From BBC reporting on this
When Det Con David Barr, taking the statement, asked senior officers if he could detain Packer, he was also told no.
"I'm told… when you get Iain Packer and bring him in, it doesn't matter what he tells you - he won't ever be an accused in this case," he recalled.....
....senior officers told them not to pursue Packer.
Both Stuart Hall and retired Det Con David Barr have told the BBC that the order not to detain Packer came from the inquiry's senior investigating officer, Willie Johnston.
Why was he allowed to roam free, when there was evidence in things he had told them that implicated him (in 2006 when they interviewed him)?
Why was he not ever going to be an accused? What an odd thing to say.
I can see perfectly well the police misogyny and poor treatment of all the women around the time of the 1st investigation (just like the girls in Bradford and Manchester were treated). And then these statements - just stick out like a sore thumb. Did someone high up want to protect Packer? and why?