Gay Boris aide who admits having 'strange sex life' is cleared of possessing extreme pornography 'likely to cause serious harm'

  • Charges of having 'extreme' images and an indecent image of a child dismissed in unanimous verdict
  • But 50-year-old said allegations had damaged his 'career and personal standing'
  • He was fired by London Mayor Boris Johnson after allegations emerged
  • Added that he had not given up his right to a private sexual life when he stood for public office

A former aide to Mayor of London Boris Johnson who admits to having a 'strange sex life' was today cleared of possessing extreme pornography 'likely to cause serious injury'.

Simon Walsh, 50, smiled as he was acquitted by a jury at at Kingston Crown Court while a handful of his supporters gasped and cried with relief in the witness box.

The gay barrister, who was also a member of the City of London Corporation, was accused of sending and receiving 'obscene' pornographic photos on a personal email account.

Walsh
Relief: Simon Walsh, 50, leaves Kingston Crown Court with a friend after being cleared today

Relief: Simon Walsh, 50, leaves Kingston Crown Court with a friend after being cleared today

Today a jury of six men and six women took just 90 minutes to dismiss the five counts of possessing an extreme pornographic image, and one count of possessing an indecent picture of a child.

Some of the charges related to photos he took of him and two other men at a New Year's Eve sex party.

Jurors accepted Mr Walsh's insistence that the photos were not extreme or pornographic and his denial that anyone had been hurt.

He said he had the New Year's Eve party images 'as a record of what we have done', adding: 'I know the limits and I respect them.'

Mr Walsh was also cleared of receiving emails containing photos of other men engaged in 'extreme' sex acts, as well as an allegation that one of the men in the collection of photos was underage.

Judge Nicholas Price QC said: 'He can now be discharged.'

Opening the trial at Kingston Crown Court, prosecutor Thomas Wilkins said: 'Pornography is extreme and therefore illegal if it is grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise obscene and shows and activity likely to cause serious injury.'

He called Mr Walsh 'a gay man who has what he described as a strange sex life'.

Career damage: Mr Walsh was fired by London mayor Boris Johnson, pictured, after the charges emerged

Career damage: Mr Walsh was fired by London mayor Boris Johnson, pictured, after the charges emerged

However Mr Walsh said that those who attended the New Year's Eve party were responsible for safety, adding: 'It was not like a safety announcement when a plane takes off, but people know if it hurts you say "ouch" and it stops.'

Asked by Mr Wilkins if he could recall anyone being hurt during the party, Mr Walsh replied: 'Not at all.'

He added: 'During the whole of the evening nobody expressed any discomfort at all... I accept there is a remote possibility that they may both be dead, but I think that is highly unlikely.'

Mr Walsh, who was once tipped to stand as a mayoral candidate, said today that being wrongly accused of possessing extreme porn had damaged his 'career and personal standing.'

He spoke shortly after he was unanimously cleared by the six male and six female jurors, praising their 'common sense' verdict.

Mr Walsh also urged prosecutors 'not to prosecute individuals in possession if images depicting private and consensual adult sexual acts.'

His solicitor Myles Jackman said his client was 'exhilarated' by the acquittal.

'Right to a private life': Walsh thanked the jurors at Kingston Crown Court, pictured, for their 'common sense' verdict

'Right to a private life': Walsh thanked the jurors at Kingston Crown Court, pictured, for their 'common sense' verdict

Reading a statement on behalf of Mr Walsh, he said: 'Today I was unanimously acquitted by a jury at Kingston Crown Court of five charges of being in possession of extreme pornography despite the images depicting acts which are legal to perform, and an extremely damaging allegation of being in possession of child porn in respect of a single image sent to me unrequested via email over three years ago which the jury had no difficulty deciding was in fact a picture of an adult.

'I would like to commend the jury for their common sense verdict, my legal team for their robust efforts and all the support I have received from the general public.

'I would like to take this opportunity to encourage our legislators and regulators not to prosecute individuals in possession of images depicting private and consensual adult sexual acts.

These allegations have damaged my career and personal standing. As I said in my evidence I do not believe that when I stood for public office I gave up my right to a private sexual life. I reiterate that point now. I hope to return to public life as soon as possible.

- SIMON WALSH

'Nonetheless, these allegations have damaged my career and personal standing. As I said in my evidence I do not believe that when I stood for public office I gave up my right to a private sexual life. I reiterate that point now.

'I hope to return to public life as soon as possible. I have no further comment to make at this time.'

His solicitors today condemned the 'dreadful' ordeal he had suffered as he was unanimously acquitted of all charges at Kingston Crown Court.

Samira Noor-Khan, a partner at Hodge Jones & Allen, said: 'This case highlights the dreadful state of affairs where people can be prosecuted for possessing images of adults legally participating in consensual sexual acts.

'Simon’s personal life was placed under extreme scrutiny and his career ruined on the basis of a handful of images found on his email server.'

However, the Crown Prosecution Service insisted there had been 'sufficient evidence' to bring the matter to trial.

A CPS spokesperson said: 'Possession of images that depict acts likely to cause serious injury is illegal and the CPS prosecutes the law as it stands. We do not make the law and cannot change it.

'This case was not about the practice itself, but was based on the evidence of medical experts who said the way the acts were performed was likely to cause serious injury or harm.

'We therefore concluded that there was sufficient evidence to prove this offence and that the matter should, therefore, be put before a jury to decide.'

The comments below have been moderated in advance.

The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.

We are no longer accepting comments on this article.

Who is this week's top commenter? Find out now