Trawling and Trickery

Although there is mounting public concern about disclosure failures by police and prosecutors – especially when allegations of a sexual nature have been made – there is also a danger that a range of other types of police misconduct and malpractice may be being overlooked. It is obvious that any comprehensive review of how the embattled Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) reached its current state of crisis must certainly examine the much wider institutional flaws which are undermining our justice system.

I am referring particularly to the practice of police ‘trawling’ for complainants. What the police are unable to secure via ‘quality evidence' (i.e. unearthing actual facts which help to prove what the truth is), they often attempt to make up with ‘quantity evidence’. That’s to say, if the complaints they are dealing with seem weak and ostensibly difficult to prove (sometimes because they could well be blatant lies or fantasies), the police know that if they can find others willing to make a similar complaint, they then have a much better chance of securing ultimate ‘success’ in court.

The police use this similar allegation ‘evidence’ to sway the jury into thinking the accused is a pretty unseemly human being or to use the vernacular, ‘a dirty old man’. They know that if they can muster even a ragbag of fantasists and liars to support the original allegation, they have a much better chance of persuading twelve members of a jury to convict the accused, thereby ensuring the often vast amount of taxpayers’ money that has already been spent in the so-called investigation is never going to be a source of subsequent embarrassment. This is why investigative teams are hell bent on securing convictions at all costs once a suspect has been arrested. And, of course, successful prosecutions will certainly not damage any CPS lawyers' or police careers.

There is no place for this crude practice of police trawling in any fair, just democracy.

To exacerbate matters, the police sometimes use individuals who operate outside their force to advertise on their behalf, as happened in their ‘investigation’ of the complaints made against me, in 2012, by two greedy, unscrupulous liars. Our parliamentarians need urgently to investigate and deal with the fact that certain police forces choose to enlist this active support of private individuals – totally unregulated and completely unaccountable – in order to ‘trawl’ for further allegations of sexual misconduct (often, although not exclusively, historical in nature). The fact that these trawling operations have taken place is then often concealed from the defence, the judge and the jury.

In my case, they used the services of a Newbury businessman, a man seemingly obsessed with the entire ghastly topic of child abuse, who proclaimed on his website, within hours of the official announcement of the postponement of my trial in April 2014, that he had been asked by the investigating force to advertise on his website the fact the police were still eager for others to come forward to make complaints against me. He also stated that he would be ready to receive allegations to pass on.

How utterly crude is this and some might well argue how utterly corrupt. I can only speculate how this sort of online trawling is permitted in any decent, lawful society and what the self-appointed ‘agent’ acting on behalf of the police gains in involving himself in such a case. It is difficult to fathom. Is he simply an obsessive injustice collector (specialist subject: child abuse) or is there a much more sinister reason?

The dangers of police officers getting involved with such characters must be obvious: making use of an unaccountable, often covert, third party who has nothing to do with the actual investigation violates all professional standards of modern police practice. How much of this dangerous activity has already been going on in the background for years?

One of the major concerns about these unofficial trawling activities is that of cross-contamination of evidence. In some cases there is blatant collusion between individuals who are now claiming as adults that they were sexually abused years earlier when they were children. Those planning to make complaints may have got together face-to-face or else may have communicated with each other online or by phone. Is it possible to ascertain the extent of the sharing of bogus stories between subsequent complainants in order to ‘get things straight’ before they even approach the police? Others read about the original complaints against the defendant online or in the press and exploit the information to their advantage, often financial.

Then there is the malignant role being played by certain firms of personal injury lawyers who thrive on the historical sexual allegation industry. Apart from the myriad which appear online at a few touches of the keyboard, there is well-documented evidence of advertisements being placed in prison newspapers for those who wish to make allegations of a sexual nature to contact one or other of these firms, with the promise of sizeable sums of compensation.

It isn’t difficult to understand why someone who is short of a few bob, or a prisoner who earns a miserable £10 a week, might be inspired to spin a profitable yarn to an obliging lawyer in the hope of getting a generous tax-free payout. And since the risk nowadays of being prosecuted for lying to the police, or for perjury in court, is absolutely minimal, any fantastic pack of old lies will do. There is nothing to lose and perhaps a lot to gain.

I found it unsurprising to learn that the individual who actively advertised – unsuccessfully as it turned out – for further false allegations against me actually includes hyperlinks from his own website to a particular firm of personal injury solicitors who specialise in cases of alleged historical sexual abuse, including directing messages to a named lawyer at the firm. Was he hoping for commission, I wonder?

