BREAKING NEWS Head of Scotland Yard's disastrous Operation Midland VIP paedophile investigation has gross misconduct probe dropped at 11th hour
The only officer to face disciplinary proceedings over the Metropolitan Police 's disastrous VIP paedophile investigation saw the case against him sensationally dropped today.
Former Met Deputy Assistant Commissioner Steve Rodhouse was due to face a disciplinary board later this month on an allegation of gross misconduct over claims that he lied in public at the conclusion of the Operation Midland probe in 2016.
However the charge has been dropped at the 11th hour after the Met 'recently disclosed' a 'large volume of relevant material.'
Mr Rodhouse, who was later promoted to Deputy Head of the National Crime Agency, Britain's version of the FBI, oversaw Midland, an investigation based on the lies of fantasist Carl Beech – aka 'Nick'.
Beech accused prominent public figures including former home secretary Leon Brittan, former Army head Lord Bramall and ex-Tory MP Harvey Proctor of being part of a murderous paedophile ring.
He was jailed for 18 years over the false allegations in 2019.
Mr Rodhouse was first cleared of misconduct in relation to his handling of the Midland investigation in 2017, however the police watchdog ruled that he should face a fresh gross misconduct hearing in 2023 over claims he used 'inaccurate or dishonest' words as the investigation concluded.
These related to two other serial liars – outed in a Daily Mail investigation – who appeared to back Beech's lies.
Beech was only prosecuted following a damning review of the Midland probe by retired High Court judge Sir Richard Henriques, who suggested he be investigated by another police force.
However the two other fantasists – known as Witnesses A and B – were not referred by the Met for outside investigation, despite Sir Richard recommending they should be.
In 2016, Mr Rodhouse privately told Sir Richard he was 'satisfied' that Witnesses A and B had 'told deliberate lies.'
But in a public statement issued just months earlier, Scotland Yard said detectives 'had not found evidence to prove they were knowingly misled by a complainant.'
Mr Rodhouse reiterated this in a TV interview over the collapse of the 16-month inquiry.
The pair have since been referred to West Midland Police to be investigated over claims they perverted the course of justice.
Today, the Independent Office for Police Conduct [IOPC], said it had withdrawn its direction that Mr Rodhouse should face gross misconduct proceedings after a 'large volume of relevant material was recently disclosed' to the watchdog by the Met.
The statement said that, following analysis of the recently disclosed material, there was 'no evidence… that there was any inappropriate motivation in Mr Rodhouse's comments to the media'.
The bombshell announcement is just the latest blow to victims and relatives of those caught up in the Midland scandal, widely regarded as one of the worst police investigations in living memory.
It follows almost a decade of allegations of incompetence and cover-up at the heart of the Met in relation to the investigation and raises serious questions over the competency of the police watchdog, which has repeatedly refused or been unable to hold officers to account.
Despite the allegations of incompetence, today's announcement means no officer has been held to account over the fiasco.
IOPC director Amanda Rowe said it was 'highly regrettable' that material requested three years ago had 'only recently' been discovered and disclosed.
'Police forces have a legal obligation to provide information to the IOPC when we request it,' she added.
'However, we acknowledge that we could have taken further steps during the investigation to seek additional assurance from the Met that relevant email material was definitely unavailable.
'We apologise to all of those affected and we are working with the force to establish exactly how and why this situation has occurred, and to reduce the risk of it happening again.
'Today's announcement does not change our finding that by failing to follow Sir Richard's recommendation in his review to investigate the witnesses, the Met's service was unacceptable and its subsequent reviews concluding no investigation was needed were flawed.
'During our investigation we reported a potential crime to the Met, which is being actively investigated by another force.'
Last year, Mr Rodhouse received a £10,000 pay rise despite being removed from his role as director-general of operations at the National Crime Agency because of the disciplinary hearing, taking his salary to £190,000-£195,000.
In a statement in response to today's decision, Mr Rodhouse stood firm and described the investigation against him as a 'debacle.'
'I am pleased that the IOPC has finally recognised that I acted with honesty, integrity and care throughout a difficult investigation,' he said.
'I welcome the IOPC's apology, but I have yet to receive an adequate explanation as to how this debacle occurred.
'I recognise that senior police officers must be held accountable for their actions, and that public complaints must be properly considered. However, if police officers are to willingly take on complex and challenging investigations, they must have the confidence that any complaints made about their conduct will be competently investigated in a balanced and timely fashion. That was not the case here.
'Vital evidence was not considered despite it being readily available and repeatedly requested. Once it was finally considered, it became clear that the allegations made against me were ill-founded and incorrect.
'I am grateful for all of the support that I have received, and I now look forward to resuming my career investigating and prosecuting serious criminals.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
29 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Public sector struggling to define what a woman is, trans report finds
Public sector workers and trade unions are widely refusing to accept the Supreme Court's judgment on what a woman is, a think tank has warned. A new study by Policy Exchange shows that dozens of organisations across the public, private and charitable sectors have continued to question the legal meaning of 'a woman', despite the ruling. In April, the court ruled that the term 'woman' refers to a biological female in the Equality Act 2010. The decision means trans women, who were born male, should use men's toilets, changing rooms and other single-sex spaces, contradicting the previous stance of a string of public sector organisations. Policy Exchange's report, the fifth edition of its 'Biology Matters Compendium', compiles examples of organisations refusing to acknowledge the legal force of the court's judgment. These include universities, professional bodies and several trade unions, along with other public bodies. Rosie Duffield, the gender-critical MP who left the Labour Party last year, hailed the report and said it showed that 'radical positions on gender identity have become deeply embedded and it will be the work of years to rectify it'. Ms Duffield wrote in the foreword: 'There should be no illusions that this is over: there will be many more battles to fight before women's sex-based rights are secure.' Lara Brown, the author of the report, said that 'despite progress, our latest edition of the Biology Matters Compendium reveals there is still a great deal of ideological capture in the policy and practice of many public institutions'. 'The defence of sex-based rights does not end with a court ruling. It requires persistent scrutiny, open debate, and the courage to challenge ideological orthodoxy – wherever it may reside. This compendium finds that in this domain, there is still much more to be done.' The report notes that at least seven major trade unions have appeared to question the ruling in recent months. Unison, one of the UK's largest unions, and the University and Colleges Union, which represents academic and support staff in further and higher education institutions, have warned of the judgment's 'harmful implications'. The Fire Brigades' Union has said in response to the ruling that 'the law is not always on the right side of history'. The Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen (Aslef) released a statement on social media saying that it 'recognises the distress and uncertainty that the Supreme Court's ruling about the definition of sex in the Equality Act 2010 has caused to trans and non-binary communities.' The union declared: 'We have a proud history of championing the rights of our trans and non-binary members and we continue to stand in solidarity with them.' A collection of unions, including Unite, the civil service union PCS, the RMT and the BFAWU, a food industry union, have staged marches against the Supreme Court's decision, with one leading figure declaring that 'the trade union movement will protect and stand with trans people, whether the law cares or not.' Policy Exchange's report also draws attention to professional bodies such as the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy continuing to describe gender self-identification as 'valid'. After the Supreme Court judgment, a number of public bodies announced plans to change their policies on gender recognition. Within days, the British Transport Police announced that trans women could in future only be strip-searched by male officers. The NHS was also told by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, the equalities watchdog, to change guidelines that did not fit the newly clarified legal settlement. The Football Association announced that athletes would have to compete in their biological sex categories, going forward. But other bodies were more reluctant to accept the ruling. The British Medical Association, the doctors' union, branded the Supreme Court's decision 'scientifically illiterate'. Meanwhile, the National Police Chiefs' Council said it would 'not rush' to change rules on strip-searching in order to fall in with the court's decision.
