Sussex police missed chance to investigate Jimmy Savile, says IPCC

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/may/12/sussex-police-missed-chance-jimmy-savile-ipcc

Version 0 of 1.

Sussex police missed an opportunity to investigate and interview Jimmy Savile in 2008 after a woman reported that she had been sexually assaulted by him, the Independent Police Complaints Commission has found.

The IPCC examined Sussex police’s response to an allegation made by a woman on 3 March 2008 that Savile had sexually assaulted her in a caravan in Worthing in 1970.

It found that detectives failed to properly follow all lines of inquiry. “While there was no evidence officers deliberately dissuaded the woman from pursuing her allegation, she felt reluctant to do so following contact with police,” the IPCC said.

The commission’s deputy chair, Sarah Green, said greater efforts should have been made by police to look into the allegation and to encourage the woman to cooperate with an investigation. “She showed considerable courage in coming forward to police but regrettably she felt that the two officers who visited her had a negative attitude towards her pursuing her allegation,” Green said.

The two male officers who visited the woman in 2008 were both experienced CID detectives – one a detective sergeant and the other a detective constable – but neither was a full-time sexual offence liaison officer, the IPCC said.

It emphasised that Sussex police should have been aware that victims of sexual offences may have severe reservations about talking to an officer of a different gender, an issue that was highlighted in the force’s own policy at the time.

“Not sending a trained female officer, coupled with the perceived absence of support, resulted in a missed opportunity by Sussex police to investigate Savile in 2008,” Green continued.

The IPCC concluded that the officers’ failure to encourage the woman to pursue her allegation indicated potential performance issues rather than misconduct.

“Organisational learning for the force in relation to the deployment of specialist trained officers in all cases of alleged sexual offences, along with the need to have a clear audit trail of decision making in a policy file, has already been addressed by Sussex police. The 2007 Sussex force policy referred to in this report was withdrawn and new guidance issued,” it said.

The IPCC launched its investigation last September. Two other officers – a detective chief inspector and detective inspector – who had supervisory roles at the force in 2008 also received misconduct notices in relation to the the time they took to pass information about allegations of sexual abuse by Savile at Duncroft school in the 1970s to other forces. That report is yet to be published.

The IPCC also has a number of investigations related to Savile in progress at other forces such as North Yorkshire and West Yorkshire.

This month it was reported that the publication of Dame Janet Smith’s inquiry into sexual abuse at the BBC had been delayed after police said it could prejudice ongoing investigations.

The inquiry said the report, which took evidence from more than 475 witnesses, had been completed and it had “reluctantly” taken the decision to delay publication.

“The Metropolitan police has told the review that it is concerned that publication of the report now could prejudice its ongoing investigations into sexual abuse,” said a statement issued on behalf of the review.

“As a result, Dame Janet has taken the decision that publication of the report (and its delivery to the BBC) should be delayed. The decision to delay publication has been made reluctantly.”