police Chief constable Faces Potential Jail Time After Contempt of Court Finding
A Northamptonshire police chief constable is facing up to two years’ imprisonment or a fine after being found in contempt of court for misleading statements and failures to disclose evidence. The unanimous ruling came from Lady Justice Asplin, Lord Justice Coulson, and Lord Justice Fraser, who stated that ”misleading and untrue statements … have been made to the court on behalf of the chief constable, both to the county court … and also to the court of appeal in relation to the application for permission to appeal and the appeal itself.” They noted that a extensive listing of inaccuracies “would lengthen this judgment considerably.”
The case stems from a dispute with claimant Carol Buzzard-Quashie, who initially represented herself in a battle against the police force and its legal team. Buzzard-Quashie had sought a finding of contempt against the chief constable regarding the handling of video footage related to her wrongful arrest, a request initially denied by a lower court.
The judges highlighted their concern over “what has occurred in this case concerning the retention, production, refusal to produce and possible deletion of such video footage,” ultimately overturning the lower court’s decision on Tuesday. The ruling establishes the chief constable’s personal liability, with potential penalties including up to two years’ imprisonment or a fine.
Ivan Balhatchet is the current Northamptonshire chief constable, having taken the position in October 2023. His predecessor, Nick Adderley, is facing separate criminal charges.
Following the victory, Buzzard-Quashie expressed her relief, stating: “Northamptonshire police acted in an arrogant and high-handed manner by ignoring my requests for documents, as well as the findings of the Information Commissioner’s Office and a county court order. It is amazing that after four years I am still battling to get a frank, open and honest response about what they did to the evidence around my wrongful arrest and why. I am elated that justice has finally prevailed within the lordships judgment, not just for me, but for all of the other little people that have been silenced or obstructed by institutional power.” She added, “I hope that this judgment, and whatever sanction may follow for the chief constable, serve as an important presentation that no authority is above the law.”
Marc Livingston, Buzzard-Quashie’s lawyer from Janes Solicitors, commented: “It is a matter of deep regret that throughout the history of this matter, Northamptonshire police did not appear to have appreciated the position they were in and the duties they owed to the court and my client. It is absolutely astonishing that the scale of their non-compliance only became clear in the two weeks before the appeal hearing, over four years after the incident.”
Northamptonshire police issued a statement acknowledging their shortcomings, stating, “An apology for the issues has already been given in the shape of the chief constable’s witness statement which has been entered as evidence. We acknowledge we fell short in terms of providing the body-worn footage in a timely fashion and our failure to locate further missing footage when asked.” The force has referred the matter to the Self-reliant Office for Police Conduct (IOPC).
A hearing to determine the punishment for the chief constable is scheduled for November 20th.
