| Last updated
The Prime Minister's special adviser Dominic Cummings may have committed a 'minor breach' of Coronavirus guidelines, an investigation by Durham Police has concluded.
The breach refers to a 50 minute journey that Cummings made to Barnard Castle whilst he was staying at his parents' house in the county.
Cummings has previously claimed that he drove his four-year-old son and wife to the tourist spot in order to check his eyesight.
Durham Police concluded that Cummings could have been guilty of a 'minor breach' of the rules after his April 12 journey.
However, despite the force issuing 137 fines to others for breaking the rules, they have concluded that no further action is necessary against Boris Johnson's most senior aide.
The full statement reads: "On 27 March 2020, Dominic Cummings drove to Durham to self-isolate in a property owned by his father.
"Durham Constabulary does not consider that by locating himself at his father's premises, Mr Cummings committed an offence contrary to regulation 6 of the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020. (We are concerned here with breaches of the Regulations, not the general Government guidance to "stay at home".)
"On 12 April 2020, Mr Cummings drove approximately 26 miles from his father's property to Barnard Castle with his wife and son. He stated on 25 May 2020 that the purpose of this drive was to test his resilience to drive to London the following day, including whether his eyesight was sufficiently recovered, his period of self-isolation having ended.
"Durham Constabulary have examined the circumstances surrounding the journey to Barnard Castle (including ANPR, witness evidence and a review of Mr Cummings' press conference on 25 May 2020) and have concluded that there might have been a minor breach of the Regulations that would have warranted police intervention. Durham Constabulary view this as minor because there was no apparent breach of social distancing.
"Had a Durham Constabulary police officer stopped Mr Cummings driving to or from Barnard Castle, the officer would have spoken to him, and, having established the facts, likely advised Mr Cummings to return to the address in Durham, providing advice on the dangers of travelling during the pandemic crisis. Had this advice been accepted by Mr Cummings, no enforcement action would have been taken.
"In line with Durham Constabulary's general approach throughout the pandemic, there is no intention to take retrospective action in respect of the Barnard Castle incident since this would amount to treating Mr Cummings differently from other members of the public. Durham Constabulary has not taken retrospective action against any other person.
"By way of further context, Durham Constabulary has followed Government guidance on management of alleged breaches of the regulations with the emphasis on the NPCC and College of Policing 4Es: Engage, Explain and Encourage before Enforcement.
"Finally, commentary in the media has suggested that Mr Cummings was in Durham on 19 April 2020. Mr Cummings denies this and Durham Constabulary have seen insufficient evidence to support this allegation.
"Therefore Durham Constabulary will take no further action in this matter and has informed Mr Cummings of this decision."
Chosen for YouChosen for You
Most Read StoriesMost Read