Photography: Police officer was left feeling uncomfortable
The barrister and amateur photographer suspended for two years for a conversation with a woman about nude modelling made the comments to a trainee police officer, it has emerged.
The Bar disciplinary tribunal said the references made by Alan Wheetman to her physical appearance and talk of modelling “indicated some level of sexual motivation”.
Mr Wheetman accepted that he subsequently told his clerk that he “had been greatly helped by an extremely pretty CID officer, who was unlike any CID officer [he] had ever met”.
She said she had just wanted him to explain aspects of the court system but felt he was asking her to become involved in sexually explicit photography, having shown her his online portfolio, a mix of artistic-style nude, topless, bikini and clothed images of women.
We reported recently that Mr Wheetman,66, was suspended for two years after the tribunal found he made “inappropriate comments and behaviour of a sexual nature made towards a female involved in a case he was instructed in at a magistrates’ court in August 2022”.
The full decision has now been published and explained that the pair were alone in a room in the court building.
It said: “He led her into an unnecessary, unexpected and essentially inappropriate and unwanted discussion about possible nude photographic modelling, examples of which he showed to her [on her photography website]; in doing so he used some crude language, although the exact words were not agreed.”
While the officer said Mr Wheetman told her ‘You do not have to start with fanny or minge shots. You can take your clothes off the more confident you become’, his evidence was that he said ‘You do not have to do fanny or bum shots’ and that he was referring to his models generally.
“However, even on his own version the wording was still crude,” the tribunal said. “At its lowest the respondent’s behaviour caused her to believe the respondent might have wished to photograph her naked or semi-naked and any reasonable person would have drawn the same inference.
“Overall, it was conduct which clearly left her feeling uncomfortable, even if she was too polite to show it or he was too insensitive to appreciate the effect on her.
“Person A was sufficiently troubled at the time to describe what had happened to her mother on her way back to the police station and to raise it immediately with her colleagues at the police station.”
In his self-report to the Bar Standards Board (BSB), Mr Wheetman explained that he was a keen photographer and that several of the photographs he took were of professional models and some were fine-art nude models.
In deciding sanction, the tribunal said the conduct was aggravated by the disparity in age and seniority and “by the essential recklessness of Mr Wheetman towards Person A who was attending court for the first time in her career, and by his responsibility for the situation which arose”.
He had faced four other charges, of which one was dismissed because the BSB offered no evidence when a barrister witness was unable to attend the hearing, and two were dismissed as showing no case to answer.
In the other, the details of which were not set out but related to a female pupil barrister at Mr Wheetman’s former chambers, the majority of the panel considered that, although his behaviour had been “to some extent inappropriate and concerning”, it did not amount to professional misconduct.
They had an “established friendly professional relationship” and a shared interest in photography, and she already knew the type of photos he took.
The context did not suggest any sexualised motive and the pupil herself did not consider Mr Wheetman’s behaviour or comments to be offensive or inappropriate, taking them as no more than a joke which had perhaps been overfamiliar.
“She did not suggest any adverse impact upon her,” the panel said.
The tribunal observed that, although Mr Wheetman had shown “some insight” in respect of the conduct towards members of his chambers, “he showed considerably less in respect of [the police officer], although he did express some insight and regret with the benefit of hindsight”.
He had no previous disciplinary record, did self-report, and was suspended from his chambers in August 2022.
Mr Wheetman said he did not intend to return to practice. But should he change his mind after the two years, the tribunal said he would first have to undertake the BSB’s course on equality, diversity and inclusion.
“The BSB should also note the panel’s concerns about his future suitability as a pupil supervisor,” it added.
In a post on his PurplePort webpage, Mr Wheetman said the decision should “serve as a warning to all photographers who are employed or working in a regulated profession”.
He urged colleagues to be “very careful when engaging people in discussions about modelling or showing any images from your portfolio to anybody in the workplace…
“What may be viewed by some as an innocent discussion about your hobby or pastime, can so readily be interpreted by others as ‘inappropriate comments and behaviour of a sexual nature’.”
Leave a Comment