Police & Crime Chair: The Anatomy of a Cover-Up

Whitby --> Featured --> Police & Crime Chair: The Anatomy of a Cover-Up

Police & Crime Chair: The Anatomy of a Cover-Up

N Yorks Authorities ‘data-kettling’ NYP&C Chair expenses enquiry?

  • an ‘In My View’ article, by Nigel Ward, reporting on the thunderous silence and pungent aroma of cover-up emanating from North Yorkshire authorities regarding allegations implicit in public record evidence that a  public servant’s Expenses claims appear to have been fraudulent.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~data-kettling_carl_les

 

IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST

Almost a month ago, on 27th May 2013, Real Whitby ran an article entitled “Police Chief’s ‘Impossible Journeys’”, in which certain discrepancies from the public record of 2010/11 Mileage Claim Forms signed and submitted by County Councillor Carl LES (who is also Chair of the North Yorkshire Police & Crime Panel) were exposed.

Briefly, an examination of County Councillor Carl LES’s travel expenses with two local authorities – North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC) and the now-defunct North Yorkshire Police Authority (NYPA) – detected a significant number of claims for journeys that could not possibly have taken place as claimed, in virtue of the fact that County Councillor Carl LES, despite his many other accomplishments, does not have the capability to be in his car travelling to and from a given destination at the same time as he travels in his car to and form another quite different destination.

In short, it is apparently the case that Councillor Carl LES, by his own hand, has been caught “bang to rights” falsely declaring his mileage expenses. (And this comes three months after County Councillor Carl LES admitted, in an email to a member of the public, that he had failed to updated his Register of Interests within the legal requirement period of 28 days; a criminal offence under the terms of the Localism Act 2011, but no action taken by the authorities).

The sequence of events since that article was published reflects very poorly on all of the local authorities involved.

North Yorkshire County Council

Prior to publication of the Carl LES article, I emailed David BOWE, who is NYCC Corporate Director, alerting him to the discrepancies and requesting a comment for publication. David BOWE did not respond to my email.

During the days following publication of the article, Real Whitby was contacted by a member of the public (MOTP), complaining that he had been outraged by the revelations in the article. He has been attempting to report the matter to the North Yorkshire Police (NYP) at Scarborough Police Station.

On Friday 7th June 2103, I emailed David BOWE again, requesting an acknowledgement of my email of 27th May and requesting details of if and when the matter had been referred to the NYP by NYCC. I also offered him a second opportunity to make a statement for publication.

Five days later, on 12th June, I received an email from NYCC Chief Exec Richard FLINTON, informing me that the matter had been passed to NYCC Monitoring Officer Carole DUNN, who would “respond to me directly”. This was more than a little disingenuous of Richard FLINTON, since he is aware that I have an outstanding Formal Complaint against Carole DUNN in respect of past cover-ups, and, contrary to NYCC regulations, Richard FLINTON has point-blank refused to process my Formal Complaint against Carole DUNN in accordance with Council regulations, on the grounds that he has every confidence in her. I do not. And I have previously made Richard FLINTON aware that I have blocked Carole DUNN’s email address, as I refuse to engage with any paid public servant whom I believe to be corrupt.

In simple language, Richard FLINTON looks to have shunted the Carl LES issue off down a blind alley.

Two days later, on 14th June 2013, I finally had word from David BOWE, who provided me with the redundant information that he had passed the matter to Richard FLINTON and Carole DUNN. Thank you, David. Keep up the good work.

In simple terms, NYCC has been attempting to “stonewall” the Carl LES issue by the time-tested technique of sending me around in circles.

So I emailed Richard FLINTON on Monday 17th June requesting contact details for both the Internal and External Auditors of NYCC.

