A magistrate has received a formal warning for misconduct after independently researching a defendant on the internet to help him reach a decision in a case.

Guidance provided to magistrates underscores the inappropriateness of conducting online research related to their assigned cases, including on the case-specific issues and individuals involved in those cases. The guidance states that researching in this way threatens judicial impartiality.

The magistrate, Grant Roberts JP, has issued an apology and assumed complete responsibility, according to the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO). Roberts attributed his mistake to a ‘lack of knowledge and understanding,’ citing his relatively inexperienced status as a magistrate.

Although he acknowledged the possibility he was informed about abstaining from independent research during his training, he admitted not recalling this information at the time.

A spokesperson for the JCIO said that a conduct panel from the South East Region Conduct Advisory Committee investigated and concluded that Roberts’ actions had ‘damaged his integrity and standing and that of wider magistracy.’ Mr Justice Keehan and the Lord Chancellor concurred with the conduct panel’s findings, resulting in Roberts being issued a formal warning.

As a result of Roberts’ actions, the case will now be reallocated to a new court.

Previous reporting from the Justice Gap has highlighted the low quality of decision-making by magistrates, one of a number of systemic shortcomings legal reform charity JUSTICE exposed in a report released this month. Other shortcomings identified in the report in relation to decision-making included racially biased practices, failure to refer to relevant laws, and a lack of thorough reasoning.