Skip to main content

ANOTHER RIDGEWELL CONVICTION OVERTURNED - THE LONG SHADOW OF A DARK HISTORY

 

For me history is a nice and safe hobby.  Sitting in warm archives wading through documents is a good way a, mostly, unemployed person can keep out of the way.  It helps that my areas of interest are niche and largely unimportant to most people.  But, history has a habit of invading the present and, moreover, what is history to some people is unfinished business to others.  To understand the past one sometimes has to step into the present day.

I have written several times about the case of Derek RIDGEWELL.  He was, as most people now know, a corrupt British Transport Police officer who died in prison in 1982.  He was imprisoned for theft and associated offences from the Bricklayers Arms goods depot in south London.  He was associated with organised crime and, throughout the 1970s, regularly targeted innocent men and ‘fitted them up’ for offences of which they were entirely innocent.  RIDGEWELL was a racist, a thug and a perjurer.  Not all of his victims were black but he was quick to exploit the overt racism which was a hallmark of society in the period. 

This week some of his victims (or rather their children as they have since died) saw the Court of Appeal overturn convictions based on his fabricated evidence at Bricklayers Arms.  This may be the last case in his long chronology of corruption as it arose in the final phase of his career.

RIDGEWELL’s crimes all took place a long time ago. “ The police service is different now”.  “Things have moved on”.  These are phrases I have heard many times in discussions with serving and retired police officers.  I always urge them to the testimony of his victims and, even more so, to their families, about the long term consequences of the convictions that still cast a shadow today.

I am also often reminded that most police officers in the 1970s were honest and hardworking.  This is true.  In BTP officers were facing a dramatic rise in violent crime with few resources.  They were poorly paid and not at all appreciated by the government, the courts or even the general public.  To question the way corruption was handled at the time should not tarnish those who were a force for good.  Many serious criminals were convicted at great personal risk and in most cases justice was done, often against the odds.

Unfortunately the legacy of these officers, and indeed of the organisation, is potentially harmed both by the crimes of officers such as Ridgewell but also by the failure of the organisation to deal with them.  This failure started in the early 1970s when one of his cases was thrown out of court (he had arrested two Jesuit students as they travelled on the tube) followed by a BBC Nationwide programme which highlighted the corruption that led to the acquittal.  In fact RIDGEWELL was never charged with any offence relating to his regular perversions of justice.    Nor was anyone else,  and herein lies a problem.  Decades have past but a review of RIDGEWELL’s cases did not take place until well into this century.  However some individuals who had given evidence at the original trials were still alive even then. I have no inside knowledge of the investigations that have taken place within the BTP but I do know that investigators would have been hampered by BTP’s poor record keeping.  Files and correspondence were not kept.  Virtually no files survive from the period.  This was not a conspiracy.  There is no advantage to the modern incarnation of BTP to indulge in a continuing cover up.   But I am left with some questions about the police review of the convictions that were/are potentially unsafe:

1.       How did the review miss the Bricklayers Arms case that has just been quashed by the Court of Appeal?  It is the work of minutes to find this case in the British Transport Police Journal – a fully digitised publication copies of which are held by BTP.

2.       What attempts were made to interview RIDGEWELL’s associates and colleagues?  At the time of the first successful appeal (2018) there were plenty of potential witnesses. 

3.       Did the force employ the services of a forensic or academic historian?  Using archives and historical sources are not skills taught to detectives.  Experience from investigations of the ‘troubles’ in Northern Ireland and other events on the mainland have shown the advantages that come from using experts who understand the context of policing in the 1970s.  It is worth remembering that it was the volunteers of the British Transport Police History group (BTPHG) that found paperwork relating to one of the original trials and located HR information about RIDGEWELL’s career.  The Group also searched through the BTP Journal at the request of the Criminal Cases Review Commission.  Historians, even amateur ones, are comfortable with documentation from the past.

4.       When did BTP access RIDGEWELL’s Will – a public document?  The Will makes reference to the “contents and all correspondence personal and otherwise, of my safety deposit box”.  Were BTP able to track down this correspondence?

5.       Did the force make use of contemporary newspapers to find other cases that featured RIDGEWELL?  An easy task using modern databases.

6.       Will BTP and other police forces learn from the process of reviewing old cases of police corruption?

I have no right to know the answers to these questions.  Investigations have to be conducted in a confidential manner, but I am curious.   In due course papers will be revealed to historians.

There is a background issue here.  The police service has a culture that is largely contemptuous of the suggestion that anything that happened more than a decade ago can be relevant.  This is one of the reasons that the police are so bad at learning the operational lessons of past incidents.  To the modern service everything is new.  Every time it repeats the mistakes of the past Chief Officers don sackcloth and ashes and proclaim loudly that lessons will be learned.  A telling phrase one hears in working with police officers is ‘…that’s before my time’, it is as if relevance can be measured only with a personal stopwatch. 

There is an aspect of this that troubles me greatly.  RIDGEWELL did not act alone in any of the cases that involved fitting up innocent people.  Two other officers were convicted with him when he was eventually caught stealing.  But these were not the only officers who supported his criminal conspiracies and who lied on oath.  It is important to remember that the cases that have been overturned in the last five years did not involve officers exaggerating what they saw or heard.  These were not examples of ‘gilding the lily’ or of ‘noble cause corruption’.  These prosecutions were a work of complete fiction.  Innocent people were seized and imprisoned by police officers who exercised their powers for their own purposes.  In the process these men were dehumanised by  people who were supposed to uphold the law.  I don’t think I know a police officer capable of such conduct – that they existed (and may still exist) shakes my belief in the system that gave me employment for most of my adult life.  History teaches us that crime, including crime committed by police officers, does not occur in a vacuum.  Systems matter and so does culture.