So why would police officers ally themselves to individuals who are so shamelessly and openly touting for compensation business? Might it be because detectives who work in this field are only too aware that the potential prospect of an undeserved financial payout of thousands of pounds can be a powerful motivating factor for some insidious individuals who come forward to make bogus complaints?

And I have recently discovered that the activities of this Berkshire-based ‘injustice collector’ are far from being unique. In certain instances, some self-proclaimed ‘activists’ have particularly dubious backgrounds of their own, including those who are themselves convicted criminals. Some have stood in the dock convicted of fraud, others of a range of drug offences; even some who have records for the vile and violent abuse of women and/or children, including members of their own family.

Many of these obsessive characters would be unable to pass any positive vetting or criminal records check required to be allowed to join the police, not to mention employment as teachers or carers, yet they are seemingly regarded by some detectives as being appropriate persons to gather sensitive intelligence that may be used in prosecutions (even if the actual source of the trawling remains concealed). How can that possibly be interpreted as justice in any form?

The time is long overdue for a major reform of our justice system. It has become far too easy – indeed, virtually risk free – for fraudsters, fantasists, revenge seekers and attention-seeking liars (as well as their enablers) to make false allegations, especially of a sexual kind against innocent victims. But this will doubtlessly continue until police officers investigate all allegations impartially and dispassionately, refraining from usurping the role of the jury in deciding whether the particular allegations being made are “credible and true.”

Alison Saunder, DPP

In addition, ALL police contacts with those who are engaged in trawling for complainants on their behalf must be fully documented and disclosed to the defence well in advance of any trial. Police forces urgently need to ensure that they never make use of dubious, unaccountable trawlers, who are subsequently hidden and protected. In cases where personal injury solicitors have already been consulted by complainants, juries should be told the details if and when a case eventually goes to trial.

We, the British public, deserve better from our police forces in these ‘investigations’ and there is a need for real consequences for fraudsters and perjurers who seek to destroy the lives of innocent people and their families. Making false allegations of any kind is never a victimless crime and where police or judges suspect that a complainant is lying, prosecution should always be seriously considered (to be honest, I’m not holding my breath on that). Otherwise, our legal system will never address the current crisis, in which innocent victims of miscarriages of justice continue to be sent to prison, their lives destroyed, while those of us who were falsely accused and then acquitted will forever live under the shadow of monstrous lies.

The Price of Innocence

Are any of us that surprised that the despicable liar, 'Nick', whose outrageous claims of widespread sexual abuse at Dolphin Square, where he was supposedly raped and where he claimed he witnessed murders, turns out to be nothing more than a pathetic fantasist who allegedly spends his leisure time looking at child pornography? Today in the national media, including The Telegraph and The Sun newspapers, a true picture is painted of this cruel, manipulative specimen of humanity.

'Nick' - charged by police

This lying fantasist, whose claims against our former Prime Minister, Sir Ted Heath, were described so famously by Detective Superintendent Kenny McDonald of 'Operation Midland', standing in front of the former P.M.'s Salisbury home, as being 'credible and true'. What he said in full was: 'The team (Operation Midland) and I believe what Nick is saying is credible and true.'( A phrase which is now synonymous with unsubstantiated and false). DS McDonald goes on to praise Nick 'for showing so much courage in coming forward'.

Pass me the sick bucket, someone.

‘Nick’ – the key source of the Operation Midland ‘VIP paedo’ fiasco – is himself now charged with the alleged possession of child abuse images. Will this thoroughly discredited individual now be forced to face justice for his cruel lies and to return the undeserved compensation money (rumoured to be around £50,000) he has received from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority? Will 'Operation Midland' officers now finally admit to having been well and truly duped by this fantasist?

This broadcast outside the former PM's house in Salisbury was given the go-ahead because those working on 'Operation Midland' were desperate for others, anyone, to come forward, to help lend credence to 'Nick''s allegations. Quoting Mr McDonald: 'We need others to come forward. You will be believed. You will be supported.'

Doesn't all this now make the average person's blood run cold? The police were taken in by this insidious liar, hook, line and sinker. This fiasco is bad enough - this appalling assault on the integrity of a number of high profile politicians and the almost puerile gullibility of senior police officers - but the fact is our justice system is in crisis. Almost every day brings fresh news of some escalation in the disaster: police failures over disclosure; police officers believing without pause for thought highly unlikely, unproveable and false allegations; criminal trials collapsing; wrongful convictions; failing, overworked probation services… the list seems endless. Amid all this chaos, only the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, appears to be blithely unaware of the scale of the problem.

As I have written previously concerning alleged historical sex allegations, the current scandal over the police's and Crown Prosecution Service's (CPS) almost child-like gullibility and the evidence disclosure failures are nothing new. Those of us who have had direct experience of UK criminal law are only too well aware of the human consequences of this ideologically-driven ‘justice’ system. Innocent people are having their lives and reputations trashed because target-obsessed police and CPS flunkies are determined to raise conviction rates, especially in cases involving sexual allegations, regardless of any evidence that might undermine the prosecution’s case.

I am absolutely convinced that this blinkered approach has already led to numerous miscarriages of justice, with a significant number of innocent men and women now rotting in our prisons, despite Ms Saunders’ ludicrous denials. And those who manage to survive these horrors – and, sadly, some don’t – are released to face the virtual impossibility of rebuilding their shattered lives. Many will have lost their homes, their jobs, their reputations, their savings and even access to their loved ones. False allegations wreck families, especially where there are children or grandchildren caught up in the maelstrom.

Even those of us – like me – who were completely exonerated by unanimous jury decisions, delivered in a matter of minutes, have had to live through months or years of misery. Most – like me – have lost their careers and homes during the 'investigation'; many others are ruined financially and still face crippling legal bills due to fighting allegations which were totally groundless.

And don’t think for one moment that being acquitted in court is the end of the nightmare: it isn’t. Those of us who had professional careers then have to face anxious months of further inquiries by official government bodies to determine whether we are ‘fit’ to ever work again as teachers, doctors, nurses or carers. In many cases, the mere fact that an allegation – no matter how preposterous – has been levelled represents the end of a successful career, which may have spanned decades. Although I was fortunate to have been cleared to teach again, many more in my former profession find themselves barred from the classroom for life, even when they have never been convicted in a court of law. Both the DBS (Disclosure and Barring Service) and the NCTL (National College of Teachers and Leadership) work along the lines of the balance of probabilities. The General Medical Council runs along similar lines.

And then there is the seemingly eternal stigma of having foul allegations, even when proven to be false, endlessly circulating via social media. Just try getting any of this spiteful, menacing nonsense deleted from the net and you will soon realise that you have more chance of winning the Lottery. The innocent remain branded online for life - and beyond the grave.

Sir Ted Heath & Lord Bramall

Will the name and reputation of Ted Heath ever recover from 'Nick's' filthy, selfish, cruel lies? Never. There are so many more victims like Sir Edward.

Our criminal ‘justice’ system is producing a myriad innocent victims who have no effective means of redress. Even the small number of victims of miscarriages of justice who manage to reach the Court of Appeal, in order to have their convictions quashed, are by that stage often utterly ruined individuals. I have left FACT meetings (False Allegations Against Carers and Teachers) alongside members who have had their lives utterly trashed by cunning chancers, whose lies have put a partner behind bars.  One I spoke to on the way to the car park recently suddenly dissolved into tears merely because I asked her which prison her husband was in. Once a strong, successful individual, enjoying a loving marriage, she was now living on her nerves, her happiness trashed. I feel upset just writing about this incident.

Few who succeed at the Court of Appeal qualify for the measly sums of compensation which are grudgingly given, and those who do, then see substantial deductions for their ‘board and lodgings’ – i.e. a wretched cell and indigestible prison food – during their months or years of totally unmerited punishment.

I believe that it is now time to demand full restitution for the victims of our failing justice system. Where wrongful convictions have been quashed by the courts, an independent assessor should be tasked with calculating the real losses that an innocent victim of a miscarriage of justice has suffered, including such items as a lost home, career, pension and savings. Moreover, older people who have seen their state pensions and other benefits frozen while they are in jail deserve to receive the money to which they are entitled. Anything less is an outrageous injustice.

I recognise that in some cases appropriate restitution may run to hundreds of thousands of pounds – or more. However, genuine restorative justice demands that our society recognises the wrongs that have been inflicted in the name of the Crown.

In addition, those who have been acquitted in court should not face ruin due to the cost of legal bills, as well as their loss of income while awaiting trial. We need to ensure that people who emerge innocent from the dock are properly recompensed for their ordeal, not bankrupted or left homeless. When trials have collapsed owing to disclosure failures, the Crown should be required to cover all legal costs incurred by the defendant.

In part, this system of restitution could be funded by ending the current perverted compensation culture that offers liars, fraudsters and fantasists substantial cash payouts, usually from public funds (with a generous slice going to lawyers, of course, who tout openly for such business). It is truly iniquitous that notorious liars – such as the vile Danny Day, who profited to the tune of thousands of pounds from his proven lies against retired fire chief David Bryant, and this disgusting, now humiliated, fraudster ‘Nick’ – should walk away from the terrible human suffering they have caused with cash in their pockets.

