Letter from Dr Alan Billings, Police and Crime Commissioner for South Yorkshire,
to the Chair of the Committee, 20 February 2015

Re: Independent review into the disclosure of information to the BBC by South Yorkshire Police

I refer to the meeting of the Home Affairs Select Committee on the 2nd September 2014 when the above matter was considered, and a letter  dated 20 August 2014 from Shaun Wright, the former Police and Crime Commissioner for South Yorkshire which referred to an independent review he had commissioner.

I now attach a copy of the review report from Mr Trotter which we have been asked to release under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, and which will be released today.

Mr Andy Trotter OBE QPM was asked to examine and comment on the extent to which national guidance applied in the particular set of circumstances surrounding this situation, whether such guidance was followed, and whether any lessons should be learned by South Yorkshire Police from what occurred.

It is very clear that some errors of judgement took place within the chronology of events which led to the disclosure of information to the BBC. However, I understand from Mr Trotter's findings, that the actions on the part of South Yorkshire Police were motivated solely by the desire to protect the integrity of the investigation.

The Chief Constable has assured me that the recommendations in Mr Trotter's report that relate to South Yorkshire Police were all implemented by the Force some months' ago.

In addition, Mr Trotter recommended that the College of Policing review its own media guidance in light of the issues raised, and my office was in contact with the College of Policing last year in this regard.

I hope that my update on this situation is helpful to you, and please do not hesitate to contact me if you wish to discuss the matter further.

Yours sincerely,

Dr Alan Billings

Police and Crime Commissioner for South Yorkshire

AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW COMMISSIONED BY

THE POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER FOR SOUTH YORKSHIRE INTO THE DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION TO THE BBC

1.        TERMS OF REFERENCE

Mr Andy Trotter is commissioned by the Police and Crime Commissioner for South Yorkshire to conduct an independent review into South Yorkshire Police's contact with the media and decision-making, leading up to the disclosure of information to Dan Johnson, a BBC journalist, on 13 August 2014 about a planned search on Thursday 14 August 2014 of residential premises in Sunningdale, Berkshire, belonging to Sir Cliff Richard (Mr Harry Webb).

Mr Trotter is asked in particular to review contact with the media between 14 July 2014 and 14 August 2014, and comment on the extent to which national guidance applies in this particular set of circumstances, whether such guidance was followed, and whether any lessons may be learnt by South Yorkshire Police from what occurred.

NOTE: The BBC acknowledged publicly on 15 August 2014 that the source of the information provided to the BBC journalist (who had made contact with South Yorkshire Police on 14 July 2014 and following this date), was not South Yorkshire Police.

2.        SCOPE OF REVIEW

On 28 August 2014 I met Shaun Wright, then the South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner, and agreed the terms of reference (above) for my review.

I have read the bundle of supporting papers supplied by South Yorkshire Police (SYP) and I have viewed, and read the transcripts of, the Home Affairs Select Committee (HASC) appearance of the Chief Constable David Crompton as well as the BBC's Director General Lord Hall, James Harding, Director of News and Jonathon Munro, Director of Newsgathering. I have spoken to senior staff from the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), the College of Policing (CoP), the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and the

Association of Police Communicators.

I have interviewed the following staff from SYP:

•          Head of Communications Carrie Goodwin

•          Detective Superintendent Matt Fenwick, Senior Investigating Officer

•         Assistant Chief Constable (Protective Services) Jo Byrne

•          Deputy Chief Constable Andy Holt

•          Chief Constable David Crompton.

3.      CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS

3.1   South Yorkshire Police investigation

Between March and June 2014 there had been discussions between the MPS Operation Yewtree team and SYP before an agreement was reached on 2 July 2014 that

the investigation into Sir Cliff Richard by SYP was ready to proceed. The alleged offence had occurred in Sheffield in the 1980s. Detective Superintendent Matt Fenwick was appointed Senior Investigating Officer under the command of Jo Byrne, Assistant Chief Constable (Protective Services).

3.2   Phone call from Dan Johnson

On 14 July 2014 Carrie Goodwin, the Head of Communications for SYP, received a phone call from Dan Johnson, a regional correspondent for the BBC, who told her he wanted to discuss four matters with her including an investigation into Sir Cliff Richard. According to Carrie Goodwin, Dan Johnson told her that he had information that SYP were investigating Sir Cliff Richard and that he knew a considerable amount of detail concerning the allegation. She firmly maintains that he told her in the phone call that he had obtained the information from a source in Operation Yewtree and that he was in a position to broadcast the story.