Daily Mail
30 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Murderer who killed his own stepmother and raped and fathered child with 14-year-old girl after spiking her drink dies in prison
A murderer who killed his own stepmother and raped and fathered a child with a 14-year-old girl has died in prison. Mohammed Fethaullah, 64, previously of Wandsworth, London, died at HMP High Down on May 13 this year. He was jailed for life in 2002 after being convicted of kidnapping and murdering Yasmin Akhtar, 35, who was in the process of divorcing Fethaullah's father at the time. With three other men, Fethaullah took Ms Akhtar from her property in Redhill to a shop on Old Kent Road, where she was strangled with black tape. Her body was then wrapped in a carpet before petrol was poured over her face and she was set ablaze in Larkhall Park, Clapham. The Old Bailey heard during Fethaullah's murder trial that Ms Akhtar had been asking her then-66-year-old husband for a £250,000 divorce settlement - which was said to have threatened Fethaullah's inheritance prospects. All four men were sentenced to life imprisonment. During Fethaullah's life sentence it then came to light that he had raped and impregnated a 14-year-old girl in 1999, several years before he killed his stepmother. A police statement said the victim had been waiting to collect her wages from Fethaullah's shop in Brixton, where she worked, when he asked her to collect some cigarettes from the front of the shop. After returning the girl finished a drink she had left on the office desk, before almost immediately collapsing. She believed Fethaullah had spiked her. Drifting in and out of consciousness, she then woke up to find Fethaullah raping her in the back seat of a car after he had driven it to a secluded location. Fethaullah believed the girl was not aware of what had happened and afterwards drove her home. But the victim found out she was pregnant a short time later, and decided to raise the child despite knowing there was a chance it could be the product of rape. A DNA test in 2016 proved Fethaullah was the father and she took this evidence to police. Fethaullah was convicted of rape in 2019 after a two-year investigation, and he was sentenced to a further 16 years in prison.
The Guardian
31 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Thousands join anti-austerity march in London to protest against Labour's cuts
Thousands of people marched through central London on Saturday calling for an end to public service and welfare cuts, in the first big anti-austerity march under Keir Starmer's Labour government. The campaign group People's Assembly, which organised the demonstration, called on the government to 'tax the rich and their hidden wealth to fund public services'. The People's Assembly said it was bringing together trade unionists, health, disability, housing and welfare campaigners with community organisations under the slogan: No More Austerity 2.0. Writer Kate Hardie, 57, was among those marching to Whitehall. She had voted for Labour in every election since she was 18, including last year, but said she will no longer support the party under Starmer. 'I worry about the fact that this government is making cuts that are unnecessary. People are really suffering because of it,' she said. She has friends who are disabled, who were 'devastated' when cuts to personal independence payments (Pip) were announced. 'It isn't just about my friends, because if we only vote for the people that we know, we're in trouble,' she added. Hardie was also dismayed over the prime minister's widely criticised 'island of strangers' speech, which was likened to the rhetoric of Enoch Powell. 'There's the problem of cuts and a problem with rising hate in this country and around the world,' she said. 'It's not just financial, it's also ideological and about how we treat each other.' She thinks the government's current approach will bear little fruit electorally. 'Why would you go and see a tribute band if you can get the real thing? It's not gonna work, it's ridiculous.' Daniel Kebede, the general secretary of the National Education Union, said: 'People are very disappointed in this government. Whether it has been cuts to winter fuel, the two-child benefit cap still being in place, we haven't seen enough investment. 'We appreciate that the government have a tight fiscal window to operate in, but we think they need to tax the wealthy more and start investing in communities.' He said the 'commitment to roll out free school meals to all families in receipt of universal credit' was welcome but called on the government to 'go much further much faster because the only person who is benefiting from cuts to communities is Nigel Farage'. Holding a sign calling for landlords to be taxed – including herself, Corinne Richeux, 57, who runs an NGO based in China, said: 'I'm really worried about the state of the country and I don't think British people can take austerity any more. We need a real radical change of direction and we need to tax the rich to make it happen. 'I think that many rich people would support more taxation. I think it's cowardly of the Labour government to pander to the rich when the people are really struggling.' She said she 'was shocked when the first thing they did was to start slashing benefits'. 'I kind of hoped that he was keeping his cards close his chest and that he was planning on taxing the rich when he got into office. I wasn't expecting it to be quite so bad.' Labour-run councils were also a target of criticism. Helen Davies, 59, a social worker, chanted in support of bin workers in Birmingham, who have been striking since January. On central government, she said: 'It's not what we expect from a Labour government. The social inequalities are being driven harder, there has to be a positive alternative to that.'
