Former Tory minister Andrew Griffiths raped and physically abused wife, judge finds

A former Conservative minister has been found to have raped and physically abused his spouse via a circle of relatives court docket judge who thought to be proof at a personal trial.

Pass Judgement On Elizabeth Williscroft also concluded that Andrew Griffiths, 51, pressurised Kate Griffiths, the Conservative MP for Burton, Staffordshire, into carrying out sexual activity, and used “coercive and controlling behaviour”.

Mr Griffiths, who used to be the MP for Burton and the minister for small industry, and once labored as Theresa May’s leader of personnel, resigned in July 2018 after a Sunday newspaper suggested that he had despatched “depraved” messages to two ladies components.

He used to be suggested to have bombarded a 28-12 months-vintage barmaid and her friend with lewd feedback over social media throughout a three-week length.

Pass Judgement On Williscroft made findings, at the steadiness of probabilities, against Mr Griffiths, in November 2020.

The pass judgement on had been overseeing a dispute among Mr and Ms Griffiths, who are now divorced, focused on a child at private circle of relatives court hearings in Derby.

Ms Griffiths, who is additionally FIFTY ONE, made a series of allegations against Mr Griffiths and asked Pass Judgement On Williscroft to make findings of truth.

Mr Griffiths denied allegations made by Ms Griffiths and “adamantly denied” rape.

Pass Judgement On Williscroft made findings in favour of Ms Griffiths however made up our minds that the ones findings cannot be made public, so as to give protection to the kid at the centre of the case.

A more senior Prime Courtroom judge then dominated that Judge Williscroft’s findings need to be discovered, and Mr and Ms Griffiths named, after newshounds, which incorporated one from the PA news company, learned about the case and argued that the general public had a proper to know.

Pass Judgement On Williscroft had requested Mrs Justice Lieven, who’s primarily based in the Family Division of the Top Courtroom, to think about arguments approximately publicity.

Mrs Justice Lieven heard the reporters’ application to be allowed to document Judge Williscroft’s findings, and name Mr and Ms Griffiths, at an individual listening to in London, and ruled of their favour.

Mr Griffiths challenged Mrs Justice Lieven’s ruling and asked Court Docket of Attraction judges to think about the case.

3 enchantment judges on Friday brushed aside his enchantment and findings made by means of Pass Judgement On Williscroft, and Mrs Justice Lieven, might be made public.

Ms Griffiths had sponsored the newshounds’ battle for e-newsletter and agreed to be named in media reviews – even supposing sufferers of sexual abuse have a felony right to anonymity.

Mr Griffiths used to be towards e-newsletter.

He argued that revealing Judge Williscroft’s findings, and publishing his title and Ms Griffiths’ identify, would hurt the child on the centre of the case and hurt his dating with the kid.

Mrs Justice Lieven dominated against Mr Griffiths.

However she mentioned the child at the centre of the case couldn’t be named in media reports.

“(Judge Williscroft) found that the daddy have been bodily abusive to the mother on greater than one occasion,” said Mrs Justice Lieven in a written ruling at the exposure arguments.

“The judge discovered that the daddy had used coercive and controlling behaviour, including to pressurise the mum to engage in sexual activity.

“The pass judgement on discovered that the daddy raped the mummy… on greater than one instance.”

Mrs Justice Lieven stated she had balanced the media’s right to unfastened speech against rights to admire for family and personal life.

She stated she had performed an “in depth and reality-explicit investigation” and concluded that Judge Williscroft’s findings need to be made public.

“I settle for that, at the specific details of this example, there may be substantial and bonafide public pastime within the e-newsletter of the judgment together with the events being recognized,” stated Mrs Justice Lieven.

“the daddy was once in a prominent and powerful place in the UK.

“Importantly, his function as an MP and a minister meant that he had a job in law-making, including in recognize of issues relating to household abuse.

“The mere indisputable fact that he was once an MP, let alone a minister, implies that there is a robust public hobby in the public realizing a few discovering by a judge of the habits of the nature of that set out within the judgment.

“The democratic device relies upon the media having the ability to post information about elected representatives, specifically where the tips comes from findings in a courtroom judgment.”

Charlotte Proudman, a barrister representing Ms Griffiths, had advised Mrs Justice Lieven that another woman had prior to now made a harassment complaint approximately Mr Griffiths to police.

Ms Griffiths and Mr Griffiths had separated after his resignation and turn into embroiled in a family court dispute overseen by Pass Judgement On Williscroft.

She had no longer made a rape grievance to police.

However she told Judge Williscroft that Mr Griffiths had raped and mistreated her after they had been married, and whilst he used to be an MP, and requested Judge Williscroft to make findings.

Mr Griffiths “adamantly” denied Ms Griffiths’ rape allegations.

He mentioned he had “never had any type of sexual touch that was once no longer consensual”.

Leave a Comment