F.A.C.T.

Falsely Accused Carers and Teachers

Fighting injustice – lobbying for change

A critique on the
Government’s reply to the
Home Affairs Committee Report
into allegations of past abuse in children’s homes.

An article by George Jensen

Context:
In October 2002 House of Commons published the fourth report of the Home Affairs
Select Committee which was titled the Conduct of Investigations into Past Abuse of
Cases in Children’s Homes. It said

"a new genre of miscarriages of justice" has arisen from what it calls "the over-
enthusiastic pursuit" of abuse allegations in children's homes, many relating to
incidents said to have occurred going back twenty or thirty years …. and that that a
large number of people who are not charged may have had their lives ruined or
seriously damaged by unfounded allegations.

In April 2003 the government published its response to this report and concluded that
whilst it respects the views of the Committee, it does not share its belief in the existence
of large numbers of miscarriages of justice.

A personal evaluation
Given that the Select Committee was set up by the Government, was chaired by the
Government’s representative and the membership was predominately Members of
Parliament, it appears rather strange that virtually every recommendation made by the
Committee has been rejected.
In this paper I intend to offer a critique of the Government’s reply to the report and to
append a possible alternative construct to the accepted attitude of the child protection
industry, that the vast majority of historical abuse allegations are valid and were
committed by staff working in children’s homes.
I will do so by referring to the points raised in the Governments response on a paragraph
by paragraph basis

Introduction (second paragraph)

• assumption made in this paragraph need to be challenged. I quote “Some of the
victims of these crimes have experienced horrendous ordeals that were

Page 1
 committed against them when they were at their most vulnerable, as children in
the care of local authorities or institutions”.

• With the exception of those cases where the defendant has pleaded guilty to the
charges, the only evidence that these people were abused in the manner alleged
is the word of the complainant. In many instances that word has been, and still is,
challenged most vociferously.

Paragraph three
• states that objections have been raised, not least by those convicted of offences.
The statement is clearly and undeniably inaccurate, in that objections in the most
strenuous terms have been made by those who were originally alleged to have
offended but not taken before a court to test the strength of the case against
them. Also strident objections have been raised by people who have never been
questioned by the police, yet held positions of authority in residential
establishments, and also by people who have intimate knowledge of the workings
of those places.

Paragraph four
• merely states that further claims have been made which question the motives of
those making allegations. It must be emphasised that such claims of financial
reward and/or preferential treatment in some form, can be substantially
authenticated and have not been afforded the weight that they should in all
fairness be awarded. There appears to be a hint of cynicism in this paragraph.

Paragraph five
• is ambiguous in that one is not sure whether this is a recommendation or an
observation! If it is an observation, it should also appreciate the infinite amount of
damage inflicted upon members of staff who are the subject of allegations, who
are either never charged or taken before a court, but are nevertheless subjected
to intense media publicity. If it is a recommendation, it does not go far enough, in
that it should make it mandatory that all approaches by the Police should be the
subject of at least audio recording.

Paragraph six
• welcomes the report and recognises the sensitive nature of the subject matter and
the deep dissatisfaction voiced, yet almost entirely rejects the report and all the
recommendations made in it.

Paragraph seven
• remarks on the guidance published by the Government, the police, social services
and other professionals. However, it must be stated that whilst the police had
issued their own guidance for the investigation of such allegations, they were not
been adhered to by the investigating officers.

• In a submission to the home affairs select committee Mr. M. Merrett, a former care
home resident, stated the police came to his house 3 or 4 times, determined to
Page 2
 get an allegation out of me and that they were giving me teachers names hoping
that they were going to have me saying ‘yes he did it’.”

• Such breaches of the guidelines have been the subject of complaint to the police
forces concerned. In a number of instances men who were the subject of
allegations were interviewed by the police, were the subject of intense media
publicity, the allegations were listed in the press but no charges were ever
forthcoming. The lives of these men and their families were irrevocably damaged
and remain so.

Paragraph eight
• claims that there are safeguards in place to guarantee the integrity of
investigations and to guard against eliciting false allegations, whilst paragraph
nine assumes a cautious and prudent approach based on objective fact. Neither
aim has been achieved. There is ample evidence that false allegations were made
to, and indeed accepted by, the investigating officers. In one trial a Crown Court
judge in his wisdom described the witness as a fantasist and instructed the jury to
disregard his evidence. Does this indicate that safeguards are in place or
constitute a cautious and prudent approach to the evidence presented by the
police and the crown prosecution service to the court hearing such cases?

Paragraph ten
• almost denies belief in the naivety of the response as presented in this statement.
The Committee is accused of making assumptions that miscarriages of justice
have occurred because :

a) Significant numbers of complainants make fabricated complaints for dishonest

motives - there is however ample evidence, both actual and anecdotal to support
this conclusion.

b) They conspire to do so --- there is ample evidence to this effect. At Ford Park
School, for example, a group was established with the aim of pressing for
compensation. In North Wales meetings are known to have taken place amongst
complainants in order to prepare a plan of action.

c) These fabrications remain undetected throughout lengthy enquiries – such

enquiries are one-sided and often accepted because they support preconceived
opinion. (see response to paragraph eight)

d) The agencies referred to would appear to have vested interests in accepting the
word of complainants because of their predisposition to accept the child protection
industry belief that “because it is said it must be true.” This is clearly
demonstrated by the initial approach to the Cleveland and Orkney Island uproars,
where the experts would not concede ground until it became impossible for them
to maintain their stance. This attitude is exemplified by the reply of Mr. Peter
Garsden, Head of Child Abuse Compensation at Abney Garsden McDonald
solicitors, to a statement by David Winnick M.P., referring to the client base of his
firm, “If the production line stops, your business is in jeopardy.” The reply –

Page 3
 “Arguably yes.” David Cameron M.P. stated that the list of cases in the solicitors
website was “almost an invitation for abuse complaints.” Mr. Garsden also stated
that he did not believe that there was anyone in prison who is entirely blameless.
Such an approach can hardly be described as neutral.

e) This statement is evidently correct and therefore it is difficult to understand any

inference intended.

f) This innuendo is uncalled for, however it must be taken into consideration that
their word is accepted, despite their criminal history, against that of the defendant
who, in the majority of cases, has no criminal record. Conversely, there is no
evidence to support the belief that the allegations are utterly truthful.

Paragraph eleven.
• The Government, it would appear, does not see evidence to support these
assumptions. Equally, it seems that the Government does not want to see
evidence that would support the claims that the allegations are false.

Paragraph twelve.
• This is clearly utter nonsense. It is clear from the context in which the term
‘miscarriage of justice’ is used, that it means that men have been committed to
prison and lost their liberty and good reputation on the strength of extremely
dubious complaint and subsequent procedures.

• The term miscarriage of justice means the same in the Committee report as that
used in paragraph eighty eight by the Government, effectively that justice has not
been done nor seen to be done. The Government should reconsider this statement
in the light of Terry Grange, Chief Constable of Dyfed Powys, who has admitted
that “Some recent police enquiries into alleged abuse in care homes may have
made mistakes;” or the Lord Chief Justice – Lord Woolf, - There may indeed have
been wrongful convictions and that evidence given by some complainants,
motivated by compensation,” and again by Terry Grange, “Some innocent men
may have gone to jail.” These statements surely adequately define a miscarriage
of justice.

• It should be recognised that different requirements are made of the prosecution

and defence. For example, there is an expectation that the defence should be
absolutely accurate in details such as dates etc, whilst the prosecution makes the
case that it is not sensible to expect complainants to be accurate after such a long
time!

Paragraph thirteen
• The Government recognises that solid facts can be difficult to identify, yet requires
these solid facts to be available to afford a balanced view. Under such difficulties,
how do the victims of an allegation prove their innocence?

Paragraph fourteen

Page 4
 • The response in this paragraph is basically incorrect in that the Home Affairs
Committee was not considering miscarriages of justice under five headings. The
Committee was reporting on past cases of abuse in children’s homes. The element
of miscarriages of justice arose from their investigations.

Paragraph fifteen
• “We are open to the possibility of further guidance etc.” In reality the whole
investigatory process is flawed and has been acknowledged as such by
representatives of the legal profession and also by the police. Under the heading
of ‘supporting facts’, paragraphs sixteen to twenty two, there are a number of
factors which should be re-examined.

