A new report into how former East Devon councillor John Humphreys was able to receive an honorary title while under investigation for sex crimes against children is to be carried out.

Mr Humphreys, 60, who also previously served as mayor of Exmouth, is now eight months into a 21-year prison sentence for sexually assaulting two teenage boys 10 years apart.

He was first questioned in 2005 but police did not find sufficient evidence for a prosecution.

Following a complaint by a second victim, Cllr Humphreys was arrested in 2016 before being released on bail on suspicion of sex crimes against children.

Neither incident was made public and Mr Humphreys continued to be a councillor until May 2019, eventually being awarded the honorary title of alderman by East Devon District Council (EDDC) in December that year.

Following his conviction in August last year, EDDC voted to remove his title and to have a review of the alderman process. 

But the review has so far only looked at peripheral matters such as whether alderman should keep their free car parking permits. 

Now, following a vote at full council, councillors have agreed to commission an in-depth investigation into the circumstances surrounding Mr Humphreys' receipt of the honour.

The award of alderman is made by many councils to former councillors in recognition of their civic contribution. In East Devon, those who receive it are entitled to free parking in EDDC car parks and may continue to represent the council at some functions.

Proposing that a report should be commissioned, Councillor Jess Bailey (Independent, West Hill and Aylesbeare) said she wanted to find out how John Humphreys, despite his arrest in 2016, continued to serve as a councillor until May 2019, retained his position as lead member for Exmouth and went to be bestowed the honour of alderman in December 2019, with particular focus on the circumstances that led to him receiving the title.

She said any report into these matters should be "about one key thing: child protection and safeguarding of children."

"Both the CPS [Crown Prosecution Service] and the police specifically commented on the fact that John Humphreys held a position and standing in the community.

"People who hold positions of power and authority are more difficult to challenge. It's therefore essential that the council do everything possible to make sure it does not in any way perpetuate this power and potentially make it more difficult to come forward and seek justice.

"Simply saying innocent until proven guilty is not enough. Whilst it might not have been possible to prevent John Humphreys from being a councillor while he was under investigation, the council was not under any obligation to bestow the honour of alderman on him."

Despite being under investigation since 2016, no officers or councillors at EDDC have stated that they had any knowledge of the allegations against Mr Humphreys during his time in office or when he was named as an alderman.

A statement from one of John Humphreys' victims was read out at a public EDDC meeting last December in which he said he had a psychological fear of Mr Humphreys because of his standing and influence in the community. 

The victim wrote: "I still feel that Humphreys has been favoured because of his connections, his apparent good character and social standing as a councillor.

"In my mind, he has been a monster to me. He took away my teenage years and this has gone into my adulthood. I should have retained that innocence – but that choice was taken away from me by this man.

"There are still so many questions to be answered. After the verdict, I was still ignored. I'd like to be heard."

Speaking at the recent EDDC meeting, Councillor Paul Millar (Labour, Exmouth Halsdon), who seconded Cllr Bailey's proposal, said: "There has to be a way that individuals in any way involved in the nomination process are able to intervene to prevent nominating a potentially inappropriate individual. 

"No institution in its right mind should ever risk offering a civic honour if they had any knowledge within that institution of a serious criminal investigation that could be taking place.

"For the victims, I believe they deserve to know this [alderman] process, if reformed, could genuinely guarantee that this could never happen again. If not we have to scrap the system."

"Victims deserve an independent external investigation because this council in its previous report to scrutiny [a council committee] in my view has failed to investigate this internally and address the key concerns."

An EDDC overview and scrutiny meeting last month came up with a number of recommendations regarding how the alderman and alderwoman award process should work in future. These recommendations will now be paused until the new report into Mr Humphreys' honour is complete.

Forty-one members voted in favour of looking into options for this new report. Councillor Phil Twiss (Conservatives, Honiton St. Michael's) was the only member to abstain.

Mark Williams, EDDC's chief executive, will now progress this work. He told the meeting: "Councillors need to go into this with their eyes open" in terms of how much such a report could cost, how long it could take and how difficult it might be to decide on the terms of the enquiry or investigation.