Misconduct Committee ‘must reject itself’, says lawyer for suspended police chief

A misconduct hearing committee must exclude itself from the hearing, said the lawyer for a suspended police chief accused of telling “enormous lies” about his naval history.

Matthew Holdcroft, representing Nick Adderley of Northamptonshire Police, accused the panel’s chairman of being “determined” about his client’s honesty and said members of the public had expressed to him that the hearing was not being conducted “fairly”.

Legally qualified chairman Callum Cowx has served in the Royal Navy, Army and police – a fact that had worried Mr Adderley when he was appointed to chair the hearing, Mr Holdcroft said as he moved a motion to recuse the entire three-person panel, which also includes former police officer Andy Cooke and independent member James Maund.

The request came after Mr Cowx raised several concerns on Friday morning about the claims Mr Adderley allegedly made based on his own experience and knowledge of the Navy.

John Beggs KC, representing the Office of the Northamptonshire Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner (OPFCC), told Tuesday’s hearing that Mr Adderley had “built a military naval legend” by telling people he had served in the Royal Navy for 10 years when in fact it was only two years, and appeared to include his service in the Sea Cadets from the age of 10.

He is also said to have claimed to be a veteran of the Falklands War, even though he was only 15 years old when it began in April 1982. He is also said to have attended the prestigious Britannia Royal Naval College for four years, even though his application was rejected.

He also claimed to have been on active duty during his Navy career, to have served as a military negotiator in Haiti despite never having visited the country, and to have been a “commander or lieutenant” despite only having attained the rank of able seaman.

Mr Cowx pointed out that Mr Adderley could not have joined the Sea Cadets until he was 12 years old and that, according to his own CV, he did not meet the academic requirements to attend the world-famous naval school.

He also highlighted problems with Mr Adderley’s claim that he had “shown leadership” and received recognition for helping to recover a ditched Sea King helicopter using a winch on HMS Invincible and for tying down a stricken Italian frigate. He said an able seaman would “under no circumstances” be trusted with such duties.

Mr Cowx added: ‘When asked to give further examples of his naval career, Mr Adderley said he had been responsible for the armoury and security of HMS Cochrane.

“He may have been employed in the armory and entrusted with general security duties, but in my experience it is contradictory that such a junior figure would be responsible for the armory where their weapons are stored and the security of the base.”

Mr Holdcroft said anyone listening to the chairman’s arguments would have to assume that he “held the view that Mr Adderley was dishonest” and therefore the hearing had not been fair.

He said: “You have explained in detail the reasons why you hold these views and why you will not be dissuaded from them.

“There is evidence to suggest that this is not a steep hill that I would have to climb to convince you of his honesty, but a bare rock face.

“It is unprecedented in my career that members of the public present have come to me to express their view that you are not conducting this process fairly.

“This is the strongest indication that an unbiased and informed observer would conclude that the court was biased.

“From the outset, Mr Adderley was concerned about your appointment given the obvious overlap of your careers in the Navy, Army and Police.

“Concerns have been raised that it seems unlikely that an independent, legally qualified chair would be randomly selected and entrusted with a case that has such a large overlap with their own experience.

“Unfortunately, I find myself in a position where I must ask the committee to abstain from making a decision.”

Addressing Mr Cowx, Mr Beggs said the panel must be aware of the reality that the intense efforts to remove you are based on the fear that you might bring very useful expertise.

He said: “This is the second or third attempt to get rid of you. Mr. Adderley does not want anyone who has more expertise than the prosecutor.”

“If this case is proven, it will inevitably end Mr Adderley’s career.

“It is inconceivable that a police officer, especially a senior officer, who has repeatedly lied in order to visually improve his length of service, could receive any sanction other than summary dismissal.”

He added: “It is a well-known tactic in the legal profession to repeatedly attack members of the tribunal. This is aimed either at derailing the proceedings in order to delay the evil day or, more maliciously, at undermining and intimidating the person being attacked into bending over backwards and demonstrating that they observe the opposite.

“We invite you not to be intimidated.”

Mr Cowx said the panel would take as much time as necessary to consider the motion to dismiss before making a decision.

The misconduct hearing was adjourned until June 20 to allow representations to be made on the matter and for the Independent Office for Police Misconduct to make further attempts to contact two authors mentioned at Thursday’s hearing.