Police chief told lies about brother’s Falklands service, misconduct panel hears
Nick Adderley had claimed the South Atlantic Medal he was pictured wearing on multiple occasions came from his brother.
A suspended chief constable’s claims about his brother’s Falklands service are “utterly preposterous” and a “pack of lies”, a misconduct panel has heard.
Nick Adderley, of Northamptonshire Police, who is facing a gross misconduct hearing amid claims he exaggerated his rank and length of service and lied about his naval achievements, previously claimed the South Atlantic Medal (SAM) that he has been pictured wearing since at least 2012, was given to him by his brother Richard when he emigrated to Australia in 2008.
The SAM was awarded to British military personnel and civilians for service in the Falklands conflict, but John Beggs KC, representing the Office of the Northamptonshire Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner (OPFCC) told the hearing, which continued in Northampton on Thursday, that Richard Adderley did not embark for The Falklands until July 2 1982, with the hostilities ending around three weeks previously on June 14.
He added that the chief constable’s brother was not entitled to wear the SAM with rosette and only applied for a SAM under a change in criteria for applicants put in place in 2015 on October 12 2023 – 10 days after Nick Adderley received a notice of investigation from the Independent Office for Police Conduct.
The misconduct panel previously heard from a Ministry of Defence medal office expert that a SAM allegedly worn by Nick Adderley on a number of occasions since at least 2012 was “110 per cent” a fake.
Mr Beggs said: “Mr Adderley asserted in interview that his brother went to The Falklands on the HMS Hermes. He repeats that, but in fact he wasn’t.
“How plausible is it that a brother wouldn’t know if his brother had served in the conflict? It is something you would know with exquisite detail.”
Mr Beggs said this was “entirely indicative of one of the worst deceits” Mr Adderley had put forward.
He said: “The circumstances of Richard Adderley’s claim to the medal were distinctly dubious.
“He said he got it a few weeks after he arrived in the mess hall, in a box from some lads with his name and service number on it.
“What would he have been awarded it for, and why would some lads be giving him the medal?
“How on earth could the medal have been conceptualised, approved in Whitehall, designed and manufactured and then sent, perhaps by Concorde, to arrive by July 3?
“It is utterly preposterous, and it is a pack of lies in which unfortunately a chief constable has engaged.
“Perhaps the key point – why do you suppose that Nick Adderley was so unenthusiastic about calling Richard Adderley to give evidence?
“Just as he wouldn’t give evidence, he didn’t want his brother giving evidence, it would have been a car crash.
“It gets worse because Richard Adderley wasn’t entitled to any SAM medal until the criteria was amended in 2015. Nick Adderley said he gave it to him before emigrated to Australia in 2008.
“We now know Richard Adderley wasn’t even entitled to a SAM during that period.
“Why did Richard Adderley say he got the medal a few weeks after arriving at a mess hall? Because he wasn’t telling the truth, and at whose instigation is he not telling the truth? If you join the dots, we say it is pretty obvious what is going on.
“Everywhere you look, there are inconsistencies.”
During his closing statements, Mr Beggs urged the misconduct panel, chaired by legally qualified chairman Callum Cowx, not to view the evidence in “compartments”.
He said: “To do so would strip it of competence or sense. Every one of the groups of allegations all relate to one fundamental issue and the importance of that obvious point is that there is an overarching theme in this case – from start to finish, from 2009 when he started wearing a SAM and has probably been involved in some skullduggery as to its providence.
“The theme runs throughout the 14 years covered by the charges. One has to join the dots and not compartmentalise.”
Mr Adderley did not attend Thursday’s hearing, but Mr Cowx said he had directed him to attend when the hearing continues on Friday.
Matthew Holdcroft, representing Mr Adderley, said his client was simply proud of his older brother’s military service, wore the medals he was gifted by him and that “it isn’t unusual for a younger brother to consider that which an older brother tells them to be true”.
The misconduct hearing took a three-week break at the end of May after Mr Adderley’s defence team accused the panel of bias and put forward an application for them to be recused.
The application was rejected and the hearing resumed on Thursday.
The hearing was adjourned on Thursday afternoon while the panel retired to start its deliberations and continues on Friday.