3.3   Meeting with Dan Johnson

A meeting was arranged for the following day, 15 July 2014, at SYP HQ between Carrie Goodwin, Detective Superintendent Matt Fenwick and Dan Johnson. According to Carrie Goodwin and Matt Fenwick, Dan Johnson reiterated that he had obtained information about the SYP investigation into Sir Cliff Richard from a source in Operation Yewtree and that he was in a position to proceed with the story. Carrie Goodwin and Matt Fenwick were concerned that if the BBC broadcast the story before a search of Sir Cliff Richard's UK residence took place then evidence could be lost. It was agreed by Carrie Goodwin and Matt Fenwick that SYP would inform Dan Johnson of the date and location of the search if he would not publish the story before the execution of the warrant. At that meeting it was confirmed to Dan Johnson that the information he had was broadly correct. The location of the search was not known at that time.

3.4   Meeting between the Chief Constable and Carrie Goodwin

On 15 July 2015 Carrie Goodwin met with the Chef Constable (CC) after her meeting with Dan Johnson. She informed him of Dan Johnson's knowledge of the investigation and the agreement that had been reached. They discussed the College of Policing Guidance On Relationships with the Media [to be referred hereafter as the 'CoP Guidance'] and they discussed the options available to them. They agreed that Dan Johnson would not accompany SYP on the search but that he would be told when it was taking place.

3.5   The Search

On 6 August 2014 the address of Sir Cliff Richard was confirmed and the next day a search warrant was obtained for the property in Berkshire. As part of the agreement with SYP, Dan Johnson was informed at 1635hrs on 13 August 2014 that the search would take place the following morning. Dan Johnson drove overnight from Cumbria, arriving early on 14 August 2014. The search was filmed from the outside of the premises and the BBC deployed a helicopter to film from above.

SYP put out press releases explaining the purpose of the search and giving details of the offence that was being investigated (See Appendix A). Matt Fenwick also read out two.of these press statements outside SYP HQ on 14 August 2014.

The search resulted in considerable publicity as well as criticism from other media outlets that SYP had 'done a deal' with the BBC.

3.6   Aftermath of the search

The BBC's website carried an article from their crime correspondent Danny Shaw claiming that SYP had been seeking to maximise publicity by allowing the media to be being present at the search. This prompted increasingly heated exchanges between SYP and the BBC, resulting in a letter of complaint from the SYP Chief Constable David Crompton to the BBC. The BBC agreed to tweet that SYP was not the source of their original information.

Sir Cliff Richard issued a statement in which he said: "The police attended my apartment in Berkshire today without notice, except it would appear to the press."

Dan Johnson attended SYP HQ on 15 August 2014 where, according to Matt Fenwick, the two of them had a brief conversation during which Dan Johnson denied ever saying that his source was Yewtree. Matt Fenwick said he terminated the conversation at that point.

SYP received a number of complaints about the press being present at the search as well as a lot of criticism on social media. The Chief Constable and the BBC were summoned to HASC and appeared on 2 September 2014. During that appearance the BBC representatives denied that Dan Johnson had said that his information came from Operation Yewtree. The Director General Lord Hall also stated that had SYP told him that one of his journalists had threatened to broadcast details which would have interfered with the investigation, the BBC would not have run the story.

4.              REVIEW FINDINGS

4.1 Decision to cooperate

At the core of this report was the decision by SYP to cooperate with the BBC. This decision was taken at the meeting between Dan Johnson, Carrie Goodwin and Matt Fenwick on 15 July 2014. It was clearly the view of Carrie Goodwin and Matt Fenwick that failure to

cooperate with the BBC could lead to the premature release of information from the BBC, and the potential loss of evidence from the search. They strongly believed Dan Johnson had a very reliable source and could proceed with his story at any time. Everything that followed was a result of that view.

4.2   The risk of BBC broadcasting the story

From my interviews with Carrie Goodwin and Matt Fenwick, they state that Dan Johnson claimed to have got his information from Operation Yewtree, which they believed he had as much knowledge of the case as they did and that he was ready to run the story. It is my view that even if Dan Johnson had a credible source he would not have been able to name that source in any broadcast, as any leak from a public servant would be a disciplinary or criminal offence. He would only have been able to refer to an unnamed source. He could of course have obtained his information from sources other than Yewtree, but in the absence of any further investigation by the BBC he still would not have had any corroborating evidence to support his story. I consider it unlikely that the BBC would have run the story on the strength of an alleged leak alone.

During his appearance at HASC Lord Hall was clear that had SYP approached the BBC to ask for the story to be pulled because it would interfere with the investigation, then they would have done so. This was an option that SYP could have pursued, but when questioned by Ian Austin MP at HASC the Chief Constable confirmed that he thought that even if he had approached the BBC there was a risk that they could have gone ahead with the story in any case. (See HASC Q22).

4.3   Why did Dan Johnson approach SYP?

SYP state that Dan Johnson 'knew as much' as they did. However if, as claimed by the BBC (HASC Q124), Dan Johnson only had a name and nothing else why did he go to SYP rather than the MPS or any other force? Sir Cliff Richard does not live in the area has no connection with SYP other than with this investigation. Operation Yewtree is an MPS operation with some cases farmed out to local forces for investigation.

