Former University of New England Vice Chancellor boss Brigid Heywood, who is facing assault and offensive behaviour charges, will have her case re-heard, following a courtroom dispute between her lawyer and a magistrate.
Magistrate Mark Richardson and Heywood’s barrister, Jack Pappas clashed during a series of hearings in the Armidale Local Court in 2023, which resulted in Mr Pappas requesting the magistrate step down from the case due to the potential appearance of bias.
After listening to audio recordings of the hearings in question, Supreme Court Justice Julia Lonergan on Wednesday “reluctantly” ruled Mr Richardson be prohibited from presiding over the case. Heywood’ team asked for a new magistrate last year.
“Various comments suggested His Honour thought Mr Pappas to be incompetent, rude, discourteous and a time-waster,” Justice Lonergan said in her ruling.
“Whether this is an accurate view for His Honour to hold or not, His Honour on occasion belittled, derided, hurried, harassed, ‘warned’ and at one point threatened counsel with physical removal from the court.
“A fair-minded lay observer might have thought the magistrate was contemptuous of Mr Pappas.”
Heywood is accused of licking her finger and wiping it on a schoolgirl’s face while making a racist comment, during an International Women’s Day event in Armidale on March 8, 2022.
At the time, Heywood was the vice-chancellor of the University of New England and was appearing as a guest speaker at the event.
She resigned from her role with the university after being charged with common assault and behaving in an offensive manner in a public place, to which she has pleaded not guilty.
During the second day of the case being heard in the Armidale court in July 2023, Heywood’s lawyer requested Mr Richardson disqualify himself from further hearing the matter on the basis of apprehended bias.
The magistrate refused to do so, prompting Heywood’s lawyers to file an application for his disqualification with the Supreme Court the following day.
Heywood’s lawyer in the Supreme Court matter, Slade Howell, argued the culmination of comments made by Mr Richardson during the three hearing days in July 2023 and a return of subpoena argument on October 31, 2022 could be perceived as bias.
During one of the exchanges, Mr Pappas was deemed to have been bullying the police prosecutor over objections to his line of questioning posed to a witness.
Justice Lonergan found Mr Pappas’ behaviour was “rude, defensive and obnoxious” but noted it was a magistrate’s role to, “ensure the outer signs of impartiality are exhibited at all times, and to deal with the legal representatives for both sides in an even-handed fashion”.
“The way Mr Pappas chose to voice his concerns was offensive, supercilious and unprofessional, but the initial even-handedness of the magistrate evaporated and gave way to sarcasm and belittling of Mr Pappas,” Justice Lonergan found.
“A fair-minded lay observer might reasonably conclude that the magistrate was taking a very dim view of Mr Pappas’s skills, probity and attention to his task.”
Heywood’s matter will recommence before a different magistrate.
Like what you’re reading? Support The New England Times by making a small donation today and help us keep delivering local news paywall-free. Donate now