New sexual harassment allegations surface against controversial former Hamilton lawyer
FOLLOWING his resignation last week, fresh allegations of sexual harassment against former Magistrate and Hamilton lawyer at Hunter Newns and O’Keeffe Pithouse Lawyers, Richard Pithouse, emerged after a statement was released by the Judicial Commission of Victoria.
In the statement released on Wednesday, the Commission revealed at the time of his resignation there were multiple investigations into Mr Pithouse’s behaviour resulting from separate complaints made last year.
One complaint received by the Commission on December 21 last year alleged Mr Pithouse had communicated with a junior solicitor, whom he was in a mentoring relationship with, in an unprofessional and inappropriate manner.
The statement did not provide details of the text messages, emails and other electronic communication sent.
The Commission was satisfied the alleged conduct “could be characterised as sexual harassment by Mr Pithouse of the junior solicitor, in accordance with the Commission’s Judicial Conduct Guideline on Sexual Harassment”.
While he was given the opportunity to, Mr Pithouse elected not to respond to the complaint.
In February this year, a separate complaint regarding Mr Pithouse’s in-court behaviour that was referred to an investigation panel was revealed, which led to him being stood down from performing any functions in open court by Chief Magistrate the Honourable Justice Lisa Hannan.
The complaint alleged Mr Pithouse’s conduct during a criminal matter in August last year was “excessively and unnecessarily aggressive and intimidating towards the defendant”, and he “used the threat of immediate imprisonment to terrify the defendant” who had children present in the court.
It was also alleged Mr Pithouse failed to show “respect and courtesy” towards the defendant, and that he appeared to “pre-judge the matter” before hearing from the lawyer, allowing his emotional state to decide the outcome rather than application of the law.
The complaint also alleged Mr Pithouse did not have the capacity to discharge the judicial function in accordance with expectations of impartiality, integrity, and appropriate treatment of court users.
On November 24, 2022, Mr Pithouse provided a response denying the allegations.
Both the in-court behaviour and sexual harassment complaints were referred to the same investigation panel in accordance with section 87AAR of the Constitution Act 1975 – which states an investigating panel may investigate two or more complaints referred to it.
After he was stood down, Mr Pithouse resigned effectively at the close of court on March 24.
In the statement released this week, the Commission revealed the panel investigating both complaints dismissed them on March 28, pursuant to section 35(2)(e) of the Act, which states “an investigating panel must dismiss a complaint if the officer concerned has resigned or retired and is no longer a judicial officer”.
The statement revealed no findings were made in relation to the allegations contained in either complaint.
Mr Pithouse was previously a well-respected member of the Hamilton community after moving to town in 1996 as a solicitor.
During his time in Hamilton he coached the Western District Umpires Association, was a committee member for Good Shepherd Kindergarten, and was on the board at The Hamilton and Alexandra College.
