Criminals and Crooks

April 3, 2019

This web page is published in the public interest. The facts are true. I have evidence to substantiate the facts and the allegations made. It is in the public interest that these matters are brought to light, especially when there is a cover up by all levels in a police force up to and including the chief constable and Police and Crime Commissioner.  My opinions are clearly stated as such and should not be taken as fact.  My opinions are formed on the basis of my observations and some are my deductions based on what I saw, read and heard.

We thought it would be useful to list the people involved in criminal activity and cover up in the Cheshire constabulary.  Please see our definitions of crooks and crooked.  It is our judgment that the actions of all those mentioned were deliberate, but if they tell us that their incorrect actions were the result of incompetence, then we shall amend the record accordingly


PC 2222 Eoin Anderson and PC 2345 Nicola Rimmer: Click on the link to open their page.  They started by submitting a deliberately false and untrue description of an event on a Traffic Offence Report, then following that up with deliberately false and untrue witness statements and then committing the crime of giving deliberately false testimony under oath in court.


Superintendent John Armstrong, head of “professional standards” branch (now retired): In some ways the worst crook of all – as head of so-called professional standards, he was in a position to set a high ethical standard for the constabulary. Instead, he set a very low standard; his staff were a disgrace; he condoned and excused a non-existent investigation and lied during the appeal process. Altogether an absolute disgrace and not fit to be a constable, let alone a senior officer.

Inspector Richard Hill, assigned to investigate my complaint: Another absolute disgrace, but it is hard to know from his performance whether he is just plain lazy or incompetent, but certainly crooked and possibly even criminal in his neglect of duty. The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC, now replaced by the IOPC) lays down a standard for the investigation and reporting of police complaints. He violated just about every requirement.  His investigation and report fell far short of the standards.

Miles Dignam, allegedly a “complaint manager” whose role is to ensure that complaints are handled in accordance with IPCC requirements. He totally failed to do that and, as far as I can tell did so deliberately. From his emails, it appears that he is a total scumbag. Zero ethical standards, no doubt with the support of Armstrong.

Jennifer Rowland, Fundamentally dishonest, or incredibly stupid, in her categorization of my complaint, trying to downplay the serious misconduct of police falsifying descriptions of an incident to make it appear that an innocent person is guilty of an offence. Such an offence strikes at the very principle of our justice system and at public confidence in the police.

Simon Byrne, ex-chief constable.  He condoned and excused the unacceptable performance of the professional standards branch.  He submitted a deliberately false and untrue statement of defence against my claim for wrongful prosecution.

John Dwyer, ex Police Crime Commissioner.  Condoned the gross misconduct of the constabulary.  Did nothing to hold the chief constable to account for his low level of performance.  As an ex police person himself, he apparently supports the police over and above the public who elected him.  He is standing for election again in 2020.  The public need to recognize that he is no better than David Keane.

David Keane, Police Crime Commissioner. Apart from displaying utter incompetence over the matter of Simon Byrne’s alleged gross misconduct, he has always condoned Cheshire constabulary criminality, in spite of his pre-election commitment to doing something about it.

Janette McCormick, ex-Acting Chief Constable: Condoned the criminality of constables Eoin Anderson and Nicola Rimmer; condoned the lack of investigation into their criminality; refused to take any action.


“His Honour” Judge Richard Pearce, Not a member of the Cheshire constabulary but he might as well have been: displayed his lack of integrity and lack of impartiality by ignoring evidence and making up evidence in order to rule in favour of the chief constable.  We have no hesitation in describing his judgment as crooked in that it was not honest and straightforward.  He compounded that by refusing to hold a costs hearing and awarding costs to the constabulary in spite of their numerous violations of the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Conduct and their submitting a false statement of defence and false witness statements.  Altogether a nasty vicious little scumbag.

{ 0 comments… add one now }