Paragraph sixteen
• Some of the evidence submitted to the Committee was I believe incorrect. I refer
essentially to that submitted by Detective Chief Inspector Gareth Tinnouche of
South Wales Police, whose evidence to the Committee was the subject of a
complaint regarding its inaccuracy. Additionally, Terence Grange had doubts
regarding the convictions of several men who had been imprisoned, see
paragraph twelve.

Paragraph seventeen
• The figures quoted by the Government are reproduced from those given by the
police to the Committee. Allowing that some of their evidence was incorrect, one
must be at liberty to question their figures. If one accepts police and CPS figures,
one must also accept that :- At Bryn-y-Don School, sixty percent (more than half
the staff, of which at least twenty percent were women) were involved in sexually
abusing residents. The figures therefore suggest that almost the entire male staff
were guilty of sexually abusing boys. This is merely one example of the
extravagant claims made regarding the prevalence of abuse of a sexual nature in
residential homes

Paragraph eighteen
• These figures mean little or nothing. The fact that no cases had been referred to
the Court of Appeal by the CCRC at that time has limited value. The fact that two
cases were recently successful at Appeal would suggest that a rather high
percentage of the cases referred by the CCRC are likely to succeed. Therefore the
possibility of a relatively high number of miscarriages of justice is clearly
indicated.

Paragraph nineteen
• The prospect of the CCRC making a comparison based study of cases of historical
abuse is to be applauded. However, it should be recognised that they would gain a
tremendous advantage were they to avail themselves of the considerable
expertise of a qualified and highly experienced ex-residential worker. Such a
person would afford the Committee an insight into many of the vagaries of
residential work with highly disturbed and often delinquent children.
Page 5
Paragraph twenty
• The element of new evidence in the successful appeal case referred to in this
paragraph does serve to indicate that the police investigations are not always as
thorough as they claim to be.

Paragraph twenty one

• The fact that evidence emerged at a later date serves, as stated above, to
indicate a less than thorough investigation in the first instance. It does not
eliminate a degree of doubt regarding other investigations in which men have lost
their liberty.

Paragraph twenty two

• It will be of concern to a very wide body of interested people what decisions are
arrived at in the Appeal Court and also what the findings are of the CCRC in their
study. I would anticipate that a number of convictions will be subjected to severe
examination and the result of previous investigations called into question.

RESPONSE TO KEY CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

OF THE CONDUCT OF POLICE INVESTIGATIONS.
Paragraph twenty three, {Recommendation 1}
• The concept of trawling and the connotation it implies is that of finding a crime
and a victim, (as opposed to the normal procedure adopted of having a crime
reported and then investigating to attempt to find the culprit), and is not a
satisfactory means of establishing the truth in any matter. The difficulty in
investigating an alleged offence after a period of many years is readily
acknowledged. However it should also be recognised that it is equally difficult to
defend against an allegation after such a time lag, when often the records of an
establishment may have been destroyed or the people who might have offered
support to a defendant are deceased.

Paragraph twenty four, {Recommendation 2.}

• Regretfully, the suggested formulae for this initial approach by the police leaves
much to be desired. It would not satisfy many people who have knowledge of
similar approaches over past years. All approaches by the police to any person
who may or may not have reason to complain, should be recorded so that should
an allegation subsequently be made against any person, all such recordings must
be made available to the defence. Such a practise would go a long way to
removing any suspicion of malpractice. There is ample evidence of police in
interview, encouraging, or at least inviting complaint.

Paragraph twenty five

This paragraph is extraordinarily revealing. The Committee used the term ‘ trawling’, not
as a convenience, but in the accepted sense that people recognise. The definition given
by the Government response accurately describes what the term means to most people
concerned. “Trawling implies an indiscriminating approach with a predetermined
outcome in mind.” “Dip sampling,” as suggested, does not in the slightest describe the
Page 6
function undertaken by the police in their investigations into these cases. This is an
attempt to cover up the real point that the system and practise is biased in the extreme
and does not allow the judicial process to be implemented without fear or favour.

