Fresh shame for ‘Nick’ police chief
Met officer failed to investigate two other VIP abuse probe liars ‘to spare force further embarrassment’
THE police chief who led Scotland Yard’s bungled VIP child sex abuse inquiry failed to investigate two lying conspiracy theorists to save his force from embarrassment, it was claimed last night.
The pair made false statements backing claims by fantasist ‘Nick’, real name Carl Beech, about a murderous Westminster paedophile ring that the Met had described as ‘credible and true’.
Their testimony in 2015 prolonged Operation Midland and the agony of those falsely accused by Beech for months.
Ex-Metropolitan Police deputy assistant commissioner Steve Rodhouse later conceded during an inquiry into Midland that the accusers – known as A and B – had told ‘deliberate’ lies to his officers.
Yet no action was taken against the pair, who have appalling criminal records, even after ex-High Court judge Sir Richard Henriques said in his scathing report on the VIP abuse inquiry that an outside force should investigate them for attempting to pervert the course of justice. Mr Rodhouse, who was in charge of Midland, had also previously decided not to investigate paedophile Beech for telling lies. When Operation Midland closed without any arrests or charges in March 2016, the Met said in a statement authorised by the shamed police chief there was no evidence Beech had ‘knowingly misled’ officers.
This was despite clear indications that Beech had lied about VIP sex abuse and murder, damaging the reputations of former Tory home secretary Leon Brittan, ex-Armed Forces chief Lord Bramall and former Tory MP Harvey Proctor.
In compliance with the wishes of Sir Richard, Beech was referred by the Met to an independent force and is now serving 18 years in prison for perverting the course of justice and other offences.
Yet the Met ignored the retired judge’s recommendation that the two other serial liars be investigated over their dishonest statements. Had they been prosecuted, it would have heaped further shame on the Met, which has faced unprece dented criticism over Midland. A senior legal source with knowledge of the Nick scandal said last night: ‘I can see no possible justifiable explanation for not referring A and B to an independent force. The Met knew they had attempted to pervert the course of justice and wasted months of police time.
‘The cost to the police was considerable – over 20 officers for several months. Sir Richard’s report was accepted in its entirety by [then] Met chief Sir Bernard HoganHowe.
‘Who decided to disagree? And on what grounds when a criminal act has been so blatantly committed?’
Mr Proctor, who lost his home and job as a result of Midland and has lodged an official complaint about the Met’s handling of A and B, said: ‘My solicitors reported Carl Beech for wasting police time and perverting the course of justice by making false allegations against me. Steve Rodhouse refused to record it as a crime, still less investigate.
‘Now I find out that Rodhouse did not investigate A and B, two further witnesses against me within Operation Midland which Rodhouse said he knew had lied. We know Beech went on to commit paedophile offences after Midland closed, which Rodhouse could have prevented.
‘Rodhouse’s failure to investigate Beech and A and B was about protecting his own skin and saving his force from embarrassment.’
Mr Rodhouse also led a disastrous probe into a false rape claim against Lord Brittan and a botched inquiry into Jimmy Savile.
According to reports, the Commons home affairs committee will soon call the officer – now head of operations at the National Crime Agency on £245,000 a year – to answer questions over the Nick scandal.
In his 2016 report, Sir Richard noted that both A and B had significant criminal records and described their evidence as ‘worthless’.
He added: ‘It is not suggested by any officer in the case that either A or B could possibly be relied upon. Both deliberately lied.’
Scotland Yard declined to say which officer decided to ignore Sir Richard’s recommendation that they be investigated.
It said records show evidence of ‘a clear rationale for not commencing an investigation but not of the explicit recording of this to the standard required’.
It added a complaint against the Met had therefore ‘been recorded and… voluntarily referred to the Independent Office for Police Conduct [and] it would be inappropriate for us to comment further.’
Mr Rodhouse declined to answer questions from the Mail.