It is hard to understand why Dan Johnson approached SYP in connection with this case if he only had Sir Cliff Richard's name and no other details. Had the leak come from SYP then that would explain why he went to them, but the BBC have confirmed that SYP was not the source of the leak. There is always the possibility that SYP were to some extent 'conned' by Dan Johnson into revealing more information than he already had, but both

Carrie Godwin and Matt Fenwick are adamant that Dan Johnson knew as much as they did about the case and that he repeatedly named Yewtree as his source during their discussions before the raid.

I have not interviewed Dan Johnson but I have no reason to disbelieve Carrie Goodwin or Matt Fenwick, and their accounts of their meeting with Dan Johnson are supported by their notes. Those notes were written on 17 July 2014, two days after the meeting and would

have benefitted from more detail of the rationale leading to the decision to cooperate (see Recommendation 1). It would be extraordinary for SYP to have agreed to cooperate with Dan Johnson on the basis of a name alone. The suggestion that a journalist could just mention a name of a well-known person to a police head of communications and a senior investigating officer, and get them to reveal details of a highly sensitive and confidential investigation, is not one I believe to be credible.

4.4   Outcome of the decision to cooperate

At the meeting of 15 July 2014 Carrie Goodwin and Matt Fenwick confirmed to Dan Johnson that the facts he had about the Sir Cliff Richard investigation were correct. As a result of that confirmation he now had a story that he could broadcast. He had gone from operating on details arising from a leak, or other source that he could not name, to having a big story confirmed by the police. He was now in a position to use the story because of the confirmation that SYP had given him.

Had there been a media strategy in place for this case, such a scenario could have been envisaged and catered for. It is not unusual for journalists to ring police press offices trying to confirm leaks, or rumours on social media, and there should have been a strategy to deal with this (see Recommendation 2).

4.5   Critical Incident

When Dan Johnson spoke to Carrie Goodwin on the phone on 14 July 2014 and raised with her the SYP investigation into Sir Cliff Richard, the potential damage to the whole of Operation Yewtree from a leak should have been apparent. The threat to the SYP investigation and to Operation Yewtree should have been treated as a critical incident and should have triggered a Gold Group under a Chief Officer to determine the next steps (see Recommendation 3).

4.6   The meeting with Dan Johnson on 15 July 2014.

It was at this meeting that the facts of the investigation were confirmed to Dan Johnson and the agreement reached to inform him of the search. This should not have taken place without prior Chief Officer approval. It was as a result of this meeting that SYP lost control of the confidentiality of the investigation.

4.7   Meeting between Carrie Goodwin and the Chief Constable on 15 July 2014

Carrie Goodwin made the CC aware of what had happened at her meeting with Dan Johnson and they discussed the options open to the force. They have both confirmed that they examined the CoP Guidance and went through their options. The CC agreed that the integrity of the investigation was paramount and he confirmed that Dan Johnson should be informed of the search in order that he did not broadcast his story prior to it. It was agreed

that Dan Johnson would not be given any further details of the investigation nor would he be allowed onto the premises to be searched. While the options were discussed with the CC, the reality was that Dan Johnson already had confirmation of his story and was now in a position to run it. The scenario that SYP were trying to avoid became a reality because of their actions.

While it is helpful for the CC to be easily available to his Head of Communications, it is equally important that there are clear lines of command through Assistant Chief Constables in operational matters before the CC becomes involved in the detail of investigations. A close involvement at too early a stage leaves no room for any further upward referral (see Recommendation 4).

4.7 Press conferences and press statements

After the search Matt Fenwick spoke to the press on two occasions outside SYP HQ and the force issued four press statements, as reproduced in Appendix A.

I have some concerns about the press statements. Firstly, by having a police officer speak to the press, further opportunities were given to the media thus giving the story more substance. Secondly I consider the statements to be unnecessarily detailed. While SYP claim consistently that they have never named Sir Cliff Richard, by releasing details of the search following the BBC coverage, the force in effect confirmed his identity. The statements also contained details of the allegation against Sir Cliff Richard and therefore put in the public domain allegations of which he was not yet aware. Bearing in mind that at this stage Sir Cliff Richard had not been interviewed, let alone arrested, he should not have been informed of the allegations through the media.

The situation was compounded by the 1608hrs statement on

15/7/14 which said: 'Since the search took place a number of people have contacted the police to provide information'. While this statement did not mention 'victims' it may well have given the impression that further allegations had been made. Clearly the force had to · confirm certain facts of the search given the vast publicity it had generated, the inclusion of the details of the allegation and reference to others coming forward were deeply regrettable and avoidable, and could have caused further distress. The operation would have benefited from a post-search media strategy signed off at a senior operational level (see Recommendation 5).