Protecting Our Children At School

Modern Britain is a remarkably tolerant society: we have a long tradition of minding our own business, especially when it comes to people’s religious beliefs. Unlike some other countries – such as France – we do not seek to limit individuals’ choices when it comes to what clothing is worn in public.

However, we also have a responsibility to give authority to head teachers and school governors to ensure the well-being and safety of children in their care. This is why the latest warning of the dangers of radicalisation in schools by Amanda Spielman, the Head of Ofsted, should be taken very seriously.

Her comments about extremists seeking to “indoctrinate impressionable minds” follows the furore that followed a recent decision by the head teacher of St Stephen’s primary school in East London, Neena Lall, to ban girls under the age of eight from wearing the hijab in the classroom. It was a decision that had been supported by the chairman of the school’s governors, Arif Qawi. Unfortunately, vocal criticism from hardline campaigners – including some parents of pupils – has since forced Mr Qawi’s resignation, while the head teacher has backed down and reversed what was a sensible decision concerning school uniform.


There is no legitimate reason for any young girls to have to wear the hijab or any other form of overtly religious dress in British school classrooms. Even in hard line Iran the headscarf is not compulsory for girls under nine years of age. There is no religious tenet anywhere which requires an 8-year old to wear a hijab.

This fiasco sets a very dangerous precedent: head teachers and boards of school governors need to have the authority to determine what is best for children in the classroom without fear of a backlash from a minority of disgruntled parents. Evidence suggests that our children thrive best in schools with good discipline, clear rules and high standards, including policies on behaviour and the wearing of smart uniforms; uniforms which cross all social divides, promoting a sense of corporate belonging.

Our classrooms should be places where there are no visible distinctions between pupils of differing faiths. We all know how children who are perceived as being ‘different’ can fall victim to bullying. A fairly applied code on school uniform can play an important role in minimising divisions between youngsters who should be focusing their attention on studying and learning, not on what they, or other pupils, are wearing.

Educational standards and levels of academic attainment are highest in schools in countries such as South Korea, Finland, Singapore and Switzerland, where teachers enjoy a high level of respect within their local communities and where parents are fully supportive of head teachers and the rules of the schools which their children attend. In contrast, when parents and activists set about undermining the authority of head teachers, it leads to plummeting standards and failing schools. Here in the UK, where there are regular public protests and social media mobs undermining the running of our schools, we have slumped to 20th place according to the 2015 OECD report.

As someone who worked as a teacher for over 30 years, I am absolutely certain that one of the key reasons why there has been a serious deterioration in standards of behaviour amongst many pupils here in the UK, which continues to affect negatively on standards of basic numeracy and literacy, is the marked decline in the authority of teachers, made worse by a failure by some parents to back staff when they make decisions that may be necessary, even if these may be unpopular with children or their families.

Head teachers need to be empowered and supported whenever they make rules which keep all children safe. As a society we have a responsibility to keep extremism and divisive dogmas, of any kind, out of the classroom. Unfortunately, tolerance can easily be mistaken as weakness by extremists and young, impressionable children can be vulnerable to manipulation by hardline fanatics who are eager to peddle poisonous doctrines of separatism, hatred and division.

Not Fit For Purpose

The scandals surrounding failures of police/CPS disclosure and the consequent collapse of trials – mostly, but not exclusively, to do with allegations of rape or sexual assault – just keep coming. Almost every day brings a fresh revelation concerning the withholding by police or prosecutors of vital information which might have assisted the defence.

We are being asked to believe that these appalling failures within our justice system can be attributed to human error, to tight budgets or to staff shortages. Personally, I don’t believe a word of this self-serving flannel. Key evidence is being withheld from defence teams, judges and members of juries – and even, on occasions, from barristers representing the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), because convictions at all costs, especially when defendants have been charged with sexual offences, suit the current ideological dogmas prevalent within both police forces and the CPS.

Even a cursory glance through the latest official CPS report on ‘Violence Against Women and Girls’ (note that there is no mention of violence against men or boys in that title!), issued on 10 October 2017, reveals just how target-driven our justice system has become in recent years (basic common sense tells us pre-set targets and justice are mutually incompatible). In fact, the CPS report celebrates rising prosecution and conviction statistics. For example, it highlights that successful prosecutions of sexual offences (including rape and child abuse) have increased by 14 percent since 2015-2016. Needless to note, there is absolutely no reference to wrongful convictions or to people currently spending time at Her Majesty's Pleasure while maintaining innocence.

