I think a lot of large cases have these kind of charges on people around the periphery of the case, so I'm trying not to read too much into it. I also remember in the case of the young woman who died in Sheffield after a night club that a man was taken in on suspicion of rape and later released and rape wasn't part of the conclusion of the investigation.
But what I am curious about, in addition to the identity of the person and what the charge is actually about, is that for the police to make this arrest they must have evidence that this person has lied/misled during questioning? So they've actually picked up evidence to the contrary of what this person's said?
This kind of charge could be almost anything from providing a false alibi, lying about their or someone else's whereabouts or actions, to phoning in false information to the police (such as "look in such a place, I saw something strange out there that night," but in reality the person was just attention seeking). But I find it interesting that whatever it is, the person seems to have been caught in the lie by either evidence or someone else contradicting their word. What evidence could the police have that this person has lied/misled investigators?
Are we likely to get more details if the person is charged? Or would that possibly jeopardise case-building and be kept quiet?
