We haven't been able to take payment
You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Act now to keep your subscription
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Your subscription is due to terminate
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account, otherwise your subscription will terminate.

Met and CPS apologise to Liam Allan over collapsed rape trial

Liam Allan with his mother Lorraine after the case against him collapsed
Liam Allan with his mother Lorraine after the case against him collapsed
BEN GURR FOR THE TIMES

The Metropolitan police and Crown Prosecution Service have apologised to an innocent student who was wrongly prosecuted for rape after errors and a lack of knowledge.

Liam Allan, 22, was brought to trial because a detective denied that the alleged victim’s mobile phone contained evidence proving that she had lied, a review of the case found today.

He spent almost two years on bail and three days in the dock at Croydon crown court before his trial was halted last month after police finally handed over the crucial evidence.

The failure to disclose evidence has prompted a review by the CPS of all rape and serious sexual offence cases in England and Wales.

A joint review of the investigation by the Met and CPS published today said that there was no evidence that the mobile phone messages were withheld deliberately.

Advertisement

It blamed a “combination of error, lack of challenge, and lack of knowledge”.

The report reveals that Detective Constable Mark Azariah, the officer in charge of the investigation, had assured a senior officer and prosecutors that the 57,000 text and social media messages from woman’s mobile telephone contained nothing relevant to the case.

Commander Richard Smith, who oversees all Met rape investigations, said that he had personally apologised yesterday to Mr Allan, a criminology student from Beckenham, southeast London.

“It is clear from our review that both the Met and the CPS did not carry out disclosure procedures properly in this case,” he said. “Although we are confident there was no malicious intent in this case, it was important that we carried out this urgent review and learn lessons from it.

“Those lessons will now be adopted across not only the sexual offences teams but across the Met. There are important lessons for us to learn from this case. Equally, there are important lessons for the criminal justice system.”

Advertisement

Mr Allan’s defence lawyers had asked the CPS last June for any text and social media messages from the alleged victim’s telephone relating to their relationship.

The review found that Mr Azariah had not carried out a wider check of social media and had refused the defence request, saying that it was not “proportionate or necessary”.

Commander Smith said that Mr Azariah would not face any disciplinary action

“The officer is unable to explain why he failed to make a record of the searches [of the messages] conducted,” he said.

Commander Smith said that there was no evidence that the woman who made the false allegations against Mr Allan had committed any criminal offence.

Advertisement

An extra 120 officers have been allocated to review all 600 rapes cases currently awaiting trial in London. The CPS has allocated 11 lawyers to the review.

Commander Smith admitted that caseloads for officers investigating rape cases were “higher than we want them to be” but denied that there was a shortage of funding.

The review recommends disclosure training for police officers and the appointment of “disclosure champions” in the CPS.

Claire Lindley, chief crown prosecutor for south London, said that she knew that there had been “issues” with some of the other cases already reviewed.

“My view is that the cases we are seeing show we are not making decisions quickly enough when material come to light,” she said.

Advertisement

Asked if innocent people could have been jailed because of disclosure failures, she replied: “If any defendant feels they are wrongly convicted they must appeal in the normal way.”

Ms Lindley said that Mr Allan’s cases had “highlighted some systemic and deep-rooted issues that have been apparent to those working in the criminal justice system for some time”.

She added: “The prosecutors involved in this case did not sufficiently challenge the police about digital material. That meant that it took longer than was necessary to drop Mr Allan’s case. It is vital that lessons are learnt from this case and others which have come to light over recent weeks where disclosure obligations have not been met.

“It is incumbent on all parties in the criminal justice system to ensure that these issues are addressed, and we have been working with our partners since last summer on a range of measures designed to improve performance in this crucial area.”