Senior judge cleared of flashing

A senior judge was today found not guilty of exposing himself to a woman on two busy commuter trains.

Sir Stephen Richards, who sits in the Court of Appeal as Lord Justice Richards, was cleared at City of Westminster Magistrates' Court in central London after a two-day trial.

Sir Stephen, 56, a married father-of-three, had denied two counts of " intentionally exposing his genitals intending that someone would see them and would be caused alarm or distress".

He was accused of flashing at a woman on two occasions on a train between Wimbledon and Waterloo on October 16 and October 24 last year.

After hearing the evidence, Senior District Judge Timothy Workman said the case came down to his word against hers.

Although the woman, a City worker in her 20s, gave "clear, dignified and truthful evidence" there was "insufficient evidence" to back up her identification of Sir Stephen, Mr Workman said.

Giving evidence yesterday, Sir Stephen said he could not "perceive deriving any form of gratification" from such an act.

In a rare move, the case was heard by chief magistrate Mr Workman, the most senior district judge in England and Wales, sitting with two lay magistrates.

He said that "sadly" the British Transport Police had failed to investigate the allegation promptly or to investigate it thoroughly.

He ruled: "Had they done so, they would have been able to obtain closed circuit television from the train on October 24 and probably on October 16.

"That evidence may well have supported her identification and, equally, may have exonerated Sir Stephen.

"There was no supporting evidence obtained during the investigation.

"In the absence of any evidence capable of supporting the identification of October 16 and 24, we ... for this reason only, reach the conclusion that the evidence is insufficient to meet the high standards required on identification and we cannot be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt.

"The charges are therefore dismissed."

On the court steps after the verdict, Sir Stephen, accompanied by his wife Lucy, expressed his relief.

He said: "Throughout the trial I have put my trust in the legal process and I am delighted that it has enabled me to clear my name." He thanked his legal team and continued: "Lucy and I would like to express our deep gratitude to our family and friends for their tremendous kindness and support over the last few months.

"We now look forward to resuming a normal life and in my case returning to full judicial duties."

The woman complainant had claimed that Sir Stephen, who sits in the Court of Appeal, exposed his genitals beneath his long raincoat on the packed rush-hour train.

At first she thought that Oxford-educated Sir Stephen had accidentally unzipped his trousers - until she alleged he exposed himself again a week later.

The woman said she initially thought it could not be true because the 55 to 60-year-old gentleman looked very kind. She also claimed she spotted the judge eyeing up another young woman on the train on October 26.

On this occasion the woman turned detective and followed the man off the train at Waterloo, taking snaps on her mobile phone.

She trailed him at a discreet distance before leaving him near the Royal Courts of Justice in The Strand.

In January the woman travelled with a police officer on the same train route and pointed out Sir Stephen.

Immediately upon arrest, the shocked judge stated it was a case of mistaken identity.

At one point in the trial he held up a pair of his underpants, close-fitting black Calvin Klein briefs, to demonstrate the difficulty he would have had in exposing himself in them.

The judge told the court: "I have no desire to engage in such behaviour.

"I am a happily-married family man and I cannot perceive deriving any form of gratification to exposing my penis.

"I value greatly the attributes of courtesy and respect for other people and I hope that I have held those attributes throughout my personal life."