Tom Watson, the deputy leader of the Labor Party, has come under fire for his involvement in a botched police investigation into allegations of historical sexual abuse. According to a source, his intervention left detectives “in a state of panic.” Watson quickly disputed the findings, saying they contained “multiple inaccuracies” regarding his role and that the study was intentionally published to minimize criticism of the police. The case should have been withdrawn, according to retired high court justice Sir Richard Henriques, at least when former Conservative Home Secretary Leon Brittan was questioned under oath.
The Tom Watson controversy explained
However, he said that because of a letter received by the deputy leader of the Labor Party on a House of Commons letterhead, officials may have been “in a state of panic”. Watson allegedly “severely insulted” a suspect who was never prosecuted, according to Henriques. Beech was initially known only by the name “Nick”, and the man whose lies sparked a witch hunt against the innocent claimed that Watson was part of “a small group that supported me”. Watson met Carl Beech, the fantasist who misled detectives and aided police who wanted Beech to allow them to investigate his abuse claims, which were later proven to be false.
There is no question that Tom Watson believed Nick, and it should be noted that he had previously provided MPS with information that resulted in convictions in other cases, according to the Henriques study, which was commissioned by the Metropolitan Police. Watson had a long history of involvement in abuse cases. However, his involvement in both Operation Vincente and Operation Midland put further pressure on MPS officers. Also, a lady named Jane said that Brittan had raped her in the past. When the police closed the investigation without speaking to Brittan, she was upset.
Watson intervened in the case by writing a letter to the Director of the Crown Prosecution Service. Henriques argued that the Met erred in interviewing Brittan on a 1967 rape allegation and disregarded the opinion of one of its lead detectives that there was no case to answer. In Henriques’ assessment, the investigation into the rape allegation against Brittan could have been completed 16 months earlier and should have ended in June 2014. According to the investigation, “one possible inference is that the officers then responsible were in a state of of panic induced by Mr. Watson’s letter”. More information about this case will be released very soon, until then, keep an eye on PKB news.
Categories: Trending
Source: vtt.edu.vn