FROM “SILK” TO “SINK”: THE FALL OF JO SIDHU KC AND THE FIVE-YEAR GHOST HE LEFT BEHIND

SIDHU’S APPEAL COLLAPSES—AND NOW THE INTERNET WANTS HIS “KC” LETTERS REPOSSESSED

In Britain, we love a redemption arc—preferably one that arrives with legal costs, public embarrassment, and a soundtrack of keyboards clattering at 2am. This week’s main character is Navjot “Jo” Sidhu KC, a once-glittering figure of the criminal Bar, now officially disbarred after the High Court rejected his attempt to downgrade professional exile into a time-limited slap on the wrist.

The misconduct finding itself wasn’t the battlefield. The appeal was about punishment: Sidhu’s team argued the tribunal should have chosen a lengthy suspension, not the professional equivalent of being launched into the sun. The court said no—disbarment stands. The judgment describes a 2018 incident where a junior aspiring barrister on mini-pupillage was pressured into staying overnight in his hotel room and bed, with kissing and touching following—conduct the tribunal treated as extremely serious given the power imbalance.

But the serious punch in this story isn’t only about what happens when a senior figure falls. It’s about who gets crushed on the way up.

Back in 2015, Sidhu was the target of an intense online harassment campaign. The London Evening Standard reported that a man, Jason Place, was convicted and ultimately jailed for five years after a Crown Court trial—offences including stalking/harassment and related matters.

Jo Sidhu KC should have his Kings Counsel title removed immediately. His excuse for grooming young aspiring female pupil barristers was "I no longer have sex with my wife". #josidhukc #josidhu pic.twitter.com/1lp1s240Yj

— ConfidentialAccess (@caxitydotcom) January 28, 2026

Now, in the messy court of public opinion, the man convicted in that case is resurfacing online, arguing that Sidhu’s collapse is “karma” and that his own punishment looks even darker in hindsight. That claim is disputed, untested here, and not the same thing as a legal vindication—but it’s exactly the kind of unresolved bitterness that turns into a five-year shadow the justice system can’t easily delete.

And here’s the twist that enrages people most: “disbarred” and “stripped of KC” are not automatically the same thing. The KC rank is granted by Letters Patent, and removal is a separate process—rare, formal, and historically notable when it happens.

So the campaign mood is clear: if the Bar wants to look like it means accountability, don’t let the honorific linger like a luxury badge on a repossessed car. Over on ConfidentialAccess.by, readers are already calling it the “two-letter problem,” while the ConfidentialAccess.com forums are debating whether the system protects reputations better than it protects people.

Because in the end, the profession’s real credibility test isn’t how it celebrates its heroes. It’s how cleanly it removes their crowns.