Friday, November 02, 2007
A corrupt British police force
A chief constable is being investigated over his force’s dismissal of child abuse allegations against a judge. The police watchdog stepped in after claims that the officer allowed his professional relationship with the circuit judge to prejudice the force’s actions. The complainant, the judge’s estranged wife, alleged that he gave a child a sexually transmitted disease, viewed child pornography websites and misused transcripts from child abuse cases that he had presided over. There were also allegations of mortgage fraud and domestic violence.
Documents sent to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) and seen by The Times said that the force concluded that there was insufficent evidence to even interview the judge and decided not to analyse his computer. The force refused to accept a further complaint from the accuser that the working relationship between the judge and the officer, who worked on a criminal justice panel together, had biased its approach.
The IPCC has now ordered an investigation into the alleged bias. The Times also understands that the case is being investigated by the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman, Sir John Brigstocke, who became involved after the allegations about the judge were reported to the Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA). The accuser expected it to bar the judge from presiding over child abuse cases. When it did not, the ombudsman was brought in.
A letter to Sir John, also seen by The Times, claims that the DCA also failed to “address an allegation against [the judge] of unhealthy misuse of transcripts relating to child sexual abuse cases”. The complainant alleged that the judge had taken the transcripts home for his own sexual gratification and that police were given a video that showed the judge masturbating.
The case has raised questions about the IPCC’s complaints procedure. When the complainant first contacted the watchdog with her complaints about the police investigation, it told her to submit the complaint in two parts: one about the alleged bias, and one about the perceived failure to follow proper investigatory procedures, such as seizing computers. She did not resubmit the second part, relating to the police investigation, until 28 days after the police force rejected her complaints. The IPCC ruled it to be out of time and therefore could not investigate it.
Its ruling says that the “allegations of inappropriate behaviour towards children, domestic violence and mortgage fraud” did not constitute “special circumstances” allowing it to extend the 28-day period. The force will not be required to reinvestigate the claims against the judge.
The chief executive of the police force authority said: “The IPCC has instructed us to record the complaint but in doing so we need to obtain further information." Asked about the allegations of inappropriate behaviour towards children, the judge said: “It is not a subject I would wish to comment upon in any circumstances.”
Report here
(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Up till now the Judge made a comfortable and respectable living routinely depriving young children of their own fathers, on spurious grounds of alleged peadophilia and wife abuse. That is the kind of spurious peadophilia and wife abuse allegations he now stands charged with, to be judged on in turn, by opportunist vermin like himself !
Up till her own estrangement from the Judge, the wife lived comfortably and respectably with the same man whom she now alleges had been a wife abusing peadophile. That is attempting by her disgusting lies, half truths and shameless treachery to gain an upper hand in any subsequent divorce court proceeding. No doubt there again, being the eternal parasite she is, reliant and dependant on another chauvenist Judges' favour !
Up till now the Chief Constable has secured his position and pay, not by dismissing spurious wife abuse and peadophilia allegations that are obviously false, but by doing his chauvenist duty to his utmost. That is by prosecuting, indeed persecuting other men who come up against similar charges as his good friend the Judge. The only difference in these cases being the fact of the hapless men having no financial stake, as wives do, or career interest, as judges do, in the bastardisation of children for profit !
And this lot are presented as the civilised and well educated set, specifically elevated to positions of prestige and status for their better pedigree ? How much worse can then be expected from the great unwashed whose majority vote for, and sustain this rotting elite ?
Post a Comment