STEP BY STEP, FIVE ERRORS THAT NEARLY SET ATTACKER FREE

Three High Court judges ruled that the Parole Board failed to scrutinise Worboys’ claims to be a reformed man – and highlighted five damning failures...

DODGY PAROLE DOSSIER

The three-member Parole Board, an experienced chairman, a specialist psychologist and a qualified lawyer, was given a 33 -page parole dossier about Worboys.

But it did not contain the sentencing remarks of the judge at his trial, which should have been included, nor the psychiatric report from the time.

The dossier, from the Ministry of Justice, did feature references to wider allegations about his attacks, including the police investigation which heard from 83 potential victims.

But judges found the board had failed to consider those wider allegations when considering whether Worboys continue to pose a risk, even though they were entitled to do so.

The dossier also made no reference to a ‘rape kit’ found in Worboys’ car, containing condoms, sedatives and miniature bottles of champagne which he used to drug his victims.

LACKLUSTRE QUESTIONS

Worboys, now known as John Radford, was called to give evidence to the Parole Board hearing in November 2017 – but he was only questioned for 50 minutes.

Notes from the meeting revealed a Ministry of Justice representative ‘asked few questions’, and that neither that official nor the Parole Board panel queried the apparent inconsistencies in his account. He told them: ‘I’m deeply sorry about what I have done. I feel I’ve become a better person since I changed my stance and admitted my guilt.

‘I found religion – decided if I’m going to follow the Lord I’ve got to be honest and admit what I have done.’

The judges said: ‘It is a fair reading of the notes of the hearing that the credibility and reliability of Mr Radford’s [Worboys] account was not probed to any extent, if at all.’

HIS CYNICAL CLAIMS

Nine months before he would become eligible for parole and after serving his minimum term, Worboys dramatically admitted he had carried out the attacks of which he had been convicted, although he continued to deny any other offences.

During a tearful prison interview he told a psychologist he had ‘always felt guilty’ about his crimes and now wanted to admit them to ‘say thank you’ to his victims, as he felt they had been fair about him in their accounts to police and the courts.

The High Court judges said it amounted to a ‘dramatic volte face’

‘Mr Radford’s change of position came after at least six years of adherence to an account which he now accepts was completely untrue... This factor, coupled with Mr Radford’s apparent deftness in impression management, should have engendered a considerable degree of dubiety.’

DATES DIDN’T ADD UP

Worboys said his attacks on women began in 2005, after he broke up with his girlfriend.

But police believe they began in 2002 and Worboys settled a civil claim brought by 11 victims, including one who detailed an attack in 2003.

Worboys paid £241,000 to the 11 women, despite only admitting he had attacked three of them.

The judges said ‘basic lines of inquiry’ would have uncovered the discrepancies in his account.

WARNING THEY IGNORED

A Parole Board review in September 2015 found Worboys posed too great a risk to be released.

He was then assessed by four psychologists ahead of the 2017 Parole Board, who did not agree about whether he should be released.

Three eventually agreed his treatment in prison had been effective. A fourth recommended he be kept in prison for further treatment.