The four students who were falsely accused of the gang rape of a woman at a college summer ball have been told they can seek costs of £221,000.

Judge Jamie Tabor QC gave Thady Duff, Leo Mahon and Patrick Foster, all 22, and James Martin, 20, the go-ahead for part of their legal costs to be paid by the prosecution.

He also blasted Detective Constable Ben Lewis for getting too close to the woman who made the claims, and accused police of “cherry-picking” evidence to help her case.

The students, who study at the elite Royal Agricultural University in Cirencester, saw the case against them dropped last month.

They had all denied rape, sexual assault and assault by penetration but had been left with legal bills running into hundreds of thousands of pounds.

The case against them fell apart after it emerged the claimant, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had given “different accounts” while she was a witness in a separate rape case.

DC Lewis made “serious omissions” and failed to disclose “game-changing” evidence, according to Judge Tabor.

Inconsistencies in the woman’s evidence in the case of an alleged rapist - a soldier - was not disclosed by police.

The soldier in that case was later cleared of rape.

View photos

Costs: Judge Tabor gave the green light for the students to seek £221,000 (SWNS)

Police were also aware of text messages sent by the complainant in the hours after the alleged incident, as well as a conversation with her friend about what would happen if video footage became common knowledge.

However, this evidence was only discovered when the defence asked experts to carry out a full examination of the claimant’s mobile phone.

Criticising DC Lewis, Judge Tabor said: “Aware as he was, not only of his duties, but the character of the complainant, Det Con Lewis should have investigated the download from the telephone in far greater detail than he did.”

DC Lewis told the Crown Prosecution Service that “nothing of relevance” had emerged from a search of the telephone just three days before the start of the trial.

Judge Tabor added: “This was a truly startling state of affairs.

“Had not the applicants carried out a thorough investigation of the telephone a much skewed picture would have been presented to the jury.”

Criticising the detective for getting too close to the claimant, he said: “The lack of training for the role of disclosure officer and identifying too closely with the complainant very nearly led to the applicants conducting their trial with one hand tied behind their back.

“His omissions in relation to the disclosure of the telephone evidence were stark and very serious. His failure to adequately record meetings and conversations with the complainant was also a serious omission.

View photos

Story continues