header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
26 November 2015 / Dermot Feenan
Issue: 7678 / Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail

Emotions at work

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7678_feenan

Dermot Feenan explores the topic of judicial tears

The reported shedding of tears by Mr Justice Dingemans during sentencing in the recent Becky Watts case raises important issues about the role and behaviour of a judge, not limited to criminal proceedings. Is judicial crying incompatible with the office of the judge? Is it an excusable response to exposure to pain and suffering?

The case involved the killing of 16-year-old Becky Watts by Nathan Matthews and Sharon Hoare. The defendants abducted Watts for a sexual purpose. They suffocated her before placing her body in the boot of Matthews’ car. He then used a circular saw to cut her body into pieces before wrapping the pieces in cling film and plastic bags. Matthews and Hoare were convicted of murder and manslaughter respectively.

As the judge neared the conclusion of his sentencing remarks, he paid tribute to the family of the deceased. His voice trembled. There were tears in his eyes. He rose and swiftly left the court.

The judge’s tears were widely reported in the media. A judge

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll