Suspended pending investigation for theft

I hope someone can help here.

Last week I was suspended from work by a blue chip manufacturer. I have 18 years unblemmished service. The allegations are of theft of company property 4 years previously. At the time I purchased a quantity of 'scrap' components which were infact quite valuable - the company no longer had a use for them and sold them to me for a nominal fee. I subsequently sold these components and readily admit it.
However, the parent company has discovered this, and it transpires that the division I work for should have destroyed these components rather than dispose of them. As this 'theft' goes back 4 years it's difficult to prove my innocence, the company does have records listing 'assorted items' or similar that were purchased at the time, but they claim it was for something else as it doesn't list the items specifically. Most of the people involved at the time have left the company, although two remember these components and will vouch for the companies disposal.
The problem I have is that the parent company will want answers and I think my company will sacrifice me to protect their reputation.
They are following correct procedure as expected, but I think it will utimately lead to dismissal for 'suspicion of theft' which appears legal.
Is this the case, and if so, what would be my best course of action? I don't see how I can prove my innocence and there would always be a 'suspicion'

Many thanks

Right -scary isn't it? So the first thing you need to do is stay calm. Even if your speculation about the outcome is correct then losing the plot to panic won't help you. It is early days and this may pan out before a disciplinary or it may run the whole gamut. Nobody knows yet, so it's one day at a time....

These items were legitimately purchased by you and you have proof of the transaction. So unless you were specifically forbidden from reselling them you have done nothing wrong. The fact that the sales receipt doesn't specify what they sold is not evidence of theft. It is evidence of the fact that a legitimate transaction approved by the employer took place and, if this went to a tribunal they would need to show that it was for something else, which they cannot do because it doesn't specify what it was for!

An employer does not have to prove their case to the level of evidence of a criminal court - but they must be able to show a reasonable belief that you are guilty of theft. They have no evidence that there has been a theft, there is evidence that the items were legitimately sold to you, and THEY cannot prove otherwise. Based on what you have said here, I cannot see that reasonable belief could be established. For now all you can do is collect any evidence you can, and wait for their next move.

Many thanks for your response. That's the first positive thing I've read so far. As far as I can see, I don't have proof of purchase per se. The company has the records and it looks to me like they have been abbreviated - for example there's a record of purchase for '4 small crates' but it doesn't say what was in the crates. It's not unusual for the records to be rather vague though, the manager responsible for the scrap purchases wasn't particularly bright.
Two people have independantly verified that they beleive these items were sold rather than destroyed, but as it's 4 years ago, they can't remember details. I hope you're right concerning the 'belief of guilt' but I can't help thinking I will be made a scapegoat here.

And if you are right it may take a tribunal. But they really must have a reasonable belief that you stole something for a tribunal. If what you say is true (and I am not saying it isn't - only that I only have your version of the story and there are always two! ),they have no evidence that the items were not sold to you, evidence that something THEY can't quite identify WAS sold to you, and not a shred of evidence that you stole anything! There's nothing reasonable about that belief. Fairies at the bottom of the garden comes out more credible!

Yes I know I have a logical solid case, but we are talking about a £2bn company who have become slightly embarrassed and would love to clear this matter up by claiming theft and dismiss a single employee. They definately won't risk a tribunal if there's a chance of loosing, but I'm afraid of dirty tricks.

Can you suggest what evidence might be useful to me in this case? I am trying to locate more people who can vouch for the sale of these components - I think I wasn't the only person to purchase items, but nobody will be able to say for sure what I bought. Is there anything else I need to establish to support my case?

Many thanks

Any evidence is good evidence - but here's the thing. they kept no record of what they sold you - so how do they know what you had? What they claim is missing - how could they ever prove at this stage that you even had it?

Yes, they kept rather vague records and don't even know to the nearest year when these items went 'missing' Infact it's only that I admitted selling them, did they know they were missing, or rather not destroyed.
I sold most of the items on a well known internet auction site and so there is a list of the items I've sold and for how much - they have taken this list, and compared it to items that were supposed to be destroyed and some of the items are similar as expected.
I think by probability, it's fair to assume the items are the same and I won't deny it, but at the same time, I don't want to admit things I can't prove are true. It seems the more I tell them, the more they turn it around against me. As this is in an 'investigation stage' I don't want to seem unhelpful but it's making me feel that way.

When I was first questioned about these components and suspended, I asked 'what am I accused of?' and I was given an accusation - would this help me to prove this investigation isn't fair? I only ask because the HR guy was very eager to retract his statement the next day.

Many thanks for your opinion.

I am not sure that I follow this - retract what statement, and what did they say? Why do you suggest the investigation may not have been fair?

When I was first asked about selling these components, the questions I think were designed to 'trap' me into some sort of admission of guilt which is understandable I guess. I wasn't sure what the questions were referring to at the time - remember all this occurred 4 years ago. When I asked specifically 'what am I accused of' I was given the answer something like 'theft of components'
The next day, the HR guy who made this statement was very keen to tell the trade union that he wasn't accusing me of anything, and they were in investigatory stages.
This made me suspicous and I'm wondering if they should not have made this statement as it infers guilt prior to investigation, or maybe because if they can't prove theft, I could have some recourse for sueing etc?

.....The company are contacting the manager who was responsible for the scrap sales - he retired 3 years ago, but I'm afraid he may panic upon any questions such as 'did you sell these items and keep the cash?' and 'why weren't they destroyed?' He'll probably claim somebody must have stole them and that could be the end of it.