This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/england/london/6765753.stm

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Judge 'could face flashing quiz' Judge 'could face flashing quiz'
(about 11 hours later)
A judge cleared of exposing himself to a woman on a train may be questioned again after police confirmed two women had complained of similar incidents.A judge cleared of exposing himself to a woman on a train may be questioned again after police confirmed two women had complained of similar incidents.
Sir Stephen Richards, 56, of Wimbledon, south-west London, was found not guilty of two counts of indecent exposure.Sir Stephen Richards, 56, of Wimbledon, south-west London, was found not guilty of two counts of indecent exposure.
City of Westminster magistrates trying the case said police had failed to investigate the matter thoroughly.City of Westminster magistrates trying the case said police had failed to investigate the matter thoroughly.
British Transport Police said it was investigating complaints by two women about incidents on the same route.British Transport Police said it was investigating complaints by two women about incidents on the same route.
Identity paradeIdentity parade
Sir Richards was accused of flashing at the same woman on trains in the Wimbledon area on 16 and 24 October 2006. Sir Stephen was accused of flashing at the same woman on trains in the Wimbledon area on 16 and 24 October 2006.
During the trial the Court of Appeal judge held up a pair of Calvin Klein underpants, similar to those he wears, to show the difficulty of exposing himself in them.During the trial the Court of Appeal judge held up a pair of Calvin Klein underpants, similar to those he wears, to show the difficulty of exposing himself in them.
The court heard the woman had allegedly captured Sir Stephen on a mobile phone and identified him at a video identity parade.The court heard the woman had allegedly captured Sir Stephen on a mobile phone and identified him at a video identity parade.
But he maintained the allegations were a case of mistaken identity.But he maintained the allegations were a case of mistaken identity.
City of Westminster magistrates said the evidence to identify Sir Stephen was insufficient.City of Westminster magistrates said the evidence to identify Sir Stephen was insufficient.
Truthful evidenceTruthful evidence
They said in the absence of any evidence supporting the judge's identification and "for this reason only" they could not be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt.They said in the absence of any evidence supporting the judge's identification and "for this reason only" they could not be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt.
However, Senior District Judge Timothy Workman said the woman, a City worker in her 20s, gave "clear, dignified and truthful evidence".However, Senior District Judge Timothy Workman said the woman, a City worker in her 20s, gave "clear, dignified and truthful evidence".
He blamed British Transport Police (BTP) for failing to investigate the allegation promptly or thoroughly.He blamed British Transport Police (BTP) for failing to investigate the allegation promptly or thoroughly.
Judge Workman said had they been able to obtain CCTV "that evidence may well have supported her identification and, equally, may have exonerated Sir Stephen".Judge Workman said had they been able to obtain CCTV "that evidence may well have supported her identification and, equally, may have exonerated Sir Stephen".
A BTP spokesman said the force had accepted the failings highlighted by the judge during the court case.A BTP spokesman said the force had accepted the failings highlighted by the judge during the court case.