The visit of Ch Insp Bettison to Parliament a few weeks later was facilitated by Mr Shersby and agreed through SYP senior officers.
In his first prepared statement to the IOPC, Ch Insp Bettison recalled that after the meeting of the Police Federation on 3 October 1989, Mr Shersby asked DCC Hayes “if the video and plans could be shown to an invited audience of fellow MPs in an informal setting he intended to host.” According to Ch Insp Bettison, DCC Hayes subsequently discussed this with CC Wright and then confirmed the visit should go ahead. Ch Insp Bettison stated that DCC Hayes “told me that he wanted me to reprise the presentation and to play it exactly as I had done at the in force meeting.”
He also stated that prior to the initial meeting with Mr Shersby, he had been asked by DCC Hayes “to produce a compilation video to try to convey the breadth and the complexity of the events of the day”. He added: “I did produce a video which included a factual account of the aspects of evidence that were presented to Lord Justice Taylor.”
When he gave evidence to the Goldring Inquests, DCC Hayes confirmed he was aware that Ch Insp Bettison had said he had produced the video on DCC Hayes’s instruction. DCC Hayes stated that he didn’t dispute it but had no clear recollection of it.
Around 40 MPs were invited, of whom 12 attended. Ch Insp Bettison showed the video and answered questions. In a memorandum to CC Wright after the presentation, Ch Insp Bettison commented that while the MPs had welcomed the input, he did not think any opinions had been changed.
The IOPC sought to contact the MPs for their recollections. Three had died and four had no specific recollection of the visit or the video; one was in ill health and gave a confused account. The other four all commented in different ways that they felt it was an attempt by the police to put across their side of the story; they also indicated they were not convinced by the video or the police stance.
If, as may be assumed from Ch Insp Bettison’s memo to CC Wright, this was indeed SYP’s intention, the evidence indicates that it failed.
Given the clear evidence of both the memo, and the fact that he authorised Ch Insp Bettison’s visit to Parliament, it seems implausible that CC Wright would not have been aware of the content of the video and the fact that its overall angle was an attempt to articulate the police side of the story. In assessing CC Wright’s actions in relation to the media and MPs, the IOPC was of the view that his agreement to the video being shown to MPs indicated he approved of its content and tone and amounted to his participation in efforts to minimise SYP’s culpability and to deflect blame. This was among the reasons for the IOPC reaching the opinion that CC Wright would have a case to answer for gross misconduct, as stated in paragraphs 7.120–7.124.