Paragraph twenty six

• The statement that trawling is a necessary response to the duty of the police to
investigate, is arrant nonsense. There are many other methods by which such a
process may be undertaken. In the majority of the police investigations, no formal
complaints of sexual abuse being committed many years previously had been
made, so the purpose of the trawl was clearly demonstrated to be in order to
promote allegations.

Paragraph twenty seven

• The Committee’s reservations with regard to the practice of ‘trawling’ is clearly
underestimated in the paragraph. The term ‘dip sample’ is, as commented on
above, of no practical value. One example of such practice is illustrated in one
case where the police claimed to have investigated 10% of cases in a register,
conveniently overlooking the claim that no records were available for that
establishment. They did not say whether the 10% represented the whole register
population, the population at the time of the alleged offences, or a percentage of
those who were resident at the time the offences were alleged to have been
committed. Thus the term is to all practical purpose of no value whatsoever.

Paragraph twenty eight

• The Government may agree that the implementation of recommendation 2 would
help to ensure that dip samples follow best practice, but as indicated above, the
practice would be far from satisfactory and would allow further examples of
slipshod investigatory practice by the police. There have been sufficient incidents
of police practice being criticised by the judges in court to encourage a more
systematic and exemplary investigatory process which would be open to critical
examination.

Paragraph twenty nine, {Recommendation 3}

• See recommendation 2 regarding recording all interviews.

Paragraphs thirty – thirty one, {Recommendation 4}

• It would be a step in the right direction for such recordings to be made, subject to
the conditions set out above. The Government did not rule out the need for
recording interviews, but they remain sceptical because, in their view, the only
evidence available to support the need is anecdotal and disputed. However the
evidence said to be anecdotal is in fact the personal accounts by ex-residents,
some of whom experienced as many as ten or twelve interviews by the police,
who produced only one statement and no contemporaneous notes. One assumes
that it is the police who are disputing such evidence.

Paragraph thirty two

Page 7
 • The evidence given to the Committee by the police may have expressed the
opinion that the routine practice is adequate to ensure that interviewing officers
do not influence the witnesses. This routine practice has been proven to be
inadequate, as there have been a number of instances where the police have,
either intentionally or inadvertently, clearly intimated to the person being
interviewed, who had been questioned or arrested and other aspects of their
enquiries.

Paragraphs thirty three – thirty five

• The recommendations for recorded interviews should pertain in all cases where
historical allegations of any kind are being made. If a course of action such as
recording interviews would make complainants unique, it would merely serve to
emphasise the uniqueness of their position, in that they are making a complaint
some twenty, thirty or even forty years after the event. The justification for such a
course of action is amply provided for by the examples of dubious practice
previously identified above. The resulting evidence in the recordings would
undoubtedly be advantageous to both prosecution and defence appropriately.

Paragraphs thirty six to thirty nine, {Recommendation 5}

• The recommendation to research the possible use of statement validity analysis is
to be welcomed. As a tool for evaluation of witness statements it could have a
positive influence. Had such an analysis been applied to statements made by
witnesses, it would have exposed many flaws in the text of such statements. Many
of the statements made by complainants have been examined and evaluated by
individuals not connected to any particular trial and a number of doubtful
elements have been noted, either due to fabrication, or by police ‘interpretation’
of witness words which may have placed an entirely different emphasis on the
words spoken.

SENIOR INVESTIGATING OFFICERS HANDBOOK.

Paragraph forty – forty one, {Recommendation 6}
• The concept of prescriptive listing of elements of procedures in the handbook for
senior investigating officers sounds fine and gives the impression of proper
procedures being carried out. Unfortunately the police have already been accused
of failing to follow the guidelines currently in place.

VICTIM SUPPORT SERVICES.

Paragraphs forty two – forty three, {Recommendation 7}
• One must question the validity of offering victim support, including counselling, as
advocated in this recommendation. After a period of many years between the
alleged assault and the commencement of an investigation, one must be aware of
the considerable disquiet surrounding the concept of False Memory Syndrome,
which has-been roundly condemned. In cases of immediate relevance it is
recognised that some form of counselling may be appropriate. However, it should
Page 8
 be acknowledged that recent (2003) research has indicated that counselling may,
in fact, be harmful.