Late on Thursday 20th June 2013, I received this rather terse response from Richard FLINTON:

Nigel

The Audit Manager for Deloitte is Chris Powell and his contact details:

cdpowell@deliotte.co.uk

Deloitte LLP

1 City Square

Leeds

LS1 2AL

Max Thomas is Head of Internal Audit, his contact details are:

Max.thomas@veritau.co.uk

Veritau Limited

County Hall

Northallerton

DL7 8AL

Regards

Richard Flinton

I suspect Richard FLINTON is still smarting after the exposure of NYCC Investigating Officer Catriona GATTRELL’s whitewash of the serious complaints against County Councillor John BLACKBURN.

Perhaps that is why Richard FLINTON neglects to mention that County Councillor Carl LES was appointed to the Board of Directors of Veritau Limited the day after the Real Whitby exposé was published!

Both Richard FLINTON and County Councillor Carl LES are now fellow Board Members of another NYCC company – NYNet Ltd (purveyors of high-speed Broadband connectivity). As I said to Richard FLINTON, I really begin to wonder if you have the first inkling of what transparency and accountability is about.

*** STOP PRESS ***

Very shortly before publication of this article, I received a belated response from Richard FLINTON, informing me that the internal NYCC investigation will indeed be conducted by Veritau Ltd.  He also states that “there will be a thorough internal audit investigation without any regard for the position of Cllr Les as Company Director.”

How reassuringly cosy.

North Yorkshire Police & Crime Commissioner

Back on 12th June 2013, I emailed Julia Mulligan, who is the Police & Crime Commissioner for North Yorkshire, apprising her of the fact that a large question mark now hangs over the Chair of her Police & Crime Panel, urging her intervention, and requesting a statement for publication.

Guess what? No response. And this is the sixth occasion on which I have apprised Julia MULLIGAN of corruption issues ranging from “The Clergyman’s Widow” to the Jimmy Savile cover-up.

Julia MULLIGAN has NEVER responded to me – even when I drew her attention to the remarks by the Rt. Hon. George Mudie MP [Lab] – (Leeds East) in the Yorkshire Post, stating:

  • “I see transparency and accountability as things a police commissioner should have at the top of their agenda.”

In the same article, Leeds North East MP Fabian HAMILTON [Lab] is quoted as stating:

  • “It cannot be right that the police are like a closed shop and they do things in their interest and against the public interest.”

I heartily concur with both of those sentiments. Julia MULLIGAN [Con] apparently does not.

North Yorkshire Police

  • “THAT PARTICULARLY DUBIOUS CONSTABULARY THAT MERITS CAREFUL INVESTIGATION” (Lord Maginnis of Drumglass, referring to North Yorkshire Police and their handling of the Hofschröer fraud and abuse case).

Returning now to the attempts to report the matter to the North Yorkshire Police, here follows the timeline of a series of attempts by a member of the public (MOTP) to report compelling prima facie evidence of an apparent Mileage Claim Form fraud crime to NYP (as provided to me by the MOTP himself):

MOTP’s Time-Line

  • c. 6th June: – Report made to police station in Scarborough. The police constable on the front desk was very helpful, and courteous. The officer who listened, was patient, and helpful. He advised me that a specialist team is available to take information related to fraud and could help me with this case. This team could be contacted via telephone and would take all of the information I had.
  • Call made to Fraud reporting line, and after a lengthy discussion with a female, all information was recorded. She took my contact information, and asked me to preserve all of the evidence I had in my possession, in case it was needed in the future. I didn’t get a reference from the lady, and this did not occur to me until after the call, because of the fact that it was a lengthy call, and there was a lot of information to convey in that time
  • c. 8th June. – I called through to 101 and asked stated that I had contacted the Fraud reporting line, and asked if it was possible to get a reference number for the above. The man I spoke to was very helpful, and told me that I would need to call the above number again, because they were a separate unit.
  • I called through to the Fraud reporting line, and there was either a fault on the system, or I was on hold for what seemed like an eternity, and I couldn’t get through.
  • c. 11th June. – Due to having a clear-out at home, the original paper with the Fraud Reporting telephone number on was misplaced, and I couldn’t locate the original number. So I called through, to 101 again and explained the situation, and that I was after a reference number. I spoke to a man who was very helpful, and checked their computer system for a crime report number. He couldn’t find one, but offered to put me in touch with the original officer who I went to see at Scarborough Police Station.
  • c. 12th Jun. – I did get a call from an unknown number (according to the missed calls on my home phone), but I was out at the time of the call, and this could well have been the officer returning my call.
  • 13th June  – I discovered that there is a national organisation for this sort of crime called Action Fraud. I called them and spoke to a man who also couldn’t find any details about my original report on their database, and seemed a bit confused about this. So, he took all of my details again, took the details of the crime and issued me with a report number – 130600277828. I was again advised to retain all evidence, so that it could be called upon if needed by the investigation. I was also asked for my permission to contact me again if the investigation needed it. I gave my permission, and we concluded the call. Nothing since.

The next day, in the afternoon of Friday 14th June 2013, I emailed Det. Insp. Ian WILLS of the NYP Major Fraud Investigation Team – a highly respected fraud investigator of the first order – alerting him to the situation and requesting a NYP Crime Reference Number.

The following Monday morning (17th June 2013), Ian WILLS responded promptly, apologising for the (negligible) delay, and taking a step sideways by stating:

  • I cannot deal with your request and have forwarded it to the press office where all such requests should be made.

He did not include a contact email address for the Press Office, but I did locate (on the NYP web-site) a number of contacts addresses at the Press Office and I immediately emailed all of them (collectively), requesting the NYP Crime Reference Number and a short statement for publication.

I received no response from the NYP Press Office, but later in the day I did receive an email from, Steve READ, who is the Head of the Professional Standards Directorate at NYP (i.e. the Force spin doctor), requesting to see the evidence (which consists solely of County Councillor Carl LES’s NYCC and NYPA Mileage Claims Forms – already in the public domain as FOIA responses) and stating that:

  • “North Yorkshire Police are required to act in accordance with data protection and human rights legislation and it would therefore not be appropriate for North Yorkshire Police to disclose to third parties, information which would confirm or deny the existence of ongoing investigations”.

Nevertheless, he requested that I should identify the MOTP and providing his/her contact details, in disregard of Data Protection and Human Rights legislation. He could simply have called the Action Fraud helpline.

  • “I should be very grateful if you would be kind enough to provide the contact details for that member of the public in order to facilitate contact by North Yorkshire Police with her/him in respect of this matter”.

That seems to me smack of “one rule for County Councillor Carl LES – another rule for members of the public”; but surely not. Or?

Once again, I responded almost immediately (late afternoon of Monday 17th June 2013), directing Steve READ to the public record evidence, stating the Action Fraud Crime Reference Number (130600277828), and offering to provide a comparison-spreadsheet giving a clear overview of the “impossible journeys”. I also suggested to him that it would not be difficult to find a form of words to provide at least some transparency in a statement to the public:

  • “However, in the interests of expediency, I can imagine that you would be more comfortable responding to a request for immediate information, confirming or denying that North Yorkshire Police has received a complaint in respect of a County Councillor (remembering that there are seventy-two County Councillors, so it could hardly be said that the identity of any putative suspect was being disclosed) alleged to have made false claims in respect of Mileage Claim Forms for North Yorkshire County Council and another Authority.”

Well. The week rolled by and I heard nothing more from Steve READ. I can only conclude that he does not want to see the comparison-spreadsheet and he does not want to offer at least some transparency to the public. I rather suspect that he believes corrupt acts on the part of fellow North Yorkshire Police personnel are not matters that fall within the public interest.

So on Thursday 20th July 2013, I emailed the new Chief Constable of North Yorkshire Police, Dave JONES. Dave JONES is a newly appointed import from Northern Ireland, widely welcomed as the “new broom” who will sweep away persistent allegations of corruption within NYP and the defunct NYPA or its successor, the NYP&CP.

Let us hope so. It has been widely reported that he has already challenged Police & Crime Commissioner Julia MULLIGAN over certain unspecified issues. The Northern Echo quotes him as stating:

“It’s clear that I am held to account through the commissioner, but I will be making the tough operational decisions about how we do our policing on a ground level.”

The operational buck stops with him. So I have appealed to the new Chief Constable to send a strong signal to the people of North Yorkshire that the culture of cover-up and corruption in the region’s Police Force is over, starting right now with an open and transparent investigation that cuts right through the cronyism of the Kenyon/Maxwell/Briggs era.

Sad to relate, I have yet to see a response.

If we are to witness the “new broom” sweeping clean, I fear we will have to wait until County Councillor Carl LES and his “impossible journeys” have quietly been brushed under the carpet. Until then, it looks like business as usual amongst the too-closely-knit North Yorkshire authorities ‘mafia’.

I would like to eradicate corruption in our County and I expect the new Chief Constable to assist in that endeavour – not to block it. He needs to remember that it is not the reporting of Police misconduct that gives his Force a bad name – that is entirely down to conduct of its Officers.

Summary

In my view, not one of the local authorities has handled the Carl LES allegations in a professional way.

The only explanation that I can offer is this:

There is a conspiracy of protection surrounding certain figures in North Yorkshire, and central to that conspiracy is the influence of former members of the North Yorkshire Police Authority – of which County Councillor Carl LES was Vice Chair (second in command to the then-Chair, former County Councillor Jane KENYON, who is herself presently the subject of two Police investigations into criminal conduct, with a third complaint reported only last week).

But let us give new Chief Constable Dave JONES a chance – and may the Force be with him.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Related Reading:

“Police Chief’s ‘Impossible Journeys’”

“Maxwell’s Silver Hammer”

“Kopz & Robbaz”

“Open Letter: Jeremy Holderness – CEO NYPA”

“North Yorkshire Police – Musical Chairs?”

“Formal Challenge to NYP Annual Accounts”

“County Cllr Carl Les’s NYPA Mileage Irregularities”

“Corruption In North Yorkshire”

“Tim HICKS’ ‘Operation Countryman II’ Series”

CC_Dave_Jones

About the Author:

Website Admin for the Real Whitby Website. All authors of the Real Whitby Website have access to publish on the website. Individual authors will usually sign off their articles with their own names.

23 Comments

  1. Carole Gerada June 24, 2013 at 5:14 pm - Reply

    That is the mantra of spokespeople throughout local government and the police: Sweep it under the carpet. Don’t answer any questions. Ignore people’s requests for accountability. There is nothing ‘people’ can do because they are in positions of power and will continue to abuse it.

  2. Richard Ineson June 24, 2013 at 5:50 pm - Reply

    The North Yorkshire Police Authority (NYPA) has now been abolished; during recent years we have seen mismanagement of public money by this body and dishonourable conduct from senior police officers.

    The people of North Yorkshire have undoubtedly been badly served by both the members of the North Yorkshire Police Authority, the members of which were: –

    Chair: Cllr. Jane Kenyon,
    Mr. Bill Baugh,
    Cllr. Carl Les,
    Mr.Tony Hargreaves J.P.,
    Cllr. Keith Orrell,
    Cllr. Helen Swiers,
    Cllr. Polly English,
    Cllr. Fiona Fitzpatrick,
    Cllr. David Ireton,
    Cllr. Janet Jefferson,
    Cllr. Brian Marshall,
    Mr. Jason Fitzgerald-Smith,
    Mrs. Erica Taylor J.P.,
    Mrs. Rajinda Richards,
    Dr. Craig Shaw,
    Mr. Ian Whittaker J.P.
    and also the North Yorkshire Police Authority Management Board, the members of which are:-

    Chair Cllr. Jane Kenyon,
    Vice Chair Mr. Bill Baugh,
    Mr. Tony Hargreaves J.P,
    Cllr. Carl Les,
    Cllr. Keith Orrell.
    The Management Board had delegated powers to enable it to ensure, that amongst many other things, the Authority (NYPA) operated in an open and transparent manner.

