Monday 23 May 2016

UK Police Removed Over Charges Of Bribery During Ibori’s Investigation

Ex-Metropolitan detective John McDonald has been accused in court and in legal papers of corruption
Former governor of Delta state James Ibori was convicted in 2012 on charges of money laundering in the United Kingdom.
Evidence to suggest that there could have been a cover-up in the 2012 conviction of Chief James Ibori, a former governor of Delta State, by a United Kingdom court emerged at the weekend.
A police officer has been indicted and removed from the UK anti-corruption agency, following evidence that he received payment for information about the case, according to BBC report.

The new twist in the case is that John McDonald, the detective sergeant with the United Kingdom (UK), Metropolitan Police, who headed the investigation, is being investigated by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) for allegedly receiving money in exchange for information on the Ibori case.

McDonald, who had been on secondment to the National Crime Agency’s International Corruption Unit, has been removed from the position and sent back to the Metropolitan Police, where a review of his status has been initiated against him, after the CPS said it had intelligence, which “supports the assertion” that a Metropolitan Police officer was paid for information.

Since Ibori’s conviction, defence lawyers have claimed the CPS “wilfully misled” judges about the existence of evidence that Det Sgt McDonald took money in return for information about the case.

If this is the case, Ibori’s legal team would seek to have its client’s conviction overturned by the Court of Appeal on the basis that there had been abuse of the process. 
At a hearing last Thursday, Ibori’s lawyer, Ivan Krolic, said prosecutors had consistently and deliberately manipulated the system.

“Our argument is that the whole process is infected,” he told Southwark Crown Court. The CPS, which had earlier denied claims that it did not hand over all key evidence in the case, has, however, issued a statement confirming that a review is under way into aspects of the Ibori case.

“The CPS undertook to review aspects of the disclosure related to this case. Initial results have found that material exists to support the assertion that a police officer received payment in return for disclosing information about the investigation. 
“We are working to establish whether this material could or should have been disclosed earlier.
“Any further material that fails to be disclosed as a result of that continuing review will be done so as soon as possible,” the statement said.
Before Ibori was sentenced, there were claims that police investigating him had received thousands of pounds from private detectives he hired.

An anonymous bundle of documents were reportedly sent to the Metropolitan Police, the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) and others. 
Among the papers were what purported to be invoices detailing payments of thousands of pounds to a “source for information provided” and claims that the recipient was a police officer.

The allegations were eventually investigated by Scotland Yard’s Directorate of Professional Standards (DPS), the division responsible for rooting out police corruption in the Met.

The DPS concluded the invoices were forgeries and “no misconduct was identified” in the case of Det Sgt McDonald. 
Last week, a letter was sent by the CPS to the Court of Appeal alerting judges on previously undisclosed and relevant documentation.

“There exists intelligence that supports the assertion that, on or about 10 September 2007, JMD (Det Sgt John McDonald) received payment in return for information in respect of the Ibori case,” the letter said.

Following the disclosure by the CPS, the National Crime Agency, which investigates serious organised crime, said it was agreed that Det Sgt McDonald’s secondment to the International Corruption Unit should come to an end and he would return to Scotland Yard.

Scotland Yard confirmed that an officer was returning from the National Crime Agency, but said that the unnamed officer “is subject to an internal review of their status”.

1 comment: