Judge says lawyer misled jury in Palestine Action trial

A barrister will face proceedings over an alleged contempt of court during his closing speech in a Palestine Action criminal damage trial.

Rajiv Menon KC is accused of misleading the jury and ignoring directions by the judge when representing Charlotte Head, one of four jailed for criminal damage, after they broke into the UK site of Israeli defence firm Elbit Systems near Bristol in August 2024.

In his closing speech of Head's first trial, Menon is alleged to have "created a real risk of impeding the proper administration of justice" by suggesting the court was treating protesters unfairly.

Lawyers for Menon said he was "utterly shocked" by the allegations.

Head, 30, Samuel Corner, 23, Leona Kamio, 30, and Fatema Rajwani, 21, were found guilty of criminal damage in June following a retrial.

Head, who drove a prison van into the compound, was sentenced to five years in prison.

In his speech during the first trial at Woolwich Crown Court in January, Menon highlighted a plaque at the Old Bailey which sets out the "right of juries to give their verdict according to their convictions".

The barrister also told jurors six times that the trial judge, Justice Johnson, could not direct them to convict the defendants.

During the first trial, the defendants were all acquitted of aggravated burglary and partial or no verdicts were returned for the charges of criminal damage and violent disorder.

They were later convicted of criminal damage at a retrial.

Earlier this month, Johnson referred the question of whether Menon should face contempt of court proceedings to another judge, Justice Nicklin.

A court order published on Tuesday said Nicklin believed there was enough evidence to suggest Menon may have acted in contempt of court and it was in the public interest to bring proceedings against him.

Setting out the allegations against Menon, the order said he made statements "which were capable of suggesting to the jury that the court was not impartial".

The order said he did this by referring to the defendants being prevented from giving evidence about Elbit Systems and later referring to Elbit Systems being protected and "wined and dined in the corridors of power".

"Those statements were capable of creating the impression that the defendants had been treated unfairly and that Elbit Systems had been improperly protected in the proceedings," the order said.

The barrister denied ignoring the judge, saying that he was performing his duty to fairly and fully represent his client.

Adrian Waterman KC, representing Menon at the Court of Appeal earlier this year, said the barrister "did not think he was knowingly breaching the order" and was "utterly shocked at what was being suggested".

He will appear at the Royal Courts of Justice on 28 July.

Follow BBC Bristol on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to us on email or via WhatsApp on 0800 313 4630.