'Plebgate': Police officers stand by account of Mitchell meeting

 
Andrew Mitchell Andrew Mitchell resigned as chief whip following his meeting with three police officers

Related Stories

Three police officers involved in a dispute with Andrew Mitchell about the "plebgate" affair say they do not owe an apology to the former chief whip.

They told MPs that they stood by their "accurate" account of a meeting with Mr Mitchell in October 2012.

Mr Mitchell, who resigned over the row, has challenged the officers' claim that he was not open about the incident.

But Chris Jones, from West Midlands Police, said he was "not convinced we have done anything wrong".

No action was taken against Sgt Jones, Insp Ken MacKaill, of West Mercia Police, and Det Sgt Stuart Hinton, of Warwickshire Police, following an internal review by the forces concerned into their conduct.

But the head of West Mercia Police told the Commons Home Affairs Committee the handling of the affair had been "clumsy" and the report and its recommendations should be independently reviewed.

'Room for doubt'

However, the chief constables of Warwickshire and the West Midlands said they did not feel the same because they believed the original decisions had been properly reached.

Sgt Jones, Insp MacKaill and Det Sgt Hinton's meeting with Mr Mitchell took place weeks after an altercation at the gates of Downing Street where the Tory MP was accused of swearing at police and calling them "plebs" - allegations that he has always denied.

In a briefing after the meeting, the officers - all members of the Police Federation - told journalists that Mr Mitchell had refused to elaborate on what he did or did not say during the original incident.

Mr Mitchell insists a transcript of the meeting, which he secretly recorded, shows that he apologised for swearing and expressly denied that he had used the word "pleb".

Asked by Labour MP Keith Vaz whether he owed an apology to Mr Mitchell, Mr MacKaill said no and insisted he stood by "what I believe was an accurate account of the meeting".

He said he believed he had been right to call for Mr Mitchell to resign - believing at the time that his alleged behaviour in Downing Street represented a "casual dismissal of police integrity".

Although serious questions have since been raised about the credibility of police reports about Mr Mitchell's conduct, Mr MacKaill said he had "no way of knowing that at the time".

Mr Hinton said the three had shown "poor judgement" in speaking to the media immediately after the meeting without time for reflection about what had been discussed.

Chief Inspector Jerry Reakes-Williams: "I do not consider, on the balance of probabilities, that the officers have lied."

He said he was prepared to apologise to colleagues, the public and "anyone else involved" if the three "may have said things which could be interpreted as being misleading".

But he added: "We certainly did not intend to do that and we certainly did not lie intentionally." And he said he believed there was "no conspiracy to unseat" Mr Mitchell.

But Conservative MP Michael Ellis, a member of the committee, accused the officers of "disgraceful conduct", saying they had "spun a yarn to the press to get someone out of high office".

Mr Vaz said their answers had been "most unsatisfactory" and he would be calling their media adviser, John Gaunt, to answer questions about his role in the affair.

'Room for doubt'

Earlier, Chief Inspector Jerry Reakes-Williams, who led an inquiry into the October 2012 meeting and whether the officers had tried to discredit Mr Mitchell, said he believed the trio should face disciplinary action.

Mr Reakes-Williams, head of professional standards at Warwickshire and West Mercia Police, said the officers' comments to the media "may have had the impact of misleading the public about what happened" as they had given the impression that Mr Mitchell had not sought to explain what happened outside Downing Street.

However, he said he did not believe there had been "a deliberate intention to mislead" as there was "some room for doubt and interpretation" about whether Mr Mitchell had given an "absolutely full account" of what took place.

After the October 2012 meeting, Ken Mackaill said Mr Mitchell had to resign

He said he believed the officers should face misconduct charges but not the more serious charge of gross misconduct which, if proven, would result in potential dismissal.

West Mercia Police ultimately concluded that there was no case to answer for misconduct or gross misconduct, a decision which the Independent Police Complaints Commission said it disagreed with.

But Chief Constable David Shaw, head of West Mercia Police, said he now believed the report should be independently reviewed, suggesting the whole episode had been "unedifying" and had damaged public confidence in the police.

He also said he had written to Mr Mitchell to offer him a "profound and unreserved" apology for what had happened.

Very unsatisfactory'

Also giving evidence to MPs, the deputy chair of the IPCC Deborah Glass said the transcript and recording of the meeting indicated Mr Mitchell had "answered the questions he was asked".

The police investigation had been "thorough and sound" but she believed its conclusions were wrong. "The evidence and conclusions were so at odds that I thought I had to put that on the public record," she said.