In response to the latest case BTP issued a rather clunky press release.  It starts by repeating an apology to the British African community for the trauma suffered because of RIDGEWELL’s actions.  While RIDGEWELL was a racist not all of his victims were black or would identify as British African.  This was the subject of critical comment from the families of the those convicted in the Bricklayers Arms case.  The Press Release also mentions the funding of a bursary for a British African Youth to study law.  This did not show a great deal of sensitivity to the ethnic background of the Bricklayers Arms victims.    I have previously welcomed the prospect of a bursary.  It is a powerful symbol that RIDGEWELL’s targeting of the black community in London has not been forgotten but his offending did also touch other groups and this needs to be acknowledged.

As is to be expected the press have run many articles this week, covering the background and the human interest angles of what happened and how it has blighted the lives of many.  Unfortunately some in the right leaning press have alighted on the creation of the bursary and the content of the press release and have made this the main story.  Hijacking an injustice to produce ammunition for the manufactured concept of a ‘culture war’ is pretty poor journalism.  The Spectator, The Daily Telegraph and the Daily Mail have indulged themselves in a field day of righteous indignation without making any suggestions about how best to confront the wrongs of the past – or indeed the relationship between past misconduct and that which can still be found in policing.  I made the mistake of reading the public comments on the article that appeared in the Daily Mail on line.  It will be a while before I recover my faith in the British public.

In my study of the history of policing the railway there are plenty of examples of misconduct.  I sometimes blog about them and I know that they are reflection of the wider police service.  But the corruption revealed by the RIDGEWELL case is on an entirely different level to everything else I have seen.  For many years BTP officers were so embarrassed by his crimes that they were rarely mentioned.  However it is time for all of us to acknowledge what happened.  Police history isn’t just about the bravery,  dedication and  detective skills of the last 150 years. Police historians must not ignore the darker parts of what has gone before.  We, together with serving officers, must confront the past and in doing so we contribute to justice itself.

     

Phil Trendall

Jan 2024

 

NOTES

(i)                  In other posts I often point out the skewed development of the constitutional and legal position of BTP and its railway/dock police ancestors.  I find it ironic that if RIDGEWELL were alive today he would not be placed on the College of Policing Barred List, despite his crimes and his inevitable dismissal.  BTP, which features heavily in the caselaw on police misconduct (in a positive way),  is not included in the regulations designed to prevent wrongdoers being re-employed by other police forces.  Hopefully this will change soon.

(ii)                 https://www.btp.police.uk/news/btp/news/in-the-courts/statement-regarding-decision-in-court-of-appeal-today/

(iii)               https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/25/i-just-went-bent-how-britains-most-corrupt-cop-ruined-countless-lives

(iv)               https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68017926

(v)                 Note at the time of writing the full text of the Court of Appeal Judgement is not available.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Give me a firm place to stand.........

  Is policing better today than it was 50 years ago?   Is this even a valid question?   My answer to both is   straightforward: ‘I don’t know’.   I suspect that most things are better and some things have declined but generally it is the sort of question that can take up a lot of time and enough hot air to power a dirigible.   I really DON’T want to start a debate on this because what concerns me most is my own shifting perspective.   As a grumpy git I find the sight of scruffy police officers looking bored and staring at their telephones really annoying.   I don’t understand why wearing a traditional helmet is so difficult and I don’t like the rather lightweight approach to discipline.   On the other hand my professional dealings with police officers show me that modern officers are bright, caring, thoughtful and determined to do the right thing.   As events demonstrate there is no shortage of brave people in today’s service. The horrors of racism and misogyny still haunt the service

Law and History 2: JUST THE SAME AS OTHER FORCES?

  Reading through this before posting makes me fear that it is not historical enough for this blog and trespasses into contemporary issues.   So be it.   But I do feel it necessary to remind readers that this blog does NOT represent the view of the BTPHG.   These ramblings are mine alone. It is rarely accurate to say that history repeats itself, but it is true that somethings that we think are settled in the past return to challenge us again. When I was a serving police officer in BTP I saw a steady evolution in the status of the force.   The achievements of officers, particularly in facing the ‘decade of disasters’ (1980s) and the acknowledged expertise of BTP in dealing with certain classes of activity (terrorism, theft person, theft of goods in transit, major incident response, football disorder etc) all led to an increasing recognition that BTP was an equal member of the police family.   In concrete terms this had been marked by the recommendation of the Wright Committee into the

Police Review & Parade Gossip 1902/3

  I have, at long last, returned to my project of searching early editions of Police Review & Parade Gossip for items relating to the Rail, Dock and Canal (RDC) Policing.   I have run into a couple of years where the index (which was compiled at the end of end calendar year) is missing which means I have had no choice but to go through every page of every edition.   Police Review was a weekly publication that described itself as ‘The Organ of the British Constabulary’.   It provides a valuable insight into the issues that concerned police officers and the public. So, what were the big questions of the early Edwardian period?   Well, questions of law make a frequent appearance together with operational demands.   The delay to the Coronation of Edward VII in 1902 (he was ill) led to a lot of operational angst.   Even today mutual aid brings challenges but imagine what it was like when there were 243 forces (i) covering England, Scotland and Wales.   Assaults on officers were at a v