For Sgt Biddle

Summary of my complaints for Sgt Biddle –

no lessons have been learnt by the Metropolitan Police Service or the IPCC and no-one cares about that nor about serious misconduct by Lewisham police officers, including knowingly lying in an MG11 and perverting the course of justice.

Until the serious issues are properly investigated it is impossible to have any trust or confidence in Lewisham police and that they won’t just treat me exactly the same as they did for years – if no-one cares they did it before then how could anyone believe they would care in the future.

The incidents started June 2009 when criminal family well known to Lewisham police moved in next door

I first started reporting the incidents to Lewisham police 20 December 2009 and had suffered and reported over 80 incidents by May 2013 – after which I was forced to stop reporting incidents because Lewisham police refused to go through my evidence with me to build a case, they wanted me to start from point-zero – which is where we had always been from 20/12/09 – so it was clear no enforcement action would ever be taken to protect me and my property.   I have many of documents etc proving their lies.

Throughout, neighbours were also reporting incidents by the same perpetrators, proof on this link –

Lewisham police had been covering-up their refusals to take appropriate action by lying to me and about me and about the situation, incidents and evidence – even maliciously arresting me and forcing me out of my home for two months –

at the trial, at which I had to represent myself, the case was stopped half-way through the prosecution case and the District Judge ruled I had “No case to answer” due to the “inconsisencies”/”conflicting police evidence” – CPS letter confirming this –

First complaint – 10 October 2011

See link for examples of incidents reported between 20/12/09 and 28/10/11, Pc Wren, SNT, stated they were “very low level ASB at best”…

PS Elizabeth Gibbs, from the MPS Professional Standards Dept, refused to meet with me to discuss my complaint and see my evidence, this despite my repeated requests for her to do so.

I was blamed for her not meeting with me but it was blatantly unfair, not to mention entirely against the IPCC Statutory Guidance…

on one occasion – at a time which PS Gibbs knew was an extremely stressful time for me, eg she knew:

– I had by then suffered/reported over 60 incidents since 20 December 2009

– it was just a few days after the Trial at which I had to represent myself – although the District Judge ruled I had “No case to answer” due to “inconsistencies” in the police evidence it had still been extremely stressful for me

– I still hadn’t returned home properly having been forced out of my home for the two months before the Trial because of bail conditions imposed because of the malicious lies by Pc Wren

– while I was bailed away from my home the front window of my home had been smashed and items in my back garden had also been smashed/broken –

I had not telephoned her by the day I had said I would, to arrange to meet.  I had not even missed a meeting, just one telephone call.

Without trying to contact me to find out why I had not called, or if I was ok given the circumstances, the very next working day she sent a letter saying she was sorry I was unable to tell her a venue where we could meet and she had done most of her investigation and felt she could finish it without meeting with me.

When I received her letter I telephoned and explained why I had not been able to call and said I did want to meet with her and wanted to show her my evidence – but she just refused.

PS Gibbs had met with those I had complained about – and even with Lewisham Council! – but then refused to meet with me, the complainant, to discuss and see my evidence.

Unsurprisingly then, her ‘investigation’ fully exonerated the police and her report was full of false information and the officers’ lies, serious misconduct was not investigated at all and she referred to an absolutely crucial point which at the very least fully supported, if not actually proved, the arrest/prosecution were malicious, but she completely failed to address the issue.

When I Appealed to the IPCC they did not uphold my Appeal and said I had not co-operated with the investigator – yes, because on one occasion, at a time of immense stress, I had not telephoned by the day I said I would the IPCC said I had not co-operated.

Not only am I certain any reasonable person would agree that is completely unreasonable and unfair, it was also against the IPCC’s own Statutory Guidance eg must follow all available lines of enquiry, need to make efforts to contact complainants even if they haven’t contacted investigator –

The IPCC letter refusing my Appeal also made entirely false claims which completely misrepresented the true situation and me, see

Second complaint -Jan 2012

In November 2011 it transpired that on 31 October 2011- which was two days after the Trial (28/10/11) at which I’d represented myself and the outcome was “No case to answer” due to “inconsistencies” in the police evidence and three weeks after I had made my complaint (10/10/11) against Lewisham police – PS Duncan Anderson, of the same Safer Neighbourhood Team as PC Wren, had made a referral to a mental health team about me falsely claiming I was “mentally ill” and suffering “delusions” incidents were happening.

