Page 707 - tmp

A.A. ‐ senior officer who reviews my report) upon the
conclusion of the investigation. As it stands, I see
nothing to prohibit such a referral, should the A.A. think
it appropriate.

As you know, should the A.A. elect not to refer the
matter to the CPS, you would of course have a right of
appeal to the IPCC along those lines.

If you have any questions for me please do let me know.

Kind regards

Jamie Newman | Serious Misconduct Investigation Unit
(SMIU) | Directorate of Professional Standards |

MetPhone 786675 | Telephone 0207 161 6675 | Email
Jamie.newman@met.pnn.police.uk
Address Empress State Building, 22nd Floor, Lillie Road,
London, SW6 1TR
'Setting the bar and upholding standards without fear
or favour’

From: Newman Jamie M ‐ HQ Directorate of
Professional Standards
Sent: 30 June 2017 17:23
To: 'Lorraine Cordell' <lorraine32@blueyonder.co.uk>
Subject: Our meeting today.

Good Afternoon Lorraine,

Thank you for taking the team to meet with this
afternoon, I found our meeting very useful in enabling
me to better understand your complaint.

To confirm, the first thing I shall consider is a referral to
the CPS. I shall begin by examining what consideration
was given to such a referral by the previous investigator,
Jeannette Riley.

Under the legislation that governs police complaints it is
possible to seek guidance from the CPS where there is
an indication that a criminal offence may have been
committed, it is this test that I shall apply.

Leaving the CPS issue aside for a moment and the
possibility of criminal charges, I acknowledge your
request to have sight of the PC Geoghegan’s MG11 and
notebook. Such a disclosure can be made under
Schedule 3 of the Police Reform Act 2002. I shall revisit
this request once the possibility of a CPS referral has
been addressed. However, I fully intend to comply with
such a request, subject to necessary redactions.

Going forward, In addition the your original points of
3685