The CPS report also boasts how prosecutions for alleged sexual offences against children (including historical cases) have increased by 82 percent in a decade, while convictions are at an all time high of 89 percent. What we don’t know, of course, is how many of the contested trials took place against a background of withheld evidence which might have supported the defendants’ version of events. Many accused people – especially when the alleged incidents date back decades – are quite literally fighting these cases with both hands tied behind their backs.

Of course, target-driven justice was always fated to produce miscarriages of justice. Ideological dogma (and no doubt hopes of promotion) places pressure on police officers to ‘cut corners’ and to abandon traditional even-handed policing methods of following up inquiries wherever they may lead, even if evidence emerges that undermines the accuser’s account of events.

In my own case, elementary detective work could have saved me two years of hell on earth. It was established within ten minutes of my first interview that, contrary to what was being alleged, I had never taught PE or junior school games during the early 1980s. It would not have needed Detective Columbo, even at that early stage of the so-called 'investigation', to expose the lies being told by my false accuser, who was doubtless hoping for a compensation payout and another spot in the limelight. But the police officers, from the very beginning, obviously made a decision not to make any inquiries with former colleagues or ex-pupils which might undermine their quest to have me convicted. Instead, they pushed on with a prosecution which ended my teaching career and cost me my home, even though I was eventually acquitted by a unanimous jury in a matter of minutes. Ultimately, there was little, if anything, to discuss! Meanwhile, the liar and his supportive friend, who both attempted to frame me, have walked away with no negative consequences and their anonymity intact.

Since my own 672 day ordeal finished in 2014, I have become aware of other similar cases where the lies of fraudsters and fantasists have gone unchallenged and not investigated by the police. There are people whom I believe to be innocent who have been convicted and imprisoned, in some cases for years, and had their lives destroyed at the altar of the cruel dogma of set targets. Responsibility for these appalling miscarriages of justice must be shared by the police and CPS because their basic procedures and practices have become fundamentally flawed and unbalanced due to fatuous nonsense such as the mantra ‘you will be believed’, regardless of how ludicrous or obviously bogus such allegations may be.

The very fact that the CPS has now been forced by negative media coverage and rising public concern to review all pending rape and sexual assault prosecutions is evidence that something is very rotten within the culture of the police and the CPS. It remains to be seen how many of these cases where defendants may have already had their lives wrecked, their jobs and/or homes lost, their safety constantly threatened, their family life ruined, will eventually be abandoned. All this trauma is being suffered because of a failure on the part of police and prosecutors to follow the law by disclosing evidence which might have assisted an innocent person's defence.

However welcome a genuine review of current prosecutions may be, it is far from being sufficient. The perverse practices now being exposed – such as failing to disclose vital evidence or refusing to interview potential witnesses because their evidence might assist the defence – must end now. (I can't believe that in any fair, just society I am forced to write this statement).

All target-based approaches to prosecutions must also be ended because constant demands by the CPS (and its cheerleaders in the media and in radical pressure groups) have simply encouraged police and prosecutors to abandon the basic rules of our justice system in order to pursue convictions at any cost. The presumption of innocence, as well as robust, impartial detective work by police officers, needs to be returned to the heart of our criminal justice system.

DPP Alison Saunders

Moreover, ALL contested cases, where those convicted are maintaining their innocence, must be urgently reviewed and case files examined by independent barristers and caseworkers, who do not answer to the police nor the CPS. The ridiculous assertion by Director of Public Prosecutions Alison Saunders that no innocent people are in prison due to disclosure failures is both shockingly complacent and certain to be wrong. How can someone in such a senior position be allowed to make such a preposterous statement with impunity?

It is vital to acknowledge that misconduct by police and prosecutors that could, and does, lead to miscarriages of justice hasn’t just started in the past few weeks… it has been embedded in our unbalanced justice system for years, exacerbated, of course, by 'the Savile effect'. It’s only now that the general public is becoming aware of the sheer wickedness which has been going on behind closed doors for far too long. Justice demands a root and branch reform of both police practices and the misguided, ideologically motivated policies of the CPS, which have led directly to the present crisis.

An Open Letter to Alison Saunders

A copy of my Open Letter to the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders.

Dear Ms Saunders,

Like many people who have had first-hand experience of our criminal justice system, I was dumbfounded by your recent assertion on the BBC Radio 4 'Today' programme, that no innocent victims are languishing in prison as a result of disclosure failures by the police and/or the Crown Prosecution Service. The statement is as absurd as your predecessor's that 'all complainants of historical sexual abuse will be believed.' How people who secure senior appointments such as the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) can make such preposterous statements is beyond me.

