A JUDGE has raised concerns about destroyed closed-circuit security television (CCTV) footage which could provide vital evidence in court.

Recorder Paul Worsley, a part-time judge, spoke out at Durham Crown Court after footage of an assault carried out by Matthew Croom, 24, in Darlington town centre, was not produced.

Although the incident was recorded, the footage was not made available and the tape appeared to have been wiped clean under a 28-day recycling policy.

Recorder Worsley said he understood this had been the third such incident where CCTV footage had not been produced.

"If there's evidence available from a CCTV recording of an incident it may, of course, indicate that the suspect was indeed responsible for an attack," he said.

"There was material both the prosecution and defence should have had that was not made available.

"I am concerned about this. because the use of CCTV helps everyone, the victim, the prospective defendant and the prosecutor."

The Recorder said it had not led to a miscarriage of justice in the case of Croom, who admitted assault causing actual bodily harm, but could have helped speed up proceedings.

He asked that his comments be passed to Chief Superintendent Michael Banks, of Darlington police.

Croom, of Coronation Street, Barnard Castle, was given 60 hours community punishment and ordered to pay £200 compensation plus £100 costs on Wednesday.

A spokesman for Darlington Borough Council, which runs the town's CCTV system, said tapes were retained for 28 days before being wiped for data protection and public reassurance purposes.

"If an incident is seen on the tape, then we will contact the police. Or if the police want to see tapes for a suspected incident, we seal them and hold them for as long as it takes for them to require that evidence, sometimes that can be a number of years," he said.

A spokesman for Durham Constabulary said that in Croom's case police had not requested the tape which contained footage of the assault should be saved by Darlington Borough Council, so it was wiped.

"In this case, the footage had been examined by one of our officers but it only showed the aftermath of the incident, not the actual assault," he said.

"Since the accused did not dispute being at the scene the tape was, in these circumstances, of little or no use."