It was a brusque encounter and lasted barely 15 seconds at the gates of Downing Street on an early autumn evening in September 2012.
But the Plebgate incident spiralled into a two-year battle for Andrew Mitchell and his tightknit family – and all but destroyed his chances of a return to a career on the political frontline.
Looking crestfallen, as he stood on the steps of the high court flanked by his wife Sharon and his daughter, the former cabinet minister signalled that he is admitting defeat.
Mitchell, who faces a legal bill running into millions of pounds – up to £3m according to some reports – said: “Obviously I am bitterly disappointed by the result of the judgment. This has been a miserable two years. But we now need to bring this matter to a close and to move on with our lives.”
Mitchell’s remarks suggest that he accepts he has no future on the political frontline under the leadership of David Cameron. But friends say that he is keen to stand again in his Sutton Coldfield constituency at the next election as senior allies, led by the chairman of the commons foreign affairs select committee Sir Richard Ottaway, voiced support for Mitchell.
Ottaway told Channel Four News: “Andrew has been through hell and back. Mr Rowland has been through hell and back. It is a tragedy for Andrew Mitchell and his wife. I think he should be allowed to get on with his life.”
The verdict by Mr Justice Mitting – and Mitchell’s speedy response – brings to an end a two-year campaign that was launched when friends say they invoked the memory of Margaret Thatcher to persuade him to come out fighting after he lost his job as chief whip. Imagine the regrets you would feel, they said, if you did not at least try to stage a fight – echoing the advice of Denis Thatcher to his wife in 1975, which helped persuade the future prime minister to contest the Tory leadership.
The advice was delivered during lengthy discussions with friends, family and parliamentary colleagues, and emboldened Mitchell to launch an aggressive campaign – played out in the media, then the courts – to clear his name with the help of his mentor, former shadow home secretary David Davis.
Mitchell was forced to resign because he did not retain the confidence of the new generation of Conservative MPs and after a raw calculation in No 10 that the word of a police officer could not be challenged. He admitted swearing in the presence of PC Toby Rowland but insisted he had not said “pleb”.
In ruling that he had said it, the judge pointed out just how “politically toxic” the word is.
In defeat, Mitchell might still try to claim some successes in the campaign. Police officers were disciplined and one, who falsely claimed to have witnessed the encounter between Mitchell and Rowland in September 2012, was jailed. David Cameron even called last year for members of the Police Federation, who gave a false account of a subsequent meeting with Mitchell, to apologise.
Mitchell called high-profile character witnesses including Sebastian Coe and Bob Geldof. The singer told the court his friend was “no slouch” as a swearer but would never use the word pleb.
But the MP’s campaign to restore his reputation has now ended in spectacular failure and humiliation. Mitchell was described by the judge as “childish” and inconsistent in his story.
He is also left with a legal bill running into millions, after Mitting chose to believe the word of Rowland over him.
Outside the court, Rowland said: “It is with huge regret that what happened at the gates of Downing Street more than two years ago has ended up here. It should be pointed out that I and my team tried everything possible to stop the need for court action. The pain me and my family have been through is indescribable and it is particularly saddening that all this happened because I was following procedure and simply doing my job without fear or favour.
“I also recognise how difficult it must have been for Mr Mitchell’s family and I hope now that a line can be drawn and everyone can be left in peace.”
Mitchell will have to face an immediate financial challenge. In May this year it was reported that he was making plans to sell his north London home to help pay his legal bills.
In the future the Mitchell camp may wonder whether it was wise to launch a scorched earth campaign to try to obliterate everyone who questioned his account of the incident. Mitchell and Davis believed they faced such a concerted campaign from the police – whose word is only ever questioned by the most foolhardy of politicians – that they had no choice but to undermine each and every one of them.
The biggest mistake Mitchell made in his concerted and connected campaign to clear his name was at the very point that it looked as if he was moving closer to his goal.
In December 2014 Channel 4 Dispatches broadcast footage of the incident which appeared to question the account of some of officers. Opinion shifted dramatically in Mitchell’s favour after the film.
But Mitchell followed the Channel 4 programme with a lengthy Sunday Times article in which he gave a highly detailed account of the incident.
This article came back to bite Mitchell during his libel trial when Sir John Randall, his former deputy in the whips’ office, said he found the account “rather extraordinary” because Mitchell had told him he could not recall what he said five days after the incident.
Mitchell is likely to repair to his house in Nottinghamshire to contemplate his future. He appears to have accepted that this will be a life beyond the political frontline, possibly in the world of international development where he built his reputation over nearly a decade as secretary of state and shadow secretary of state.
