Lancashire Crooked Cop

May 1, 2020

The recent case of the police officer in Accrington threatening to make something up to arrest someone, with the words “Who are they going to believe, me or you?”, which he repeated for emphasis, raises a number of points. https://twitter.com/StevieeeWx/status/1251434819659206662

“Who are they going to believe?”
Unfortunately the justice system is populated with crooked judges like his dishonour judge Richard Pearce, who went to the lengths of ignoring evidence, misinterpreting evidence and making up evidence in order to say that he believed perjuring police officers and that he didn’t believe the truth. So it is correct to say that police are “believed”, even when all the evidence is stacked against them, so what chance does anybody have when there isn’t the same conclusive evidence that the police are lying?

“I’ll make something up”
The reason that the police are held in such contempt is that we know it is true. Sure, there are a few people left who haven’t encountered this and don’t know anybody who has, so they still think the police are wonderful. The reality is that there is no real check on their powers to commit crime against the public and get away with it. Add crooked judges like Pearce into the mix and you get to the stage where forces like the Cheshire constabulary have become a criminal organisation, profiting from the crime of their members. Even the solicitors they employ are crooked, submitting false statements to court, totally disregarding the solicitors’ code of ethics. This case is one of the few times that a police person has been recorded doing what we know they do all the time.

Lancashire Police
The Lancashire police response has been nothing short of pathetic. It may sound good – suspended the officer; keeping the victim informed; referring it to professional standards. But they are utterly pathetic! Instead of taking decisive action, sacking the officer for gross misconduct, which it is, they have referred the matter to the IOPC (nominally the Independent Office of Police Conduct, in reality the not very Independent Office for the Protection of Criminals). Are they hoping that the IOPC will do their usual whitewash and not recommend dismissal? The Lancashire police have the power to dismiss and they should exercise it right away once they had confirmed the identity of the officer and confirmed that he said what he said. The other officer present who undoubtedly heard what was said, needs to be disciplined for not reporting it. After taking the necessary disciplinary action, the only thing outstanding is a review of previous convictions to establish those where the primary evidence against the accused was the statement of this officer. No such convictions should stand.
The Lancashire police have blown it by not taking swift and decisive action. Pathetic, but also an indication that they do not take this as seriously as they are pretending to. Let there be no mistake, this police officer was threatening to commit a crime against a member of the public, and that itself is a crime. There is no excuse for dillydallying around and passing it to someone else to make a decision. The chief constable Andy Rhodes is a complete wimp, same as his near neighbour in Cheshire, Darren Martland, chief crookstable of Cheshire.

The IOPC
I don’t know why, but the IOPC has shown itself to be not very independent, at least when it comes to the crimes committed by the members of the Cheshire constabulary. They have let the following criminals off the hook without investigation: constables Eoin Anderson and Nicola Rimmer, ex-Inspector Richard Hill, ex-Superintendent John Armstrong and Miles Dignam of “professional standards”. Interestingly they were all related to those two criminal constables falsifying evidence. I draw two conclusions from this: first that the Cheshire constabulary thinks it normal that their police officers will falsify evidence and commit perjury, and should therefore not be disciplined for it; second that the IOPC agrees with them. Which leaves me very worried about how they will treat this Accrington issue. My guess is that the whole thing is done to buy time so that the officer will return to work when the clamour has died down and will just be told to apologise or some such thing. But this guy is just as much of a disgrace as criminals Eoin Anderson and Nicola Rimmer and should be gone immediately.

{ 0 comments… add one now }

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: