Smirking father of baby Poppi refuses to answer 69 questions about death
THE father of Poppi Worthington refused yesterday to answer 69 questions about his daughter’s death.
A family court judge has previously ruled that Paul Worthington, 49, probably sexually assaulted the 13-month-old before she collapsed at home.
But questioned in public for the first time about what happened, her father smirked as he quoted rules on avoiding self-incrimination to avoid interrogation.
As the second inquest into Poppi’s death in December 2012 descended into farce, her mother left yesterday’s hearing in disgust.
Despite family court judge Mr Justice Peter Jackson’s ruling in January 2016, Mr Worthington has never faced criminal charges because prosecutors said there was insufficient evidence after a bungled police investigation.
It emerged yesterday that Mr Worthington is in ‘long-term witness protection’ and he was bundled into the inquest through a back door with a blanket over his head to hide him from press photographers. The coroner also allowed him to be screened from the public in case he was intimidated.
Giving evidence, Poppi’s father repeatedly dodged questions by citing ‘Rule 22’, which allows witnesses at inquests to avoid incriminating themselves.
As the hearing came to a close, he was asked: ‘ Do you accept from 2.30am on December 12, 2012, to the point where you took Poppi downstairs not breathing in your arms, you are the only person who can account for what happened?’
Mr Worthington replied: ‘I refer to my earlier statements – I rely on the right not to answer under Rule 22.’
He was also questioned about the ‘X-rated adult stuff’ he has previously admitted viewing on his laptop in bed on the night before Poppi died. But asked what kind of pornography he had been looking at, he refused to answer.
He was flanked in the witness box by two police officers with Tasers.
Before his evidence, Gillian Irving QC, speaking for Poppi’s mother,
Tragic: Poppi Worthington who cannot be named for legal reasons, argued that Mr Worthington should be visible to everyone in the coroner’s court.
She said: ‘ Poppi’s mother has waited almost five years for this hear-
‘Unsatisfactory in the extreme’
ing and the notion that she should be deprived from hearing what will probably be the last formal occasion Mr Worthington gives evidence is unsatisfactory in the extreme.’
But as each question was put to him, Mr Worthington repeated: ‘I refer to my earlier statements – I rely on the right not to answer that under Rule 22.’
He avoided 69 questions in this way, including all those about what happened at the family’s home in Barrow-in-Furness, Cumbria, on December 11 and 12, 2012.
Coroner David Roberts told him: ‘I think all these questions are tending to incriminate.’
Mr Worthington was, however, required to answer 22 questions about the family’s general routine.
He has been in hiding since November 2015 but was forced to come to
‘He is in a position of vulnerability’
court and face the mother of his dead daughter yesterday. It emerged that he is being protected by police after online death threats.
His barrister Paul Clark told the hearing: ‘He has been in a long-term position of great vulnerability and risk and as a result has been in a long-term position of witness protection whereby his current appearance and location are not known.’
Witness protection, normally offered to people whose lives are at risk from criminals they give evidence against in court, can cost the taxpayer as much as £50,000 a year.
Mr Clark argued that Mr Worthington’s life would be at risk if newspapers reported his current appearance. Comments on online news outlets were read in court, including one that said: ‘I hope someone kills him.’
The coroner directed that his evidence would be in view of the press but screened from the public gallery.
Mr Worthington’s refusal to reveal what happened on the night of Poppi’s death was the latest attempt to shroud the truth in a case that has been dogged by allegations of excessive secrecy and cover-ups.
A first inquest in 2014 lasted just seven minutes and found Poppi’s death was unexplained. This was quashed by the High Court the following year and a fresh inquiry was ordered. The inquest continues.