No prosecution of Police Ombudsman Marie Anderson over 'reported domestic incident' two years ago

She had been reported for potential offences of perverting the course of justice and misconduct in public office in relation to what the PPS calls a “reported domestic incident" in Holywood, Co Down, in September 2023.

On June 9 a file had been sent to the PPS about the case.

On June 17 it was announced she was taking a leave of absence from the role because "current commentary is detracting from the focus of that work" (with her salary continuing to be paid throughout).

A previous leave of absence had lasted from at least June 2024 to January 2025 and was due to illness, the Ombudsman’s office had said.

Today the PPS has said: “After careful consideration of a file submitted following an investigation led by West Midlands Police into alleged actions by the Ombudsman, it was concluded by prosecutors that there was no reasonable prospect of conviction for any criminal offence.”

The PPS statement quoted Stephen Herron, Director of Public Prosecutions, as saying: “This was a complex and sensitive matter which was given careful consideration by a team of senior prosecutors and highly experienced independent senior counsel.

“This case has understandably generated significant public interest and speculation – much of which was factually inaccurate.

“The events of September 2023 that led to this investigation were undoubtedly difficult. The evidence shows that PSNI engaged with the Ombudsman with care and sensitivity, and their investigation was conducted properly and in good faith.

“The central allegation in this case was that the Ombudsman had misconducted herself in public office and / or attempted to pervert the course of justice through her interactions with police who were investigating the incident referred to above.

“The legal threshold for both offences is high. In assessing whether the Test for Prosecution was met, prosecutors considered all of the relevant facts and circumstances including the particular context in which the interactions took place;

"Contemporaneous records made by police in relation to what was said by her;

"And the evidence from senior police who spoke directly to the Ombudsman during key stages of the relevant events.

“It was concluded that the evidence was insufficient to establish that the Ombudsman was either acting or purporting to act as a public officer at the relevant times;

"Or that she misconducted herself or attempted to pervert the course of justice through anything she said or did in response to police enquiries.”

Little has been publicly confirmed about the “incident” at the heart of the case.

It happened at about 6.30pm on September 23, 2023.

Police said at the time that they “were unable to gain access to the address and, following contact, a man aged 63 was arrested for common assault and interviewed at Musgrave station”.

The man later accepted a caution for common assault.

The PSNI requested that West Midlands Police lead an investigation into separate allegations against the Ombudsman, relating to her conduct during the early stages of the PSNI investigation.

An initial file went to the PPS in September 2024, with a full file following in June 2025.

It is understood that to qualify as an offence of misconduct in public office, someone “acting as” a public official must have “willfully neglected” to perform their duty or “willfully misconducted” themselves “to such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust” – and that this must be “without reasonable excuse or justification”.

Perveting the course of justice requires the suspect to have done something which has “a tendency to pervert” or which is “intended to pervert” the course of public justice.

Bobby Singleton, PSNI Deputy Chief Constable, said: “The PPS has now considered the evidence and directed ‘no prosecution’ as the investigation did not pass their evidential test.

“Where there are reasonable grounds to suspect the commission of criminal offences it is the duty of police to investigate those matters.

"Police will make relevant enquiries, interview those with information, question suspects and, in consultation with the PPS, either charge a person or submit a file to the PPS in relation to the investigation. This procedure was followed in this case.

“This was an extremely complex and challenging investigation and the difficulties that police encountered have been fully acknowledged by the PPS.

"I want to echo the comments of the PPS on the high standard of the police investigation. I also want to place on record my thanks to the independent investigation team from West Midlands & Greater Manchester Police for the professional and thorough investigation they conducted.

“The delays in progressing the case were beyond the control of the PSNI and the independently-led investigation team.

"Police of course have a duty to impartially investigate all potential crime without fear or favour and in accordance with the law and we are committed to doing so. I have full confidence that those duties were discharged in this investigation.

“Prosecutorial decisions are made independently by the PPS and it would be inappropriate to comment further other than to reiterate the police service's commitment to treat everyone equally before the law.”