This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30115981

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Plebgate libel trial: PC Rowland denies inventing account Plebgate libel trial: PC says row was 'trivial incident'
(about 5 hours later)
A policeman who claimed Andrew Mitchell called him a "pleb" has denied inventing his account of the incident. A policeman who witnessed the so-called "plebgate" row has said he considered it a "trivial" incident of a "gentleman on a bicycle who had the hump".
PC Toby Rowland was on duty in September 2012 when the then cabinet minister attempted to leave Downing Street on his bike via the main gate. Ian Richardson said he did not make detailed notes of the argument after MP Andrew Mitchell was stopped from riding through Downing Street's main gates.
Their ensuing altercation made front page news and cost Mr Mitchell his job. The High Court is hearing rival libel claims from the former chief whip and PC Toby Rowland, who claims Mr Mitchell called officers "plebs".
At the High Court, the officer told the so-called "plebgate" libel trial he had recorded "exactly what Mr Mitchell said as soon after the event as possible". The dispute happened in September 2012.
A judge will decide on the conflicting accounts of what happened. It made national headlines and Mr Mitchell - who admits swearing but says his words were not aimed at officers and denies using the word plebs - stepped down as chief whip in October 2012.
'Definitely agitated' Mr Richardson, now retired, said he heard PC Rowland tell Mr Mitchell: "Please don't swear", and so moved closer to listen.
Mr Mitchell - who admits swearing but denies it was aimed at the officer - is suing News Group Newspapers for the Sun newspaper's coverage of the clash. He said after Mr Mitchell left, PC Rowland told him the MP had sworn at him and called police "plebs".
At the same time, PC Rowland is suing Mr Mitchell for comments the former minister made in the media and at a press conference a year later. Under cross-examination, Mr Richardson was asked why he had not put that in the notes he made later at the police station.
The officer claims that, in an expletive-laden exchange, the MP for Sutton Coldfield called police "plebs" who should learn their place. He said there were three reasons he did not take detailed notes: he thought it was a "minor incident"; he knew PC Rowland was writing a report; and "laziness" - "I was eating my sandwiches," he said.
But in court the judge, Mr Justice Mitting, questioned PC Rowland's claim that members of the public were alarmed by the incident. He also said that after Mr Mitchell left, he and PC Rowland walked down Whitehall looking for witnesses in case Mr Mitchell reported the incident to the Prime Minister.
"You told me the words were being spoken at you at conversational volume by a man within a gated compound," he told the officer. "It would be power to our elbow," he said.
"I don't at the moment understand how anyone outside the gates could be caused alarm by it." "I suspected Mr Mitchell would come in the morning and speak to the Prime Minister and say officers had been rude to him."
PC Rowland told the judge Mr Mitchell was "definitely agitated" and that people could have been caused distress by the language used. 'Invention' claim
'An invention' Earlier in court, PC Rowland said he had recorded "exactly what Mr Mitchell said as soon after the event as possible".
James Price QC - who is representing Mr Mitchell - suggested that the words attributed to him were "an invention". But James Price QC - representing Mr Mitchell - suggested the words attributed to the MP were "an invention".
PC Rowland replied: "The evidence I've given is the truth."PC Rowland replied: "The evidence I've given is the truth."
Mr Price said the officer had been "reconstructing events from bits of evidence" he had seen.Mr Price said the officer had been "reconstructing events from bits of evidence" he had seen.
The policeman responded: "My evidence has been clear and consistent throughout."The policeman responded: "My evidence has been clear and consistent throughout."
He said that, during the exchanges with Mr Mitchell, the word "pleb" - which he claimed not to have known the meaning of at the time - had been an "irrelevance", because he was more concerned about the swearing. PC Rowland said that, during the exchanges with Mr Mitchell, the word "pleb" - which he claimed not to have known the meaning of at the time - had been an "irrelevance", because he was more concerned about the swearing.
PC Rowland was asked by Mr Justice Mitting when he found out the meaning of the word "pleb". He was asked by the judge, Mr Justice Mitting, when he found out the meaning of the word.
The officer said he had read a definition in a newspaper shortly afterwards when, he said, it "referred to plebeian and all of that".The officer said he had read a definition in a newspaper shortly afterwards when, he said, it "referred to plebeian and all of that".
Mr Justice Mitting will rule in a fortnight. Mr Mitchell is suing News Group Newspapers for the Sun newspaper's coverage of the clash.
At the same time, PC Rowland is suing Mr Mitchell for comments the former minister made in the media and at a press conference a year later.
At the end of the two-week hearing, the judge will rule on which claim of what was said at the Downing Street gates is substantially true.