Mar 10 2015
On December 15th 2014, I sent an email to Temporary Inspector Paul Ahmed – the ESSEX POLICE OFFICER dealing with the very serious complaint that I have made against the, errrr, ESSEX POLICE.
The reason for the email – found in full below this update – was the fact that he was/is without a doubt fobbing me off by saying that he could not act on the complaint until any court action is over and done with.
Course, the very fact that the nature of the complaint would put an immediate stop to any court action apparently counts for fuck all in the wholly corrupt world of the Essex Police Force.
Now as well as sending the e-mail to Paul Ahmed, I also sent a copy to the Independent Police Complaints Commission as it would – as far as I can see – be a waste of time even investigating my complaint were Ahmed to remain in charge of doing so since my complaint now extends to his conduct also.
Along with the IPPC, I also sent a copy to the Essex Chief Constable, Stephen Kavanagh – whose swift reply to the email was to have a court summons [badly] drawn up on the 17th of December, charging me with harassment… That then is a measure of the total lack of integrity and disregard for the law, possessed by the Essex Chief Constable.
Indeed, my Solicitor confirmed to me in January that the summons was malicious and unheard of given that I wasn’t due to answer bail for the charges until the 20th of January 2015.
And the final recipients of the email – which I had a barrister read before I sent it – was my MP, the right useless, disgrace to office, Jim Dud-drige and the under-fire, totally unfit for purpose Essex PCC Nick Nick Alston.
Neither of the latter – nor Paul Ahmed – made any reply whatsoever… Again, a true indication of their total lack of integrity.
So, having signed off the email with the words “I now look forward to your prompt response, which will of course be shared with my supporters”, it was somewhat of a surprise to receive the following letter YESTERDAY (9/3/15) – nearly 3 months after sending the email.
I can confirm that I have had NO other communications detailing the further complaints – no surprise there then, since the ESSEX PLOD PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS are at best; dire.
Neither are the rules regarding complaints flexible and as such do not allow for a “pragmatic approach” to them being taken… The guidelines on that matter are clearly stated.
Indeed, the very fact that the plod have now consulted with the CPS on this matter proves that the CPS were not contacted in the first instance – thus another episode of the corrupt
police force flouting the law when it suits them.
Of which they do far, far too often for them to be classed as anything other than a gang of criminals.
Staff at Essex Police are on restricted duties after the force announced the cases of 59 alleged victims, some young children, over nearly five decades were being investigated. Rapes are among the serious cases being looked at.
One officer within the child abuse unit has been suspended while 11 others have been placed away from the department following the referral to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) – the largest referral of its kind in the force’s history.
Chief Constable Stephen Kavanagh said the force has now referred additional matters to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC).
These are understood to involve similar issues – child sexual exploitation, the use of intelligence and the quality of response officers – as the cases already raised.
Reacting to the development, Nick Alston, police and crime commissioner for Essex, said victims deserves the best support possible from the force, adding: “Nothing matters more than protecting our children.”
Mr Alston said: “As the review into the quality of child abuse investigations instigated by Essex Police progresses, regrettably I do not find it surprising that it has identified further cases of concern and fresh referrals to the IPCC.
“It was essential that the review was conducted, and it is equally essential that cases of concern are brought to the attention of the independent watchdog.
“It is distressing that the number of child abuse cases being referred has increased.
“I am convinced the force is making real efforts to identify and resolve problems with the quality of child abuse investigations. I am deeply committed to ensuring that the standard of professionalism of all investigations matches the standards of the best, and I am holding the chief constable to account for this.”
Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha – Prick!
He added that he expected the review to be completed “shortly”.
The inquiry was announced earlier this month when Essex Police said the more recent investigations include allegations of a lack of honesty or integrity by officers.
Seventeen of the cases are historic and date back to the late 1960s and early 1970s, as well as 13 more recent alleged offences.
The matter came to light in November when an urgent review of the child abuse team was ordered amid “concerns in respect of the quality of investigations and the management of cases”.
An experienced retired detective has now been brought in to review the live investigations being conducted.
A special helpline has been set up for victims of families worried about child abuse investigations by Essex Police. Those concerned can contact 01245 282103. Source
How fucking strange that it took a Jersey Newspaper to report this news whilst I can’t find anything at all about it in the Southend Echo… But I am sure that the phone number provided will be a great help to around no people whatsoever in Jersey.
And I also feel positive that heads WON’T roll over this totally unacceptable display either:
A former chief constable is being sued by the police force where he used to work in a bid to recover £85,000 in ‘golden handcuffs’ payments he received for staying in his job.
