Samuel Armstrong, an MP's aide, said he could have been wrongly convicted of rape if his defence team hadn't unearthed key evidence days before his trial

A Tory MP's aide cleared of rape today said he could have been wrongly convicted if not for crucial evidence finally disclosed just days before his trial.

Samuel Armstrong, 24, was accused of abusing his position to attack a young woman when she fell asleep in his boss's Westminster office after a night drinking in Parliament.

His defence team is understood to have waited up to nine months for phone and medical records which his accuser initially refused to hand over to police.

In messages eventually recovered from her phone, she said she had contacted a journalist just hours after the incident to secure a 'sympathetic' write-up, while her medical notes revealed details of a history of mental health issues, including depression and anxiety.

That information was not handed over to Mr Armstrong's defence team until more than a year after the accuser first made the complaint, and just days before the trial was due to begin, raising questions over why it took the Met so long to get the information.

The CPS denied that its disclosure was late, insisting that the evidence was handed over to the defence a day after the detective overseeing the case first examined it, throwing the spotlight on the police. This evening a Met Police spokesman said the force was 'content with the investigation and our disclosure work'.

A jury at Southwark Crown Court today found Mr Armstrong not guilty of two counts of rape and other offences after a two-week trial.

The failed prosecution comes as the way rape cases are handled is under intense scrutiny, following the collapse of two trials in the past week due to a failure to reveal evidence potentially undermining the accusers.

Speaking outside court, Mr Armstrong said: 'My whole life has been turned upside down. For a year I have not slept or eaten, and I was innocent.

'Were it not for the fact that crucial evidence was disclosed to my defence team just eight working days before trial, there could well have been yet another miscarriage of justice in this case.'

Mr Armstrong's parents Andrew and Amanda have supported him through his ordeal

Mr Armstrong's boss, the Conservative MP for South Thanet Craig Mackinlay, said the verdicts should prompt debate over rape cases

Three cases collapse in the same week December 14 Liam Allan's trial collapsed last Thursday after lawyers discovered his alleged victim texted him suggesting she wanted to have more sex after the alleged attack. The 22-year-old, from Kent, was charged with rape and said he has been 'dragged through hell' for two years. Talking about the moment his trial ended, he said: 'I was relieved, not just for me but for everyone who has been with me every step of the way and everyone this has impacted on.' December 19 Isaac Itiary, 25, was released from prison on Tuesday after it emerged the alleged victim posed as a 19-year-old woman and lied about her age. Police officers had texts which showed the girl, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was lying about her age but only released them last week. Mr Itiary, from south east London, spent the last four months in custody awaiting his trial but was celebrating with his parents after his release. December 21 Samuel Armstrong, 24, was today cleared of raping a woman after a night drinking in Parliament. His defence team is believed to have waited up to nine months for phone and medical records which his accuser had refused to hand over to police. It has raised questions why it took the police to get the information and Armstrong, from Danbury, Essex, said he could have been wrongly convicted if the evidence was not disclosed before the trial.


Mr Armstrong's boss, South Thanet MP Craig Mackinlay tweeted: 'I am very pleased for Sam, a young man whose life has been destroyed over the past 14 months.

'Debate now needed over anonymity of those accused, especially in a week where actions of the authorities in such cases have been found wanting.'

Grammar school educated Mr Armstrong, who has been supported by his parents Andrew and Amanda during the trial, wiped away the tears in the dock as he was cleared. He was later comforted by his father.

He said he has been suspended from his 'dream' job in Parliament as a result of the 'horrible allegations'.

Mr Armstrong has been unable to return to Westminster and the role he 'adored' since his arrest.

'While it is embarrassing and I have suffered and I am never ever, ever going to get my career back, that is not the point,' Mr Armstrong said. 'The point is on this allegation somebody is trying to send me to prison for a very long time for something I didn't do.'

It is the third high profile case in the past week which has failed to secure a prosecution - after the trial of Liam Allan was halted while a case against Isaac Itiary collapsed.

Prosecutors denied they handed over the evidence too late, insisting disclosure was 'undertaken properly and in line with our legal obligations'.

It also comes on the same day a 26-year-old man, who was given a four-and-a-half year jail term when convicted of rape, won an appeal after telling judges Facebook messages boosted his credibility.

Danny Kay was jailed in late 2013 after jurors heard a woman had accused him raping her in 2012.

Kay denied rape and said sex had been consensual and challenged the conviction. Today, three appeal judges agreed and quashed his conviction.

Conservative MP Craig Mackinlay (left) told a trial that Samuel Armstrong (right), his chief of staff, was like a son to him

Speaking outside court, he said his life had been turned 'upside down' by the allegations

Referring to Mr Armstrong's case, a CPS spokesman said: 'We disclosed additional material to the defence on 30 November [2017] – only a day after the police officer in charge and the CPS had first examined it.

'The trial went ahead on 11 December and it was not suggested by the defence that there was no case for Samuel Armstrong to answer at the close of the prosecution case. The case was left for the jury to decide and we respect their decision.'

Their response will raise questions over why it the police took so long to get the information from the accuser.

A Met Police spokesman added: 'We are content with the investigation and our disclosure work, which was conducted in liaison with the CPS.

'During the course of the trial there has been no adverse comment from the Judge about the police investigation.'

Mr Armstrong had insisted he and the woman ended up alone in his boss Craig Mackinlay's office in the early hours of the morning and were joking around before having sex.

He said the complainant asked him to play jazz music and sat with him on a sofa, before jumping up and demanding: 'Dance with me.'

Mr Armstrong, pictured with former prime minister David Cameron, denied raping the woman

Mr Armstrong said that they danced in the office and began kissing, before he performed a sex act on her as she sat on the sofa.

'She made all the appropriate noises,' he told the court.

Mr Armstrong said the couple then had sex for several minutes, but the complainant got up to change the music when a 'mood-killer' song came on.

He said: 'After a little while she said, 'some people are going to think that you have taken advantage of m'', but it was in a sort of teasing voice. I responded, 'I'm not sure anyone could come to that conclusion'.'

Mr Armstrong said the woman then sat on top of him and they began to have sex.

While on she was 'bouncing on top' of him he asked her 'how does the size suit the lady?', which he heard a tailor say and to which she replied 'it suits the lady very very well'.

The alleged incident was said to have happened in the Norman Shaw North building

Defence barrister Sarah Forshaw QC said: 'Were you being serious both of you during the course of this conversation?'

He replied: 'We were joshing around and being funny. I was being a bit of a prat.'

Ms Forshaw suggested the woman panicked and made the allegations after becoming distressed as she tried to leave the Palace of Westminster without a pass at around 2am - then was caught in the lie.

Mr Armstrong, from Danbury in Essex, was arrested after the woman was captured on CCTV running through the corridors of Westminster in tears.

Describing how he felt when he was arrested, he said: 'I didn't really know what to think. I thought there must have been some sort of mistake. It must have been that they had got the wrong name.'

He added: 'It was just like somebody had punched me in the stomach. I was winded.'

Mr Armstrong said the couple had sex for several minutes, but the complainant got up to change the music when a 'mood-killer' song came on

Tory MP Mr Mackinlay, who was not in Westminster on the night of the incident, had told the court he and his aide were like 'father and son'.

Mr Armstrong joined Mr Mackinlay's permanent staff in April 2016 after graduating with a politics and history degree from Nottingham University.

The court heard that Mr Mackinlay's wife would tell Armstrong 'she was going to find one of her nieces to marry because he was too nice a young man to be single'.

Claims of delays in handing over evidence will add to fears rape accused are being set up for miscarriages of justice

Today's bombshell verdicts come after every police force in Britain was put under pressure to review thousands of rape, sexual assault and child abuse cases.

The Metropolitan Police is already urgently examining 30 sensitive investigations, with 'scores' more to follow.

It came after DC Mark Azariah, the detective in charge of two collapsed rape trials, was removed from active duty by the Met following the revelation police failed to disclose vital evidence to prosecutors.

Isaac Itiary (lett), was remanded in jail for four months after being charged with raping a child under 16 - but has been freed after texts showing his evidence were not released by Met DC Mark Azariah (right) who is no longer working on active cases

Concerns have previously been raised at the most senior level of the criminal bar that disclosure failures and lack of resources will lead to miscarriages of justice.

The rape trial of Liam Allan was halted last week and the prosecution of Isaac Itiary, accused of raping a child, collapsed on Tuesday. In both cases, the cases were withdrawn after the late disclosure of evidence that could have helped the defendants.

The barrister who stopped the prosecution in the Liam Allan after texts proved he was innocent said today it 'happens every day'.

Jerry Hayes, a former Tory MP, said officers are withholding evidence that undermines their case and 'it's got to stop'.

He told Radio 4: 'This is not one rogue officer. This is a systemic, cultural problem with the police.'

Liam Allan, pictured with his mother Lorraine, poses outside Croydon Crown Court after all rape charges against him were dropped

Attorney General Jeremy Wright said the cases are 'appalling failures of the criminal justice system'.

Campaigners and legal experts have warned the failures are likely to be far more widespread – and that further cases could be undermined by shocking blunders by officers.



Verdicts will fuel row over anonymity for rape accused Today's verdicts will add to calls from those cleared of sex offences for suspects to be given anonymity until they are found guilty. Critics of that idea however claim it can stop other victims of those charged from coming forward. Anonymity for men and women accused of rape until conviction was in place for 12 years until 1988 when it was repealed. At the time one of the main reasons given was that the public could not be warned by police if a suspected rapist was on the run. Margaret Thatcher's government also wanted to 're-balance' the system in favour of victims - and in high profile cases encourage other victims to come forward. People accused of rape in Britain can be named and cases involving public figures often attract significant media attention. Parliament has considered the idea of anonymity for those accused of rape on a number of occasions. The previous Coalition Government said it would extend anonymity in rape cases to defendants. However, having undertaken an assessment of the evidence, it concluded in 2010 that there was insufficient reliable evidence to justify a change in the law. Advertisement

Around 30 cases are already set for trial and are being prioritised, but it is not yet known how many other cases will be affected.

It has now opened the door for hundreds of convicted rapists to start appealing their sentences.

Angela Rafferty QC, chairman of the Criminal Bar Association, suggested 'unconscious bias' stops the police and the CPS 'impartially and thoroughly investigating and scrutinising complaints in sexual offence cases'.

A police doctor today told of fears that medical evidence could become contaminated due to practices by private firm G4S.

Dr Stephen Hopkins wrote The Daily Telegraph saying he was asked by the contractor to take samples from both victims and suspects, raising fears of contamination.

He refused to carry out both examinations, but fears other doctors may have done so.

G4S has denied the doctors carried out both examinations, but Dr Hopkins' claim will add to fears over the safety of rape trials and convictions.

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Cressida Dick has said disclosure of evidence is becoming 'increasingly incredibly complex and demanding' in the digital age.

Ms Dick said: 'I again speak for the Met and my colleagues when I say the very idea that somebody might find themselves convicted inappropriately when they were innocent through a failing of disclosure is unconscionable and my officers take disclosure very seriously.

'They see themselves as genuinely following the evidence, professional, fair and absolutely understanding in an impartial way the necessity for justice and for justice to be served whatever the emotions there might be around that particular issue or a particular case.'

She said that, while she had publicly apologised to Mr Allan, her review was not complete and nobody knew 'exactly what happened'.

'It is complicated, they always are, and I'm not going to prejudge the results of either of those reviews,' she said.