Police issue verdict on 'family voting' claims after Reform UK complaint (original) (raw)

Police have found "no evidence" of family voting in the Gorton and Denton by-election after Reform UK reported the claims.

Election observer group Democracy Volunteers said it had witnessed "concerningly high levels" of family voting, an illegal practice where two voters either confer, collude or direct each other on voting.

Nigel Farage - whose party failed to win the contest - seized on the claims and said Reform had reported cases of family voting to the police and the Electoral Commission. In February's race, Reform UK's candidate Matt Goodwin came second with 28.7% of the vote. The Green Party's Hannah Spencer won the by-election with 40.7% of the vote and a majority of 4,402.

In a statement issued on Friday, Greater Manchester Police said: "We’ve concluded our investigation into alleged ‘family voting’ at last month’s Gorton and Denton by-election, finding no evidence of any intent to influence or refrain any person from voting."

Police said Democracy Volunteers observers did not allege "any verbal instruction or physical conduct that indicated one person was directing or coercing another regarding how to vote". "This is a crucial part of the legislation to prove such an offence was committed," the force said.

Police said they had asked the election observer group for descriptions of those alleged to be involved, and timings on when incidents are believed to have occurred. These details "were not documented by observers or the complainant, and we have not been provided with any identities or descriptions to pursue," GMP said.

The force said it had obtained some CCTV footage from three polling stations visited by Democracy Volunteers and spoken to the presiding officer from each one, but that these stations did not show any evidence of people directing or coercing others on how to vote. "There is no evidence to suggest any intent to influence or refrain a person from voting as stated in the Ballot Secrecy Act 2023," it said.

The row over claims of family voting erupted overnight on the by-election night claims of "family voting". By-election officials reacted with fury after Democracy Volunteers said it had seen family voting in 12% of polling stations.

At the time, officials said no such issues had been reported throughout the day and questioned why the group had not raised the serious allegations before then.

After the police investigation, Green Party leader Zack Polanski said: "The morning after Hannah won I was asked time and time again about this. There was no evidence for it. Instead the establishment media fuelled the fire. It was Islamophobic. And it's because those in power are scared of us ending rip off Britain."

Police statement in full:

Issued by Greater Manchester Police

We’ve concluded our investigation into alleged ‘family voting’ at last month’s Gorton and Denton by-election, finding no evidence of any intent to influence or refrain any person from voting.

Our investigation into alleged influencing of voters at a polling booth (under Section 62C Representation of the People Act 1983 (Ballot Secrecy Act 2023)) began after a criminal report from the Reform UK party following a public statement made by independent electoral observers at Democracy Volunteers.

We have spoken to the four Democracy Volunteers observers present at polling stations on the day of the by-election (26 February) who have shared with us their eyewitness account. This includes some instances of more than one voter going into a booth at the same time, and instances of people looking over the shoulder of voters.

The information they have provided to us estimates this may have happened on 32 occasions across 15 polling stations.

The observers do not allege any verbal instruction or physical conduct that indicated one person was directing or coercing another regarding how to vote. This is a crucial part of the legislation to prove such an offence was committed.

Our investigation team, led by an experienced senior investigating officer, spoke to all four volunteers from Democracy Volunteers as part of our enquiries – obtaining a copy of their observations.

We also spoke to the Presiding Officers at 15 stations as well as the Acting Returning Officer, none of whom received any reports other than from Democracy Volunteers.

We have received no further criminal reports.

For us to investigate allegations, we require an understanding of who the potential suspects may be, and evidence that may corroborate eyewitness accounts. For an investigation to meet the criminal threshold for prosecution, we require admissible evidence of intent or action aimed at influencing the vote.

We have asked Democracy Volunteers for descriptions of those alleged to be involved, and timings on when these are believed to have occurred. These details were not documented by observers or the complainant, and we have not been provided with any identities or descriptions to pursue.

The absence of this information means there is no remaining reasonable line of enquiry. This also includes limitations with CCTV as an absence of descriptions, and votes not being time-stamped, meaning we are not able to identify individuals from footage.

We have approached all 45 polling stations in the Gorton and Denton constituency to ask for CCTV from the day. Forty-one of those polling stations told us they did not have CCTV activated in the building as it would have compromised the secrecy of the vote during polling day, in line with advice given.

We have seized and viewed CCTV from three of the remaining four polling stations. These are three polling stations that Democracy Volunteers visited. We have spoken to the Presiding Officer from each one.

However, these stations do not show any evidence of anyone directing or coercing another regarding how to vote – the crucial part of the legislation to prove such an offence was committed.

There is no evidence to suggest any intent to influence or refrain a person from voting as stated in the Ballot Secrecy Act 2023.

We have been liaising with the Electoral Commission, who we have shared our findings with. We have also shared our findings with the Returning Officer.

We have updated the complainant about the work of our investigation and the conclusion we have reached.