Roger Baker was employed by Essex Police on a salary of £139,000, but bonuses and expenses took his total pay above £200,000 a year.
The payments included £85,000 to reward him for staying at the force – but the area’s police commissioner now disputes these bonuses, and has launched a legal challenge to claw them back. Continue Reading
Just another case of Pigs with their snouts in the trough.
However, since Nick Nick Alston states that the bonus was illegal, why the fuck are the force suing him as opposed to arresting him?
ILLEGAL – Adjective: Not allowed by law.
Its not rocket science!
And as I stated earlier; I have had no correspondence about the totally malicious, totally unfounded, unnecessary referral that the corrupt arsewipes made to the social services after they arrested me and stole my property with no arrest warrant, no search warrant, at 2 AM IN THE MORNING despite the corrupt thugs knowing that there is a baby living here… But before they investigate those extremely serious allegations, along with others, it is imperative that they get the misdemeanours out of the way, that they have maliciously charged me with because I had the cheek to point out their cover-up of my complaint… Boy you couldn’t make that shit up.
However, for the benefit of the equally corrupt social workers, Nicole Miles and Julie Robinson, who WILLINGLY went along with the malicious referral – as evidenced HERE – Every picture tells a story don’t it:
What follows is a duplicate of an email which I have today sent to Mr Paul Ahmed, a Canvey Island based Police T/Inspector with The Essex Police Force – A thoroughly repugnant, wholly corrupt police force that is to my mind without doubt an affront to truth & justice.
Sadly, The Essex Police Force is a fair representation of all Britain’s Police Forces – a situation of which our highly paid, under-worked, self-serving MP’s appear to be either unable, or worse still, unwilling to reverse.
Yet the fact is, our Politicians, Police Top Brass, & PCC’s alike, still continue to harp on at any given opportunity about the need for the public to have confidence & trust in the nations forces, which – given the reality of the situation – is basically nothing more than meaningless,hot air propaganda.
I would in fact maintain that public confidence & trust in the police is at an all time 21st century low with mistrust and fear of those who swore on oath to uphold the COMMON LAW OF THE LAND, being a far more realistic assessment of the situation.
Now, many of you will know that Paul Ahmed is the ESSEX Police T/Inspector, appointed to investigate the EXTREMELY SERIOUS, publicly evidenced allegations of INDICTABLE crimes that I have accused the ESSEX police – acting in part with the help and collusion of Castle Point Council Social Services and to a lesser extent, the Greater Manchester Police – of committing against myself, my teenage daughter & my infant grandson,
Indeed – and once again as many of you will already know – I have in all truth had my suspicions from day one that Paul Ahmed was not acting with the integrity befitting his office… Which, following certain pieces of information passed on to me, in conjunction with doing a bit of research for myself, has subsequently revealed that I was right to be suspicious.
The reason for that is clearly set out in the duplicated e-mail found below of which I have also forwarded a copy to my MP James Duddridge, Essex Chief Constable, Stephen Kavanagh, and the PCC for Essex Nick Alston.
The fact that all three of the above mentioned have to a man largely ignored the huge public outcry on my behalf, thus making the trio a party to the sustained insidious harassment which has seen
Policemen violent, mindless thugs working out of Southend Central Police Station conspire with Social Workers child snatchers working for Castle Point Borough Council to maliciously abduct a much loved, well looked after, thriving toddler on the basis of two illegal arrests carried out without just cause, search or arrest warrants.
Course, the very fact that Ahmed, a CASTLE POINT BASED, ESSEX POLICEMAN, was tasked with investigating extremely serious allegations of criminal acts made against his OWN FORCES SENIOR MANAGEMENT AND POLICE OFFICERS, who in collusion with CASTLE POINT social workers, conspired to commit an act which would have in all probability condemned an 18 MONTH OLD BABY TO UNIMAGINABLE ABUSE speaks volumes of the County’s law enforcement, our corrupt politicians and further re-enforces what I wrote about the abhorrent state of Britain’s Constabularies as a whole.
And to top it all, I have it on extremely good authority that every single law firm I approach, is very quickly told that representing me could be very bad for business… And our Prime Minister has the front to criticise the likes of China, Russia & North Korea for their dictatorial leadership.
So, in the words of the song: ‘If you tolerate this then your children will be next’
Do not let that be the case… Act now.
Failure to act on IPCC complaint
After taking advice, I find myself contacting you with grave concern about the handling my complaint, made at Southend Central Police Station on the 30th of July 2014.
