POLICE Scotland has committed to reviewing its discourse of people accused of crimes applying for work with vulnerable groups after a rapist secured a place with a mental health charity.
Morgan Prior, a man accused of multiple sexual offences including rape, found work as a children’s counsellor in schools in Angus.
He applied for and was awarded a post with Place2Be, a mental health charity patronised by the Prince William, in April 2021.
The charity was not informed the Carnoustie man, who was this week jailed for more than three years for rape and sexual assault, had appeared on petition accused of child sexual assault, rape and sexual assault charges in March 2021.
Prior worked in an Arbroath school up until the beginning of his week-long trial at the High Court in Dundee and never disclosed the charges with his employer or Disclosure Scotland.
A Protecting Vulnerable Groups (PVG) check was conducted as standard procedure when Prior applied to work as a mental health counsellor with Place2Be.
According to The Courier, police chose not to raise Prior’s court appearance, or bail conditions, with the charity.
However, police have confirmed they will review in an effort to “maintain public confidence”.
Prior was convicted by jury of rape and sexual assault of two of his former partners and was cleared of the child sexual assault allegation by the same jury.
What has the charity said?
Place2Be said they were “concerned” about the result of Police Scotland’s decision not to inform them about his court appearance.
The charity said no concerns were flagged during the course of the PVG check and that Disclosure Scotland did not raise any concerns either.
In a statement, the group said: “We contacted Disclosure Scotland and Police Scotland to understand why Place2Be was not notified about the charges against Mr Prior.
“Disclosure Scotland said they could only reveal information that was shared by Police Scotland.
“Police Scotland have informed us that they took an active decision not to disclose this information – and that they stand by this decision.
“We have requested written confirmation of this decision from Police Scotland.”
The statement added: “We accept that the right to a fair trial includes the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
“However, we are concerned by the implications of Police Scotland choosing not to disclose the information in this case.
“All organisations working with children and vulnerable people will want assurance from Disclosure Scotland and Police Scotland that the PVG system is robust and fit for purpose.”
The charity said it had received a written response from Police Scotland on June 20.
A further statement said: “In their letter, they acknowledge the legitimate public concern around the Morgan Prior case, along with the importance of maintaining public confidence in the application of the PVG scheme.
“Police Scotland confirm that they considered the disclosure of Prior’s non-conviction information on various occasions and reached their decision not to disclose the information after applying their tests to the facts and having conducted a peer review.
“They confirm that there have been a number of discussions around this case and that they will conduct a wider review of the current thresholds for disclosure of non-conviction information, which will be carried out in conjunction with Disclosure Scotland.
“The review will consider any learnings from the case.”
The charity said it was “encouraged” by the commitment from Police Scotland and responded to say they “welcome the opportunity” to offer input into the review process.
Police Scotland response
A police spokesperson said: “Police Scotland has confidence in the Protection of Vulnerable Groups (PVG) scheme and our application of the necessary tests regarding relevancy, accuracy, necessity, currency, proportionality, and the impact on the human rights of applicants, PVG scheme members and others.
“We have engaged with relevant organisations to address concerns with regards to this case.
“As a result, we are undertaking a wider review of the current thresholds for disclosure of non-conviction information, working alongside Disclosure Scotland.
“This review will consider any learning from this case, and to ensure our collective and whole system approach to disclosure of such information maintains public confidence and also reflects the most up to date case law in relation to such matters.”
Scottish Government
In a letter to Tory MSP Maurice Golden (below), children’s minister Natalie Don said she was aware of the media reports into the case and understood its seriousness.
She added: “I am unable to comment on the specific details, however I am confident that Disclosure Scotland and Police Scotland do remain focused on the protection of vulnerable groups and the PVG Scheme most certainly makes communities safer by ensuring unsuitable people do not work with those who are vulnerable.
“It is important to explain the legislative framework around the PVG Scheme to help you better understand that there is a clear separation in duties between Disclosure Scotland, who are exercising the functions of the Scottish Ministers under the Protection of Vulnerable Groups Act 2007 (“the PVG Act”), and Police Scotland.
“Ultimately, the decision about whether to provide Disclosure Scotland with relevant non-conviction information is for Police Scotland alone to make.
“In this specific case, I understand Police Scotland have confirmed with Place2Be that they chose not to provide Disclosure Scotland with non-conviction information, and they have explained (as far as possible) their reasons for that decision.
“They have offered to meet Place2Be and my senior officials at Disclosure Scotland will be involved in that meeting.”
She continued: “It is important to say that there are important European Convention on Human Rights and proportionality issues rightly accompanying any decision by the police to disclose non-conviction information.
“This is undoubtedly a complex balancing act between various duties. Over-disclosure would likely lead to a breach of the right to a private life.”
In response, Golden said: "This case raises serious questions about the justice system and the protection of children.
“Both of those issues of responsibility ultimately sit with the Scottish Government.
“The parents in this case are rightly furious, and they are unlikely to be satisfied by a Scottish Government intent on passing the buck.
“Severe failings have been exposed here, and it’s time ministers took responsibility for those and set out in detail how they intend to fix them.
“A case like this cannot be allowed to happen again.”