5.  COMPLIANCE WITH COLLEGE OF POLICING GUIDANCE

The CoP Guidance was produced by the ACPO Communications Advisory Group following the Leveson Report and was issued as Authorised Professional Practice in May 2013.

5.1   Identification of Sir Cliff Richard

A key principle of the CoP Guidance is that the police service has a duty to safeguard the confidentiality and integrity of information, which must be balanced against the duty to be open and transparent whenever possible. SYP took the view that the confidentiality of Sir Cliff Richard's identity had already been breached by the leak from Yewtree and that the force's priority was now to protect the investigation.

One objective of the Guidance was to deal with the vexed issue of the naming of people who had been arrested and it was decided that 'the names or identifying details of those who are arrested or suspected of a crime should not be released by police forces to the press or the public'. The guidance provides for exceptions including 'the prevention or detection of crime or a matter of public interest and confidence'. Any decision to name the arrested person 'should be made at Chief Officer level and a record made of the reason'.

SYP claim they did not name Sir Cliff Richard at any time. However by confirming details of the search location in their press statements, following the naming of him by the media covering the search, they effectively identified him to the public. The decision to confirm his details to Dan Johnson on 15 July 2014 was taken at Head of Communications and Senior Investigating Officer level and not at Chief Officer level, as required by the guidance. It

could be argued that as Dan Johnson already had Sir Cliff Richard's name, SYP didn't actually reveal his identity. Carrie Goodwin and Matt Fenwick firmly state that they believed Dan Johnson already had detailed knowledge of the investigation and they were not revealing anything new to him. However, at his brief meeting with Matt Fenwick on the 15 August 2014, and from the BBC's evidence at HASC, Dan Johnson claims never to have mentioned Yewtree and insists he only ever had Sir Cliff Richard's name, and no other details of the investigation.

Whatever was said at the discussions on the 14 and 15 July 2014 by Dan Johnson to SYP, the outcome of cooperating with him was that Sir Cliff Richard's name was in the media along with the details of the allegation against him before he was interviewed or even informed of the enquiry.

5.2   Giving Dan Johnson details of the search

As part of the arrangement to defer the publication of the story by the BBC, Dan Johnson was given the time, date and location of the search at Sir Cliff Richards address. Part 4 of the CoP Guidance deals with exclusives and taking the media on operations. Dan Johnson did not have an exclusive in the sense that he did not bring a previously unknown matter to the police. While he was not taken on the operation by the police or given access to the premises, his camera crew and the BBC helicopter were there because the police had let them know the date, time and location of the search.

According to the CoP Guidance, reasons for taking the media on operations include matters in the public interest, those likely to reassure or inform the public, or to help prevent crime. In my opinion none of those reasons applied in this case.

The guidance states that risks to take into consideration when taking the media on operations include: interference with an individual's privacy, and causing unnecessary distress or harassment to those being investigated. The search at Sir Cliff Richard's apartment, and the nature of the allegation, generated considerable publicity across the world, certainly interfered with his privacy and may well have caused unnecessary distress.

The guidance concludes that it does not provide answers to every situation but sets an approach and an ethos. It would be helpful to revise the guidance to ensure that a situation such as this is catered for (see Recommendation 6).

5.3   SYP and the guidance

It is clear from my discussions with the force that they were conscious of the need to comply with the guidance and there was no intention not to comply. The guidance was discussed in some detail and they compared their actions to it. The rationale set out by SYP turns on their belief that Dan Johnson could broadcast his story at any time and by working with him they could protect the investigation and potentially detect crime.

5.4   Sources of advice

While Carrie Goodwin was looking at the options available to her to deal with the problems she faced with the BBC, she studied the CoP Guidance and McNae's Essential Law for Journalists. There were other places the force could have gone for advice including the Chair of ACPO Communications Advisory Group, the ACPO Head of Communications, the College of Policing Head of Communications, and the Association of Police Communicators. The MPS Directorate of Media and Communications also has considerable experience of dealing with journalists on high profile inquiries. It would have been helpful for the force to take advice before agreeing to cooperate with the BBC. I consider that, had outside advice have been sought, other courses of action would have been considered prior to the irreversible decision SYP took (see Recommendation 3).

6.                  CONCLUSION

6.1  Whatever the motivation and good intentions of those involved from SYP the outcome has been bad publicity for the force, the Chief Constable being summoned to HASC, criticism from the media and politicians, complaints from the public, abuse on social media and a public spat with the BBC. More importantly people have seen a search on Sir Cliff Richards's apartment unfold on television with details of a serious allegation put into the public domain prior to him being interviewed by the police. The force can argue that the search was carried out successfully and there was no interference to the investigation and