Acid attacker left on loose by police mistake
DETECTIVE FAILED TO CIRCULATE CRUCIAL CCTV IMAGES FOR 20 MONTHS
A thug who threw acid over an innocent woman at a cinema in Ealing wasn’t caught because a Metropolitan Police officer failed to circulate a CCTV image of the suspect for 20 months.
Xeneral Webster threw the acid over the woman as she watched a film in March 2017, causing significant injuries to her leg.
The detective constable leading the investigation obtained CCTV images of the suspect the day after the attack but did not circulate the images on the Met’s internal database until November 8, 2018.
The following day the suspect was identified as Xeneral Webster.
During those 20 months Webster, also known as Imiuru, had been jailed for the manslaughter of Joanne Rand in another acid attack three months after the Ealing incident.
Mrs Rand, 47, was sitting on a bench in High Wycombe on June 3, 2017 when she was struck by a bottle which contained industrial strength corrosive sulphuric acid, which splashed over parts of her body and caused fatal injuries.
Webster and another man had been fighting when the bottle was knocked out of Webster’s hand and was then kicked in Mrs Rand’s direction during the struggle.
Sadly, she died from her injuries and Webster, of Westway, in Shepherd’s Bush, was jailed for 17 years for manslaughter.
Now the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) has said the officer, who has been placed on restricted duties, has a case to answer for misconduct and the Met will arrange disciplinary proceedings. Announcing the decision on June 1, IOPC regional director Sal Naseem said: “Our investigation began against a backdrop of an escalation in acid attacks in London.
“The consequences of such attacks are devastating, and my sympathies are with the family and friends of Joanne Rand because the circumstances surrounding her death are truly tragic.
“Having assessed all of the evidence we concluded the failure on the part of the detective constable to circulate the CCTV image was not intentional or deliberate, however it was entirely avoidable.
“The officer had an opportunity in April 2017 to circulate the CCTV but this did not happen.
“We passed our report and its findings to the Metropolitan Police Service who agreed with us that the officer had a case to answer for misconduct. They will now arrange for a misconduct meeting to take place during which the evidence will be assessed.”
The IOPC said it only names officers facing gross misconduct proceedings. The Met said: “Following the conclusion of the investigation in February it was agreed that the DC had a case to answer for misconduct for breaching the standards of professional behaviour in respect of duties and responsibilities, orders and instructions and discreditable conduct.
“The MPS will now arrange for disciplinary proceedings to take place in due course. The officer is currently on restricted duties.”