At the time of the October 2012 meeting, the Police Federation, which represents rank-and-file officers, was involved in a dispute with the government over changes to police pay and employment conditions.

Mr Mitchell's friends have accused them of pursuing a political agenda and called for root-and-branch changes to guarantee police accountability.

Eight people, including five police officers, have been arrested and bailed over the original altercation at the security gates to Downing Street amid claims that details of the incident were falsified.

The Crown Prosecution Service is currently considering charges.

 

More on This Story

Related Stories

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    -1

    Comment number 16.

    How much money has already been wasted on this nonsense?

    I have strong opinions on police competence and conduct based on my own experiences.

    On the other side of the coin, Michael Portillo accidentally let the cat out of the bag last week on Andrew Neil's politics programme when he said that "pleb" was a word he had Mitchell use in public.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 15.

    Why haven't the police involved been sacked?
    The whole system collapses if we can't trust the police. Sadly we can't. As with all other public bodies it's self interest first paying public a distant last.

  • rate this
    +5

    Comment number 14.

    From my limited experience dealing with police, I'm not surprised some of them are liars.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 13.

    This matter has dragged on for so long-far too long and I am sure it could have been resolved much more quickly.The police have taken far too much time investigating the incident and the Police Federation has emerged with little credit.All complaints against police should be dealt with by the IPCC to protect both complainant & officers.I feel for the many decent officers who are tarnished by this.

  • rate this
    -6

    Comment number 12.

    Isn't this whole debacle pathetic and must be costing a fortune.

    'You called me a pleb, lose your job!'

    'I didn't, ill get my MPs onto you'

    £1 million in court costs later...

  • rate this
    +35

    Comment number 11.

    I dislike how British institutions are bound by law to be accountable fair and honest, but then when there is trouble, they close ranks, produce smoke and mirrors, hide behind procedures, appeal against judgements etc

    The worst modern example of this must be Hillsborough, where both the police and government tried repeatedly to stop the public knowing the truth behind the death of so many fans.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 10.

    He apologised for swearing at the police officers and had denied using the word "plebs". From the transcript it appears he did not want to deny it in court, as he did not want "to go down that route". I get the impression Mitchell wants the police to accept his denial as truth rather than voracity of the police statement to be tested in court, where he would have to repeat his denial under oath.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 9.

    The biggest issue with the police is their practice of recruiting senior officers from within their own ranks. That has to stop. Bringing in ex-military officers, for example, would provide a degree of discipline and professionalism that the police currently lack

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 8.

    The one law for the public and another two for police and MP's (Of all description but mainly Labour) have to end and now during this period of apparent reform of social justice seems to be as good a time as any. GET ON With IT !

  • rate this
    -39

    Comment number 7.

    I believe the police officers.

    The weight of the entire government, the government sponsored IPCC and the government supported press is against them.

    The government need to stop us plebs having the misguided opinion that there is one law for everyone and that no-one is above it.

    The police simply forgot that they are expected to turn a blind eye to the goings on of the political classes.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 6.

    The Police don't come out of this well. However, MPs casting aspersions about truthfulness and bad behaviour is firmly in the realm of pot/kettle land.

  • rate this
    -5

    Comment number 5.

    Who are the biggest liars?polititians or police ,as far as I am concerned there is no difference.

  • rate this
    -4

    Comment number 4.

    Surely Pleb isn't the issue, if he was rude to the police, isn't that enough for him to resign over? The police hopefully will say exactly what he said to them today in front of his MP colleagues

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 3.

    This story has run on and on and on, mass murder cases were solved, prosecuted and convicted quicker than this...come on now.

    Just punish the guilty and can we now move on to solving all the other real problems people face in our day to day lives?

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 2.

    Year after year the police constantly shoot themselves in the foot. Yet another organisation that just does not get it.

  • rate this
    +3

    Comment number 1.

    I am so looking forward to this. How the police can pretend that there is no need for disciplinary action given the findings of the IPCC beggars belief.

    Those that enforce our laws must be subject to the same investigative rigour that we expect for others.

 

Page 27 of 27

 

More Politics stories

RSS

Features

  • Jesse, Milo and JudahNo kidding

    The family with 34 children - and they're adding two more


  • Lost itemsLost and found

    The strange things passengers leave on the Tube


  • German cabin Stollen Christmas

    How German markets captured the UK's imagination


  • Man and dog on dark winter morningSolstice lag

    Why mornings will keep getting darker after 21 December


BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.