
Police broke the law in the bungled probe into VIP child abuse fantasist Nick, a former High Court judge says today.

Sir Richard Henriques said officers used false evidence to obtain search warrants to raid the homes of retired Armed Forces chief Lord Bramall, the widow of ex-Home Secretary Lord Brittan and ex-Tory MP Harvey Proctor and should now face a criminal investigation.

In an astonishing intervention, he tells the Daily Mail that Scotland Yard detectives did not have the right to search the properties because their description of Nick – real name Carl Beech – as a ‘consistent’ witness was false, effectively fooling a judge into granting the warrants.

He also alleges the ‘course of justice was perverted with shocking consequences’ and says he finds it astonishing that no officer has been brought to book over the fiasco. He says a ‘criminal investigation should surely follow’.

Police broke the law in the bungled probe into VIP child abuse fantasist Nick, former High Court judge Sir Richard Henriques says today. He said officers used false evidence to obtain search warrants to raid the homes of retired Armed Forces chief Lord Bramall, the widow of ex-Home Secretary Lord Brittan and ex-Tory MP Harvey Proctor and should now face a criminal investigation

Last week it was confirmed that not one officer would face misconduct proceedings over the case, following a watchdog investigation branded a ‘whitewash’ by critics.

In 2016 Sir Richard wrote a scathing report for Scotland Yard about its £2.5million investigation into Beech’s allegations. His report, which identified 43 blunders, was heavily redacted and has never been fully made public.

But his 1,200-word statement in today’s Mail will pile pressure on ex-Metropolitan Police chief Sir Bernard, now Lord Hogan-Howe, and the officer who led Operation Midland, ex-deputy assistant commissioner Steve Rodhouse, who has been promoted to one of the top jobs in British policing.

Carl Beech, 51, has been jailed for 18 years for telling a string of lies about alleged VIP child sex abuse and serial murder

In other bombshell claims, Sir Richard:

Says the Metropolitan Police has ‘sought to protect itself from effective outside scrutiny’ over Operation Midland;

Alleges that during his hard-hitting 2016 investigation, the Met did not give him ‘all relevant documentation’; and

Attacks police watchdogs for clearing two senior officers of misconduct without interviewing them.

Sir Richard’s broadside at the Met and police watchdogs comes days after vicar’s son Beech, 51, was jailed for 18 years for telling a string of lies about alleged VIP child sex abuse and serial murder.

At his ten-week trial, jurors heard the fantasist told officers that he was used as a human dartboard by the former heads of MI5 and MI6, that his dog was kidnapped by a spy chief, and that the paedophile ring shot dead his horse.

The court also heard Beech is now a convicted paedophile after child porn offences came to light when an independent police force, at Sir Richard’s behest, started investigating him on suspicion of making false claims about a murderous Establishment paedophile ring.

In the wake of his convictions last week, Scotland Yard chiefs faced intense criticism over its staggering incompetence and 16-month investigation launched on the word of a pathological liar.

But shortly after he was found guilty last Monday, the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) announced three officers accused of misconduct over search warrant applications had been cleared.

The IOPC said the officers, led by senior investigating officer detective chief inspector Diane Tudway, acted ‘with due diligence and in good faith at the time’.

At his ten-week trial, jurors heard the fantasist told officers that he was used as a human dartboard by the former heads of MI5 and MI6, that his dog was kidnapped by a spy chief, and that the paedophile ring shot dead his horse

But Sir Richard tells the Mail the finding is ‘in conflict’ with his review of Operation Midland in 2016 and he maintains ‘the opinion that the three search warrants authorising the searches of the homes of Lord Bramall, Lady Brittan and Harvey Proctor were obtained unlawfully’ from a district judge. This is because, he says, Beech’s allegations had changed since he first contacted police in 2012 and were not ‘consistent’.

He continued: ‘I remain unable to conclude that every officer acted with due diligence and in good faith. When the applications were made officers leading the investigation were fully aware of six matters in particular which undermined Beech’s credibility.’

Warrants: How they work If police want to search a suspect’s home, they have to apply to the local magistrates’ court for a search warrant. The court will only grant it if satisfied there are reasonable grounds to suspect an offence has been committed – and that material of substantial value to an investigation is likely to be recovered. Once a warrant has been granted, police have three months to carry out the search – or one month if issued under the Misuse of Drugs Act. When a police officer attends a search, they must provide a copy of the search warrant. If the homeowner is present, they must ask permission to search the property – unless the search would be hindered by doing so. Advertisement

In another damning revelation, Sir Richard said that during his review for the Met, he was not – as promised at the outset – given ‘all relevant documentation’.

He said Mrs Tudway – who was promoted to superintendent while under investigation for alleged misconduct and retired just before Beech’s trial – was aware of several matters which undermined Beech’s credibility and ‘knew full well that they had not been brought to the attention of the district judge’. He added: ‘Knowingly misleading a district judge is far more serious than mere misconduct. The IOPC should in my judgment have investigated whether a criminal act had been committed.’

He also lambasted the watchdog for offering no explanation as to why two senior Operation Midland officers – Rodhouse and ex-detective superintendent Kenny McDonald, who called Beech ‘credible and true’ at the start of the inquiry in 2014 – were exonerated without being interviewed by watchdogs.

‘Through the device of deploying an officer with an incomplete knowledge of the investigation to sign the applications and to make the applications, the Metropolitan Police has sought to protect itself from effective outside scrutiny,’ he concluded.

Last week Met Deputy Commissioner Sir Stephen House said he believed all five officers probed by police watchdogs over Operation Midland ‘worked in good faith’.

They cooperated fully with both the Henriques’ Review and the Independent Office for Police Conduct investigations, he added.

The court was given false and misleading evidence... a criminal inquiry must now follow: Shattering verdict of Sir Richard Henriques, the top judge who ran VIP abuse case review

On Monday, July 22, the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) published its findings into how the Metropolitan Police handled the investigation into allegations made by Carl Beech, namely that the Operation Midland officers involved in applying for search warrants acted ‘with due diligence and in good faith at the time’.

That finding is in conflict with my own finding set out in my review handed to Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, as he was then, on October 31, 2016.

Retired High Court judge Mr Justice Henriques wrote a scathing report for Scotland Yard about its £2.5million investigation into Carl Beech’s VIP paedophile allegations

That section of my review has not as yet been disclosed to the public or to those named and falsely accused by Beech, previously known by the pseudonym ‘Nick’.

I concluded in my review – and maintain the opinion – that the three search warrants authorising the searches of the homes of Lord Bramall, Lady Brittan and Harvey Proctor were obtained unlawfully.

All three applications stated that Beech had remained consistent with his allegations.

Beech had not been consistent. His allegations made to the Wiltshire Police in 2012 were fundamentally inconsistent with those he made to the Metropolitan Police in 2014 and with blogs published by Beech in 2014.

Beech told Wiltshire Police that he was first raped by an unnamed lieutenant colonel. He told the Metropolitan Police that he was first raped by his stepfather.

The identities of subsequent named alleged rapists were inconsistent. The alleged locations were inconsistent, persons allegedly present were inconsistent, the alleged accompanying acts of violence were inconsistent and Wiltshire Police were never informed of three alleged child murders.

These numerous inconsistencies were within the knowledge of those officers leading the investigation. A document highlighting Beech’s ‘inconsistencies’ was in existence prior to the application for search warrants. The Wiltshire interviews had been handed to the Metropolitan Police in May 2013.

The description of Beech as having been consistent was false and misleading and persuaded the district judge to grant the applications, as did the fact ‘that this has been considered at deputy assistant commissioner level’.

I remain unable to conclude that every officer acted with due diligence and in good faith. When the applications were made officers leading the investigation were fully aware of six matters in particular which undermined Beech’s credibility.

They are set out in my review at some length and should have been brought to the attention of the district judge in the event of any application being made.

In particular there was compelling evidence that Beech had never been injured in the manner he had asserted, that he had never been absent from home as alleged, nor removed from school as alleged, there was no evidence that any one of the three children allegedly murdered had in fact been murdered, and no corroboration of any single allegation not withstanding a public request for information made on December 18, 2014.

None of these matters were disclosed to the district judge as they should have been.

Every search warrant application contains the words ‘this application discloses all the information that is material to what the court must decide including anything that might reasonably be considered capable of undermining any of the grounds of the application’.

In order to obtain a search warrant, an applicant must establish that he or she has reasonable grounds to believe that an indictable offence has been committed.

I concluded in 2016 – and I remain of the view – that the officers responsible for the three applications did not in fact fully believe that there were reasonable grounds to believe Beech’s allegations.

If such reasonable grounds had existed, and had officers believed in their existence, I have no doubt Harvey Proctor would have been arrested on suspicion of having committed three child murders.

When I was asked by Sir Bernard to conduct my review, I was assured that I would receive all relevant documentation. I was not in fact supplied with the three applications for search warrants.

Nor were the applications listed on a list of relevant documents supplied to me. It was necessary to approach Westminster Magistrates’ Court direct in order to obtain the written applications.

It is significant a comparatively junior officer – a detective sergeant with limited knowledge of the investigation and with no knowledge of the content of the Wiltshire interviews (having chosen not to read a summary provided to him) – was detailed or required to sign the three applications and to apply in person to the district judge.

Indeed, the detective sergeant told the IOPC that he was unaware of the inconsistencies in Beech’s accounts and had not read the Wiltshire interviews.

The senior investigating officer, however, attended before the district judge and had herself reviewed the written applications.

She had access to the Wiltshire interviews and to the document highlighting Beech’s several inconsistencies.

She was present at the application when the more junior and less well informed officer gave evidence on oath in support of the applications. The senior investigating officer was aware of the several matters referred to earlier which undermined Beech’s credibility and knew full well that they had not been brought to the attention of the district judge.

The consequence of obtaining and executing these three search warrants and then informing Beech thereof must not be underestimated. Beech immediately informed Exaro, the online news agency, which resulted in the avalanche of dreadful publicity which has blighted the lives of Lord Bramall, Lady Brittan, Harvey Proctor, nine other named individuals and their families and friends.

If any police officer drafted, reviewed, promoted or signed an application for a search warrant stating that Beech had remained consistent whilst knowing he had not been consistent, such an officer would be guilty not only of misconduct, but also of intending to pervert the course of justice.

I was surprised to learn that the criticism made by me in my review had been assessed to amount to misconduct only by the IOPC. Knowingly misleading a district judge is far more serious than mere misconduct.

The IOPC should in my judgement have investigated whether a criminal act had been committed, and if so by whom.

I was also surprised by the length of time taken to complete the IOPC investigation.

I was informed by Sir Bernard that the matter would be referred to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (as the IOPC was previously known) in November 2016 and the investigation was not completed until July 2019. Whilst the IOPC apologised for the time taken to conclude the matter, such delay undoubtedly resulted in ‘officers being unable to specify which documents each had sight of and knowledge of at what time’.

Finally, there was no explanation from the IOPC as to why the two most senior officers were exonerated without interview, not least since the district judge relied on the fact the search warrant applications had been considered at deputy assistant commissioner level.

Through the device of deploying an officer with an incomplete knowledge of the investigation to sign the applications and to make the applications, the Metropolitan Police has sought to protect itself from effective outside scrutiny.

The fact remains, however, that Beech had not remained consistent, the Metropolitan Police informed the district judge that Beech had remained consistent and ‘he is felt to be a credible witness who is telling the truth’.

Thus the course of justice was perverted with shocking consequences. A criminal investigation should surely follow.

Sir Richard did not request or receive a fee for this article.

The top officers in the firing line: Cleared of blame, detectives now face fresh call for criminal investigation

Not a single police officer will face misconduct proceedings over the bungled Scotland Yard inquiry into Carl Beech’s allegations – despite it being widely regarded as the most appalling Met probe in living memory.

Everyone connected to the £2.5million investigation into the fantasist previously known as ‘Nick’ has been cleared of blame.

Here we examine the key players in the probe, who have come under renewed scrutiny.

Ex-Met Deputy Assistant Commissioner Steve Rodhouse

The ‘gold commander’ oversaw the running of Operation Midland and a separate disastrous rape inquiry into Leon Brittan. He had a crucial role in making key decisions in the triple murder inquiry into VIPs, including police raids and interviews with suspects.

He has repeatedly refused to comment on whether he approved the use of the phrase ‘credible and true’ by one of his senior officers, Det Supt Kenny McDonald, to describe Beech at the outset of Operation Midland in December 2014.

The phrase went uncorrected for nine months. Before Operation Midland collapsed in March 2016, without a single arrest, he became known as the man who found it hard to say sorry.

Ex-Met Deputy Assistant Commissioner Steve Rodhouse (pictured) oversaw the running of Operation Midland and a separate disastrous rape inquiry into Leon Brittan

In January 2016, he informed Lord Bramall’s lawyer that there was ‘insufficient evidence’ to charge him with paedophile offences. Mr Rodhouse’s letter announcing the end of the investigation sought to absolve Scotland Yard and blamed the media for his ten-month ordeal.

The letter, full of legal jargon and with no hint of regret, infuriated Lord Bramall’s supporters. The Met later paid him £100,000 damages.

In October 2015, Mr Rodhouse sent a similarly mean-spirited letter to Leon Brittan’s widow about the handling of a false rape claim. Three years after a Labour activist with mental health problems accused Lord Brittan of raping her in 1967, Mr Rodhouse told Lady Brittan the Met had found no evidence to charge him.

He apologised for any ‘distress’ caused, but he went on to say that Lord Brittan might still have been charged had he been alive.

As a result of the Met’s delays, Lord Brittan died with false rape allegations hanging over him.

Following Sir Richard Henriques’ scathing report about Operation Midland in November 2016, Mr Rodhouse was referred to the police watchdog for potential breaches of ‘duties and responsibilities’ – but was cleared without being interviewed in March 2017.

Lady Brittan later received £100,000 damages from the Met.

Before joining the Met, Mr Rodhouse oversaw a bungled Surrey Police inquiry into Jimmy Savile. Prior to Beech’s convictions, Mr Rodhouse refused to answer questions about the case.

He has been promoted to a £175,000-a-year role at the National Crime Agency, Britain’s version of the FBI, where he is now Director General (Operations).

Ex-Met Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe

Ex-Met Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe ran Scotland Yard with an iron fist following his appointment in 2011

He ran Scotland Yard with an iron fist following his appointment in 2011. But critics say he failed to ‘grip’ the Nick allegations.

He announced his surprise retirement from the Met in September 2016, just as Sir Richard Henriques was concluding his inquiry into Operation Midland.

Sir Richard said in a letter to him: ‘I trust that commentators will not place the blame for the grave mistakes in Operation Midland and Vincente at your door… I wish you well in your retirement.’

After his retirement, he was controversially awarded a peerage and has since forged a lucrative career in business.

Following Beech’s convictions, the peer said: ‘The investigations of claims of historical child abuse were complex and of great public interest at the time. There are clear lessons to be learned.’

Ex-Met Detective Supt. Kenny McDonald

At a Yard press conference in the first weeks of Operation Midland in December 2014, Mr McDonald described Beech’s allegations as ‘credible and true’. In his report, Sir Richard Henriques said his controversial comments were one of the ‘principal police failings’.

He was later taken off the investigation and, as the inquiry unravelled, was also off work sick.

Like Mr Rodhouse, he was referred to the police watchdog for potential breaches of ‘duties and responsibilities’ but cleared without being interviewed.

During Beech’s trial, Mr McDonald was pictured playing golf. He refused to answer questions about the case and retired with an estimated £250,000 pension payout weeks before Beech’s trial began.

Ex-Detective Chief Inspector Diane Tudway

Ex-Detective Chief Inspector Diane Tudway was the Senior Investigating Officer in day-to-day charge of Operation Midland

She was the Senior Investigating Officer in day-to-day charge of Operation Midland, reporting to DAC Rodhouse.

Mrs Tudway had close dealings with Beech and spent 17 hours watching his interviews from ‘beginning to end’ and ‘believed’ him. She was directly involved in a search of one of Lord Brittan’s homes, six weeks after he died.

Last year, while under investigation for alleged misconduct over the searches, she was promoted to superintendent working in the Met’s ‘Intelligence’ branch. She retired on a bumper police pension on the eve of Beech’s trial.

Last week, the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) said: ‘In an interview with our investigators, she was unable to recall what information was available to her at the time of drafting and submitting the applications to the court.’

Mrs Tudway denies knowingly misleading the court. The IOPC concluded there was nothing to suggest she ‘acted in bad faith or intentionally misled the judge’.

Mrs Tudway was asked to comment before the Beech verdicts. On her behalf, the Met said: ‘Diane Tudway retired from the Met in April, after 30 years’ service as a highly-respected officer... it is not for this ex-officer to apologise.’

Ex-Met DI Alison Hepworth

The murder squad detective was ‘responsible for reviewing and signing the applications’ for search warrants. In a statement to the IOPC, she admitted having extensive knowledge of Operation Midland, but ‘could not remember what specific details were known to her at what time’.

‘It would be unrealistic to expect her to have known the full detail of this material,’ the IOPC said. It added there was no evidence she deliberately withheld evidence from the applications and had no case to answer for misconduct.

She retired in March 2017, the Met said. Through the force, she was asked to comment about the case. We received no reply.

Lives trashed, homes invaded: Laid bare in their own haunting words, torment of the innocent VIPs and families who faced shock of police raids following 'Nick' allegations

The devastating toll of the Operation Midland investigation was starkly laid bare by those who had their homes raided over false allegations of murder, child rape and torture.

The trial of fantasist Carl Beech heard how officers searched the home of Britain’s most distinguished living war hero while his wife suffered with dementia.

One detective allegedly leaked news of the search of a former MP’s home to his accuser, who handed the information to discredited news website Exaro. And the grieving widow of a former home secretary was ‘traumatised’ as their two properties were searched only six weeks after his death.

As retired judge Sir Richard Henriques calls for a criminal investigation into how the search warrants were obtained, the Mail outlines the impact of the raids in March 2015.

Harvey Proctor

On March 4, 2015 officers from the Metropolitan Police’s murder squad raided former Tory MP Mr Proctor’s home on the Duke of Rutland’s private estate.

They spent 15 hours searching his grace-and-favour home in the grounds of Belvoir Castle in Leicestershire.

Mr Proctor told Newcastle Crown Court during Beech’s trial that police would initially not give him details of what he was accused of other than saying it was to do with allegations of historic child abuse.

Former Tory MP Harvey Proctor told Newcastle Crown Court during Beech’s trial that police would initially not give him details of what he was accused of other than saying it was to do with allegations of historic child abuse

In fact, police were probing at least two murders said to have been committed by Mr Proctor.

The details they had been fed – described at one stage as ‘credible and true’ – included an allegation that Mr Proctor had attempted to castrate Beech with a pen knife and was only stopped from doing so when Sir Edward Heath intervened.

Mr Proctor was assured during the search his name would not find its way into the media. He had to be talked out of taking his own life in the late 1980s when he admitted gross indecency for having sex with underage men after being exposed by newspapers.

The following morning after the raid he awoke to coverage on TV news. He told Beech’s trial: ‘When I awoke at 7am on the dot I looked up at the TV screen to see my face looking back at me and a story running at the head of the BBC news that my house had been searched in connection with historic child sexual abuse including child murders.

‘It was a Kafkaesque situation – a horrendous, irrational, nightmare.’ A detective taking part in the raid on Mr Proctor’s home is then said to have phoned Beech to update him. Beech passed details of the raid to reporters at Exaro, who ran the piece and caused Mr Proctor’s name to become public knowledge.

As a result of the raid and the following publicity, Mr Proctor lost his job and the home that went with it. After receiving death threats, he moved with his partner to Spain ‘away from the country I love’ before quietly returning to Britain to live in a converted shed provided by a friend which had no running water.

He is now back living in a property owned by the Rutland estate.

He added: ‘I suffer severe depression and sometimes weep when reminded of what I have lost as a result of the police action.’

Mr Proctor is pursuing a civil claim against the Metropolitan Police and Beech.

In an interview with the Mail in 2016, Mr Proctor said: ‘When the police raided my home in March they arrived at 8am. I was given no prior warning. There were at least 15 of them. They searched my home for 15 hours.

‘They assured me my identity would not come out. But even before they left, the Press were telephoning my office.’

Lord Bramall

As Field Marshal Lord Bramall sat down to have breakfast with his wife of 66 years, 20 police descended on their home in a village on the Hampshire-Surrey border.

The former head of the Armed Forces and war hero, 95 and wheelchair-bound, said the visit was so unexpected that he immediately invited the police inside when they knocked on the door.

In an interview with the Sunday Times, he described how he was told ‘accusations had been made’.

When Lord Bramall replied ‘Against who?’ he was informed ‘Against you.’ His wife Avril was in the advanced stages of dementia and did not understand what was taking place. She died before he could be exonerated.

Lord Bramall described how the officers arrived in overalls and spent ten hours searching ‘absolutely everything’ in the house.

As Field Marshal Lord Bramall, 95, sat down to have breakfast with his wife of 66 years, 20 police descended on their home in a village on the Hampshire-Surrey border

His daughter Sara arrived and she was asked whether he had any grandchildren before one officer added: ‘Are you afraid of leaving them alone with him?’

He told the newspaper: ‘Can you think of anything more insulting?’

The officers left with an old visitors’ book and copies of two speeches Lord Bramall had made.

In an interview with the Mail last week, his son Nicholas said: ‘They went behind every picture in the house. They ripped the place apart. There was a bus-load of police in white suits. My parents live right in the middle of the village. They weren’t being subtle.

‘Most of the officers went down the pub for lunch and it wasn’t long before the local paper got onto Dad. The trouble with all allegations, particularly paedophilia, is it sticks, doesn’t it? It’s just such an overwhelmingly awful thing.’

Lord Bramall received £100,000 compensation from the police for their handling of the raid.

Nicholas said: ‘They over-reacted and got it spectacularly wrong and Dad and other people had to pay the price.’ His wife Pip added: ‘He [Lord Bramall] said the police had raided his house and were there now. They were going through everything and he wasn’t allowed to move. He said he’d been accused of something involving a minor 40 years ago but they wouldn’t say what it was.

‘Mum was very confused. It was so unpleasant for her. She was sort of shunted from one room to another. She knew something was wrong, but wasn’t quite sure what it was. It affected her quite badly. She used to say, “What have I done, what have I done?’

In a witness statement read at the sentencing of Beech last week, Lady Brittan (pictured with late husband Leon Brittan) said their London home was searched for 12 hours and the Yorkshire residence, which was being let, for two days

Lord Brittan

Homes in Yorkshire and London belonging to the former home secretary were raided by police six weeks after his death from cancer.

The key figure in Margaret Thatcher’s cabinet was alone in hospital, terminally ill, when the allegations concocted by ‘Nick’ became global news.

The politician died in January 2015 and his grieving widow Diana had to contend with huge media interest in the allegations made by Beech.

A short time later, police raided Lord Brittan’s homes in Pimlico (pictured), central London and Leyburn, North Yorkshire

A short time later, police raided Lord Brittan’s homes in Pimlico, central London and Leyburn, North Yorkshire.

In a witness statement read at the sentencing of Beech last week, Lady Brittan said their London home was searched for 12 hours and the Yorkshire residence, which was being let, for two days.

She said: ‘The experience of having my house in London searched by a dozen police officers for 12 hours was traumatising.’

Describing the Yorkshire raid, she added: ‘The whole house was turned upside down, and questions were asked about “newly-turned earth”.

‘Van-loads of personal effects were removed. The elderly couple resident in the house were shell-shocked by the nature and extent of the search.

They were also subjected to very intrusive questioning about my husband and my family. I feared the two searches would be made public. And a few days later they were.

'The impact of these allegations and their consequences on my wider family were significant. My younger daughter, who lives in Australia, advised me shortly after my husband’s death not to go on the internet and in particular the website Exaro because she said, ‘You will find it very upsetting.’

She added: ‘My husband’s name has now been cleared, but he will never know this.’

Lady Brittan was paid £100,000 compensation by police.

STEPHEN GLOVER: If police behave so unlawfully, how can we ever have faith in them again?

Eminent former High Court judges do not normally challenge Establishment thinking. It is virtually unprecedented for one of their number to step forward and allege police incompetence, and possibly illegality, on a vast scale.

So we owe Sir Richard Henriques a great debt for his breathtaking revelations published in today’s Mail. It can’t have been easy for this one-time pillar of the judiciary to blow the gaff on the forces of law and order in such a public way.

No one can plausibly question the veracity or accuracy of his disturbing, and entirely convincing, claims. For he is a highly respected senior ex-judge of great experience and profound legal knowledge.

It seems outrageous than no senior police officer has been properly held to account while, as Sir Richard rightly remarks, the lives of several innocent people have been ‘blighted’

He also wrote in 2016 an official report about Operation Midland — the Metropolitan Police Service’s cack-handed inquiry into sex allegations against prominent supposed offenders, which cost £2.5 million.

There can be little doubt that Sir Richard has considered this lamentable and ill-conceived investigation more painstakingly than any other person alive.

The nub of his complaint — which was redacted from his published, highly critical report — is that the police ‘unlawfully’ searched the homes of Lord Bramall, Lady Brittan and Harvey Proctor as part of Operation Midland.

So we owe Sir Richard Henriques a great debt for his breathtaking revelations published in today’s Mail. It can’t have been easy for this one-time pillar of the judiciary to blow the gaff on the forces of law and order in such a public way

These unfortunate victims, along with several others, were targeted by police after baseless falsehoods had been circulated by Carl Beech, once known as ‘Nick’. The 51-year-old fantasist was jailed for 18 years last week for his ‘hideous and repugnant’ lies about alleged VIP sex abuse.

What is so deeply worrying about Sir Richard’s allegations is not only that the police credulously went along with Beech’s absurd stories, with one senior officer, Superintendent Kenny McDonald, idiotically describing them as ‘credible and true’ during the investigation.

More pertinently, the worry is that in making applications to search the houses of Lord Bramall, Lady Brittan and Harvey Proctor, police officers made statements that ignored the many inconsistencies in Carl Beech’s testimony.

For example, Beech told Wiltshire Police he was first raped by an unnamed lieutenant-colonel. But he informed the Metropolitan Police he was first raped by his stepfather.

Many other glaring inconsistencies were also withheld from the district judge, whose approval was needed before warrants could be granted to carry out searches.

These highly intrusive procedures, which of course turned up nothing, were upsetting in the extreme to the wholly innocent, and also elderly, people involved.

One such case involved Lord Bramall, a World War II hero and former Chief of the Defence Staff. In 2015, 20 police mounted a dawn raid on his Hampshire home and stayed for ten hours. This left his wife, who suffered from Alzheimer’s, bewildered and confused.

Tragically for Lord Bramall, his wife died before he could finally clear his name. His identity had already been leaked to the media, prompting a disgusting campaign against him on the internet.

Sir Richard Henriques is clear that senior police officers must have been aware of the inconsistencies in Beech’s evidence, and would surely have known there was no legal basis for ransacking people’s private homes.

He even goes further, and asks whether the police were guilty of ‘knowingly misleading a district judge’, which in Sir Richard’s reasonable estimation would amount to a misdemeanour ‘far more serious than mere misconduct’. There is, he declares, reason to believe that ‘the course of justice was perverted, with shocking consequences’.

One such case involved Lord Bramall (pictured), a World War II hero and former Chief of the Defence Staff. In 2015, 20 police mounted a dawn raid on his Hampshire home and stayed for ten hours. This left his wife, who suffered from Alzheimer’s, bewildered and confused

And yet, so far, not one police officer has been officially reprimanded for behaviour one might usually associate with a former East European communist state rather than a mature democracy in which the police are enjoined to respect the rule of law.

Last week, the Independent Office for Police Conduct finally published its findings — after nearly three years of deliberations, which is surely an inexcusable length of time for such an inquiry to have taken.

This grandiloquent body came to the unpersuasive conclusion that officers investigating Beech’s allegations acted ‘with due diligence and good faith at the time’.

Such a whitewash is totally at variance with Sir Richard’s revelations in today’s Mail. I can’t imagine that even one person in a hundred will side with the Independent Office for Police Conduct rather than a former judge whose only interest lies in disclosing the truth.

It seems outrageous than no senior police officer has been properly held to account while, as Sir Richard rightly remarks, the lives of several innocent people have been ‘blighted’.

Lady Brittan’s husband, ex-Home Secretary Leon Brittan, died with Beech’s false allegations hanging over him, not knowing that his name would be cleared. Months after his death, police were still trawling through Lady Brittan’s garden.

Meanwhile, former Deputy Assistant Commissioner Steve Rodhouse, who was in charge of Operation Midland, is now a £175,000-a-year director general at the National Crime Agency. Superintendent Kenny McDonald, the investigating officer who thought Beech was a model of credibility, retired weeks before the fantasist’s trial began with a £250,000 pension pot.

Incompetence is one thing, and we certainly don’t know whether these particular officers were guilty of anything worse. But any policeman who appears to have broken the law should face a criminal investigation, as Sir Richard suggests.

Former Deputy Assistant Commissioner Steve Rodhouse, who was in charge of Operation Midland, is now a £175,000-a-year director general at the National Crime Agency

The question remains why the boys in blue may have been prepared to bend the rules. Sympathetic souls may say in their defence that after the scandal of Jimmy Savile, whose epic sexual abuse was overlooked by the authorities over many years, the police were overzealous. If true, that is no justification.

Others point with good cause to the figure of Tom Watson, Labour’s deputy leader, who met Beech in his Westminster office before he made his ludicrous claims to the Metropolitan Police. He publicly urged officers to pursue these, and no doubt they felt under pressure to do so.

Mr Watson still has not apologised for his unhappy role in this affair, and if he had a modicum of humility or decency this self-satisfied man would admit he made a serious error of judgment.

For all that, the ramifications of Sir Richard’s revelations go far deeper. They raise questions about police conduct and accountability.

I am afraid I no longer have as much faith in their good sense and fairness, in particular of the most senior officers, as I once did.

A big shock for me came with Operation Elveden in 2012, when police made dawn raids on the homes of journalists accused of making payments to public officials. That did not seem consonant with a free society.

Needless to say, what happened to Carl Beech’s victims as a result of the inhumane and ill-considered behaviour of the police was very much worse. Those charged with enforcing the law might as well have been living in a different moral universe to the rest of us.

Lord Bramall has said that what was done to him was more painful than any experience he had ever undergone serving Queen and country. This from a very brave man who won the Military Cross.

The terrifying lesson I draw is that if the police can treat such eminent people as Lord Bramall, Leon Brittan, Harvey Proctor and the rest of them in such a brutal way, then none of us is safe.