Earlier this month we reported that following a two-day trial at Willesden Magistrates Court, Jake Clarke had been convicted on one count of harassment. At that time, Belinda stated that Jake would be sentenced on 17 October.
That date came and went with no news from court, but we noted that a cave-dwelling loony hiding out in India posted one of his standard cheerful prognostications on the matter on Friday, 19 October: Holy batshit paranoid nutters, Batman!
However, by yesterday Angela Power-Disney had emailed and set Pike’s mind, such as it is, at rest: The fact that this makes absolutely no sense whatsoever is completely beside the point.
We get the part about a six-month sentence, and the one year suspended. However, if it’s a one-year suspended sentence, how can it also extend for five years?
The clue, we suspected, was in the clause, “during which he cannot discuss the Hampstead case”. This sounded to us very much like a Criminal Behaviour Order, aka “CRIMBO” (which sounds to us like a type of chocolate bar, or possibly washing-up soap).
Pike responded with the following completely sane diatribe:
So both Angela and Pike would like to see their young protegé serve time in prison rather than submit to the demands of the court. Here’s a suggestion: why don’t they both volunteer to go to prison, and leave Jake out of it? With friends like these, who needs enemas?
Late yesterday evening, we received an email from an alert reader, containing a screenshot which explained the legal situation a bit more fully: So, removing all Belinda’s pseudo-indignant hyperbole, two of Jake’s victims were permitted to make victim impact statements to the court, outlining the distress and fear his actions had caused them.
The fact that “Jake attempted to interject periodically regarding (perceived) inaccuracies or omissions of fact” most likely signalled to the court that he had no intention of taking his legal situation seriously, and may well have confirmed the need to impose the Criminal Behaviour Order.
Jake was fortunate enough to avoid imprisonment, and we found the judge’s rationale interesting: “I don’t want to make a hero of you by locking you up!”
Whether any of this will prevent recurrences of Jake’s behaviour remains to be seen. For his sake, and that of his family, we hope it’s successful.