Prosecutor who lost brother to COVID compiles dossier of evidence ‘showing Dominic Cummings should face prosecution for breaking lockdown laws and perverting the course of justice’
- Nazir Afzal submitted evidence to suggest Dominic Cummings may have lied
- The evidence relates to the chief aide’s controversial trip in April to Durham
- Mr Afzal’s dossier is based on new eyewitness claims said to be ‘wholly inconsistent’ with account that Mr Cummings gave when he admitted travelling
Nazir Afzal is a former chief prosecutor who helped convict the Rochdale grooming gang
Dominic Cummings should face prosecution for breaking lockdown laws and perverting the course of justice, according to a former top prosecutor.
Nazir Afzal, a former chief prosecutor for North West England, has submitted new evidence to suggest the Prime Minister’s chief aide may have lied over his trip in April to Durham.
Mr Afzal’s dossier is based on new eyewitness claims said to be ‘wholly inconsistent’ with the account that Mr Cummings gave when he admitted travelling to the North East during the lockdown.
Mr Cummings faced fury when it emerged that he drove from London to Durham, and then took a separate 60-mile round trip to a local beauty spot despite having Covid symptoms.
Now the former prosecutor, whose brother Umar died from coronavirus in April, has called for him to face a new police investigation after claiming to have unearthed new evidence that he broke Covid 19 regulations.
Lawyers for Mr Afzal have sent detailed submissions to the Director of Public Prosecutions Max Hill, Scotland Yard and Durham Police, who originally investigated Mr Cummings and his wife, Mary Wakefield for alleged lockdown breaches.
The dossier also includes location data for their vehicles from congestion charge and automatic number plate recognition cameras, CCTV from Barnard Castle and areas surrounding Houghall Woods, where he was allegedly seen, and mobile phone analysis.
Mr Cummings claimed he and his wife isolated at his family’s farm in County Durham because they were worried about childcare for their four-year-old son.
A detective-led inquiry in Durham found Mr Cummings had probably breached health protection rules by travelling to Barnard Castle on 12 April, but it made no finding on his decision to leave London because the three-day investigation was confined to County Durham.
Dominic Cummings should face prosecution for breaking lockdown laws and perverting the course of justice, according to a former top prosecutor
A number of eyewitnesses claimed to have seen him in Durham a week later on April 19, but Mr Cummings insisted this was false and said that he had evidence to prove he was in London that day.
Mr Afzal now believes the legal test is met for prosecuting the couple for offences under Covid regulations, which at the time stated residents were not allowed to leave their home without a reasonable excuse.
His lawyers have sent eight annexes of evidence to police and prosecutors suggesting Mr Cummings has fallen foul of six offences and his wife has committed three.
Mr Afzal also believes he should face charges for perverting the course of justice, following Mr Cummings’ statement in the Rose Garden of Downing Street in May about his movements.
The laywer says Mr Cummings’ comments ‘appear to be wholly inconsistent with accounts of his conduct at that time obtained from eye-witnesses’.
Mr. Afzal said: ‘My one objective was to try to get to the truth. The police investigation thus far has been cursory and incomplete.
‘The picture painted by the witnesses that have come forward appears clear and coherent and is inconsistent in important parts with the version given by Mr Cummings.
The laywer says Mr Cummings’ comments ‘appear to be wholly inconsistent with accounts of his conduct at that time obtained from eye-witnesses’
‘Whilst tens of thousands of families, including mine, were struggling to mourn their loved ones, Mr Cummings was allegedly travelling the country with no consideration of the consequences.
‘The conclusion that there is sufficient evidence to prosecute is understandable, in my view. I believe the CPS’ public interest test is also met given the impact that this has had on general compliance with Covid Regulations.
‘It is now a matter for the police and CPS to decide whether to take this forward. There is a perception currently that the law isn’t being applied equally and the poorest, most vulnerable and least powerful of our citizens are those that suffer.
A CPS spokesperson said: ‘Earlier this year Durham Police issued a statement about their investigation which explained their decision not to take any further action.
‘As with all cases, if a member of the public believes they have new information they should bring it to the attention of the police.
‘The CPS has no power to direct the police and investigations into alleged criminal conduct are a matter for the police not the CPS.
‘Given this we are surprised that the material was provided to us. Once we have satisfied ourselves as to its contents, the CPS will take the steps we consider to be appropriate. ‘ ends