Anthony Alexander Armstrong

Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision

The Complainant alleged the Attorney sold his three Jamaican properties without authorisation while he was imprisoned in the USA, in breach of Canons III(f), I(b) and III(k). Relying on uncontradicted handwriting expert evidence (Beverley East) that the signatures on the sale transfers were the Complainant's authentic signatures, the Panel found the Complainant had authorised the sales, so the Attorney did not act contrary to law or commit a criminal offence. However, the Attorney admitted witnessing the transfers and agreements for sale without the Complainant being physically present, which the Panel found to be reckless conduct that may tend to discredit the profession, in breach of Canon I(b), constituting professional misconduct. No express finding of dishonesty was made. The other grounds were not proven to the criminal standard. Sanction was deferred, with the Attorney to be given an opportunity to address the Panel.

Duties found breached:

• Uphold public trust in the profession

Aggravating factors:

• Witnessing legal documents (transfers) without the signatory physically present, conveying a false impression to the public and authorities
• Attorney was an evasive witness who gave contradictory and implausible evidence

Mitigating factors:

• The Complainant was found to have actually authorised the sales by signing the transfers, so the consequences of the reckless witnessing were not as grave as they could have been
• Attorney relied on family members of the Complainant with whom he had a long-standing relationship