Mr. Roc Sandford (Hansard, 19 June 1989)

§ Mr. Frank Field
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he knows the current whereabouts of6W the wooden pipe and 1.54g of cannabis used in evidence in the prosecution of Mr. Roc Sandford at Knightsbridge Crown court in October 1985.

§ Mr. Douglas Hogg
I understand from the Metropolitan police that the pipe and cannabis used in evidence in the prosecution of Mr. Sandford were destroyed in January this year.

§ Mr. Frank Field
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will specify the dates the various interested bodies decided to take no disciplinary action and to prefer no charges against the officers involved in the prosecution of Mr. Roc Sandford for possession of drugs at Knightsbridge Crown court in October 1985.

§ Mr. Douglas Hogg
I understand that the Crown prosecution service decided on 5 December 1986 that there was no evidence to justify criminal proceedings against the officers concerned; and that the Police Complaints Authority agreed on 30 April 1987 that no disciplinary action should be taken.

§ Mr. Frank Field
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what involvement his Department had in the decision not to prosecute or discipline the officers involved on the prosecution of Mr. Roc Sandford for possession of drugs at Kinghtsbridge Crown court in October 1985.

§ Mr. Douglas Hogg
None. The decisions are the responsibility of the Crown prosecution service in respect of criminal proceedings and the Commissioner and the Police Complaints Authority in respect of disciplinary proceedings.

§ Mr. Frank Field
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is now in a position to release the names of the arresting officers and prosecution witnesses in the cases listed in the question of the hon. Member for Birkenhead on 6 July 1988,Official Report, column 596–97.

§ Mr. Douglas Hogg
Where inquiries into allegations of impropriety on the part of the police have been investigated without evidence being forthcoming to support either criminal or disciplinary proceedings, it is not the practice for the officers or other persons involved in the cases to be identified.

§ Mr. Frank Field
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department who is still considering the inquiry into the circumstance under which charges were brought and proceedings conducted against Mr. Roc Sandford; and what conclusions have yet been drawn.

§ Mr. Douglas Hogg
I am informed by the Metropolitan police that, following the conclusion of the civil action taken by Mr. Sandford, additional inquiries were made and a report was submitted to the Police Complaints Authority, which indicated on 1 June 1988 that the matter should be taken no further. These further inquiries required no additional consideration by the Crown prosecution service. The inquiries are therefore considered to be complete.

§ Mr. Frank Field
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department why the Metropolitan police solicitor failed to give discovery of the appropriate documents 7W during its defence against Mr. Roc Sandford's civil action for wrongful arrest, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution during the time period required by the court.

§ Mr. Douglas Hogg
I understand from the Metropolitan police solicitor that the court ordered both parties to exchange lists of documents within 28 days. As the question of the contents of the Metropolitan police's list was referred to counsel for advice, an extension was requested and was granted by Mr. Sandford's solicitors. Shortly afterwards, negotiations commenced, which eventually led to an out-of-court settlement. Because of these negotiations Mr. Sandford's solicitors did not press for the list, although it would have been open to them to do so.