Prescott & Anschutz – Yard Gets Formal ComplaintUnder 1916 Prevention of Corruption Acts mdi-fullscreen
EXCLUSIVE: Yates of the Yard has received a formal complaint regarding alleged offences under the 1889-1916 Prevention of Corruption Acts. The complainant is George Bathurst, a Windsor based Tory businessman. He alleges in a letter to the Scotland Yard Sleaze Buster that Prescott has, by his own admissions, confessed to offences – in particular clause 2 of the 1916 Act* states that “in the case where Government contracts are concerned (and a gambling licence is a contract), the burden of proof shall be on the defendant. That is, the police need only to prove that (1) favours were given to Mr Prescott and (2) that the giver was seeking a government contract, both of which are now a matter of public record. By contrast, Mr Prescott must prove that he did not influence government thinking in order to avoid conviction.”

* “Presumption of corruption in certain cases.– Where in any proceedings against a person for an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1906, or the Public Bodies Corrupt Practices Act, 1889, it is proved that any money, gift, or other consideration has been paid or given to or received by a person in the employment of His Majesty or any Government Department or a public body by or from a person, or agent of a person, holding or seeking to obtain a contract from His Majesty or any Government Department or public body, the money, gift, or consideration shall be deemed to have been paid or given and received corruptly as such inducement or reward as is mentioned in such Act unless the contrary is proved.” [Clause 2 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1916]

mdi-timer July 17 2006 @ 10:24 mdi-share-variant mdi-twitter mdi-facebook mdi-whatsapp mdi-telegram mdi-linkedin mdi-email mdi-printer
Home Page Next Story
View Comments