Detective who gave false evidence in court ’embarrassed by muddled response’

A detective who gave false evidence under oath in Bristol Crown Court about a dead defendant in a drugs conspiracy told his misconduct hearing: “I fluffed my lines”.

Senior lawyers asked for someone to identify the defendant and, despite not attending the post mortem, detective sergeant Nicholas Eckland said he could, based on hearsay evidence.

Accused of gross misconduct, he said he had no intention of misleading the court at the pre-trial hearing on March 23 and was “embarrassed” by his “muddled” response.

The defendant in the case pleaded guilty in January to his part in a drugs conspiracy, prompting animosity from his co-defendants, who were on remand in the same prison.

DS Eckland, who served with the regional organised crime unit, said he was concerned for the middle-aged man’s safety.

When he died suddenly on February 26, DS Eckland urged his police colleagues to ensure a forensic post mortem was carried out to determine the cause of his death. It was ruled to be heart failure.

DS Eckland told his misconduct hearing on Wednesday he did not attend the post mortem but had faith in his colleagues – elsewhere in Avon and Somerset Police – who did.

Ann Hampshire, a senior lawyer on complex cases for the Crown Prosecution Service, asked if someone with the requisite knowledge could identify the body.

She told the hearing in her experience, judges will not simply accept a death certificate.

Despite not attending the postmortem, DS Eckland claimed he met her criteria and in a phone call Hampshire said she would “think about it”. Hampshire disputed this.

DS Eckland told the hearing: “I said, surely I can give hearsay evidence as the senior investigating officer (SIO). There was no dispute that [the defendant] was dead.

“She 100 per cent, categorically knew I didn’t attend the postmortem. Why would she think a DS from the regional organised crime unit would go to a postmortem?

“I was offering the potential to take responsibility. Unfortunately, I epicly failed.

DS Eckland said he had meant to tell the court “we” had attended the post mortem, as in his colleagues, not himself personally.

He told the misconduct hearing he was qualified to give evidence because he was the SIO, he had caused the forensic post mortem to take place and for police officers to attend.

He said he knew he had ‘fluffed his lines’ but claimed he did not know he should have clarified his comments because he did not remember exactly what he had said.

Bristol Crown Court

Defence barrister David Sapiecha said in the lead up to the court case DS Eckland had been working up to 80 hours a week on a number of complex operations, many of them related to drug conspiracies.

He was also taking pain killers for an injury to his foot and an historical issue with his shoulder, but in 25 years’ service he had never taken a day off.

DS Eckland said these factors affected his “concentration levels” and his performance in court.

After it came out he could not identify the deceased defendant, the court case was adjourned so the integrity of the investigation could be investigated.

DS Eckland was removed from the case but his evidence could be corroborated and the case returned to court in October.

All but one of the defendants was convicted. They are yet to be sentenced.

Representing Avon and Somerset Police, barrister Aaron Rathmell said DS Eckland had an “unblemished” career but had treated his statement in court as no more than a formality.

He said: “Rarely is a duty more important than giving evidence under oath. It is close to the core of the administration of justice.”

Rathmell claimed DS Eckland did not intend to give accurate evidence in court.

DS Eckland said he was committed to his faith and that kept him honest: “I’ve been brought up Roman Catholic. I go to church. I know what it means to swear on the Bible. It’s a solemn confirmation to tell the truth.”

DS Eckland said the courtroom had been more intimidating than any he had been in – the public gallery was full of the defendants’ families, he received a death threat from someone drawing their finger over their throat, and he was called a “f***ing c**t”.

He said he did not know he would be called to give evidence until moments before.

The misconduct panel was told the case related to a south Bristol organised crime gang with access to firearms. The hearing is scheduled to conclude on Thursday.

Stephen Sumner is a local democracy reporter for Bristol