    The Authority (NYPA) had a high profile and standing. It monitored expenditure, (which presumably includesd alaries and allowances paid to the employees of the Authority, including its Chief Officers) against the Authority’s budget.

    The actions of the NYPA were criticised by the Independent Police Complaints Commission, who said that:

    “the Authority’s lack of control was unacceptable”
    and also by Hugh Bayley M.P., former M.P Phil Willis and Julian Smith M.P.

    But strangely, only eight out of seventy two Councillors supported a motion criticising Grahame Maxwell for wasting tax payers’ money.

    The most notable/outrageous/scandalous/disgraceful events in the recent past, which I can recall are:-
    The squandering of £500,000 on providing Volvo V70 and Range Rover vehicles for senior police officers who were not qualified to drive these vehicles on police business.

    The £28,000 shower installed in the office of then Chief Constable Della Canning.

    Then there is the matter of Peta Ackerley the wife of former Police Superintendent (in charge of NYPA police force training) who received £400,000 from the force in payments to her training companies, companies which, according to an audit report, ‘often got work without going through proper procurement procedures’.

    Superintendent Ackerley escaped disciplinary action after his application to retire , after thirty years service, was accepted by Chief Constable Grahame Maxwell; on this point, officers have the right to retire after thirty years, but where disciplinary charges are outstanding this right can be waived until the charges have been heard, in this case this was not done.

    Phil Willis, M.P. for Harrogate and Knaresborough at the time, said,

    “Hopefully, this brings to an end a period when NY Police had a cavalier attitude to accountability for public money”.
    High hopes indeed.

    Then there are the circumstances surrounding the early retirement of Assistant Chief Constable, David Collins in July 2009, who earned a £100,000 salary, and who went off on sick leave in November 2008, claiming stress, and was still off work in June 2009, still drawing half of his salary.

    On 4th June, he attended a University of York conference and handed out flyers to delegates to promote his life coaching consultancy service.

    But, unfortunately for Mr Collins, one of the conference delegates was his former boss, North Yorkshire’s ex-Chief Constable Della Cannings, who promptly reported him to North Yorkshire Police Authority.

    They investigated and discovered Mr Collins was also offering mentoring services via the internet.

    The 49-year-old was allowed to back up his business qualifications with training while he worked as a policeman, but he did not have permission to seek customers for his business.

    Shortly after being discovered by Ms Cannings, Mr Collins went on holiday. When he returned he discovered that the police authority wanted to relieve him of his post.

    Instead Mr Collins, of Monk Fryston near Selby, successfully applied for retirement. Because of this, he received a six-figure sum for his 30 years of service.

    Jeremy Holderness, the chief executive of North Yorkshire Police Authority,at the time said,

    “Although the authority considered all options with regard to the conduct of Mr Collins in the circumstances, it was not possible to instigate formal disciplinary action against him as he was no longer a serving police officer.”
    There are other considerations here of course – if Mr.Collins was too sick to work, he was presumably claiming sickness/incapacity benefit, under the terms of which, the claimant is not allowed to do any work of any kind, perhaps the Dept. of Work and Pensions might have an interest in reclaiming any benefits which might have been paid in this case.

    The nepotism cases which resulted in the resignation/early retirement of Adam Briggs and Graham Maxwell.
    It has previously been revealed that the Independent Police Complaints Commission spent £100,000 investigating claims that Mr Maxwell and his deputy, Adam Briggs, unfairly helped relatives during a recruitment exercise for new police officers.
    Two counts of misconduct were upheld against Mr Briggs and he then retired from the force.

