Chief constable admits weaknesses in Huntley vetting
Vetting systems at Cambridgeshire Police had “weaknesses” and “shortcomings” at the time Ian Huntley was being checked, its chief constable admitted today.
Tom Lloyd apologised for two errors by his staff during the vetting of Huntley before he was cleared to work as a school caretaker.
And he stressed again that it was now “more likely than not” that Humberside Police, which dealt with sex allegations in Huntley’s past, was never asked to vet him.
The admissions came in written submissions to the Bichard Inquiry, published as Mr Lloyd began his live evidence at the London hearings.
Mr Lloyd revealed that an internal report had been critical of the force’s vetting system.
It was his force that gave Huntley the all-clear to work at Soham Village College just months before he murdered Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman in August 2002.
Holly’s parents, Kevin and Nicola Wells, were at the inquiry to hear Mr Lloyd explain his force’s shortcomings.
Mr Wells has revealed it was “soul destroying” when he discovered Huntley had nine sex allegation against him in the 1990s but they never emerged in the vetting checks.
His comments came in an ITV television interview to be broadcast tonight.
In his statement, Mr Lloyd said his force was asked to vet Huntley for a job at Soham Village College in December 2001, when he was deputy chief constable.
He said the force’s vetting unit, the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB), was under his command.
He admitted one of his staff, Stephen Barnes, entered Huntley’s date of birth incorrectly on to the Child Access database.
He also said a Police National Computer operator, Jacqueline Giddings, failed to check the name Huntley and only his alias Nixon.
The chief constable said: “I apologise for these errors.”
In a second statement, he revealed that an internal investigation, which he commissioned, highlighted weaknesses in the checking system.
The report, carried out by Detective Chief Inspector Gary Ingrey, says operators worked in varied ways and there was a lack of ability to audit what checks had been conducted.
There were also “shortcomings in the supervision and management of Cambridgeshire CRB at that time”.
Mr Lloyd said he accepted the broad thrust of the conclusions but did not “always agree with the tone and language he has used”.
He also said that the weaknesses have now been eradicated.
Humberside handled a string of sex allegations against Huntley in the 1990s, including four suspected rapes.
But it is clear that even if a request had been sent, Humberside would not have had any records because of flaws in their intelligence handling.
Mr Lloyd said in his statement: “Either way, the Cambridgeshire system was in error and I take no comfort from the fact that no trace would have been revealed.”
