Linked Data API

Show Search Form

Search Results

524189
registered interest false more like this
date less than 2016-06-09more like thismore than 2016-06-09
answering body
Attorney General more like this
answering dept id 88 more like this
answering dept short name Attorney General more like this
answering dept sort name Attorney General more like this
hansard heading Gurpal Virdi remove filter
house id 1 more like this
legislature
25259
pref label House of Commons more like this
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
tabling member constituency Worthing West more like this
tabling member printed
Sir Peter Bottomley more like this
uin 40180 more like this
answer
answer
is ministerial correction true more like this
date of answer less than 2016-06-14more like thismore than 2016-06-14
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>
answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam more like this
answering member printed Jeremy Wright more like this
question first answered
less than 2016-06-14T13:53:54.987Zmore like thismore than 2016-06-14T13:53:54.987Z
question first ministerially corrected
less than 2016-06-24T09:44:08.533Zmore like thismore than 2016-06-24T09:44:08.533Z
answering member
1560
label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright more like this
previous answer version
3723
answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam more like this
answering member printed Jeremy Wright more like this
answering member
1560
label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright more like this
tabling member
117
label Biography information for Sir Peter Bottomley more like this