A Police Ombudsman investigation has found no evidence to support allegations of serious sexual assault made against a police officer by a female on 22 June 2010.
The woman (Witness A) telephoned the officer (Officer A) on that date to allege that he had sexually assaulted her while on duty on 4 June 2010, and again on 16 June 2010.
The alleged offences had taken place at a police custody office, which Woman A had attended in order to be interviewed about an allegation of harassment which had been made against her.
Having received the phone call from Witness A, Officer A immediately informed his Sergeant about the allegations. The Sergeant then referred the matter to the Police Ombudsman's on call Senior Investigating Officer, who initiated an investigation.
Witness A was subsequently interviewed by specially trained Police Ombudsman investigators. She told them that on 4 June 2010 she had been arrested at her home by Officer A and taken to a police custody office where she was to be interviewed about the allegations against her.
Witness A claimed that as she was waiting for her solicitor to arrive, Officer A took her to one of the interview rooms where he subjected her to a serious sexual assault. She said no violence or threats had been used by Officer A, but said that the sexual acts had taken place against her will.
Witness A also claimed that when she attended the same custody office on 16 June for further questioning, Officer A took her to cell where he again sexually assaulted her against her will. Again she stated that no violence or threats had been made against her.
She added, however, that shortly before the second incident her husband had called her on her mobile and he had recorded the alleged assault taking place.
Witness A's solicitor then arrived and she was interviewed by Officer A about the harassment allegations against her. Witness A made no immediate complaint to her solicitor about the alleged assault.
On 22 June 2010, Witness A and her family left Northern Ireland to move to another part of the UK. Whilst at a ferry port Witness A phoned Officer A and made the sexual assault allegations against him.
Once the matter had been referred to the Police Ombudsman's Office, investigators conducted a forensic examination of the entire custody suite in which the alleged offences had occurred (Witness A could not specify exactly where they had happened).
CCTV footage showing Witness A arriving and leaving the custody suite was also recovered, but there was no footage from within the suite itself.
Investigators also attempted to retrieve the clothes Witness A had been wearing at the time of the alleged sexual assaults, but she said they had been disposed of at a local waste collection centre. Attempts were made to recover them, but these were unsuccessful.
Officer A's police uniform was seized and submitted for forensic examination. This produced no evidence to support the allegations made by Witness A.
The mobile phones used by Witness A and Officer A were also seized, and the alleged recording of the assault made by Witness A's husband was examined, but again these enquiries produced no evidence to support the allegations.
Police Ombudsman investigators also identified and interviewed witnesses who had been at the custody suite at the times referred to by Witness A. These included custody officers, civilian detention officers, solicitors and others. None of these enquiries produced evidence in support of Witness A's allegations.
When interviewed, Officer A strenuously denied the allegations and stated that his only contact with Witness A had been in a professional capacity.
Other police officers who had had dealings with Witness A after 4 June 2010 were interviewed, and they stated that Witness A had told them that her husband believed she was having an affair with Officer A.
On 7 September 2010, Witness A contacted the Police Ombudsman's Office and withdrew the allegations she had made against Officer A.
Having reviewed all the evidence, the Police Ombudsman concluded that Officer A's dealings with Witness A on 4 and 16 June 2010 had been entirely appropriate, and determined that the evidence did not support either criminal or misconduct action against him.
The Public Prosecution Service (PPS) directed on 15 October 2010 that Officer A should not be prosecuted. The PPS Prosecutor said there was no evidence to support the allegations, and indeed there was considerable evidence to detract from the allegations and support Officer A's version of events.
The Police Ombudsman, in a report to the Minister of Justice, the Chief Constable and the Policing Board, recognised the stress that the allegations would have caused Officer A , but noted that the fact they had been properly reported had facilitated the independent investigation which cleared him of any wrongdoing.
Officer A has since decided not to pursue any complaint against Witness A.
The Police Ombudsman made one recommendation to the PSNI as a result of the investigation - that the PSNI should continue with its work to install CCTV cameras in all its custody suites. He noted CCTV's value as an evidential tool which protected the rights of both prisoners and police officers.