Nick Adderley accused of 'bare faced lies' in disciplinary hearing
Nick Adderley accused of 'bare faced lies' in disciplinary hearing
Former wife raised concerns about Nick Adderley's naval service claims, the gross misconduct hearing which began today heard
By Nadia Lincoln and Sarah Ward
Suspended Chief Constable Nick Adderley was accused of ‘bare faced’ lies in his gross misconduct hearing today.
Allegations of deception on his CV relating to his former naval career were laid out at the hearing held at Northampton Saints ground as top police lawyer John Beggs KC, accused Adderley of ‘building a military naval legend that wasn't true.’
The hearing has come about after Adderley was first put under scrutiny in July last year when a former wife got in contact with the office of the police fire and crime commissioner to say that the top cop’s claims about his ten-year naval service were false.
An investigation was begun by Paul Fell, a director in the commissioner’s office, who after speaking with Adderley referred the matter to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) which decided to investigate.
Adderley then went on to become national news in September when the Sun exposed he had worn a Falklands War medal to a police awards ceremony in July, despite it not being his own.
The senior police officer, who was born in 1966, would have only been 15 years old during the conflict.
Adderley admits he "breached standards" in terms of duties and responsibilities, but denies gross misconduct and that he "acted without honesty and integrity".
At the hearing today the catalogue of alleged falsehoods were laid out by Mr Beggs, who had been taken on by the former police, fire and crime commissioner Stephen Mold to act for his office against Adderley. The opening note from the authority, which was supplied to the media, stated that the former commissioner was ‘deeply saddened by revelations in this case since he was of the view that Nick Adderley was a good chief constable’.
John Beggs KC alleged that Adderley told "barefaced lies" on a number of matters in his CV when he applied for the chief constable role in 2018. These included claims that he served for ten years in the Royal Navy, was a former Commander, was a military negotiator in Haiti at the age of 20, and attended the prestigious Britannia Royal Naval College.
The counsel said that Mr Adderley's application shared a "common theme of deceit" and a "false narrative, building a military naval legend that wasn't true".
The hearing was told that military records had been checked and Adderley served in the Navy for just two years before he was discharged in 1986, and stayed at the most junior position throughout. It was also noted that he had never attended the Dartmouth naval college as his application was rejected.
Mr Beggs KC said:
"This case is not about whether Mr Adderley made a positive contribution to Northamptonshire Police.
"This case is about whether Mr Adderley has, over many years, deliberately advanced the false narrative to exaggerate his service, his rank and his achievements in the Royal Navy.
"The idea that he served for 10 years [in the Navy] was completely untrue, unless you take into account that he was a sea cadet from the age of 10.
"To claim you served in a war for your country when you were 15 and in the sea cadets is an egregious thing to have done."
He also put to the hearing that Mr Adderley had failed to correct a number of errors reported by the media and even Northamptonshire Police, in relation to his years of military service. These included claims that he rose to the rank of Lieutenant and had received commendations.
Adderley, who has been receiving his full £176,550* salary since his suspension in October last year, looked confident during the morning session, but began to look stressed in the afternoon, especially when his lawyer was putting questions to Paul Fell. He did not speak at any point, but is expected to do so when cross examined tomorrow.
The hearing filled in the details of how questions about Nick Adderley’s naval career and CV first came to light. Until then Adderley had been a very popular among the rank and file and had even been suggested by the Daily Express as a potential to become the chief of the MET police, when Cressida Dick stood down.
The hearing heard that after receiving information from an ex wife of Adderley’s, Paul Fell made a call to Adderley on July 17. In the phone call Fell says Adderley told him he joined the Navy in early 1982 and was 17 at the time. He completed basic training and was then deployed to the Falklands.
However two days later he sent an email to Paul Fell, changing his story from the verbal phone call and introducing the suggestion he had told the director the medal he had been seen wearing was his brother’s who had given him permission to wear it. He also raised an issue about the quality of the phone call. In the email he said ‘I have never stated that I served in the [Falklands] conflict’ and also wrote:
“I will confess that I do not read about myself and trust the accuracy of the detail to those who write it for me. Lesson learned for me. It is my belief that this picture [the Falklands war narrative] has been built up over time through misreporting and assumption, something that wouldn’t and couldn’t be correct due to timings.’
Also within that same email he referenced a ‘20 year campaign of harassment against him and referred to the complaint about the falsification of his military career as ’her latest attack which feels again totally unjustified and another attempt to damage me and my career.’
Fell stood by his claims of the verbal phone call in the hearing when questioned repeatedly by Adderley’s legal counsel. Adderley’s defence had also tried to get Paul Fell’s evidence ruled as inadmissible - meaning it cannot be used. It will be for the panel, which is being led by legally qualified chair Callum Cowyx to decide whether it is admissible.
The defence counsel, Matthew Holdcroft, put to the hearing that Adderley had never suggested the Falklands medal was his when the complaint was first made and that he was always clear that it was his brother's service being described.
Adderley also contended through his defence that he never claimed to be a military negotiator in Haiti and that the confusion of his position came from "poor wording" surrounding an academic paper he had written on the protests at the time.
The hearing will continue tomorrow.
*Our first version incorrectly stated Nick Adderley salary at the lesser amount of £165,000. His salary has increased during the time of his suspension.
Really good summary of events so far.
Is Mold going to be called at some stage? I would like to know why there seems to have been no due diligence done during the recruitment of Adderley. As has been shown already, the lies about his Naval service could easily and quickly have been discovered years ago by checking of readily accessible public domain records. Which would have avoided entirely the need for this sorry and embarrasing saga.