Joey Barton faces new criminal trial over alleged assault on wife

Trending 1 week ago

Joey Barton faces a caller criminal proceedings complete an allegation he assaulted his wife, judges astatine nan precocious tribunal person ruled aft proceedings against him were antecedently paused.

The erstwhile footballer was accused of assaulting Georgia Barton successful a drunken statement – which he denied – and was owed to look proceedings astatine a magistrates tribunal successful 2022.

However, nan lawsuit was adjourned aft Mrs Barton sent a missive to prosecutors retracting her allegations.

A judge past ordered that proceedings beryllium paused complete concerns a proceedings would beryllium unfair to Barton aft prosecutors said they did not scheme to inquire Mrs Barton to springiness grounds successful court.

The head of nationalist prosecutions (DPP), Stephen Parkinson, appealed against nan determination astatine nan precocious tribunal successful London, pinch barristers claiming astatine a proceeding past period that a adjacent proceedings could spell ahead.

In a judgement connected Friday, 2 elder judges ruled successful nan DPP’s favour and said Barton should look a proceedings complete nan allegations successful beforehand of a different judge.

In a 20-page ruling, Dame Victoria Sharp said nan erstwhile judge’s determination “was incorrect successful principle”.

Barton was accused of grabbing his woman by nan pharynx and kicking her successful nan caput during a statement extracurricular their location successful Kew, south-west London, wherever they had been pinch 2 different couples successful June 2021.

He denied a complaint of battle by beating aft he was arrested by constabulary astatine his home, pinch Mrs Barton said to person been near pinch a play ball-sized bruise connected her forehead and a bleeding nose.

But Wimbledon magistrates tribunal heard successful March 2022 that Mrs Barton wrote to prosecutors a period earlier nan scheduled proceedings to declare she was injured accidentally erstwhile friends intervened successful an statement betwixt nan pair, having some drunk “four aliases 5 bottles of wine”.

Mrs Barton did not support nan prosecution and was not owed to beryllium called arsenic a prosecution witnesser during nan proceedings complete fears she would springiness an untruthful relationship of events.

Lawyers for Barton said this would time off him astatine a disadvantage arsenic it meant she could not beryllium questioned complete inconsistencies successful her evidence.

However, Sharp said nan prosecution was only obliged to telephone witnesses who had provided witnesser statements it planned to trust connected and it was not “an maltreatment of process” to not telephone Mrs Barton.

She continued: “In nan circumstances of this case, it would person been due for nan defence to person called Mrs Barton, and for nan prosecution to person cross-examined her.”

The judge, sitting pinch Mr Justice Saini, added that Mrs Barton had ne'er provided a witnesser connection and had besides “expressed an unwillingness from nan outset to springiness grounds against her husband”.

Sharp concluded: “No prejudice could conceivably person been caused to Mr Barton if Mrs Barton had been called by nan defence, aliases by nan tribunal for that matter.”

Source theguardian