Minister downplays judicial review prospects for paedophile nursery worker case
A justice minister does not believe permission could be secured for a judicial review of the Parole Board’s decision to release paedophile nursery worker Vanessa George.
Robert Buckland told MPs that his examination of the case has not highlighted the sort of procedural flaw needed to justify a court allowing such a review.
He also said it did not appear that any other offences by George were “left to lie on the file”, unlike the case of black-cab rapist John Worboys.
Two victims of Worboys succeeded in making the Parole Board reconsider its decision to release him after bringing a judicial review, arguing “critical evidence” of the “wider allegations” against Worboys should have been taken into account.
Mr Buckland commented on the case of George during a parliamentary debate.
The 49-year-old, who worked at Little Ted’s Nursery in Plymouth, was jailed indefinitely in 2009 and told to serve a minimum of seven years after taking photographs on her phone of her abusing toddlers.
The Parole Board recommended her for release following a review, although her movements will be restricted and she will be prevented from using social media – among other conditions.
Speaking in Westminster Hall, Labour’s Luke Pollard (Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport) said the families have been let down twice.
He said: “First in the lack of a robust system to protect their children who they entrusted to George and Little Ted’s Nursery, and for a second time now – as they’ve told me, some through tears – as the woman who abused so many children will be released early.”
Mr Pollard said the decision to release George (pictured) should be urgently reviewed, adding: “I believe Vanessa George should not be released or considered for release until she has named all the children she abused.”
Conservative MP Gary Streeter (South West Devon) added: “She should serve at least another 10 years in custody before being released on licence.”
Replying for the Government, Mr Buckland said: “The calculation of the seven-year term was in accordance with the law as it then stood.
“It is important to understand that because from my reading of the judge’s remarks and my understanding of the indictment, it does seem to me that the full extent of the criminality was reflected in the indictment.
“There doesn’t seem to be any other offences that were left to lie on the file.
“I’ve conducted a preliminary investigation, I will conclude that and if there is any change in that position I will of course write to (Mr Pollard).
“That, I think, is a very important distinction between this case and the case of John Worboys.
“People will recollect Worboys had been made subject to a similar type of sentence, an IPP (imprisonment for public protection).
“The Parole Board had directed he be released on licence in January of last year but in March the High Court quashed the decision and ordered the Parole Board to take a fresh one, and they did do that – concluding the public could only be protected by keeping Worboys in closed prison conditions.”
Mr Buckland said new protections to avoid a repeat of the mistakes in the Worboys case were implemented.
He said the new regime came into force on July 22, but does not have a retrospective effect.
Mr Buckland said he has been told there was “no attempt by the legal team” to expedite George’s hearing to avoid the new rules.
He went on: “Because this matter pre-dates the change, the only course of conduct open to me or the department would be a judicial review – and I have to say on my examination so far of the procedure, it doesn’t seem there’s the sort of flaw in procedure that would justify a court giving permission to judicial review.”
Copyright (c) PA Media Ltd. 2019, All Rights Reserved. Picture (c) PA Wire.
