This does beg a few questions;
1. Which Policeman contacted Akhtar and how did he know of his relationship with the abuser?
2. Did Akhtar just pass over the mother’s number without questioning what it was about?
3. Did he discuss it with the mother or Hussain afterwards?
4. Why do others finger Akhtar as being there?
There doesn’t seem to be any argument about the girl being handed over in a service station. Something in itself that is quite bizarre and a little dramatic; normally a hot potato would be handed over quickly, dropped in town, or outside a police station.
So unusual is the hand over and the failure to prosecute it suggests that a deal was done and more questions need to be asked.
5. Was it Hussain’s mother who dealt with the negotiations or is Akhtar hiding behind her skirts?
6. Did she negotiate a non-prosecution deal for her son and when Akhtar told his mates he was trying to take credit falsely?
7. At what level in SYP was the decision to not arrest and prosecute made?
This last question is very important. A policeman or woman, maybe more than one, made a decision to pardon the perpetrator of a clearly committed offence . More questions:
8. Was there a process to decide when and when not to prosecute in these types or case and was it applied?
9. Was the police officer /s authorised to make that decision?
10. Was the case referred to the CPS?
In conclusion Akhtar is hiding behind the probability that he did not commit a crime. And/ or that if an offence was committed it occurred with the complicity of the SYP when they chose not to prosecute.
Is helping a perpetrator escape prosecution a crime? What are Police powers here?
This leaves the biggest question of all. Can SYP investigate when they themselves are implicated in the offence?”