Wrongful Conviction of Kieron Hoddinott

Kieron Hoddinott, was convicted on 17th October 2017 and received a 15 year sentence for allegedly raping and seriously sexually assaulting his estranged partner, who is the mother of his younger daughter.

1) The complainant made her 1st allegation of sexual abuse after she and Kieron had a heated discussion about his rights to have contact with their daughter.

2) Her best friend, at that time a paralegal for South East Rape and Serious Sexual Offences division of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), persuaded her to contact Kent Police to make the allegation.

3) Several days later, after consultation with her friend, the complainant made more allegations to Kent Police.

4) No tangible evidence to determine Kieron Hoddinott's innocence was sought by Kent Police.

5) Text message conversations between Kieron and the complainant were provided to CPS by the Officer in Charge, Jonathan Pearce.(Now ex-officer Jonathan Pearce) However, vital messages to show that Kieron wanted formal visiting rights to his daughter and, also, that the complainant ridiculed his salary as insufficient for her needs were not exhibited.

6) The whereabouts of the download of the complainant's mobile 'phone has not been ascertained. This download would provide vital information about the true character of the complainant and her conversations about removing Kieron from her life

7) Kent Police have stated that MG6D file (Non-Sensitive Material) was not used in the investigation of Kieron's case. Officer in Charge testified that all data on handsets and SIM cards of devices from complainant and defendant was available to Kent Police. Respondent's Notice by CPS. states that the missing download is listed on MG6C file (unused material) but, although there is evidence of a submission form , albeit with an incorrect reference number, there is no listing of the 'phone download. Key Exhibits list records text messages from suspect's 'phone plus some unattributable screenshots from the complainant's old device, which she emailed to Officer in Charge of the case. CPS. have stated that the download of the complainant's 'phone is sensitive material and not to be disclosed to the Defence Team. The necessity for proof of the existence of this download went unanswered during the Appeal process with a response that Kieron's 'phone appeared to have been downloaded in the conventional sense.

8) The witness statements (MG11)of the complainant and her witness differ as do their testimonies and this was dismissed as inconsequential during the Appeal process .

9) During trial, the jury was sent out by the Trial Judge Martin Joy, on more than one occasion because the prosecution "witness" kept adducing inadmissible evidence. However, the jury was not disharged and a retrial odered.

10) The complainant , during a break in her cross- examination, emailed the Officer in Charge and, having looked at her 'phone data, provided a date for one of her allegations. Prosecution Counsel asked the Jury to add this date to their notes. Post conviction, Kieron provided an alibi from his employers. Subsequently, CPS. stated that this was possibly not the date provided by the complainant during trial. The response in refusing leave to appeal, was that the complainant was at liberty to change the date if a mistake had been made at Court.

11) With reference to the date, which was provided by the complainant during trial, Prosecution Counsel advised Trial Judge that Kieron has been cross-examined on evidence )that was not in the Digital Case System (DCS. and that this could lead to "other issues".

12) In October 2020 the Officer in Charge of Kieron's case was dismissed for gross misconduct of a sexual nature with a vulnerable witness in another case and for not recording the investigation. (Report of his immediate dismissal from Kent Police, https://rb.gy/pqxnea) Upon learning this news , Kieron's former partner and mother of his older daughter revealed that ex-officer Pearce had contacted her via telephone to take a character witness statement about Kieron. He then attempted to make contact with her on Facebook but deleted his messages when she did not respond to him. This telephone call was 8 months after Kieron had been charged with the offences, although Kieron had put her name forward as a person to be contacted during his second police interview. Ex-officer Pearce transcribed her statement in his handwriting on a scrap of paper and e-mailed her to say that he had submitted it to CPS. Defence solicitors have confirmed that this character witness statement was not included in served material nor unused material. In indictable only cases, cases which are likely to be deemed not suitable for summary trial and cases in which the defendant elects trial in the Crown Court, the Non-Sensitive Schedule (MG6C) must be completed along with the MG6D.

Attemps to appeal conviction: Data for points of appeal were composed mainly by Kieron's twin brother, after discussions with Kieron. Letter requesting leave to appeal sent 06/11/17, refused. Further effort to CoA 09/08/19 Single Judge Mr. Justice Edis refused to grant leave to appeal.

At this point in appeal process, a barister, was paid a substantial amount by Kieron's family to review the case and to write a perfective letter to Full Court. However, the barister decided after a lengthy interval that there were no grounds for appeal and that he would not write the letter but that he would still keep the fee! A letter was hurriedly composed by the family and sent 25/01/20. 11/02/20 Decision received from Full Court hearing. Mr. Justice Chamberlain refused to grant leave to appeal, Justice Edis also sat in on the appeal

Kieron Hoddinott (A150 7EC), The Verne, Portland, Dorset, DT5 1EQ