HOW SHAMEFUL POLICE WON’T HUNT SPEEDBOAT FUGITIVE

THE gravity of the crimes perpetrated by convicted fugitive killer Jack Shepherd should have inspired the toughest possible response from our criminal justice system.

This is a reckless, dangerous individual who not only ended the life of 24-year-old Charlotte Brown through his gross negligence in a speedboat on the Thames, but then, while awaiting trial for her manslaughter, committed grievous bodily harm on a barman in a Devon hotel.

I believe the collective feebleness demonstrated by the police, the courts and the Crown Prosecution Service has repeatedly enabled him to evade justice, and makes a mockery of our legal system.

Despite a charge of manslaughter, Shepherd was both granted bail and allowed to keep his passport. Such leniency made it possible for him to abscond from his Old Bailey trial last year and stay on the run to this day.

Even before the trial, this incompetence was, in my view, compounded in the aftermath of his brutal assault on the barman, when the police, even after his arrest, apparently failed to link him with the manslaughter case.

Then the CPS failed to bring him to court for the offence, claiming in September that legal proceedings had been ‘finalised’ — which means that Shepherd is unlikely ever to face prosecution (although police say an arrest warrant was still active).

As the Mail has reported this past week, the fiasco continues to deepen with Shepherd being granted legal aid while on the run to pursue an appeal against his conviction for manslaughter, for which he was sentenced to six years in his absence.

Just as disturbingly, the police seem to have made little progress in tracking him down, even though there are plenty of avenues to pursue. As a former Metropolitan Police Chief Superintendent, I find this saga deeply depressing. The primary duties of the police and law enforcement agencies are to protect the public, prevent crime and punish offenders. But on every front the decisions by the authorities in this case seem to have been wrong-headed.

Charlotte Brown’s father Graham said that his family felt badly let down. ‘I would question what kind of priority and resources they’re putting in to finding him. I have got no confidence,’ he said.

He is correct to voice his dismay. There has been far too much complacency and far too little urgency in the handling of the case. From the moment of Charlotte’s death in December 2015, Shepherd seems to have been treated with kid gloves. My suspicion is that the police may have initially just regarded the incident as a tragic accident, and therefore sent the file to the CPS for advice, without imposing any bail conditions. Even when the CPS brought a charge of manslaughter, the same leniency prevailed, with Shepherd granted bail.

If that was the case, then it was misguided, given the extreme seriousness of the charge. Shepherd should have been remanded in custody pending his trial, so there was absolutely no chance of his absconding, and his passport should have been taken off him.

Those two requirements became even more crucial after the Devon hotel assault, for which, again, he should have been placed on remand. And it seems that neither the CPS made any request for the

surrender of the passport, nor did the Old Bailey judge demand it. It might be argued that this was understandable, given that Shepherd, until the Thames killing, had no criminal record and was not deemed a flight risk.

But in my experience, anyone has the potential to go on the run if the charges against them are serious enough. Indeed, it is precisely the gravity of the crime that will make them more likely to abscond in a cowardly fashion when confronted with the horror of what they have done.

I have little doubt that, in the ‘soft’ treatment he enjoyed, Shepherd was helped by his affluent background. It is difficult to believe that if he had been a thug or street robber from a deprived estate, he would have been granted unconditional bail and allowed to keep his passport.

Given these failures, I believe the police have an absolute duty to track down Shepherd. Yet there appears to be a worrying spirit of paralysis, reflected in a reluctance to devote resources or personnel to the task.

My view is it should not be that hard to find him if the will is there. He is not a professional criminal and it is probable that, if he has gone abroad, he travelled under his own passport. There would be a record in passenger lists held by airlines and ferry companies.

Moreover, thanks to modern technology and post 9/11 security, it is hard today for anyone to disappear completely. From mobile phone data to email exchanges, CCTV to automatic number plate recognition, all of us leave traces of our movements.

If Shepherd takes out cash from a bank, gets a job, makes a hotel booking, hires a car, uses a credit card or visits an internet cafe, there will be a record.

The National Crime Agency should be liaising with Interpol — both organisations have developed pioneering expertise in the field of cyber tracking.

It is possible that Shepherd may be relying on support from family and friends, perhaps through the provision of credit cards or cash, but that is a highly risky course for any conspirator, since helping a fugitive is a serious crime.

Mind you, even with the finest technology available, the conduct of the police in this case does not always inspire confidence. It was extraordinary that, after the Devon attack, the police appear initially to have made no connection with the Thames killing, though a quick database search should have revealed Shepherd’s involvement.

Furthermore, journalists researching the story seem to have made far more progress than the police, just through basic work such as contacting Shepherd’s friends and former school friends.

This is the kind of essential detective work that should have been done months ago, but appears to have been neglected until recently.

This newspaper’s welcome campaign — a £25,000 reward for information leading to Shepherd’s capture — seems, at last, to have galvanised the police into action.

I am told that, over Christmas, officers kept a watch on the home of Shepherd’s mother in case he returned.

But much more is needed if justice is finally to be achieved for Charlotte’s family — and Shepherd is put behind bars where he belongs.