THE ROLE OF THE CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE.

Paragraphs forty four – forty five, {Recommendation 8}
• The term ‘institutional’ used in this paragraph is prejudicial in the context in which
it is used. If the Government means those offences allegedly committed within the
confines of an institution by one individual upon another, the use of the word
institutional is inappropriate. The sheer volume of such cases which are rejected
by the CPS does not solely indicate that it is applying a robust review to sift out
weak cases, it is also highly indicative of the vast number of inappropriate
referrals being made by the Police Service.

• The statement “the existing CPS tests are considered robust and sufficient to
prevent weak cases from reaching court” is ludicrous. If these tests are, as stated,
robust and sufficient, are they applied objectively, or do they embody the
paranoia which surrounds any allegation of child abuse? The CPS have taken a
number of individuals to court only to reduce the number of charges at the last
moment, or to discontinue the case entirely when it became clear that the
defence had the ability to rebuff the charges. In some cases the evidence which
the CPS and the police have presented to the court has been weak in the extreme
and in several cases, the unreliability of the evidence has been exposed.

DISCLOSURE.
Paragraphs forty six – forty nine, {Recommendation 9}
• The Government has noted that “failure to disclose evidence inconvenient to the
prosecution case was a factor in many – if not most – proven miscarriages of
justice.”(Is this the miscarriages of justice in which the Government found lack of
clarity, paragraph 12?) It is of significance to note that recommendations
regarding disclosure made by the CPS Inspectorate were published in March 2000,
whilst the Attorney General’s guidelines were issued in November of that same
year and in December2001, the Home Office commissioned research, on the same
subject, was published.

• Revised operational instructions have been issued to the police and the CPS and
began in April 2003, with a view to full implementation in early summer. The one
factor that has apparently been overlooked in discussions on disclosure is that it
was already a legal requirement to make full disclosure prior to these
recommendations. It is reasonable to assume therefore, that in all previous cases,
where the requirement for full disclosure was not complied with, the Police and the
Crown Prosecution Service have acted illegally. This must have serious
implications for all the men who have been imprisoned in such cases. The police
are no longer a prosecuting authority since this role has been the responsibility of
the CPS for some considerable time. Therefore the role of the police should be
solely investigatory and all evidence should be made available to both prosecution
and defence to use as they see fit. The police should not be seen to be biased in
Page 9
 either direction. Such a system would not only allow total disclosure but may also
assist the police to recover the public trust that they have lost.

Paragraphs fifty – fifty two, {Recommendation 10}

• This recommendation should be encompassed by the disclosure recommendation
in the previous paragraph. The concept of unused material is highly relevant in the
case of historical abuse allegations. It is known that many ex-residents were
interviewed by the police and had no complaint to make, despite considerable
encouragement to do so. No contemporaneous notes were made, so the
interviews were never brought to the attention of the defence in many trials
before the courts.

SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE

Paragraph fifty three, {Recommendation 11}
• The major danger in the use of’ ‘similar fact evidence’ is that the actual evidence
presented to the court is distorted by the assumption that, because two or more
complainants make allegations of abuse, then those allegations must be true.
Often, in reality, the allegations are not similar, having only the claim of abuse in
common, the manner – the modus operandi in which the offences are claimed to
have occurred are strikingly different. (It should be noted that the central pillar of
police investigations is often the modus which is the link between a number of
crimes.)

• Were the various allegations to be tried as separate offences, it is extremely

doubtful if any of the complaints would stand up to vigorous scrutiny. It is
reasonable, under such circumstances, to consider that all safeguards for the
defendant in such historical cases should be strengthened considerably.

Paragraph fifty four – fifty six, {Recommendation 14}

• Another factor in the use of ‘similar fact’ evidence is, as suggested above, the
distortion element. However, one recognises the point raised by the Government
in this section of their response, that defence claims may not be substantiated in
certain circumstances. The return to the concept of ‘strikingly similar’ evidence
would be welcomed in that it would eliminate a number of difficulties presently
incorporated in the presentation of both the prosecution and defence in cases of a
historical nature. The statement that juries and magistrates “might be denied a
range of highly relevant evidence” is extremely subjective. The admissibility of
bad character evidence allows for a certain element of ‘similar fact’ or even
‘strikingly similar’ evidence. For despite denial in Paragraph 10{E}, the majority of
complainants making allegations of abuse had been resident in care
establishments i.e. Approved Schools, Remand Homes, Children’s Homes etc.
Many will have already been convicted of criminal offences at that time and many
continued in a criminal career.

• The argument put forward against the concept of ‘strikingly similar’ evidence does
not appear to recognise the safeguards embodied in that term. Whilst collusion

Page 10
 between fellow offenders during incarceration over a period of time could produce
‘similar fact’ evidence, ‘strikingly similar would be far harder to achieve. ‘Similar
fact’ evidence may have been promoted when the police have either deliberately
or inadvertently referred, during interview, to other complaints being made, or to
persons against whom complaints had been made.

• Advertisements in national and local newspapers have invited persons who allege
that they have been abused to contact certain firms of solicitors with a view to
claiming compensation, this compensation to be paid even if the defendant is
found not guilty. Such elements are a powerful incentive toward making false
allegations and with collusion, will readily make ‘similar fact’ evidence. Were it
necessary to produce ‘strikingly similar’ evidence, it is possible that few claims
would prove successful.

Paragraph fifty seven

• makes the case that judges can order that various charges are tried separately in
order that the jury in each case is unaware of the evidence given in other cases. I
do not know of a single instance where such an order has been made. Judges
seem reluctant to consider circumstances which might seriously increase the cost
of a trial. However, as stated in Paragraph fifty three, had such an order been
made it is likely that many defendants would not have been convicted.

Paragraph fifty eight

• states “Given the centrality of fairness to the issue of severance, it is not clear
what the proposed presumption (in favour of ordering separate trials) would
substantively add.” The Government response cited:- The House of Lords held
that, in the case of Christou (1997), a trial Judge should exercise discretion in
matters of severance, and this is supported by the Human Rights Act (1998).

• The major plank in this presumption is that these factors are seldom, if ever
applied to cases of historical abuse. There is a climate of aggressive paranoia in
society toward those people who are the subject of sexual offending allegations
and such prejudice colours society’s perception of those who are accused.

A TIME LIMIT ON PROSECUTIONS OF OFFENCES RELATING TO

CHILD ABUSE
Paragraphs fifty nine – sixty, {Recommendation 12}
• This recommendation against the introduction of a time limit, may, according to
the Government’s reply paper “protect innocent defendants from fabricated
allegations that are difficult to refute, it may also prevent guilty defendants being
brought to justice.” Sir William Blackstone wrote, ”It is better that ten guilty
persons escape than one innocent suffer.” It would appear that we no longer
subscribe to that thesis. It is indeed easy to make an allegation against any
individual after a period of many years but it is extremely difficult to refute such
an allegation and almost impossible to disprove it. The context in which these
cases are formulated is that the defendants are assumed to be guilty and
Page 11
 therefore must prove themselves to be innocent. A complete reversal of the
concept upon which British justice was and is evolved.

SAFEGUARDS AGAINST ABUSE OF PROCESS.

Paragraphs sixty one – sixty two, {Recommendation 15}
• The suggestion that allegations of sexual abuse against a person should only
proceed given the permission of the court, presumably the higher court, is to be
generally applauded. The assumption that the CPS are entirely capable of, and do
critically examine, the evidence which they present to the court with a “realistic
prospect of conviction” is lamentably misplaced. There have been 11 instances
where claimants alleged that abuse took place when either they, or the accused,
were not at the

establishment nor had any connection with it at the relevant time. There have been
many instances where the quality of evidence presented to the Court has been severely
criticized by the presiding judge. In one instance, the judge described the claimant’s
evidence as ‘fantasy. The CPS appear, in common with the police, to be victims of the
prejudice referred to in Paragraph fifty eight.

EXTENSION OF ANONYMITY TO THE ACCUSED

Paragraphs sixty three – sixty six,{Recommendation 15}
• The Government’s reply to the recommendation for anonymity for the defendant
in cases of sexual abuse, whether historically against children, or in any other
context, is utterly wrong. It makes no sense, either in theory or in practice. The
claim that protecting the alleged victim is to protect them from hurtful publicity
and to encourage others to complain to the prosecution is clearly extremely
biased. The assumption being that publicity does not harm or damage the
reputation of an innocent person who is wrongly accused. There are many cases
reported in the media where a person has been reported as having previously
abused children, when later the CPS decided that they would not proceed with a
prosecution. Nevertheless, the life of the person concerned was ruined, his family
pilloried and his employment terminated, and for no good or useful purpose. The
failure to grant anonymity prior to a conviction is an affront to the system of
justice in this country.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERSONAL INJURY SOLICITORS &

POLICE
Paragraphs sixty seven – sixty nine, {Recommendation 16}
• There is doubt in the mind of the Government regarding the possible existence of
a problematic relationship between the police and firms of solicitors. It must be
emphasized that these solicitors have a propensity toward bias and actually base
their business on the procurement of compensation for the claimants. (See
Paragraph 10,D)It is therefore beholden upon the police not to be seen as being in
any form of collusion with the claimants, even if through a third party.

Page 12
 • In some instances very large sums, amounting to as much as £100.000 have been
paid in compensation. Such sums must inevitably create doubt regarding the
veracity of any participating body in the minds of others. There is another aspect
of compensation which is perhaps not generally known. It would appear, according
to Cheshire County Council, that a claimant is entitled to compensation, even if
the person against whom the allegation was made is found not guilty. (Guardian
Weekend, May 9th, 1998).

• If the prospect of very large sums of money, as indicated above, do not persuade
the Government that false allegations have been promoted by such compensation
awards, then it is perhaps impossible to convince them otherwise.

CIVIL COMPENSATION AND THE CRIMINAL INJURIES

COMPENSATION SCHEME
Paragraphs seventy – seventy two, {Recommendation 17}
• In addition to the provision for compensation to claimants as set out in the terms
of this recommendation, the Government should be aware, that under the civil
element of the compensation scheme, they should anticipate huge compensation
claims from those people whose convictions are overturned on appeal and who
have been incarcerated for a long period of time.

VICARIOUS LIABILITY
Paragraphs seventy three – eighty two, {Recommendation
18}
• I have no observation to make regarding this element.

PUBLIC FUNDING
Paragraphs eighty three – eighty four, {Recommendation 19}
• I have no comment to make regarding this element.

OTHER FACTORS
Paragraphs eighty five – eighty seven, {Recommendation 20}
• It is regrettable that the reply does not accept that the police have been in any
way influenced by requests from complainants. Even if not spoken of, it is known
that a number of complainants on bail for offences, have anticipated that an
advantage would be gained when in court. Similarly, there is no mention of the
‘bartering process’ that has been attempted by the CPS in certain cases when
they have offered to reduce the number of charges against a defendant in return
for a plea of guilty. (See

Paragraph).
THE CRIMINAL CASES REVIEW COMMISSION
Paragraphs eighty eight – ninety four, {Recommendation 21}

Page 13
 • It is difficult to understand why the Government finds that The Home Affairs
Committee report “lacks clarity” in their observations on the possible miscarriages
of justice which may have occurred. They appear to have no difficulty in
understanding the term when used by the Government or by the Royal
Commission on Criminal Justice. One is inclined to view this comment as an
attempt to sidetrack the important point that the Committee has brought forward .
The present appeal system does not appear to allow false evidence, presented by
the complainant at trial, to be corrected and presented as ‘new evidence’ to the
Court of Appeal. The system adopted by the Scottish CCRC would appear to allow
for such an eventuality and offer a more satisfactory outcome in such cases.

CONCLUSION
Regretfully, one is forced to the conclusion that the reply from the Government is
unacceptable. The emphasis placed upon the police evidence to the Committee
appears to be accepted in its entirety and without question, despite the many
recent instances where the police evidence in court has been less than
satisfactory.

It is extremely difficult to follow or to accept the rationale and reasoning behind

the reply from the Government to the report from the Home Affairs Committee
which was appointed by the House of Commons “To examine the conduct of
investigations into past cases of abuse in Children’s Homes.”

George Jensen
2004

Please note: These are personal comments and do not necessarily reflect the views of
the FACT Committee

Page 14