Not only was there lots of evidence incidents were happening but the referral was made around six weeks after my front window was smashed (Sept 2011)…which was reported by the same SNT and clearly wasn’t a “delusion” and was evidence incidents were happening.

Having obtained (via the Data Protection Act) a copy of that referral I was compelled to make a complaint to correct the malicious, false and damaging claims against me.

I asked for this to be investigated off-borough but my request was refused – and lo-and-behold the officer who ‘investigated’ my complaint – Inspector Brighouse – was the Inspector for the same SNT I was complaining about.

Despite it had been made very clear that I wanted to meet with the investigator to show them my evidence, Inspector Brighouse did his ‘investigation’ without making any contact with me at all – so again this was unfair, unreasonable and biased, I am certain no reasonable person would think it fair to meet with those complained about but not meet with the complainant/see their evidence.

The Inspector’s entirely biased ‘investigation’ completely exonerated PS Anderson – all the easily available evidence the referral was clearly malicious was conveniently ignored eg

– there was plenty of evidence incidents had happened including eg officers’ reports re my car repeatedly vandalized

– and my front window had been smashed six weeks before PS Anderson did his referral claiming I was mentally ill and suffering delusions incidents were happening

– on 31 August 2011, ie two months before the referral, PS Anderson had attended a meeting at which it was stated that i) there was a software fault with the Council CCTV in my home, and ii) it was proposed to put the perpetrators on another FIP (why would they do that if I was mentally ill and suffering delusions incidents were happening?).  It was PS Anderson who had written the minutes of this meeting!

– bearing in mind the above it makes no sense that Inspector Brighouse claimed it was at that self-same meeting on 31/08/11 that ‘genuine concerns’ were raised about my mental health so it was right for PS Anderson to do the referral claiming I was mentally ill and suffering delusions incidents were happening –

AND Insp Brighouse ignored that, then, despite this claimed genuine concern on 31/08/11 that I was mentally ill and suffering delusions, PS Anderson waited until 31/10/11, ie two months, before bothering to make the referral…yet IF there were any such genuine concerns surely waiting two months before bothering to do a referral would be neglect of duty

– had Inspector Brighouse not denied me the opportunity to present my evidence I would have also shown him documents proving the SNT were fully aware of their refusal to collect CCTV & were fully aware all the ‘lost’ Council CCTV but had been lying about it.

The IPCC refused my Appeal even though the claims simply made no sense, and anyway the ‘investigation’ was obviously unfair and biased and against their own Statutory Guidance – .

Third complaint – January 2013

I made this further complaint out of desperation because incidents were still continuing and the situation was just carrying on as it had since December 2009 – if my previous complaints been properly investigated Lewisham police would not have been able to continue to treat me as they had and do nothing.

This complaint was ‘investigated’ by AI Chalmers – he said I could send him all my evidence to support my complaint – a massive task, there is so much of it – and stated that –

“There is no requirement for me to meet with you and I believe that this would not be appropriate in the circumstances.

His email did not explain WHY it “would not be appropriate in the circumstances” to meet with me to view and discuss my evidence nor what are those “circumstances”.

Without any contact with me at all and without seeing any of my evidence, the investigator – despite being in the Lewisham ‘Professionalism Unit’ –  had clearly already formed a very negative, hostile opinion against me…

he subsequently claimed he knew better than I did the best way for me to be able to make my complaint…

and then in his report he made the entirely fictitious claim I had previously said officers did not understand me,  so he believed it was best to have it all in writing…that is a lie, I’ve never said they don’t understand me…

and in his report he also made the entirely fictitious claim “she also takes great pains to stress she is being targeted due to her mental vulnerability” – that is another lie, I have never said that is why the criminal family and their associates targeted me.

This was the THIRD time the MPS refused to meet with me to discuss a complaint and discuss my evidence – this is so obviously unfair, unreasonable and biased, clearly something is very wrong with how I was treated…and seriously wrong with the MPS complaints system.

Although I explained to AI Chalmers it was too difficult for me to send him all my evidence/explain it all in writing, he insisted he knew better than I did the best way for me to make my complaint – as he was wrong I was seriously disadvantaged.

