From BBC News, 15 April:
Police are yet to identify a group of men who raped a woman outside a church in Surrey, four days after the incident.
The woman, in her 20s, was followed after leaving Labyrinth Epsom nightclub and attacked by several men outside Epsom Methodist Church in the early hours on Saturday.
The allegation was here reported as fact, but it relied purely on the woman’s account; and on 18 April, Surrey Police announced that after reviewing “an extensive amount of CCTV footage” and “interviewing potential witnesses, carrying out forensics investigations and conducting house-to-house enquiries” no evidence could be found. The investigation has now concluded, with police stating that the offence had not occured, and that the woman had given a “confused report” following an “accidential head injury”. In the meantime, Epsom has experienced public disorder orchestrated by right-wing elements led by Danny Tommo, most notoriously with a home for vulnerable adults coming under attack in the mistaken belief that it was housing refugees. (1)
The initial BBC report could very reasonably have begun with “Police are yet to identify any suspects after a woman reported that she had been raped by a group of men outside a church in Surrey”. However, it was perhaps natural to take the woman’s account at face value: everyone knows there are false accusers – Carl Beech, Ellie Williams – but signalling a position of agnosticism might have come across as pedantic scepticism and as downplaying a serious crime with similarities to a recent genuine case in Brighton. Also, the woman was not accusing anyone specifically, and so there was no need to be mindful of the rights of a suspect.
Naturally, the case attracted commentary from opportunists: on 16 April, Reform UK’s Robert Jenrick was quick to demand that Surrey Police “share what they can about the horrific rape in Epsom”, the implication being that they might be remiss in doing so. Jenrick referred back to the Southport killings, stating that “the authorities were silent” and that this made “a bad situation worse”. This of course ignores that the police were limited in what they could say, and that one thing that made things “worse” was Nigel Farage suggesting a cover-up and giving spurious credibility to an online rumour. (2)
In this way, Jenrick invited the public draw adverse inferences from the fact that Surrey Police did not have anything to share – and once again, suspicion and disinformation flourished. On Twitter/X, CCTV images from an unrelated 2025 case in Humberside did the rounds as supposed images of Epsom suspects; they were debunked, but the high-profile Reform-adjacent activist David Atherton then addressed Surrey Police with the claim “I have just been sent images which purport to show the suspects from the gang rape in Epsom.” He went on: “Can I DM them to you for verification. No one is going to be shocked, if true.” Were these the same Humberside images, or something else? Atherton never clarified, although by claiming to be in the know he helped to whip things up while increasing his profile.
Next, on 21 April, a police officer answering questions from a hostile and abusive crowd in Epsom referred to the woman “the victim”. More properly, she ought to have said “the complainant”, but at this stage it would have sounded pointed and suggestive of scepticism, and it might have riled up the mob (3). The clip was exploited as a “gotcha” by Dan Wootton, with Atherton suggesting that it meant the police had lied about not having any evidence.
“Head injury” may be a strong defence against a charge of wasting police time, but some may feel that it is not a satisfactory resolution. Conspiracists have a window for contining to claim there has been a cover up, although more reasonably we might infer that the police would prefer not to prosecute in case it deters genuine victims from coming forward in future.
UPDATE: There’s a useful overview from Alan Rusbridger in Prospect.
Notes
1. Tommy Robinson was not present, but happily noted that a protestors had “hit a suspected HMO [House in Multiple Occupation] housing unvetted migrant men”.
2. Jenrick also cites Jonathan Hall KC, the government’s Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, who was quoted as saying that “I personally think that more information could have been put out safely without compromising potential criminal proceedings”. Hall, though, was unhelpfully vague about what information he meant exactly. Farage claims to have been vindicated by Hall – even though Hall was concerned with police countering the kind of disinformation that he was promoting.
3. The 2016 Henriques Report, by Sir Richard Henriques KC in the wake of the Operation Midland fiasco, criticised police procedures that instructed officers to automatically “believe” complainants, and recommended using the word “complainant” rather than “victim”. However, old habits die hard, and when presented with someone in distress who says she has just been attacked any sympathetic person might find it difficult to suspend belief.
Filed under: Uncategorized
Perhaps, but Sorry Police have a long history of deleting, ignoring, perjuring on medical and crime evidence of child abuse. My own cases are proven. In 2021 the constabulary lied to CICA falsely claiming no evidence, contrary to their own National Data base entry “Wounding, acts to endanger life” but I won my award June 2025 for sustained child torture. Surrey Police is one of the worst constabularies for protecting real paedophiles from prosecutions. A firearms officer abandoned Surrey Police publicly stating “Liar, Conman, able to fabricate evidence, and botch cases ? Then Surrey Police wants to employ you!!” . Form your own opinion but they have lied to me on a consistent basis. I won’t reveal here the actions being taken against them starting shortly.
Lindsay, I didn’t realise this case was mainly about you. It’s strange how often that turns out to be the way of it.
Tom, the case above mentioned is nothing to do with me, I am speaking generally about child abuse corruption which is rife, with no working criminal accountabilities.Surrey Police is a serious offender, I am flooded with cases for the I.C.C. and yes, we (European Prosecutors) are proceeding.
Tom, your rather odd comment “Lindsay, I didn’t realise this case was mainly about you. It’s strange how often that turns out to be the way of it.” makes me wonder if you work for Surrey Police. You will know that Maggie Oliver (Foundation) that has brought the High Court case against Starmer for failing IICSA, is now talking to U.N. lawyers, a suggestion of mine to her. And here we have Surrey Police – I can talk about my own cases, not the others we have – that told me “You can prove it, but unfortunately child torture is not a crime in this country” and “I cannot go against the decision of my D.I. if I want to keep my job”. That is Surrey Police culture. A case that turns out to be one of victim confusion, (?) does not defeat my right to respond on what Surrey Police actually is, generally speaking. HMIC 2017 Found 41 out of 43 regional constabularies corrupting child (0 to 18 years of age) abuse cases, where Hampshire and Surrey are among the worst for cover ups, and nothing has changed. It requires international courts to confront U.K. allowed Denial of the Truth Crimes, in State Crimes against Humanity, The Child, would you not agree ?
My point was that you could start your own blog rather than monopolise someone else’s with monomaniacal screeds which are too long to read, and repeat themselves over and over again. All the best with your recovery and being able to move past this one day.
Tom, on April 30, 2026 at 11:59 pm said:
My point was that you could start your own blog rather than monopolise someone else’s with monomaniacal screeds which are too long to read, and repeat themselves over and over again. All the best with your recovery and being able to move past this one day.
No wonder the U.K. has a U.N. identified corruption crisis with Tom-foolery around, trying to suppress appropriate comments against Surrey Police. Short enough for you ?
And Tom, the reason I have a question on the mentioned victim that Surrey Police say was “confused” I would add this. Surrey Police is highly experienced in deleting hiding and lying about medical and crime evidence of child torture, and manipulating victims AND courts, that there is no evidence of child abuse. In 2021, the constabulary known as “Sorry” Police, wrote a report to CICA that was a pack of evidenced lies in every box, and I have that ‘report’. In June 2025, CICA awarded and paid me the maximum compensation to me for “sustained child torture”. But CICA could not prosecute the Surrey lying officers. But we can prosecute them. We have the documents that a senior officer of Surrey Police had stated the CPS would not prosecute my State inflicted psychotic torturers because it was “not in the national interest to prosecute”. The CPS told me the Surrey Police mobsters claims were false. They even allowed my psychotic sex abuser, and her violent husband, ann Army Officer, to abscond and disappear, refusing to tell me where they were, so I could not even sue them for damages. Later, Action Fraud established my State-inflicted torturers’s motive for stealing my valuables was in revenge for me reporting them. My valuables have never been recovered. My Church of England traffickers remain un-prosecuted. They trafficked me to the psychotic, being criminally sterilised, to see if that quote “balanced psychosis” and that experiment had failed if I were tortured in quote “under a year”. The hospitals’ records finally procured in 2022 record I was tortured from my birth until I was 32, in a secluded wooded area in Surrey. Those officers are being prosecuted at the International Criminal Court, and the Church authorities still hiding the one document we want. The rest we have. Surrey Police officers involved will be Charged with Denial of the Truth Crimes, in State Crimes against Humanity, The Child. There are no time limits nor immunities in these crimes, and I would advise any other victims of such crimes, to follow our example, and they can get submissions manuals directly from the I.C.C.. We have many cases, which is why European Prosecutors are taking the actions I have stated. So Tom, your washout response has no effect on proceedings, and although I have no involvement in the Surrey “confusions” case, I have no confidence in such a corrupt, paedophile-protecting, vile constabulary, which is what Surrey Police is, one of several such constabularies. With your permission, of course.