    But the main focus of the investigation and subsequent disciplinary action was Mr Maxwell, with tens of thousands of pounds mounting up in legal costs after the Chief Constable initially challenged the charge of gross misconduct.

    He only admitted the charge late in the case, and was given a final written warning.

    The full police authority costs for bringing the cases against Mr Maxwell and Mr Briggs were £218,456. Around £19,000 was spent on inquiries involving both officers – but the bulk was spent solely on the Chief Constable’s case.

    If Mr Maxwell had admitted to his gross misconduct, immediately. most of the £200,000 costs could have been avoided. It is understood it may still have cost around £20,000 to carry out the formalities of a hearing.

    Skipton and Ripon Tory MP Julian Smith, who previously described Mr Maxwell’s position as “untenable”, said:

    “Taken with the one hundred thousand pounds spent by the Independent Police Complaints Commission, the amount of money this investigation has cost so far is over a quarter of a million pounds.

    In addition, this is not necessarily the end of the money spent as these figures do not include any money spent by the force itself.

    Had the Chief Constable admitted his guilt immediately, instead of at the very last minute, hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money could have been saved on legal costs.

    It is deeply regrettable that during challenging financial times, the actions of the county’s leading police officer should have cost the Police Authority so much. Whether it’s been the communities of North Yorkshire or police officers themselves, the people I’ve spoken to have been very clear.

    They have been shocked by this situation and I think they will be even more surprised by these costs.”

    York Labour MP Hugh Bayley, who previously suggested the Chief Constable should consider his position, said:

    “With the police budget being so squeezed by the Government, it’s tragic that so much money has been spent on this. Money is desperately needed for front-line policing.”
    The police authority said it had nothing to add to a statement made last month which said Mr Maxwell “could have avoided organisational and personal turmoil and unnecessary cost to the council tax payer” if he had admitted his guilt immediately

    Responding to a freedom of information request, the North Yorkshire Force said it had spent £1,171.00 on advice from legal counsel in relation to the inquiries into Mr Maxwell and Mr Briggs and also £1,763.88 on a public relations agency.

    Mr Maxwell declined to comment.

    The enquiry/hearing was held in secret, at a secret location, strange then that the North Yorkshire Police Authority Management Board proclaimed that one of its aims was to ensure that NYPA operated in an ‘open and transparent manner’.

    Then of course, the revelations about enormous sums of money spent on ‘personal development’ by Adam Briggs and Graham Maxwell.

    NYPA chief executive Jeremy Holderness said the allowances were designed to ensure its Chief Constable and their deputy could “perform at the top of their game” and “develop into more senior roles”.
    He said:

    “Such allowances are not unfamiliar in policing, or indeed many other avenues of business, and they are seen to be quite reasonable in the circumstances of employment of senior professionals.”
    He said such allowances were generally beneficial, and called the IPCC response “disproportionate”, but said:

    “We agree that, in this instance, sadly the arrangements might not have operated as we would have wished and we have learned lessons for the future.”

    This is the kind of institutionalised,sleazy,’we don’t give a damn, we’re the police’ behaviour which has been endemic, under the Chair of Miss Kenyon, for too long in the North Yorkshire Police Force. Let us hope that Chief Constable Dave Jones is going to start a new era of honesty, integrity, openness, transparency and accountability. This is a good opportunity for him to demonstrate that he means business.

  3. kathleen parker June 24, 2013 at 6:31 pm - Reply

    It makes you wonder where do you go to report theft from the public purse? They certainly cover each others backs cos they’re all at it,would our MP help I wonder? Oh silly me he’s as bad!

  4. rj arbuckle June 24, 2013 at 7:01 pm - Reply

    have u tried a complaint 2 da I.P.C.C. ?
    http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/en/Pages/default.aspx
    MUCH LOVE ALL (:

  5. Brian Parent June 24, 2013 at 8:40 pm - Reply

    Crime after crime after crime
    and they think they are all prime
    Don’t put them on camera
    because they hate show time
    Like the man receiving 75 years
    for filming their slime
    I don’t hate them all
    but some aren’t worth a dime

    • Carole Gerada June 25, 2013 at 1:01 pm - Reply

      Absolutely brilliant. What I cannot understand is that people accept this treatment because the government protects it. Hey ho, maybe time to move.

      • Brian Parent June 25, 2013 at 6:41 pm - Reply

        I doubt it will matter where we move. They censor the hell out of my site! theteapartytruther

  6. Tim Thorne June 24, 2013 at 8:45 pm - Reply

    If it is over £500, they should be disclosing all such transactions on their website, as per Eric Pickles instructions.

  7. Tim Thorne June 24, 2013 at 8:48 pm - Reply

    Lets give the new Police chief a bit more time before condemning him. I’m sure he’s a very busy bloke with his new job. I would hope the new Chief Constable and Mrs Mulligan put some of the problems this website has pointed out right. If they don’t, how can anyone have faith in them?

  8. Carole Gerada June 24, 2013 at 8:58 pm - Reply

    I was told by Julia Mulligan that my complaints had been passed to her Chief of Police and I have heard nothing despite chasing twice. I have no faith in them and fear Julia has no authority.

  9. Carole Gerada June 24, 2013 at 9:03 pm - Reply

    I have complained to IPCC but they are not independent and they stuck together and called me a liar. Because of my complaint I am now black listed by Eastfield police who call me aggressive and a liar. There are more of them than me so majority rules.

  10. Rupert Ferguson June 24, 2013 at 9:28 pm - Reply

    You couldn’t make any of this up if you tried!

  11. Richard Ineson June 25, 2013 at 7:22 am - Reply

    The trouble is that you don’t have to make anything up, truth, in relation to NYP is always stranger than fiction.

  12. Nigel Ward June 25, 2013 at 2:41 pm - Reply
  13. Janine Griffiths July 10, 2013 at 4:45 pm - Reply

    Love this article. It’s so detailed and informative.No wonder the public has no confidence in local authorities

  14. Steven Old July 10, 2013 at 7:25 pm - Reply

    Corrupt people that investigate corrupt people! How will anything ever change when the entire system revolves round investigating your self its not what I would call neutral is it?

  15. Nigel Ward July 12, 2013 at 8:16 pm - Reply

    Four years from crime to punishment:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-23282995

    Judge David Wood told McLuckie: “This case is not really about penalty points, it’s about justice and equality before the law. You are not entitled to avoid the law or interfere with the course of justice.”

    Equality before the law extending to a former Police Authority Chair – if you believe eight months for perverting the course of justice is appropriate and proportionate.

    http://www.real-whitby.co.uk/not-so-mclukie-streak-in-my-view-by-nigel-ward

  16. Carole Gerada July 13, 2013 at 8:39 am - Reply

    Really, what can we do about it? We all know how corrupt they are – do we have to leave our homes, jobs and friends and move out of North Yorkshire? I know there is corruption elsewhere, but I have never known such corruption first hand, against me and on such a large scale as in NY. When I have tried to get justice, ranks close, walls go up, mouths get shut and I am left isolated after being told by Inspector Andy Short that none of his police officers or PCSO’s like to deal with me! He was sat in my kitchen when I made a complaint about a PCSO who harassed and threatened me because Eastfield councillors told her to! Fortunately I had asked my neighbour to be present because he arrived alone. While he was telling me how aggressive I was he was pointing his finger in my face approximately 4 inches from it across my kitchen table. I was so upset he reduced me to tears by the aggressive and threatening way he spoke to me and he refused to hear my complaint. I was left very shaken and upset and realise now the power of local politicians in NY.

    • Nigel Ward July 13, 2013 at 9:39 pm - Reply

      Carole,

      If your account is true – and I have no reason to doubt you – then you and your witness need to make comprehensive notes containing every detail that you can recall, while memories are still fresh.

      Then, in the best interests of the entire neighbourhood, you need to lodge a Formal Complaint with North Yorkshire Police Professional Standards Director, Steve READ. His email address is:

      Steven.Read@northyorkshire.pnn.police.uk

      Steve READ will delegate an Investigating Officer to visit you and take statements. He will do his utmost to persuade you to sign a document agreeing to a “local resolution”. I would not advise you to sign it because it will prevent your Complaint from passing to an impartial investigatory body.

      Because of the “political sensitivity” of the situation, it is clearly the case that the matter should be referred to an outside Force, where a perfunctory investigation will in all probablity conclude that there is no case to answer anyway, but it is important to proceed in compliance with the established procedures.

      In my view (and I have some experience in such matters), if you take the matter to the IPCC, NYP will very likely apply for a “dispensation” to deal with it internally.

      None of which means that the incident should go unaddressed. Justice and fair play have been eroded in this country precisely because the complaints procedures have long been known to be useless – and are therefore free to get worse!

      • Carole Gerada July 13, 2013 at 9:52 pm - Reply

        Thank you for your advice. I have been mulling over my options and concluded that I don’t have any. The reason is exactly what you stated, Nigel – nothing will come of it.

        The inspector even said to me that he thought I might want to make a complaint to the IPCC and he confidently handed me a complaint form because he knows nothing will happen.

        I will try the local guy, but I wrote to Julia Mulligan and she has not even acknowledged my requests (I sent more than one in case for some reason, she never received the others).

        • Nigel Ward July 13, 2013 at 10:52 pm - Reply

          Apropos North Yorkshire Police & Crime Commissioner Julia MULLIGAN, who, when she was elected in November 2012 “acknowledged there was “lot to be done” to win the public’s confidence” (she was not kidding!); I have written to her on six occasions, each time raising important issues regarding the conduct of certain members of the now-defunct North Yorkshire Police Authority. I have never received as much as an auto-response, much less an acknowledgement or a proper response.

          Julia is correct that there is a lot to be done to win the public’s confidence. Her strategy would appear to be one of total non-responsiveness and inaction.

          Nevertheless, where and whenever wrong-doing on the part of paid public servants has taken place, victims have a duty to pursue the matter, in the public interest – however futile our experience tells us the process is. When we neglect to pursue such matters, we contribute to the general atrophy that has already beset our society.

          • Carole Gerada July 14, 2013 at 10:17 am - Reply

            I have just realised, Nigel, when I complained to the IPCC before about the previous inspector to Andy Short, Leo Suret, because he told his team there was nothing they could do about the hate mail I received because it was anonymous, even with emails stating the same thing by a fellow councillor who did provide his name. It was Steven Read from the IPCC who suggested I agreed to a local resolution, which I did. The result? Nothing because they said the local police could do nothing due to the hate mail being anonymous. And when I complained about 2 policemen being very aggressive toward me in my home, refusing to take my statement about a neighbour who assaulted me or the statement of my neighbour who witnessed it because she was ‘too old to give a statement (she was 59 at the time) 2 policeman’ words against mine, so they believed them over me. They agreed that is democracy, because the majority rule. Therefore victims of bullying can never receive justice or resolutions because if they are outnumbered, they lose.

Leave A Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

This Is A Custom Widget

This Sliding Bar can be switched on or off in theme options, and can take any widget you throw at it or even fill it with your custom HTML Code. Its perfect for grabbing the attention of your viewers. Choose between 1, 2, 3 or 4 columns, set the background color, widget divider color, activate transparency, a top border or fully disable it on desktop and mobile.

This Is A Custom Widget

This Sliding Bar can be switched on or off in theme options, and can take any widget you throw at it or even fill it with your custom HTML Code. Its perfect for grabbing the attention of your viewers. Choose between 1, 2, 3 or 4 columns, set the background color, widget divider color, activate transparency, a top border or fully disable it on desktop and mobile.