This correspondence is issued on the basis that you are aware of the IPCC Governance Police Guidelines on handling complaints, which clearly states the following:
5.2: It is important that appropriate authorities understand which complaints can be dealt with by local resolution and which require investigation. This section describes the process of local resolution and the threshold test to be applied in using it.
Section 9 describes the process of local investigation.
5.3: The primary focus of the person handling a complaint, regardless of the process followed, should be to resolve the complaint.
5.4: When a complaint is made, the person dealing with it should establish exactly what the complaint is about and what the complainant would regard as a satisfactory outcome. A personal approach to this is more likely to be successful than sending a letter as a conversation will allow for any issues or concerns to be explored in more detail.
Undoubtedly, you will also appreciate that, any officer or investigator given charge of a complaint, cannot use as a defence the excuse of not understanding the rules.
Accordingly, I believe that given the contents of sections 9.48 through to section 9.54 as set out below, together with information received from a third party, that you, have personally, deliberately and wilfully obstructed the investigation into my complaint relating to gross misconduct, abuse of power, perverting the course of justice, false accusation and other criminal conduct involving officers of the Essex and Greater Manchester Police Forces.
In doing so, I would formally request that you be removed forthwith from investigating my complaint and the said complaint widened to take into account the probability of your own involvement in respect of being a party to conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, and/or any other relevant offence.
Indeed, the content of your very first communication to me evidences, at best, a dismissive and somewhat cavalier attitude to the seriousness of my complaint.
This belief is further evidenced by your suspension of my complaint, justified by knowingly quoting me a blatant misinterpretation of the law, with what I can only assume is a specific intention to ‘cover up’ the above mentioned crimes committed by your fellow officers.
Moreover, I also accuse you of deliberately failing to follow procedures as set out in the IPCC Governance Police Guidelines on handling complaints.
I refer you to your repeated justification, via e-mail and post, for the failure to investigate the serious allegations that make up my complaint, which is as follows:
“Regarding your complaint, as you are currently on Police bail in relation to the investigation, the matter remains ‘sub judice.’ Once the investigation is complete, I shall be in contact with you to discuss the matter”
Furthermore, following a three-week delay in contacting me, your first communication, which arrived via email on the 19/09/2014, falsely stated:
“I have been allocated your complaint against the Police to deal with.
“I understand that you are currently on bail, with proceedings pending, the next court date being 19/11/2014.
“Due to the fact that your complaint is part of the proceedings at court, this complaint remains, ‘sub-judice.’
“Once proceedings at Court are finalised, I shall contact you with a view to investigating your complaint”.
I will now draw your attention to Section 9.48, as set out in the IPCC Governance Police Guidelines on handling complaints.
9.48: The power to suspend only arises where continuing the investigation or other procedure would prejudice a criminal investigation or criminal proceedings. Thus, there should be specific, identified prejudice (and that prejudice should be significant). In order to determine whether such prejudice arises, it will be necessary to consider the following:
(a) the extent to which the matter raises issues which are the same as, or closely connected with, the issues in the ongoing criminal investigation or proceedings; and
(b) what particular prejudice (if any) would be caused to the ongoing criminal investigation or proceedings by the investigation or any other procedure.
Pursuant to the above provisions, you will note that:
(a) my complaint raises no issues whatsoever in relation to my arrest on the 30th of July 2014, which is cited as ‘suspicion of harassment over social media.’
(b) Given the extremely serious nature of my complaint, I believe your decision not to investigate, based upon the possibility of prejudicing the investigation is far outweighed by the probative value of so doing. I would refer you once again to the guidelines:
9.49: If the power to suspend arises, appropriate authorities should next consider whether it is appropriate to exercise that power in all the circumstances. When deciding whether to exercise the power to suspend, authorities should consider whether, if the investigation or other procedure were to continue, there would be prejudice to the criminal investigation or proceedings which is so significant that it is not outweighed by the public interest in ensuring:
(i) the prompt investigation of the matter; and
(ii) the prompt bringing of criminal or disciplinary proceedings against persons serving with the police where they are warranted.
Having regard to the relatively high profile nature of my arrest for a non indictable crime, in contrast to the indisputable facts surrounding the indictable criminal actions of the police, before, during and after my arrest, in the absence of any valid and specific explanation to the contrary, pursuing my complaint more than satisfies the criteria set out in (i) and (ii) above.