Ms Saunders, how could you possibly know that there are no innocent victims suffering as a result of disclosure failures? Pray, tell me, how?

These puerile claims do everyone who is involved in the criminal justice system no credit at all. Anyone who has had a 'taste' of British justice in recent years, particularly in alleged sex abuse cases, knows that the whole system is set up solely to produce convictions at almost any cost. Any defendant will have a mountain to climb to prove his or her innocence. (Let's stop pretending that in alleged sex abuse cases it is innocent until proven guilty).

We all know that once the police arrest someone they feel it is their bounden duty to secure a conviction. We all know that any evidence to cast doubt on the prosecution case will tend to be ignored. Yet, you attempt to whitewash what has become a broken, unbalanced system and this serves to damage your high office as the DPP. Asserting, as you do, that there is no need for the police to review media accounts and mobile phones in such cases is to shut down, potentially, vital avenues of inquiry. This very issue seems to be one of the key reasons prosecution cases are now collapsing on what is virtually a weekly basis. (Full marks to prosecuting counsel Jerry Hayes for getting the ball rolling).

How can you possibly continue to maintain this arrogant fiction that no innocent people are rotting in jail on account of the biased m.o. of the police and/or CPS? The truth is you cannot possibly know unless you order a review of disclosure procedures in every contested prosecution case that has ended in a conviction. After all, juries in criminal trials are under oath to try cases solely on the basis of evidence presented to them during the trial. If crucial evidence which might assist the defence is held back, then such trials can be neither fair nor just. It is no surprise that the recent public collapse of several criminal prosecutions has cast serious doubt in the minds of the general public about the competence - and bona fides - of the entire prosecution system here in the UK.

The CPS, under your leadership, seems to be continuing misguided policies that were introduced for largely ideological reasons. Your unlamented predecessor, Sir Keir Starmer, now a Labour shadow minister, did immense damage to our justice system by politicising the role of the CPS. As DPP, you have rendered a bad situation worse.

British justice used to be the envy of the world, something of which we could all be justifiably proud. Now it is becoming inexorably a national disgrace. Ms Saunders, people's lives are being destroyed due to appallingly one-sided and unbalanced police 'investigations' (try reading my latest book 'Presumed Guilty'; and I was one of the lucky ones!). These 'investigations' presuppose guilt and, what is worse, seem institutionally inclined to conceal or suppress evidence that might undermine prosecutions. In this way they boost the chances of the prosecutors hitting your arbitrary, ideological targets for 'successful' results, i.e. accused people being found guilty.

Ms Saunders, you have spent most of your professional career inside the CPS and it isn't hard to understand why you see no reason to pursue meaningful reform or to challenge the current status quo. Could there be a better reason to consider the ethics of promoting someone from within the system to the post of DPP?

Rather than grandstanding in the media, you might well be advised to look more closely at the reasons public confidence in our criminal justice system is being undermined - an issue highlighted this week by the former Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge. The law of unintended consequences of the present unbalanced, unfair approach to these 'investigations' might just be that juries will no longer have confidence that they have heard all the relevant evidence and acquit the guilty.

Ms Saunders, we all know that miscarriages of justice are a fact within our legal system. If they were not, then the Court of Appeal would not be quashing convictions. And I can tell you that the chancers/liars/fantasists are rarely hauled into a court of law, even when they are shown to be just what they are. (I am still awaiting for the two liars who falsely accused me to be called to account).

The system is stacked against those accused and the complainants, often referred to as 'victims' from the outset, are supported throughout. For an innocent person, found guilty in a court of law, has little chance of a case review unless there is incontrovertible evidence to prove that innocence. Which makes fair, balanced initial investigations all the more important.

Ms Saunders, there are innocent people rotting in our dangerous prisons. These people are victims, just like those who have been genuinely raped or abused. This latest assertion by you that only the guilty are being punished, are having their lives ruined, gives the impression you are either out of touch with reality or in denial.

Yours sincerely,

Simon Warr

We Must End The Compensation Craze

Happy New Year to all. I do hope many of those who are suffering at the hands of the state, following malicious false allegations of abuse, will this year receive the justice they deserve. I feel the tide is at last turning.