There is so much wrong information with AI Chalmers’ ‘investigation’ and in his report it would take several pages to explain but, for example:

– part of this complaint was that officers had been falsely recording incidents on the police computer but AI Chalmers did not investigate that serious aspect at all

– he conveniently ignored information within the audio recordings I’d sent him of officers’ visits eg I had reported via 101 that another condom had been thrown into my back garden, on my audio recording I’d sent to AI Chalmers the officers who visited can clearly be heard confirming  had seen the condom…but conveniently did not mention it at all in their report of their visit, these were the officers who insisted to me I was depressed and needed tablets and counselling,

– he ignored the incident in February 2012 when, yet again, I was repeatedly threatened with violence…and that I’d explained there was CCTV of this incident, that I’d told the officers this but the incident was closed the same day and they had not bothered to view the CCTV

– he states the incident 11/04/13 – as the pictures below, these two thrown into my back garden the day after an egg was smashed against the glass of my shed – was “A BBQ sauce sachet was left on the fence”

bags 1bags 2

– he ignored that L&Q (landlord of relatives of perpetrators next door) could hear abuse on audio recording but police who visited stated no abuse at all could be heard,

– he had asked me to send him details of the incidents during the period for this complaint, which it took me a great deal of energy and time to do, but then he completely ignored everything I said and from his report it is clear he had made no attempt at all to cross-check/investigate

– he dealt with my complaint as a service issue when, according to an IPCC ‘Learning the Lessons’ bulletin, it should have been dealt with as individual officers’ misconduct

– he ignored that the ‘ASB Minimum Standards’ was not being adhered to, he clearly hasn’t learnt any lessons as regards the corrosive and devastating effect repeat incidents have, he ignored that every incident was being treated in isolation, and he is apparently unaware of police powers re ASB

– he claims to believe I am mentally ill because my voice changes while I’m talking to officers…being upset, frustrated and tearful after over three years and around 70 incidents is, according to him, mental illness

– he says officers couldn’t understand why I was reporting as ‘hate’ but I’d very clearly explained why as audio recording proves,

– he said in his report he would be considering what actions could have been taken at the time but ignored that all his recommendations for future action could very easily have been done at the time

– he claimed that the reason no-one ever contacted me again after each visit for every incident – despite the audio recordings proved I was told I would be contacted, and despite the Risk assessment form showing me as ‘high risk’ – was “the sheer size of the organisation and the inherent difficulty of securing a reliable means for individual officers to be contacted”…

yes, according to AI Chalmers the Metropolitan Police Service was incapable of ensuring a high risk repeat victim was contacted as they had been told they would be, a shocking state of affairs IF true…

he also claims the Metropolitan Police Service lacked “a readily accessible system to identify apparent victims of ASB accessible by all officers”, although 101 either always asked if I was a repeat victim or I told them and my audio recordings prove I always told the officers who visited of the long history etc.

– he refers to my “assertions such as lying about the existence of cctv or lack of, allegations of officers lying about their investigations etc.” and, unbelievably, says he “can find no evidence to support this assertion”which is astonishing because there is so much of it…

there are the examples above eg re the condom and the incident when I was threatened with violence but officers closed the incident without viewing the CCTV evidence

I’ve already posted re Lewisham police refusing to collect CCTV

and I’ve posted the proof re Lewisham Council ‘losing’ the CCTV evidence

I will be posting soon the other evidence which AI Chalmers claims he could not find, the proof  Lewisham police were knowingly lying about the CCTV evidence.

There is much more such nonsense in his report, too much to list here.

The IPCC refused my Appeal despite I went to great effort to explain in detail so they could not just ‘miss’ crucial points – but as they could not miss them they came up with astonishing, shocking, claims instead, most notably that the principles of their Fiona Pilkington report findings applied only to that case

and although I’d pointed out to them that lessons should have been learnt, the IPCC denied that any lessons should have been learnt from their report

and although I pointed out to them that, aside from anything else, the principle of their finding that

“aside from the family’s vulnerability, Fiona was a member of a local community who was reporting incidents of crime and anti-social behaviour and simply asking police to carry out their responsibilities, which they failed to do”

must apply to other cases and that I was a member of a local community who was reporting incidents of crime and ASB – over eighty incidents suffered/reported between December 2009 and May 2013, and throughout neighbours were also reporting incidents – and I was simply asking Lewisham police to carry out their responsibilities which they had failed to do…

and that the IPCC had stated (same link as above) “It is vital that the police take anti social behaviour and harassment seriously, listen to the concerns of the victims and take appropriate action.” –

still the IPCC insisted their finding applied only to that case.

So, many years after ASB and harassment legislation was introduced, victims just left to suffer, no lessons learnt by the Metropolitan Police Service or the IPCC.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: