Scotland Yard admitted it was wrong to describe the key witness’s allegations about a Westminster paedophile ring as “credible and true” before the conclusion of its investigation.

In an unusually detailed statement about the status of the inquiry, the Metropolitan police said the remarks made by an investigating officer had gone too far.

The Met said the effect was to suggest it was “pre-empting the outcome of the investigation” into three alleged murders by Conservative politicians in the mid-70s, following allegations made by the witness known only as “Nick”.

The Met’s statement added: “We always retain an open mind as we have demonstrated by conducting a thorough investigation.”

Scotland Yard has faced questions over its handling of the investigation into Nick’s allegations, known as Operation Midland.

Last week, the force was accused by the former director of public prosecutions Ken Macdonald QC of “showing a medieval contempt for the accused” when it described Nick’s claims as “credible and true” before the investigation had run its course.

Police sources say officers on the team are divided on whether it is possible to continue with Operation Midland, amid reports that it was due to be scaled back after being unable to substantiate Nick’s claims following 11 months of investigation.

It had been alleged that a high-profile paedophile ring was operating out of Dolphin Square, in Westminster, allegedly involving the late former prime minister Edward Heath and other establishment figures.

Sir Ken Macdonald QC has been critical of the Met’s handling of the investigation. Photograph: Tim Ireland/PA

On Monday evening, Scotland Yard sought to head off further criticism over Midland’s progress by insisting that it remains a murder investigation into the possible homicide of three young boys.

The force added in a statement: “Our starting point with allegations of child sexual abuse or serious sexual assault is to believe the victim until we identify reasonable cause to believe otherwise.

“That is why, at the point at which we launched our initial appeal on Midland, after the witness had been interviewed for several days by detectives specialising in homicide and child abuse investigations, our senior investigating officer stated that he believed our key witness and felt him to be credible. Had he not made that considered, professional judgment, we would not have investigated in the way we have.

“We must add that whilst we start from a position of believing the witness, our stance then is to investigate without fear or favour, in a thorough, professional and impartial fashion, and to go where the evidence takes us without prejudging the truth of the allegations. That is exactly what has happened in this case.”

However, the statement added that only a jury could decide on the truth of allegations after hearing all the evidence in court.

It said: “We should always reflect that in our language and we acknowledge that describing the allegations as ‘credible and true’ suggested we were pre-empting the outcome of the investigation. We were not. We always retain an open mind as we have demonstrated by conducting a thorough investigation.”

Nick’s allegations, which were first revealed by the investigative news website Exaro, prompted an angry press conference by the former Tory MP Harvey Proctor, who has been interviewed under caution as part of Operation Midland. He strongly denied any involvement, and said the allegations had destroyed his reputation and that of eight other alleged ring members.

Proctor’s press conference last month left Nick distressed, according to Exaro, which remains in close contact with the witness while the police investigation continues.

In recent days, media reports have focused increasingly on the veracity of Nick’s claims and the handling of them by police and Exaro.

On Monday, Scotland Yard said it was concerned that the ongoing media attention risked jeopardising the police investigation. In recent weeks, the force said, one journalist has disclosed the purported identity of an alleged sexual assault victim to someone who had been questioned over the allegations.

It described the incident as “extremely distressing” for anyone who had made sexual abuse allegations, and said it could deter other witnesses or victims from coming forward.

Reminding the media that sexual assault investigations often deal with very vulnerable witnesses, Scotland Yard said: “It is important to note that the police must take account of this vulnerability at all stages, irrespective of whether the allegations can be substantiated or not. We ask the media and those asked to comment to do likewise.

“We also think the press should consider following Ofcom’s approach by amending its code to recognise that vulnerability in reporting of crime is not just a matter of the age of witnesses or victims.”

Scotland Yard’s statement was welcomed by Peter Saunders, chief executive of the National Association for People Abused in Childhood (Napac), who said it was reassuring that the investigations were ongoing and were being taken seriously.

He said: “The statement clarified that when a potential alleged victim comes forward and gives their account it’s helpful for the police on a one-to-one basis to say ‘speak and you will be believed’. Then they take up the case.”



Saunders added that it was not helpful for a policeman to go on television and make the comments about allegations being “credible”.



“That just plays into the hands of the deniers and the ones who say that the police are overzealous. I think this latest statement quite clearly makes the case that they have been ‘underzealous’ in the past and they are now doing their job.”

Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Tuesday, Macdonald said there was “a danger of elevating a pub pillory over a courtroom and I think that’s precisely what’s been happening in recent cases.

“We have the routine leaking of names to media … routine abuse of bail system so people are left dangling months or years before they are cleared,” he continued. “We have the untrammelled trashing of the reputation of people who are dead and can’t answer back.

“I think it all speaks of a police service which has lost a sense of balance, perhaps they are now seeking to rediscover that balance but they have got some way to go. The police ... must not find themselves in a position that because of understandable concern for victims that they are indulging fantasists.”