Suspended chief constable will not give evidence, misconduct panel hears
Nick Adderley’s barrister said his client would not be giving evidence ‘in light of legal advice given’.
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The suspended chief constable at the centre of a misconduct hearing over claims he exaggerated his naval rank, length of service and achievements will not give evidence to the panel.
Nick Adderley, of Northamptonshire Police, who has been accused of “building military naval legend” including the implication that he served in the Falklands War despite being just 15 when the conflict happened in 1982, was due to speak on the second day of the three-day hearing in Northampton.
However, after a short meeting with his defence team on Wednesday afternoon, Mr Adderley’s barrister Matthew Holdcroft said his client had decided not to give evidence “in light of legal advice given” in relation to potential criminal proceedings.
Earlier in the day Mr Holdcroft had contended that the case against Mr Adderley, put forward by John Beggs KC on behalf of the Office of the Northamptonshire Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner, was built on “inference or innuendo and not investigation”.
The defence counsel had argued that some of the evidence that had been heard should be struck out but it was rejected by the legally qualified chair of the panel Callum Cowx.
With Mr Adderley no longer due to give evidence, closing arguments will be made on Thursday morning.
The hearing continues.