Categories
Criminal Justice Free Speech Legal Professionals

Is the Secret Barrister not a Barrister of England and Wales ?

Secret Barrister Not a Barrister ?

A complaint was made to the Bar Standards Board about The Secret Barrister on the 8th August 2024.

On the 13th August 2024, The Bar Standards Board replied “…It is possible the person may not even be a barrister”

Update 23rd August 2024 – Paul Embery wrote an article Crossing swords with the ‘Secret [and very intolerant] Barrister’

The Secret Barrister should not be confused with the BlackBelt Barrister.

A Google Search for The Secret Barrister shows that they are an Award-winning Sunday Times No.1 bestselling author much lauded by the public and legal profession.

The Secret Barrister states on their Secret Barrister website….

“The Secret Barrister is a junior barrister specialising in criminal law, and part-time author and blogger.”

The Secret Barrister also state (correctly) that they have won an award from the Law Society.

“In 2018, the Secret Barrister was named Legal Personality of The Year at the Law Society Awards.”

“In 2020, Channel 4 News produced a four-part documentary series, The Secret Barrister: Disordered Justice.” The series can be viewed here.

Since 2015, a barrister practising criminal law in the UK started blogging and tweeting under the pseudonym ‘The Secret Barrister’.

The Secret Barrister – Legal 500

The Secret Barrister regularly posts on X (formerly Twitter) and they have a blue tick which shows that they are verified and a criminal lawyer.

Seems a bit odd that the Bar Standards Board don’t think the Secret Barrister is a Barrister !

If the Secret Barrister is not a Barrister then surely this should be of concern to the Bar Standards Board ? This would also be an offence under the Legal Services Act 2007 ?

It is highly likely that The Bar Standards Board know  :-

  1. The identity of the Secret Barrister
  2. That the Secret Barrister is a barrister regulated by the Bar Standards Board

The Secret Barrister is, contrary to the email from the Bar Standards Board Contact and Assessment Team, most definitely identifiable and should be subject to proper investigation in the public interest.

The Bar Standards Board Corporate Services Team have been asked to explain. They have 20 working days to do so.

From: BSB Contact Us <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2024 2:48 PM
To: Dom Watts
Subject: RE: Reporting a concerns about a practising barrister (The Secret Barrister) 2024/1910

Dear Mr Watts

Thank you for your email and for sharing your concerns with us.

However, we are only able to deal with matters about a barrister that is identifiable, and it is the reporter’s responsibility to provide us with the name. It is possible the person may not even be a barrister; therefore, we will not be able to assess this matter further and the case is now closed in our system. If you want to make a report in the future, you will need to provide us with the name of the barrister and evidence of your concern.

We are sorry that we are unable to help at this time.

Kind regards,  

Contact and Assessment Team

Bar Standards Board

Email: [email protected]

www.barstandardsboard.org.uk

Bar Standards Board Email – Secret Barrister
Blocked by The Secret Barrister on X

Is The Secret Barrister Lyndon Harris of 6KPW Barrister Chambers ?

Check out our related articles on The Secret Barrister, Barristers, Direct Access Barrister, Barristers Behaving Badly, Inns of Court, Council of the Inns of Court, Bar Standards Board, Bar Tribunal and Adjudication Services, Bar Council, Rule of Law, Open Justice, Innocent until Proven Guilty and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

[post_title] was last updated on the 9th June 2026

By Dom Watts

Dom Watts founded the Ministry of Injustice in July 2021. Dom is an IT Professional with 30+ years experience in Tier 1 Banking, Government, Defence, Healthcare and Global Blue Chips. Dom has no legal training and is not a lawyer but has previously consulted for a Magic Circle Law Firm. You can find Dom on X or Google.

Dom Watts publishes the Ministry of Injustice as a citizen journalist. The journalism exemption is detailed in the Data protection and journalism code of practice published by the ICO and Section 124 of the Data Protection Act 2018.

Section 2 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of truth. Section 3 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of honest opinion. Section 4 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of public interest. Section 8 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the single publication rule.

Section 4a of The Limitation Act 1980 defines the time limit for actions for defamation or malicious falsehood as one year from the date on which the cause of action accrued.

Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 gives the right to freedom of expression. "This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers."

"Free speech encompasses the right to offend, and indeed to abuse another." - Para 43 Scottow v CPS [2020] EWHC 3421 (Admin)

"Free speech is a fundamental common law right" - Para 21 R v Shayler [2002] UKHL 11 [2003] 1 AC 247 per Lord Bingham and Para 42 Phillips -v- Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs [2024] EWHC 32 (Admin)

Dom is a member of The Free Speech Union

“A key issue here is the need to distinguish between conduct which, however objectionable, does not justify invoking the criminal law and conduct which crosses the line and results in criminal liability" - Para 31 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

“Harassment is generally understood to involve improper oppressive and unreasonable conduct that is targeted at an individual and calculated to produce alarm and distress” - Para 38 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

"The behaviour said to amount to harassment must reach a level of seriousness passing beyond irritations, annoyances....The gravity of the misconduct must be of an order which would sustain criminal liability" - Paras [40-44] Hayden v Dickenson [2020] EWHC 3291 (QB)

"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything"

In 2002 Dom Watts was an unlikely consumer champion. The dad of three from Croydon took on the power and might of Kodak – and won...Dom on BBC Working Lunch

Rule of Law - Open Justice - Policing By Consent