Former Lincoln Crown Court Judge has lost bid to bring a legal challenge over being removed from office
It was over 'deliberately' deleted messages
A former Lincoln Crown Court judge found to have deleted WhatsApp messages from his phone that were of interest to police has lost a bid to bring a legal challenge over being removed from office.
In June 2023, it was announced that Andrew Easteal had been removed for misconduct following an investigation by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO).
Mr Easteal was found to have deliberately deleted the WhatsApp messages between him and a man accused of drug offences from his phone.
A JCIO spokesperson previously said Mr Easteal knew the data "was of interest to police officers carrying out a criminal investigation".
Mr Easteal denied that he intended to frustrate any criminal investigation and previously told The Times that he had never purchased or taken any illegal recreational or performance-enhancing drugs.
On Wednesday, Mr Easteal brought a bid to the High Court in London to challenge the decision to remove him from office.
But Mr Justice Swift dismissed the bid, finding the case was not arguable and that there had been procedural issues.
The former judge's barrister Ramby de Mello said the data in the messages deleted was "benign" and related to a personal matter, meaning that Mr Easteal's right to privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights was a factor in the case.
Mr de Mello also highlighted that the Crown Prosecution Service had decided not to charge Mr Easteal with any offence, adding that the JCIO should have considered a lesser sanction.
He said: "The question of proportionality is a matter, we respectfully submit, that does not clearly feature in either of the findings or in the confirmation decision."
But Mark Vinall, for the JCIO, told the court: "If you want to say that having the police crawling over your phone is an unfair interference with your Article 8 rights, you can say 'I'm not giving you my phone, go and get a warrant'.
"He did not do that, instead he repeatedly deleted the contents of his phone."
Dismissing the bid to bring a legal challenge, Mr Justice Swift said there had been issues with the service of the claim which meant it could not proceed.
But he also said that even without the procedural problems, he would have "refused the application".
Mr Justice Swift continued: "I do not consider it is arguable that the decision to remove him from office amounted to a disproportionate interference with his Article 8 rights."