Report finds monitoring officer left in "unenviable position" over councillor under police investigation

The monitoring officer at East Devon District Council was placed in “an unenviable position”, when police told him a prominent councillor was under investigation for child sex offences but ordered him not to disclose this.

report by consultancy Verita into the council's reaction concluded that its monitoring officer at the time could not have alerted anyone without breaking confidentiality imposed by the police.

It said there was nothing East Devon could have done so long as it was in the dark as to the offence.

The report is due to be considered at an extraordinary full council meeting today (23 March).

John Humphreys was a Conservative councillor between 2007-19 and after that remained a town councillor in Exmouth. East Devon in 2019 made him an honorary alderman.

In August 2021 Mr Humphreys was found guilty of seven counts of indecent assault and three counts of buggery against two boys aged between 12 and 15 at the time of the offences. He was jailed for 21 years.

The report said he did not disclose to the council that he was under police investigation or had been arrested and charged.

Verita said that in March 2016 the monitoring officer attended a local authority designated officer (LADO) meeting at Devon County Council where he was told Mr Humphreys was under police investigation for alleged sex crimes against young people.

The monitoring officer told Verita that he told no-one at East Devon about Mr Humphreys having been told by police the matter was confidential to avoid prejudicing their investigation.

Verita noted: “The police direction about confidentiality in this case appears to have been more stringent than advice usually given… this typically allows for information to be shared with those who ‘need to know in order to protect children, facilitate enquiries, manage related disciplinary or suitability processes’”.

This meant East Devon could not mitigate safeguarding risks. Verita said: "We consider that typical [Devon] and police advice may, in different circumstances, have allowed the monitoring officer to share information he received at the LADO meetings with other senior officers or group leaders at East Devon.

“However, it is clear that the police’s need to maintain strict confidentiality overrode [Devon’s] normal advice and prevented him from doing so.”

The police though maintained this confidentiality requirement even after Mr  Humphreys was arrested.

“From this point he was aware of the ongoing investigation,” Verita said. “It is not clear why the police would seek to maintain this strict requirement of confidentiality following the LADO meeting in November 2016.

“We believe that being the only person at East Devon who knew about the allegations against Humphreys put the monitoring officer in an unenviable position. He was effectively prevented from sharing information with his manager or the East Devon safeguarding lead, as the subject expert in the organisation. Moreover, he was also prevented from sharing the allegations with political group leaders or the chair of council. “

Verita said no formal action could have been taken against Mr Humphreys before he was convicted and there is no evidence that his offending continued during his term as a councillor or that he abused his council position to enable him to carry out offences.

“In our view the code of conduct and allied standards process are not effective tools to promote desired behaviours, nor to effectively address poor behaviours amongst elected members,” the report said.

“Criminals and those flouting the rules are routinely unlikely to do the honourable thing and self-report their actions to appropriate authorities. In the existing legal and procedural framework, this is a likely outcome and an ever-present risk.”

The report noted comments from the East Devon Conservative Association “suggest that they may have had more remit to impose sanctions on Humphreys than were available to East Devon”.

Verita said although the honorary alderman title conferred no special powers there had been “no evidence of any qualitative assessment of the merits of those nominated, nor any explanation of how they had, in practice, delivered the ‘eminent services’ that qualified them for the award”. It said there should be a codified protocol for the bestowing of the honour.

The report also criticised the wider culture at the council. It said there was “a concerning culture of fear and hostility amongst both councillors and officers”.

It went on: “Some councillors reported feeling fearful of asking any questions or raising concerns of any nature at council meetings for fear of being attacked, harassed, or targeted for doing so.

“Such a culture is not conducive to the effective governance of any organisation. It is also a hindrance to creating an environment in which matters relating to safeguarding can be discussed openly and constructively. There is a real, present and significant risk that any future safeguarding concerns will not be raised and handled effectively.”

Mark Smulian