An addendum Freedom of Information (FOI) response, which was previously refused then answered on appeal, has revealed the rank of PSNI officer who cross-checked the Police National Computer (PNC) on Jonathan Creswell’s previous record was a Chief Inspector.
The revelation debunks previous claims that Creswell’s record for violence was not fully known, casting further concerns on the initial handling of the case and why the Police Ombudsman found only general misconduct.
It also throws up why officers did not speak to Creswell about the exposure matter from 2016, from which he absconded for four years.
Despite consistent concerns being raised from August 4 2020 – the day after Katie was admitted unresponsive to Altnagelvin Hospital – no action was taken, and it was later contended the absence of violence convictions showing on Creswell’s record was a factor.
Although this should never have led to the case being closed down as non-suspicious, it is now clear senior police were fully aware from five days after Katie’s death.
This also means they were fully armed with this knowledge when Creswell attended Strand Road PSNI Station on August 19 2020 – five days after the PNC was viewed – to discuss Katie’s death as the person who had purportedly rescued her.
Add to being now fully alert to Creswell’s propensity for violence coupled with the situation with Katie in which alarm bells were silenced, the PSNI did not at any stage invoke any safeguarding mechanisms in terms of women or children he was associating with.
The PNC stores critical data to support criminal investigations, safeguarding, and standard background checks, along with holding convictions, cautions, and warnings for any criminal offence.
With PSNI initially relying on their own system to cancel concerns as Katie’s life ebbed away, it was assumed the PNC had not been checked, and as the suicide narrative took hold, there didn’t seem to be any point.
But documents show the PNC was checked on August 14 2020 – five days after Katie’s death – and despite the full appraisal of Creswell’s propensity for violence, the non-suspicious determination was stubbornly adhered to.
The PSNI initially tried to evade answering the FOI, applying an incorrect exemption in the process, but reversed that on appeal.
In a follow-up enquiry the PSNI were asked to provide the rank of officer who accessed the PNC.
Surprisingly, without a fight it was revealing the officer was a Chief Inspector, indicating at some point their were sufficient concerns were for the case to climb through the ranks to a superior position.
Even with that high rank, there remains no explanation why the case was immediately closed down as non-suspicious at that very early stage.
This again challenges previous narratives that PSNI were unaware of Creswell’s propensity for violence because of their own system failings, when the totality of his criminal record was viewed at a senior level within days of Katie’s death.
The Chief Inspector would have clearly seen the record aligned entirely with what had been consistently flagged the previous week as Katie fought for her life,.
When Chief Constable Jon Boucher indicated aspects of Creswell’s record were missing, he assured the system had since changed to ensure this could not happen again.
However there has never been any explanation on how this occurred in the first place and if Creswell’s case was affected.
Having therefore learned the extent of Creswell’s record within days, PSNI were asked why no action was taken at that point..
A spokesperson replied: “While legal proceedings remain ongoing, the PSNI will not comment on specific detail connected with this investigation.”
In terms of the follow up the PSNI were asked what would be the expectation of any officer in such circumstances, but principally a Chief Inspector with significant experience, around examining previous convictions?
They were also asked to clarify if the case was closed as suicide/non-suspicious by this officer after they reviewed the PNC on August 14 2026?
Reverting to the default stonewalling position a, spokesperson repeated: “While legal proceedings remain ongoing, the PSNI will not comment on specific detail connected with this investigation.”
Notably the PSNI also refused to clarify expectations of a Chief Inspector in such circumstances, which was not specific to the Creswell case.
