Powered by
MOMENTUM
MEDIA
A Victorian lawyer convicted of sexually assaulting a minor after inviting her 17-year-old friends to join him at a bar has been struck off.
Glenn Ashley Thexton, who formerly worked out of Thexton Lawyers, consented to having his name struck from the roll by the prothonotary on order of the Supreme Court of Victoria’s Justice Michelle Quigley.
The strike-off application cited six years of misconduct, including aggressive engagement with the Victorian Legal Services Board + Commissioner (VLSB+C), making “fallacious complaints and threats” to prosecutors, and his behaviour during a criminal trial.
That trial saw Thexton convicted, fined $5000 and placed on the Sex Offenders Register for groping a teenager outside a kebab shop on King St, Melbourne. It followed asking her friends to join him at a bar, despite being well aware they were underage and could not legally enter.
Thexton’s appeal in the County Court has been set down for December.
The fact the proceedings are subject to appeal “militates against the court taking the conviction directly into account” in its strike-off decision, but Justice Quigley took issue with his “culpable disregard” for complying with the law by inviting the girls into a bar with him.
“I accept that the circumstances of his offending, as well as his lack of contrition and behaviour during the criminal proceedings itself … reveal a defect in character, sufficient to demonstrate unfitness and continuing unfitness to remain on the roll,” Justice Quigley said.
VLSB CEO and commissioner Fiona McLeay said the decision to recommend the strike-off “sends a strong message that lawyers must abide by the law, and we will take action against those who fail to do so”.
“The disciplinary action we take against lawyers is for the clear purpose of safeguarding consumers of legal services, and maintaining the trust and faith they have in the legal profession,” McLeay said in a statement.
The magistrate found Thexton to be “argumentative, tangential and evasive” during the criminal proceedings and observed he would fail to answer questions when he felt it would not be favourable to his case.
Thexton also sought to interfere with evidence, made “gratuitous complaints” to the VLSB+C about solicitors who had carriage of the matter for the OPP, made threats to approach media if he did not receive a favourable outcome, and claimed the prosecution was the result a collusion between the commissioner and Victoria Police.
Further, on about 27 occasions, Thexton demanded prosecution be withdrawn or sought to pressure the OPP into withdrawing. On at least 17 of those occasions, he sought to use information he alleged he had.
Thexton took issue with the Board’s identification of it as blackmail, but Justice Quigley interpreted this reference “not as a direct allegation of blackmail but to describe a style of behaviour which is akin, in common parlance, to an understanding of behaviour with those characteristics”.
“I am satisfied that the correspondence demonstrates that he sought to obtain an outcome through communications which were aggressive, hectoring, threatening and intimidating, which raised scandalous allegations and for the purpose of achieving his preferred outcome.
“Whatever label it is given, it is totally unacceptable behaviour for a legal practitioner,” Justice Quigley said.
Communication from Thexton to the board from May 2020 to late 2025 was also found to be “consistently unreasonably aggressive, threatening, harassing and generally lacking in moderation and professionalism”.
“Lawyers have a professional obligation to engage openly and appropriately with regulatory processes,” McLeay said.
“Conduct that undermines or obstructs those processes is incompatible with the standards expected of members of the profession and may result in the loss of the right to practise law.”
The court was also taken to Thexton’s June 2021 conviction for contempt of court. He was committed to prison for 30 days with the prison sentence wholly suspended.
Eight months earlier, Thexton paid a locksmith to change the locks of his Melbourne office in order to prevent a manager appointed by the board from accessing Thexton Lawyers’ files. At the time, a court had orders in place to restrain Thexton from obstructing the manager.
Justice Quigley said the behaviour that led to the conviction was “a grave breach of the standard and obligations expected of a legal practitioner”.
Referring to Thexton’s claims in December 2024 that he intended to “make application for a pardon through the Gov General’s office”, Justice Quigley said Thexton has demonstrated “a lack of insight and remorse”.
Citation: Victorian Legal Services Board v Thexton [2026] VSC 545.
