Patel demands answers from officials over ‘Nick’ abuse investigations
THE new Home Secretary has demanded a full explanation of the police watchdog’s decision to clear three officers over the bungled VIP sex abuse inquiry.
Priti Patel met Michael Lockwood, head of the Independent Office for Police Conduct, on Thursday to quiz him over allegations against the officers who carried out raids at the homes of high-profile figures.
A former high court judge, Sir Richard Henriques, this week said that police had used false evidence to obtain search warrants relating to the properties of retired Armed Forces chief Lord Bramall, the widow of ex-home secretary Lord Brittan and former Tory MP Harvey Proctor.
A source close to Miss Patel said of Thursday’s meeting: ‘She asked for an explanation of the decision.
‘They discussed it in the meeting, and he is going to reply in writing. She wants a full explanation.’
In an article for the Mail this week, Sir Richard said police did not have the right to search the homes of Lord Bramall, Mr Proctor and Lord Brittan’s widow because their description of the complainant ‘Nick’ as a consistent witness had been false.
Nick, 51, whose real name is Carl Beech, was jailed by a judge at Newcastle Crown Court last week for 18 years for perverting the course of justice.
Sir Richard suggested the officers involved should face a criminal investigation, but the IOPC responded by saying it had already concluded that there was ‘no suspicion of criminality’.
In its original probe it found officers acted with ‘due diligence and good faith’.
This week former director of public prosecutions Ken Macdonald accused the watchdog of conducting a ‘cursory investigation’ into the most senior officers, who were not even interviewed. Conservative MPs also called for the probe to be reopened.
Misconduct allegations were first referred to the IOPC’s predecessor, the Independent Police Complaints Commission, back in 2016 but the investigation was not completed until earlier this month.
Sir Richard said he was surprised by the length of the watchdog’s inquiry.