Linked Data API

Show Search Form

Search Results

524189
star this property registered interest false more like this
star this property date remove maximum value filtermore like thismore than 2016-06-09
star this property answering body
Attorney General more like this
star this property answering dept id 88 more like this
star this property answering dept short name Attorney General more like this
star this property answering dept sort name Attorney General more like this
star this property hansard heading Gurpal Virdi more like this
unstar this property house id 1 more like this
star this property legislature
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property question text To ask the Attorney General, how and why the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) joined the Metropolitan Police in announcing that retired police sergeant Gurpal Virdi was charged with misconduct in public office and with indecent assault on a person under 16 years; what publicity the CPS recorded as resulting at the time; when the memorandum of a conviction proved 1 April 1987 for offences on 7 November 1986 of a defendant born on 5 September 1970 with informant or complainant recorded as PC Markwick came to the attention of the CPS; what steps were taken to put right the effect of the wrong statement; when those steps were taken; and what the results of those steps were. more like this
star this property tabling member constituency Worthing West more like this
star this property tabling member printed
Sir Peter Bottomley remove filter
star this property uin 40180 more like this
star this property answer
answer
star this property is ministerial correction true remove filter
star this property date of answer less than 2016-06-14more like thismore than 2016-06-14
star this property answer text <p>A press release was issued by the Metropolitan Police Service which stated that the complainant was under 16. The CPS was not a party to this release and did not issue any other release. The CPS does not retain records of publicity resulting at the time.</p><p> </p><p>When the case was reviewed in 2014 for charging, the complainant and the witness clearly stated that the complainant had been 15 when the incident took place in 1986.<del class="ministerial"> In addition Mr Virdi also said in interview that the complainant had been 15 at the time of the incident.</del> The police summary stated that the complainant was 15. However the complainant’s date of birth and the date of his arrest were known and this mistake should not have been made.</p><p> </p><p>The CPS was supplied with the memorandum of conviction referred to on 17 September 2014.<del class="ministerial">The indictment was formally amended thereafter.</del></p><p> </p><p>No steps were taken to publicise the fact that the charge was later amended in open court to remove the assertion that the complainant was under 16.</p>
star this property answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam more like this
star this property answering member printed Jeremy Wright more like this
star this property question first answered
less than 2016-06-14T13:53:54.987Zmore like thismore than 2016-06-14T13:53:54.987Z
star this property question first ministerially corrected
remove maximum value filtermore like thismore than 2016-06-24T09:44:08.533Z
star this property answering member
1560
unstar this property label Biography information for Jeremy Wright more like this
star this property previous answer version
3723
star this property answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam more like this
star this property answering member printed Jeremy Wright more like this
star this property answering member
1560
star this property label Biography information for Jeremy Wright more like this
star this property tabling member
117
unstar this property label Biography information for Sir Peter Bottomley more like this