A man wrongly accused of possessing child pornography said his wife’s support steered him through his “devastating” eight year ordeal.

Jeremy Clifford, 51, won £20,000 damages from Hertfordshire Police last Friday for the distress and hurt he suffered when he was charged with possessing and making indecent photographs of children in 2005.

The allegations were dropped by police just days before a trial was due to start when the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) offered no evidence against Mr Clifford.

His first bid for damages for malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office failed in December 2008.

However, he won an appeal and after a second trial held in January, Mr Justice Mackay, sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, found in Mr Clifford’s favour.

The judge said Mr Clifford’s evidence, “supported by his wife, is that while he was on bail though he was devastated by his arrest, which caused difficulties for his business and a strain on his relationship with his wife, he always had the hope that the matter would not end in charges.

“When he was charged he found that period particularly difficult with numerous court appearances, which caused him particular distress and fear of publicity and the like.”

The police now face paying “hundreds of thousands of pounds” in costs, while Mr Clifford said he will appeal against the damages order.

It was in October 2003 that Mr Clifford was first arrested as part of Operation Ore, a cross-Atlantic police investigation into a US website called Landslide, which offered users access to adult and child pornography.

Mr Clifford’s credit card had been fraudulently used to access the site six times in 1999 – once during his wedding to wife Faith - and he received a refund after alerting his bank.

Following his arrest, several computers were seized from his Garston home and his photographic business in Borehamwood.

And it was during detailed forensic analysis on one computer – bought after Landslide shut in 1999 – that ten level one indecent images of children were found.

Level one is the lowest level of seriousness used to categorise indecent images of children.

In July 2004, Mr Clifford was subsequently charged with possession of the images that the police computer expert found despite his lawyers arguing there was no evidence he knew they were there.

But nine months later, he was formally cleared of all charges, in April 2005, when the CPS offered no evidence against him.

It was revealed police had proceeded with the case despite their own computer expert starting the evidence was “insufficient to prove guilty knowledge” as the images had been found in temporary internet folders and could not be relied upon as their origin was unknown.

When Mr Clifford’s first claim for damages was dismissed in 2008, the judge ruled there was no wrongdoing by the police and that his arrest was justifiable.

But Mr Justice Mackay said in his judgement, published last Friday, there was “no reasonable and probable cause” to charge Mr Clifford and awarded him £20,000.

Speaking to the Watford Observer this week, Mr Clifford said: “We fought this because I knew I was innocent and said we would fight this to the end, no matter what the cost.”

After his arrest, Mr Clifford said he was “in shock”. The couple eventually lost their photographic shop in Borehamwood and were forced to move house to fund their legal bid.

“I wouldn’t even look at Faith. It was devastating. But I knew I was innocent. I knew it was a mistake,” he said.

“When they told me they were going to charge me, that was a really bad time in my life. I became very depressed about it. I couldn’t work.

“It was a very difficult time.”

Faith, who has written a book on the experience from her point of view, entitled In Justice, said: “You’re accused of something so horrific, that’s the depressing part. You keep it quiet because of the subject matter. This was completely alien.

“I never had any doubt at all he was innocent.”

When Mr Clifford was cleared of all charges, however, he said his relief was “huge”.

“Now the truth has come out, we feel relieved and we’re getting on with our lives,” he said.

“But it took eight years. The frustration was losing the first damages case two years ago. We were absolutely devastated. Nobody could believe we lost when they admitted there was no evidence.

“When I was in my dark days, without my wife supporting me, who knows? Many would have walked out by now.

“But we decided no matter what it took, we were going to fight this.

“We fought it and fought it for eight years and it takes some stamina to do that.

“But I only did it with the support from my wife. Without her, I wouldn’t have been able to do it.”

A police representative said: “Hertfordshire Constabulary takes the protection of children very seriously and proactively pursues those suspected of being involved in the production, distribution and viewing of child abuse images.

“We will seek to learn from this case and service improvements have already been implemented in the years since this case started.”