9.50: In other words, a balancing exercise should be carried out. The following relevant factors should be considered:
* the relative severity of the allegation against the person serving with the police and the allegation against the suspect or defendant in the criminal investigation or proceedings;
* the relative strength of the evidence in support of each allegation;
* whether delay would lead to the frustration of any potential criminal
or disciplinary proceedings against a person serving with the police;
* in particular, whether suspending the investigation would risk the expiration of the six-month statutory time limit for the bringing of a prosecution of a summary-only offence before the conclusion of any investigation;
* whether delay would otherwise lead to injustice to the complainant, interested person or to the subject of the complaint; and
* the view of the CPS about whether continuing with the investigation or other procedure would prejudice any criminal investigation or proceedings, and if so, whether there are any steps short of suspension which can be taken to mitigate the risk of prejudice.
With regard to the “relevant factors” set out above, it should be noted that:
1. The alleged offence, for which I was arrested, is far and away exceeded in severity and number, when compared to those committed by the police.
2. The fact that I was clearly unlawfully arrested being as there cannot have logically been a shred of evidence to justify my arrest & detention and with justice being equal to all men, given mind to similar case law arrests, many with far less controversial factors involved, subsequently resulting in favourable judgments for those who later successfully sued the police – Lord Hanningfield to name but one – logically dictates that the strength of evidence against me is non-existent compared to my evidence against the police.
3. Therefore, delay in investigation, given mind to the circumstances cannot fail to make me a victim of injustice.
9.52: Appropriate authorities should always seek, and consider, the views of the CPS before exercising the power to suspend.
At this juncture I put you to strict proof that you sought the view of the CPS.
9.53: A number of steps may be taken to reduce (or remove) the risk of prejudice to criminal proceedings while still allowing an investigation to proceed. These include:-
* carrying out a single interview with each relevant witness covering both the subject matter of the criminal proceedings and the matter under investigation;
* interviewing witnesses to the matter in the presence of the solicitor for the defendant to the criminal proceedings.
As you are aware, no such steps were taken. Please provide details of how you reached the decision not to adhere to this guideline.
You should also have had regard to the following:
9.54: Appropriate authorities should always consider whether measures of this kind can be put in place and should only exercise the power to suspend where significant prejudice to the criminal proceedings, which is not outweighed by countervailing public interest considerations, would remain even if any appropriate measures of this type were taken.
You will recall that the basis of my complaint is as follows:
1. I was arrested without warrant at 01:30 (in stark contravention to police rules for searching a persons property for a summary offence) by 4 extremely aggressive police officers whom, after I had refused entry to search my home in the absence of a search warrant, proceeded to abuse Section 32 of PACE, in blatant violation of the grounds for making an arrest, thus:-
“…the arresting officer could not possibly have had: reasonable grounds to believe that a person is committing, has committed or is about to commit an offence and importantly, that an arrest is necessary for any of the criteria listed in Section 110 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005. The right to liberty is a key principle of the Human Rights Act 1998. The exercise of the power of arrest represents an obvious and significant interference with that right. The use of powers of arrest must be fully justified and officers exercising the power should consider if the necessary objectives can be met by other, less intrusive means…’
2. All four officers then proceeded to illegally enter my home, against my express protests that they should not and began an illegal search and seizure of my property including a finger tip search of my daughters bedroom where my infant grandson was asleep in his cot, causing my daughter, fear, stress and alarm and breaching her own human rights.
3. I was then held prisoner in that bedroom by one of the aggressive officers for over an hour and a half whilst the three remaining officers, trespassed in my living room, supposedly conducting an illegal search and subsequently stole two computers, a mobile phone, a keyboard and a printer, in complete contravention of Section 32 rules giving the power of search without warrant for indictable offences only and neglecting to take the stolen property away in sealed bags.
4. I was then illegally detained at Southend Central police station, by a custody sergeant, who, like the arresting officer had no grounds for doing so. In total I was illegally detained for 19 hours.
5. The arresting officer has a DUTY to ensure there are reasonable grounds to suspect a person of committing the offence that he/she is being arrested for. AN ORDER FROM SENIOR OFFICERS IS NOT CONSIDERED TO BE REASONABLE GROUNDS IN LAW.
6. You are aware that for an arrest to be lawful as set out in law: 2.1 A lawful arrest requires two elements: A person’s involvement or suspected involvement or attempted involvement in the commission of a criminal offence; AND Reasonable grounds for believing that the person’s arrest is necessary. • both elements must be satisfied, and • it can never be necessary to arrest a person unless there are reasonable grounds to suspect them of committing an offence.
7. There must be some reasonable, objective grounds for the suspicion, based on known facts and information, which are relevant to the likelihood the offence, has been committed and the person liable to arrest committed it.