Vile fantasist 'Nick' 

I have a few questions. Does that appalling fantasist 'Nick', still have his greedy hands on the £50,000 injuries' compensation money he received from state coffers for his false claims of having been abused by, among others, ex-Tory Home Secretary Leon Britton and ex-Army Chief, Lord Bramall? 'Nick' has been shown to be a cruel, manipulative liar and, in any decent, just society, he should be sent to prison for a long time but this is Great (ha ha) Britain, still suffering from 'the Savile effect', a time when perjury and perverting the course of justice are permitted... as long as you claim to be a victim of sexual abuse. What's more, you can keep the compensation pay out, it seems, even if you have been found to be lying!

'Chronic liar' Danny Day

Next, does that 'chronic liar', Danny Day (he has waived his anonymity so can be named and shamed), still have his hands on the £11,000 he was awarded for falsely claiming he was raped by ex-fire chief David Bryant in the 1990s? Not only should every last penny be repaid by now, the repellent specimen of humanity, Day, should be behind bars, serving a sentence well in excess of the stretch poor Mr. Bryant had to endure on account of Day's lies. Oh, of course, this is Great Britain which has seemingly little interest in punishing perjury and attempts to pervert the course of justice, even if all this has led to the ruin of an innocent man's life.

Of course, it is more tricky to lie your way to a gigantic slice of unmerited state funds by claiming the alleged abuse happened recently because the defence team will have a small(!) chance to prove you're telling lies, as we have seen in a number of recent, high profile cases. Faked historical abuse claims are so much less risky.

No, having endured the horrific process myself, I would tell any greedy, grubby liars that an allegation which is historical is far safer because it'll be a devil of a job for someone accused to prove his/her innocence (this judicial volte face is what is required in courts nowadays). I was lucky because the pair of grubby chancers who lied about me were too thick to come up with a plausible false account. However, since my acquittal in 2014, I have got to know a number of other innocent people who were not so lucky. One of them was accused of historical abuse after the single complainant had been coached by a malicious third party to ensure his account could stand up in a court (the accuser was far too stupid to invent a plausible story himself).

I imagine many of these liars will know how to play it because there is so much advice available from those 'riding white chargers' the personal injury lawyers. Try typing 'abuse compensation' into a search engine and you can take your pick where you go. In the case of the motor industry, they are called 'ambulance chasers' and the government has finally woken to the fact that the system is being swamped by greedy liars. So the PI lawyers, always with their eyes on the next lucrative market, (these people never advertise the fact that their fees are usually in excess of the compensation money paid out to the claimant), realise that they are on much safer ground dealing with cases of sexual abuse, leaning towards historical claims, because these are almost impossible to prove either way.

These PI lawyers rarely tout for business in low profile cases within families, where most genuine abuse occurs, because it's unlikely to be lucrative enough, with no insurance money to get their hands on and most families themselves have only limited funds. Far better to attack schoolteachers/care workers and the rich and famous... potentially lots of money on offer!

I am calling for an immediate end to the handing out of large sums of compensation payments, much of which comes of of taxpayers' pockets. Sexual abuse complainants should not be regarded as immune from the temptations and incentives, particularly financial, that drive human beings generally. These payments are making a mockery of British justice.

If someone has genuinely been abused, then he or she should be entitled to whatever professional help is required, as the victim strives to survive that abuse. The perpetrator should, accordingly, be sentenced to a long stretch behind bars. This should provide more than adequate, appropriate support for anybody who has suffered real abuse.

As for those who have lied their way to receiving a wad of state cash, they should hang their repugnant heads in shame, preferably behind bars, for a substantial tranche of their lives. But, of course, this is Great Britain, and the old boys' club of the judiciary/CPS/police don't consider all this lying, this perjury, this perverting the course of justice important enough to investigate.

Once again, may 2018 see a turning of the tide. It's only right and fair.

A Failure of Disclosure

The recent collapse of not one, but two, criminal prosecutions for alleged sexual offences has once again exposed serious shortcomings in modern policing. In the case of Liam Allan, a young university student who was facing charges of rape and sexual assault, it was left to the prosecutor, Jerry Hayes, a former MP, to blow the whistle on yet another legal scandal of our times.

If he'd been convicted, Mr. Allan could have faced a sentence of perhaps 10 or 12 years' imprisonment, followed by a lifetime on the sex offenders' list with all that entails - having to report to the police whenever he decided to spend a few days away from home or wanted to travel abroad. What's more, the likelihood is Mr. Allan would have had to endure a future life of unemployment, misery and online attacks, perhaps even physical assaults by vigilantes. Being a convicted sex offender is viewed by the public as only marginally less repugnant than being a convicted murderer.

With all this at stake, the DC in charge of the so-called investigation, Mark Azariah, decided that numerous text messages sent by the complainant, which made it abundantly clear that it was she who was the actual 'sex pest', should not be disclosed to the defence or, indeed, to the CPS. The police were in possession of thousands of messages sent by the accuser to Mr. Allan and to mutual friends and it was clear from these communications that the beleaguered defendant had been besieged by requests from her for sex and, even more pertinently, that any sexual activity in which he had engaged with her had been consensual.

Yet, the officer in charge apparently didn't consider any of these messages relevant to the case; which beggars belief. Either this is a case of total and utter incompetence by the police officers involved or it can be construed as something more sinister. All we can hope for is that the inquiry set up to look at the case's handling will be able to establish the truth of why Mr. Allan was let down in such a serious manner. The fact is we now know he should never have been charged and certainly not left to languish on police bail for nigh on two years.

In the same week we learned about Isaac Itiary, 25, who was charged with eleven crimes, including rape involving an underage girl, who had his claims that he thought she was an adult dismissed out of hand by the police. Had they bothered to check the accuser's messages, they would have learned that she was, indeed, claiming to be 19 years of age. (It doesn't bear contemplating that the police were aware of these messages and chose to ignore them. That stated, would any of us be surprised?) Poor Mr. Itiary had to spend four months in prison on remand because of - let's look favourably on the police approach - this incompetence.

Senior barrister and former adviser to the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Levitt, observed this week that the police m.o. of believing all complainants and immediately assuming them to be victims might conceivably be damaging the justice system in this country. We should get her on BBC's 'Mastermind', specialist subject 'the Bleeding Obvious'.

As I've stated time and again recently, it is NOT the police's job to believe either the complainant or the accused, it is their job to investigate 'without fear or favour', just like they didn't do when 'investigating' the allegations of a grubby, greedy misfit who accused me in 2012 of supposedly touching him up in a shower room. The officer in charge believed the insidious, unscrupulous claims from the off and disregarded any evidence which weakened the prosecution case. As journalist Richard Littlejohn would say, 'you couldn't make it up'. As a result of this, I, too, was deprived of two years of my life and have never received an apology. I'm not holding my breath.

It would be imprudent to consider the three cases to which I have referred as merely isolated but rather come to the conclusion that they are indicative of a serious problem in our justice system. If reports are correct, there are another 30 cases pending which are being reviewed to ascertain whether vital information has been suppressed by investigating officers.

This very week a number of solicitors and barristers have come forward to share their experiences of similar flaws in previous prosecutions. They claim that non-disclosure is widespread and I'm not in the least surprised. I dread to think how many innocent people are now sitting in prison cells or, having spent time at Her Majesty's Pleasure, are now unemployable, bereft of hope and happiness, living in constant fear.

In any just, fair society, non-disclosure is a very serious abuse of power. Anyone accused of a sex crime, whether modern or historical, has a mountain to climb anyway and this just makes the task even more difficult. In my case it was I on my own up against a police incident room team with their almost unlimited state resources. This will be the same for anyone else accused of a sex offence. The preposterous mantra 'victims will be believed' continues to wreak havoc across our justice system. Let's be clear about this - any one of us could be accused of a sex offence and so have our life needlessly wrecked.

A biased, unfair approach by investigating officers certainly benefits and encourages those liars, fraudsters and fantasists who drag innocent people through the court system. These people are driven to make their spurious allegations by pecuniary benefit or cruel revenge or simply a need for attention in their hitherto miserable, unproductive lives. They have absolutely nothing to lose and a hell of a lot to gain and don't they know it!

Do we citizens really have to remind the police that they are bound by law to investigate all allegations impartially, as opposed to attempting to obtain a conviction at all costs? It seems we do.
Don't the police realise that, in the eyes of the public, there are few more heinous crimes than sexual assault and that it is therefore incumbent on them to investigate all allegations thoroughly and fairly, so the innocent are protected? It seems not.

So, Messrs Allan and Itiary- and a whole host of other innocent people - will all have to contend with the impact of an unfortunate, indelible online footprint which will continue to shadow them for as long as they live. To exacerbate matters, the liars who attempted to wreck their lives will enjoy life-long anonymity. And, no doubt, the spewing forth of hatred, spite and bile from the ill-educated internet mob will persist, regardless of the accused's innocence and acquittal, because in modern day UK just to be accused is enough for the untutored rabble to spit poison and threats of violence.

As Christmas approaches, we could well be advised to spend a few moments thinking of the myriad innocent people spending time in jail for sexual offences on the word of some monstrous liars and fantasists, aided and abetted by the biased 'investigative' procedures of the police. All this shames Britain.