PSNI refuses to answer Freedom of Information request over handling of Jonathan Creswell case

The PSNI has issued what has been described as a “ludicrous” rationale for refusing to answer a Freedom of Information (FOI) request concerning its handling of a victim of Jonathan Creswell.

Last month, after what the victim said were 10 years of failed investigations by the PSNI and initially the Police Ombudsman, her complaint was upheld.

Sarah and Ian, whose names have been changed, said they endured years of failures by authorities following their experiences with Creswell, who later murdered Katie Simpson and staged the scene to make it appear she had taken her own life.

Creswell served a prison sentence in 2010 following a sustained campaign of abuse against former partner Abi Lyle.

Sarah and Ian began working at stables in Antrim in 2016, where Creswell was a well-established figure.

According to Sarah, Creswell spoke openly about having been in prison and claimed his only mistake was “not finishing the bitch off”.

She said she knew nothing about Abi Lyle or the court case, but later provided police with details which had never been made public and which she said could only have come from Creswell.

Weeks later, Sarah alleged that Creswell exposed himself.

“He was naked from the waist down and gyrating,” she said.

Sarah reported the incident to Ian and the stable owner, but claimed there was little interest in pursuing the matter.

Ian subsequently challenged Creswell and recorded the exchange on his phone.

“He was irate. He threatened to snap Ian’s neck and break his back and said I’d get what was coming,” Sarah said.

The couple later left the stables and contacted police, handing over the recording.

According to Sarah, when Creswell learned police were investigating, he fled across the Border but continued travelling north on an almost daily basis.

A year later, the case was closed because police could not locate him.

Sarah alleges An Garda Síochána was never contacted and claims the PSNI later attempted to conceal this by stating an FOI request would be too expensive to answer.

She also disputes PSNI claims that Creswell’s previous violence convictions were unknown when Katie Simpson died on August 9, 2020.

According to Sarah, a Police National Computer check carried out by a Detective Chief Inspector five days later showed the full extent of Creswell’s history, including her report.

She argues this meant Creswell could have been arrested in relation to her complaint, as well as the murder investigation.

Sarah prepared a complaint to the Police Ombudsman in 2021 but delayed submitting it until after Creswell’s trial concluded following his death by suicide in April 2024.

A response issued in August 2024 found no police misconduct and stated there was insufficient evidence to substantiate the complaint.

However, Sarah resubmitted her complaint alongside what she described as significant evidence challenging the positions of both the PSNI and the Ombudsman.

The complaint was subsequently upheld, with findings contrary to those reached in the original investigation.

Sarah said she remains concerned by PSNI failings and described the initial Ombudsman investigation as “grossly lacking”. She is preparing a further complaint.

During a press enquiry, the PSNI was asked whether it wished to apologise to Sarah.

After a delay, a spokesperson said: “The actions of the officers did not meet the expectations of PSNI or the victim. We are committed to providing a victim-centred approach, and to learn from cases where our investigative processes have fallen short.”

The force was advised that acknowledgement of wrongdoing did not constitute an apology, but no further response was received.

An FOI request was later submitted seeking the rationale for the PSNI’s failure to initially acknowledge or respond to the press enquiry and requesting the ranks or grades of staff involved.

The PSNI issued a “Neither Confirm Nor Deny” response.

That decision was challenged, citing comments previously made by Chief Constable Jon Boutcher: “The application of NCND must not be allowed to cover up acts of wrongdoing by the State.”

Following an internal review, the PSNI upheld its refusal.

In its response, the force stated: “Confirmation or denial would reveal whether PSNI holds information ... Such information would be personal data or would comprise mixed personal data.”

The response related to information concerning the press office enquiry.

Regarding staff involved, the PSNI said: “Confirmation or denial would disclose personal data. In a small or bespoke team, this may enable identification of individual staff when combined with other information available to the public.”

Reacting to the decision, Sarah said: “This is a completely ludicrous position to adopt. Information has had to be dragged out of authorities at every stage which does nothing to instil confidence.

“The reluctance is remarkable, approaching insulting. PSNI appear to view themselves as entirely unaccountable - a shocking indictment of those tasked with upholding the law.”

She added: “PSNI made a complete mess of my case which is bad enough, but I constantly think that Katie might still be here if matters had been handled properly.

“Even now, 10 years later, PSNI cannot bring themselves to apologise or provide proper explanation. My hopes weren’t high given what has gone before, but this entrenched refusal to dodge questions and therefore responsibility is deplorable.”

The rejected FOI request has been referred to the Information Commissioner.