[2025] EWHC 2684 (KB)

I shall deal with Ms Todd’s statements in due course. DS Brownsell did not accept Mr Metzer’s suggestion that Linda Todd’s first statement of 17^th May 2006 was, in broad terms, supportive of the Claimants or that she understood “from a early stage the way that Chancellor Care operated”. DS Brownsell stated that, contrary to this assertion, she stated in her first statement that she believed that she was paying for specialling costs at £13 per hour (and that extra care equated to specialling and would be for short term situations). This was correct although Ms Todd went on to set out that in January 2004 she met with Dr Barker and Mr Breeze and a definition of extra care was explained (she stated in her second statement that it was not until much later that she had an understanding of extra care).

DS Brownsell denied that potential action against Linda Todd for perverting the course of justice which was not progressed (she was informed of this on 17^th December by DS Brownsell and DC Horsburgh) was a device to “turn her into a Prosecution witness”, that she had been “played with” and “softened up” or that her final statement was “more sympathetic to the prosecution”. DS Brownsell said that no pressure was put on her to make a statement. I accept this evidence.