HC Deb 02 February 1978 vol 943 cc275-7W
41. Mr. Radice

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what further consideration he has given to the issues raised by the Member for Chester-le-Street in the Adjournment debate on 12th December 1977 about the death of Mr. Liddle Towers.

Mr. Merlyn Rees

I have given careful consideration, both before and since the debate on 12th December, to the representations which have been made for an inquiry under Section 32 of the Police Act 1964. However, for the reasons explained by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State during that debate and which I reaffirmed at the recent meeting with the deputation led by my hon. Friend, I remain of the view that it would be inappropriate, indeed wrong, to set up such an inquiry.

The cause of Mr. Towers' death and allegations that Northumbria police officers dealing with him committed offences of violence have been fully investigated in accordance with the proper processes of law. The Director of Public Prosecutions concluded, after careful consideration of the outcome of those investigations and after consulting leading counsel, that this was not a case in which criminal proceedings should be instituted against any police officer. This was also the conclusion reached by my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General, who also indicated, in reply to a Question from my hon. Friend on 3rd May 1977, that all the medical experts who had been consulted were agreed that there was no medical evidence to support a contention that Mr. Towers' death was in any way attributable to wilful violence or rough handling by the police.

It does not seem to me that it would be possible to set up any form of public inquiry into this case that did not involve a re-examination of the cause of death and a re-examination of the allegations made about Mr. Towers' treatment by the police. In practice, this could not fail to mean that individual police officers would have to face allegations of criminal conduct without the safeguards and established procedures afforded defendants in a criminal court, and after the Director of Public Prosecutions had decided that criminal proceedings should not be brought against any police officer. I recognise my hon. Friend and others are concerned at what has been the outcome of the normal processes of law in this case, but I am clear that it would not he right to use my powers under Section 32 to set up the inquiry he seeks.

I have consulted Her Majesty's Inspectors of Constabulary whose responsibility it is to keep themselves informed of the manner in which complaints are dealt with. After an inspection of the force they have assured me that complaints are dealt with in accordance with the statutory procedures. I am satisfied on this score, and also satisfied that there is no case for any general inquiry into the operation of the force.—[Vol. 941, c. 232–44; Vol. 931, c. 115.]

Forward to