'You're Lying, Mr Beckwith, Aren't You?' – Accused Maintains That Complainant Instigated Physical Contact
The Freshfields partner says the complainant made false allegations, in day six of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal hearing.
October 07, 2019 at 09:58 AM
5 minute read
Ryan Beckwith has maintained that the complainant instigated the physical contact that is the subject of the hearing into the Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer partner's alleged sexual misconduct.
Though he accepted his actions had put the firm at "considerable reputational risk", Beckwith asserted that complainant Person A had made "false allegations" against him, claiming that the physical contact at the centre of the hearing was "a consensual sexual encounter between two adults", adding that his conduct only fell below the standard expected of a Freshfields partner because he was married, not because he had abused his position of authority.
In her cross-examination of Beckwith, the Solicitors Regulation Authority's counsel, Riel Karmy-Jones QC of Red Lion Chambers, scrutinised perceived gaps in his memory, accused him of being selective in his recollections of the events, and also suggested that he was "lying" in order to both play down the complainant Person A's alleged drunkenness, and to portray her as the instigator of the alleged sexual contact.
Under an intense barrage of questions, Beckwith maintained that the sexual contact that took place following after-work drinks at The Harrow pub was a "mutual mistake" that he will "regret until the day I die", and moreover, that it was Person A who had "instigated the physical contact between us". "I couldn't be clearer about that," Beckwith added.
"Your intention of getting out of that cab was to get into bed with Person A, who was obviously impaired," Karmy-Jones put to Beckwith, who resolutely denied this.
In a rebuttal of the accusation that Person A was "significantly impaired" as she had claimed, Beckwith said the combination of her having "stroked" his arm in the pub, her having followed him to the toilet in the pub, the pair of them kissing "passionately" in the pub then later on the kerb outside, her ordering an Uber for the pair of them, her having "led" him into her bedroom and having touched him "as he had touched her", all resulted in him believing that sexual contact was "what she wanted".
Though Beckwith accepts that his "inhibitions were lowered" given the amount of alcohol he consumed, he denied that his cognitive functions were so impaired that he would have done anything non-consensual.
He further rebutted the suggestion that Person A had fallen on her way to the door, saying that if she had been so impaired, he would have "ultimately phoned the police", to which Karmy-Jones responded: "You're lying, Mr Beckwith, aren't you?"
Beckwith also denied that he told her she "had nice tits", as had been alleged, and further claims that he does not recall her "falling in and out of consciousness", nor her telling him he was married as a means of warning him off.
Beckwith also said he did not remember what happened in the Uber journey on the way to Person A's flat, that he did not recall using the toilet in Person A's flat – though he reflected in his testimony that he had asked her to use her bathroom "once the taxi pulled up to the kerb" – and that he does not recall asking either Person A or her flatmate for a condom.
As he had earlier related that the reason he did not recall certain events was because they were either "not material" or "not significant", Karmy-Jones asked Beckwith whether these particular gaps in his memory – concerning the night in question – occurred because aspects of the incident in question were also "not significant", or whether the gaps in memory were in fact "convenient", suggesting that he was being "selective" in his recollection. Beckwith denied this.
Though claiming that the sexual activity would be something he would "regret until the day I die", Beckwith said it was a "mutual mistake" in which no one party was more at fault than the other. However, he accepted that his behaviour fell below the standard expected of a partner at the firm.
While denying that his behaviour was "disgraceful", Beckwith was careful about accepting that his behaviour was inappropriate or "unbecoming of a solicitor" from a regulatory perspective, stressing that his behaviour was only inappropriate from a "marriage perspective", as "I had cheated on my wife". Again downplaying the event as commonplace, he said he expected such incidents "happen all the time" in the City.
In an earlier exchange, Beckwith also downplayed a "kiss on the head" that allegedly took place in a bar following a work-organised trip to Le Manoir in Oxfordshire, though stressed he pulled out of the kiss. Explaining the incident, he suggested that it was likely an attempt at a friendly kiss similar to a "pat on the back", that he would have given even to 'EB' – who was last week referred to as Freshfields' senior partner.
In closing, Beckwith argued that throughout the investigation process, he had been "open and honest" and "completely truthful".
The hearing continues.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMore than Half of South Australian Lawyers Report Suffering Harassment
3 minute readKing & Spalding, Weil, Gotshal & Manges Launch Pro Bono Legal Initiative for Tennis Players
2 minute readTrump Ordered to Pay Legal Bill Within 28 Days After Rejecting Costs Order
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Two Wilkinson Stekloff Associates Among Victims of DC Plane Crash
- 2Two More Victims Alleged in New Sean Combs Sex Trafficking Indictment
- 3Jackson Lewis Leaders Discuss Firm's Innovation Efforts, From Prompt-a-Thons to Gen AI Pilots
- 4Trump's DOJ Files Lawsuit Seeking to Block $14B Tech Merger
- 5'No Retributive Actions,' Kash Patel Pledges if Confirmed to FBI
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250