Judge accused of
child abuse ‘let off by police’
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2788648.ece
David Sanderson
November 2, 2007
A chief constable is being
investigated over his force’s dismissal of child abuse allegations against a
judge.
The police watchdog stepped in after claims that the officer allowed his
professional relationship with the circuit judge to prejudice the force’s
actions. The complainant, the judge’s estranged wife, alleged that he gave a
child a sexually transmitted disease, viewed child pornography websites and
misused transcripts from child abuse cases that he had presided over. There
were also allegations of mortgage fraud and domestic violence.
Documents sent to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) and seen
by The Times said that the force concluded that there was insufficient
evidence to even interview the judge and decided not to analyse his computer.
The force refused to accept a further complaint from the accuser that the
working relationship between the judge and officer, who worked on a criminal
justice panel together, had biased its approach.
The IPCC has now ordered an investigation into the alleged bias. The Times
also understands that the case is being investigated by the Judicial
Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman, Sir John Brigstocke, who became involved
after the allegations about the judge were reported to the Department for
Constitutional Affairs (DCA). The accuser expected it to bar the judge from
presiding over child abuse cases. When it did not, the ombudsman was brought
in.
A letter to Sir John, also seen by The Times, claims that the DCA also failed
to “address an allegation against [the judge] of unhealthy misuse of
transcripts relating to child sexual abuse cases”. The complainant alleged
that the judge had taken the transcripts home for his own sexual gratification
and that police were given a video that showed the judge masturbating while
shouting out a child’s name.
The case has raised questions about the IPCC’s complaints procedure. When the
complainant first contacted the watchdog with her complaints about the police
investigation, it told her to submit the complaint in two parts: one about the
alleged bias, and one about the perceived failure to follow proper
investigatory procedures, such as seizing computers. She did not resubmit the
second part, relating to the methods of the police investigation, until 28
days after the police force rejected her complaints. The IPCC ruled it to be
out of time and therefore could not investigate it.
Its ruling says that the “allegations of inappropriate behaviour towards
children, domestic violence and mortgage fraud” did not constitute “special
circumstances” allowing it to extend the 28-day period. The force will not be
required to reinvestigate the claims against the judge.
The chief executive of the police force authority said: “The IPCC has
instructed us to record the complaint but in doing so we need to obtain
further information. We have written to the complainant seeking the details we
require and are awaiting a response. Until this information has been received
we are unable to make further comment.”
When asked about the allegations of inappropriate behaviour towards young
children, the judge replied: “It is not a subject I would wish to comment upon
in any circumstances.”
Link:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2788648.ece
