Court
HANNINGFIELD SPECIAL REPORT:
Peer Challenged Cops' Justification For Arrest
Weds 20th Feb 2013, Yellow Advertiser
A DOCUMENT entered into evidence at Essex Police's High Court trial outlined investigating officers' reasons for arresting Lord Hanningfield.
The 'policy decision document' was authored by lead investigator DCI Keith Davies on September 6, 2011 – eight days before the peer was detained.
Hanningfield's barrister Rupert Bowers argued that the reasons in the document were 'fanciful'.
The document claimed Hanningfield had to be arrested suddenly to prevent him from destroying evidence or tipping off four suspected co-conspirators about the investigation.
The four other suspects, all Essex Council employees while Hanningfield was leader, were named in court as former director of policy Brandon Hallam, former head of the leader's office Alex Corbett, former cabinet advisor Max Soule and former head of communications Giles Roca.
Police never arrested any of the four and decided there was no case for any of them to answer.
DCI Davies admitted on the stand that the peer and the suspected co-conspirators had all known they were under investigation for several months before his arrest.
He accepted that they could therefore have contacted one another or destroyed evidence at any time before the arrest.
He also admitted that he had never considered arresting all five and questioning them at the same time to prevent them from colluding.
Hanningfield was released after interview without bail conditions, which meant he was still free to contact the four suspected co-conspirators.
Mr Bowers said the arrest could therefore have had 'precisely no effect whatsoever'.
Mr Justice Eady agreed.
He said: “After the interview had taken place at the police station, it is to be noted that no bail conditions were imposed which would restrict Lord Hanningfield's movements or his contact with other people.
“It would thus appear that any earlier apprehension that he would behave in any of these ways had by then dissipated for some reason.
“Why, therefore, was it necessary to arrest him at 6.45am on 14 September and only at that point?”
Back to Lord Hanningfield Trial
Back to Court
Back to Portfolio
|
|