8. A malicious police referral – later proven to be so – was then made to the social services in regard to my grandson and acted upon by social workers, unlawfully acting, seemingly in collusion with the police, in what I believe to be a conspiracy, the ultimate objective of which is/was to ensure my grandson is removed from his home and have him placed in care. This collusion seems to be substantiated with regard to dates, times, recordings and information made on a Social Services own assessment.
9. My computers were illegally searched, resulting in a second arrest by three officers whom, without search or arrest warrant, broke down my door and smashed my window, knowing that my terrified daughter and grandson were on the property. This was witnessed and filmed by several neighbours and is now freely available in the public domain, and reflects the level of unnecessary aggression and violence perpetrated by the officers involved – one of whom called my neighbour “a fucking moron” for merely exercising his legal right to film the event.
10. I was then handcuffed, arrested without caution, apparently pursuant to s.17 of PACE – despite the arresting officer stating on camera that I had been arrested under s.32 – on suspicion of possessing illegal images. These images subsequently transpired to mostly consist of legal images including a Led Zeppelin album cover; the artwork of ‘celebrated artist’ Graham Ovenden; Time Life Magazine photos of the actress Brooke Shields; art work owned by Sir Elton John and photos of two of my ex-girlfriends, both over the age of 21. There was also one “hidden file” of little boys, that I believe – given the evidence – was planted by the police and some bestiality photos that detectives were not even sure were downloaded and on a date likely to be before I even owned the 2nd hand computers, which have both been used by at least 20 people that I can name since I have owned them.
11. The arresting officers, despite telling me that they only wanted to talk, later kicked down my door and needlessly smashed my window – all caught on film. Staggeringly, they then tried to get me to sign a form stating they had caused no damage. My door and window are still boarded up and require repair.
12. They also carried out an illegal search lasting a generous five minutes, which consisted of just one of the three officers briefly looking in my bedroom and once again in MY DAUGHTERS BEDROOM, totally ignoring my living room and hall way cupboard containing a further two computers, a hard drive, half a dozen memory cards and as many as fifty photo albums in the process.
13. A second attempt was then made by the Social Services, acting I believe in collusion with the police, in a conspiracy to remove my grandson, for the same reason as before. Indeed, to date this conspiracy has only been thwarted by the police and social services incompetence, which includes evidence that the police referral for the indecent images was passed to collaborating social workers who began an assessment five days (1st of October) before I was even arrested on the 6th of October, all of which evidence of the same is now in the public domain.
14. The alleged “hidden file”, conveniently contained photos of little boys so as to make me appear a danger to my grandson in a renewed conspiracy perpetrated in collusion with social services, who received the police referral in regard to the “illegal” albeit obviously LEGAL photos and the ONE HIDDEN FILE – with no apparent trail – 5 (FIVE) days before I was illegally arrested.
15. Another victim of the trio of thugs who illegally arrested me has since contacted me. This victim, also has an ongoing IPCC complaint brought about by one of the trio of thugs screaming that he was going “to kill” the man, whilst strangling him in the back of the same unmarked police car that I was taken away in. As the attack took place, the other two police thugs tried to shield the attempted murder from witnesses filming by using their bodies to shield their view of the attack which left their victim with bruising to his neck – all of which I hold in evidence.
16. The depth of the public’s outrage at this abhorrent treatment of me and my family at the hands of wholly corrupt officers has been demonstrated time and again by the sheer number of complaints sent to yourself, other police personnel, various MP’s and the social services, yet never once did you seek to pursue my many allegations, under the guise of prejudicing an illegal investigation into what can only be classified as a misdemeanour.
Are we to assume then that this is the average standard of policing throughout the length and breadth of the country?
Indeed, for you to persist in your refusal to investigate these serious matters, you are in my view, at best a disgrace to your profession, complicit in a cover up of crimes, which include:
* Forced entry
* Breaking & entry
* Trespassing on my property
* Theft of various items including my two PC’s
* Harassment, fear stress and alarm (ironically)
Please be advised, there are tens of thousands of people monitoring how this national disgrace develops. I feel that I should also make you aware that this communication has been made public, together with all the conclusive and damning evidence to support my assertions. I would therefore urge whoever your IPCC, newly appointed successor may be, to reconsider your recent decision and properly investigate my complaint.
You can find a detailed, library of all the evidence pertinent to this correspondence on my website by clicking on the following link: http://chrisspivey.org/category/arrest-ss/
I now look forward to your prompt response, which will of course be shared with my supporters.