The police investigation into alleged sex abuse by Lord Brittan was "fully justified" - though the case was unlikely to result in a criminal conviction - a review has concluded.
Lord Brittan died a year ago still under suspicion of being part of a VIP paedophile gang.
A lack of primary evidence in the case meant he was cleared by the Met of rape, though he died from cancer aged 75 without being notified of the decision.
The way the Metropolitan Police handled the investigation has resulted in criticism for its commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe.
A review by Dorset Police has since vindicated the decision to investigate a rape claim by a student against Lord Brittan, dating back to 1967, but said any court case would likely result in an acquittal rather than a conviction.
The review said: "An investigation into allegations made by the complainant was necessary, proportionate and fully justified despite the significant passage of time."
It said the police log "was not a comprehensive document and omitted key elements of decision making" and lacked essential detail.
It also found a "poor standard" of obtaining evidence to be used in the case, and said the senior investigating officer made errors and was "inexperienced in rape investigation".
But the review also broadly supported the investigation.
It said: "Skilful investigators pursued appropriate lines of inquiry from the complainant's account and obtained credible evidence.
"At the conclusion of these lines of inquiry, any reasonable investigator could properly conclude that the allegations made by the complainant were far from fanciful and continued to be proportionate and justified."
It described the complainant, a 19-year-old woman, as a "competent witness" who displayed "no malice" in her motivation. She had "little to gain from making a false allegation", the review added.
There was "some ambiguity surrounding the issue of consent" to have sex, which would prove difficult before a properly directed jury.
The review added: "Proving that consent was not given or could have reasonably been implied would be the first difficult step and proving that LB (Lord Brittan) understood this to be the case would have proved more difficult still.
"When all these factors are taken into account, the reviewer concludes that following a thorough investigation with no useful lines of inquiry left unexplored, the case is more likely to lead to acquittal than conviction."
It said the investigation was conducted "with integrity, proportionality and objectivity ... in good faith, against a credible account provided by a compelling witness".
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article