This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/oct/21/lord-brittan-investigation-was-baseless-witch-hunt
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Version 1 | Version 2 |
---|---|
Leon Brittan rape investigation was ‘baseless witch-hunt’ | |
(35 minutes later) | |
A detective in charge of the rape investigation into Leon Brittan said the decision to interview the former cabinet minister was a “baseless witch-hunt”, while one of his bosses said it was needed to make sure the job had been done thoroughly. | |
DCI Paul Settle of the Metropolitan police told MPs on the home affairs select committee that his investigation found nothing to support a claim from a woman that Lord Brittan had raped her in 1967. He said there was thus no lawful basis to interview Brittan under criminal caution. | |
Settle appeared before MPs amid claims he had felt pressured by a letter from the Labour MP Tom Watson to the director of public prosecutions (DPP) which said Brittan should be interviewed over the rape claims. | |
Settle said his view that there was no point continuing the investigation and decision to stand his ground led his bosses to move him from his post. He claimed Watson’s letter had caused “panic” at Scotland Yard. But he later conceded that a decision to review his decision to stop the investigation may have been made before Watson even wrote his letter. | |
Settle said in September 2013 he consulted the Crown Prosecution Service and at that point decided the investigation should cease. “My reason for that,” he said, “was that I concluded that any action against Lord Brittan would be grossly disproportionate and would not have a legal basis as, in order to interview him, we would have to have had reasonable grounds to suspect that an [offence] had been committed. | |
“The investigation had shown that whilst an allegation had been made, the offence had not been made out in law and as such those reasonable grounds had ceased.” | “The investigation had shown that whilst an allegation had been made, the offence had not been made out in law and as such those reasonable grounds had ceased.” |
Settle said Watson had acted as a conduit for people who said they had been victims of abuse and three convictions had resulted. | |
But the senior detective said Watson’s letter to the DPP was a “betrayal” because he felt he and the MP had a good relationship and he had kept him updated on the investigation’s progress. | But the senior detective said Watson’s letter to the DPP was a “betrayal” because he felt he and the MP had a good relationship and he had kept him updated on the investigation’s progress. |
Steve Rodhouse, a Met deputy assistant commissioner, told MPs there were investigative steps Settle had not taken. He said interviewing Brittan could have helped investigators to prove or disprove allegations. | |
Rodhouse said there had been “reasonable grounds” to suspect Brittan of rape and suspect that an offence had taken place, on the basis of what “Jane”, the victim, had said. Critics say her testimony was riddled with errors. | |
He said the case was “close cut” and it was vital the “public had reassurance that we had fully examined all the material”, which is why he wanted a specialist rape prosecutor at the CPS to review the case, to see if the police view that Brittan had no case to answer was correct. | He said the case was “close cut” and it was vital the “public had reassurance that we had fully examined all the material”, which is why he wanted a specialist rape prosecutor at the CPS to review the case, to see if the police view that Brittan had no case to answer was correct. |