere to a steady moral and ethical code and therefore failed to act with
integrity. The ruling reflected the applicant’s view that members of the public and other members of the profession would not
expect a solicitor to behave in that way, and the Respondent therefore failed to maintain the trust the public placed in her and in the provision of legal services
Daniels submitted in mitigation that she had undertaken ‘extensive and painful soul searching’ since sending the tweets and gained insight into why she sent them in the heat of the moment. She has now removed herself from social media. In an arrogant bid to escape punishment, she told the tribunal that the firm would cease to exist, putting five jobs at risk.
The tribunal accepted that Daniels showed ‘genuine remorse’ and a degree and insight, and was unlikely to repeat her misconduct. The 18-month suspension was deemed to strike a balance between an appropriate punishment, recognition of the harm caused to the profession, the need to provide public protection and the mitigating factors presented. She will also pay £11,000 in costs.
“The tribunal considered that whilst the individual tweets may have been drafted spontaneously in the heat of the moment and without reflection, there was a series of offending tweets which could not be described as spontaneous. The conduct was persistent and protracted.”
It added: “The seriousness of the misconduct was such that public confidence in the profession demanded no less than an immediate, fixed-term suspension.”
Biatebest.co.uk