I don’t know, but I’m having a hard time buying the story that the reason he took pictures of the neighbor children is because they were vandalizing his garden. The parents tell the police that a pedophile is photographing their children, the police see that the photos were of the children vandalizing the man’s garden, and they never mention this to the parents? And I don’t see any indication that they’ve brought charges related to the vandalism. If they really do have pictures of the kids in the act of vandalizing the garden, why wouldn’t they bring charges? Why wouldn’t they publish the photos? I don’t know, the story just doesn’t add up for me.
This is where you made your mistake: "[t]he parents tell the police that a pedophile is photographing their children."
No. The article just says someone. It doesn't that someone was one of the parents.
Your questions are to the point, and are the reason why several of the police officers have been suspended from duty. This man was arrested on the basis of false allegations, and the police offered no assistance to him against the thugs who were vandalising his garden and threatening him. The “parents” and “neighbours” just wanted to defend their juvenile deliquents.
There are more details about the arrest in The Independent’s article about this - it is sad reading.