Scotland Yard blame Tamara Ecclestone for misleading them over botched police raid on home of innocent chauffeur wrongly accused of selling jewellery stolen in a £25m burglary on her mansion
- Flying squad detectives burst into the home of 57-year-old chauffeur Paul Carton
- They tied his legs and held him to a chair while they ‘ransacked’ the house
- He bought diamond ring mount in 2013, it once belonged to Tamara Ecclestone
- But police were convinced it was stolen in Britain’s biggest ever burglary in 2019
- New report has revealed the officers involved have avoided disciplinary action
Scotland Yard has blamed Tamara Ecclestone over a botched raid on the home of an innocent chauffeur wrongly accused of selling jewellery stolen in a £25million burglary on her mansion.
Flying squad detectives burst into the home of Paul Carton, 57, tied his legs and held him to a chair while they ‘ransacked’ the house.
Mr Carton had bought a gold Glenn Spiro diamond ring mount in 2013 that once belonged to the socialite and listed it for sale online last year.
Police were convinced it had been stolen in Britain’s biggest ever domestic burglary in December 2019. Undercover officers targeted the driver by posing as prospective buyers.
The astonishing report from the Met’s Specialist Crime Professional Standards Unit said the detectives were not at fault for the botched operation and laid the blame on Miss Ecclestone (pictured above) for misleading them
The father-of-three suffered a broken tooth, injured back and cuts and bruises in the raid, but a new report has revealed the officers involved have avoided disciplinary action.
The astonishing report from the Met’s Specialist Crime Professional Standards Unit said the detectives were not at fault for the botched operation and laid the blame on Miss Ecclestone for misleading them.
It stated: ‘This was not the fault of the officers, as they had been informed by the victim that the property in question (the ring) had been stolen.
‘This is borne out by the statement of Tamara Ecclestone stating that the ring had been present in her property before the burglary and that she had not sold it on.’
Mr Carton thought he was being robbed when plain-clothes officers burst into his home, so he punched Detective Inspector Ben Mahoney in the face. He was taken to Weymouth police station and arrested for handling stolen goods and assaulting an emergency worker.
He explained he had bought the ring six years prior to the burglary on Miss Ecclestone’s home but was kept in a cell for three hours. Miss Ecclestone eventually realised her mistake and seven days after his arrest Mr Carton was told there would be no further action.
The report states: ‘After your arrest, DC (Aaron) Hobbs made further enquiries and a further statement from Tamara Ecclestone states that she was mistaken in her first statement and the ring had, in fact, been sold.
‘Your account was therefore confirmed and the officers travelled to Dorset to inform you of the outcome.’
Mr Carton made a formal complaint to Scotland Yard shortly after his arrest and received the report from Detective Superintendent Stuart Ryan on Thursday. DS Ryan apologised ‘for the intervention into your life’.
Mr Carton said he was not satisfied with the Met’s response and he remains traumatised by the raid. ‘They have marked their own homework and just drawn a line under it,’ he said.
‘And it’s resulted in ten strangers ransacking my home. I was terrified for my life.’ Mr Carton had bought the ring mount for £1,000 from luxury fashion seller Nikki Bradford Morton, who sells on items no longer wanted by the Ecclestone family.
It is understood the ring, which originally held an eight-carat diamond, had been given to Miss Ecclestone by a boyfriend, Omar Khyami.
The heiress is thought to have removed the diamond and offloaded the ring once the couple split in 2012. Mr Carton said he listed the diamond encrusted ring mount for sale for £15,000 last year, saying it had belonged to ‘a famous socialite’.
Miss Ecclestone has been contacted for comment. The Met said yesterday it ‘has apologised to the complainant’.