Cleveland Police pays out £550,000 for wrongful arrest

A solicitor who was wrongly arrested by Cleveland Police officers has been awarded more than half a million pounds in compensation from the force.

James Watson spent more than three years in a legal battle with the police service after he claimed his arrest on June 3, 2009, on suspicion of perverting the course of justice was motivated by a vendetta stemming from his defence of a client.

Cleveland Police admitted wrongful arrest and was ordered to pay £550,000 compensation to Mr Watson, which includes £80,000 awarded in exemplary damages, the maximum amount possible.

Mr Watson, whose wife and two sons were also held at their home for more than seven hours, said the incident was indicative of a pattern of behaviour from a force that has been involved in several corruption cases in recent years.

He claims the 26 boxes of documents taken from his home included items protected by legal privilege. He also criticised the decision to allow Chief Inspector Anthony Riordan to retire on full pension a year after an investigation into his conduct as “misguided”, particularly in light of an Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) report which recommended his suspension.

“The shenanigans at the Old Bailey, as appalling as they may be to an outsider coming and looking at them for the first time, is the sort of behaviour Cleveland Police has been up to in small things and big for the bulk of my professional career,” said Mr Watson.

Jacqui Cheer, chief constable of Cleveland Police, said the force “accepted the recommendations within the report and has implemented changes”.

While a second investigation managed by the IPCC continues, she said it “would not be right for me to make any additional comments at this stage”, but defended the conduct of Assistant Chief Constable Sean White in choosing not to suspend Chief Insp Riordan, both of whom were on the same sailing team that led to claims of favouritism.

“ACC White considered the suspension of this officer in October 2011 in accordance with the policy and practices of the force and based solely upon the information and evidence presented to him by the investigation team,” she said.

“The decision to suspend a police officer is taken within the context of a national decision-making framework and requires that certain and specific suspension conditions and criteria are met.

“Having fully considered the interim report of the IPCC investigator, and having consulted with specialist advisers as well as inviting submissions to the suspension review process from key parties, ACC White decided that the conditions to justify suspension were not met.

“In smaller police forces, senior police officers often make decisions about officers who work for them or with them. ACC White strongly refutes the claim that his decision was influenced or based upon anything other than the facts and evidence presented to him at the time of the decision-making process.

“The IPCC report recommends that I debrief and discuss with ACC White the process for making this decision, with the benefit of hindsight, which I have done and I fully support him.”

Barry Coppinger, police and crime commissioner for Cleveland, insisted the force had enough money to cover the pay-out, adding his support for Ms Cheer.

“While not wanting to underestimate the seriousness of the matter which has been settled, insurance is in place regarding claims against the police,” he said.

“Changes have been made and actions have been implemented following the IPCC report.  

“In appointing a new chief constable I made clear that professional integrity was of critical importance and I would hold to account whoever was appointed in this respect.

“Jacqui Cheer, as chief constable, has demonstrated that integrity is fundamental to the approach the force is taking now and into the future, which has been recognised in the IPCC report. I will continue to monitor progress and the chief constable and I w