SUSSEX CHIEF CONSTABLE ADMITS HIS ‘HANDS ARE TIED.’
“On 2 or 3 occasions I have had my hand forced to accept back officers who’ve I’ve said, “No, you should lose your job,” but third parties said “No, you’ve got to have this person back.”
SUSSEX EXCLUSIVE: GOING WHERE NO OTHER “CITIZEN JOURNALIST” DARES TO REPORT.
IN THE MOST REVEALING monthly Performance and Accountability meeting with the Chief Constable of Sussex Police Giles York and Katy Burne, Sussex Police and Crime Commissioner, its been revealed that Giles York has personally sacked 2 to 3 police officers, who “third parties,” have ordered back to work against his express wishes.
No wonder something dark lurks at the heart of Sussex Police when their Chief Constable cannot sack a corrupt officer, without “independent” criminal elements within Sussex Police pulling rank and sending corrupt coppers back on the beat?
CORRUPT COPPERS BACK ON THE BEAT.
This is the scandal which you’ll only read here on the SHADOW SUSSEX POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER’S blogspot.
Katy Bourne is being paid £1.1 million a year to hold the Chief Constable to account, where-in clearly she hasn’t.
DO YOU THINK I’M MAKING THIS UP?
As Giles York eludes himself near the end of the hour long meeting while on the subject of police corruption, he says, “We have a mechanism inside called “Break the Silence,” its a well used site where people can report anonymously internally and their anonymity is guaranteed internally and for some reason it does work in Sussex better than nearly every other force. In Sussex I think its because we are absolutely adamant about people’s anonymity in reporting along the line, and we’ve uncovered significant elements of corruption coming through on the line to date.”
“AND WE’VE UNCOVERED SIGNIFICANT ELEMENTS OF CORRUPTION COMING THROUGH ON THE LINE TO DATE.”
This is the line we must all be paying attention to. “SIGNIFICANT ELEMENTS OF CORRUPTION,” “INDEPENDENT” & “THIRD-PARTIES,” which the Chief Constable has no control over.
Its ironic because having been asked by Katy Bourne for his overall reaction to the IPCC report, his first defence was to rubbish any claims that they had “SUDDENLY LOST CONTROL,” that he actually goes onto admit that as Chief Constable he has NO CONTROL in sacking corrupt police officers.
“We do have “independent” people sitting on the panel already and I can quote two or three cases where the panel, and I would agree with them, has said to an police officer “I’m sorry you should lose your job for what you’ve done.” But they’ve given leave to appeal to a third party who says, ‘no’ they can have your job back again.”
THERE YOU HAVE IT LAW-ABIDING LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF SUSSEX, from the Chief Constable’s own mouth, “criminal,” (he says “independent,”) people can over-ride the decision by a Chief Constable to sack a corrupt police officer.
THIS IS THE DARKNESS DEEP AT THE HEART OF SUSSEX POLICE, EXPOSED IN THE STARK LIGHT OF DAY.
Here for the first time is the admission by a serving Chief Constable that corrupt police officers can appeal to their “Crime-bosses,” (he says “third-parties”) to over-ride a decision to sack a corrupt police officer.
Make no mistakes about it, as Giles York, the serving Chief Constable of Sussex continues, “So on two or three occasion I have had my hand forced to accept back officer who’ve I’ve said, “No, you should lose your job,” but third parties said “no, you’ve got to have this person back.”
NO WONDER THERE IS SOMETHING DARK DEEP IN THE HEART OF SUSSEX POLICE, when the Chief Constable doesn’t even know what his police officers are doing wrong, for the public to complain against them in the first place.
This is evident in itself with his initial reaction to the fact that Sussex Police has scored 5% above the national average of complaints against it’s police force.
“I think for the last 12 months we’ve had about 12 or 13 hundred complaints made to us. So that 20% increase and I say only represents 150 complaints, you may think, “what do you mean only 20% that’s quite a lot,” well I’ll take you back to earlier this afternoon when we were saying that out of 630,000 reports made to us ever year, so out of 63,000 of all the reports, 0.2% end up in a complaint. So I say its a very small number but with that I’m still very keen to know what it is that people are complaining about against Sussex Police?”
“I’M STILL VERY KEEN TO KNOW WHAT IT IS THAT PEOPLE ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT AGAINST SUSSEX POLICE?”
For the benefit of Chief Constable Giles York, allow me to give you three easy examples of why your “customers,” are complaining about the “service” Sussex Police are presently providing.
YOU ARREST THE VICTIMS AND LAUGH WITH THE CRIMINALS.
I have recently experienced for myself THE DARKNESS DEEP IN THE HEART OF SUSSEX POLICE, when on the 16 January 2015, we rang for emergency help having suffered a serious attack at our election campaign office, only for the police to spend 15 minutes laughing and joking with our attackers, before arresting us for affray and locking us up in a police cell for the next 12 hours.
John Lenard Walson has demonstrated beyond doubt that he was a victim of child-abuse as a child and that Sussex Police helped cover-up the crimes against him to protect and nurture their own “independent’ and “third-party” interests.
“THIRD-PARTIES,” & “INDEPENDENT PEOPLE,” ARE ABOVE THE LAW.
Bully-boy directors of SIA approved Security companies, working in partnership with the Local authorities and Sussex Police, are allowed to ride rough-shot over Common Decency, Human Rights and Common Law.
Take this emergency email from Chris Green sent out to Sussex Police and copied to me.
“Oh my God I am living the dream.
Just had a letter through my door , only this time it’s for my daughter. Nick Georgiou has made allegations of harassment against a 17 year old girl.
Did u intend to once again arrest the victims and now ur going to arrest my daughter.
Nick Georgiou works illegally as security operative and operations controller at oculus or sapphire or what ever they are called. He has reported me for the same thing and made false allegations of threatening to stab him. God everything they have ever accused me of and its a lot now has been proved a lie.
You won’t even arrest a security guard with a record of losing his badge for assault , for the assault.
Did u think I wouldn’t find out Julie Oades. You make me sick and you have started a war. I could leave it I could walk away as you asked me to Julie But u drag my 17 year old into this and all bets are off.
Unlucky for you I’m not a twat. And still have evidence of the assault saved as further evidence which I have now reported along with u and Caroline bond. I should also point out Kevin has had 3 licences issued.
One he lost for assault. The man has history and a record and you give me that crap you gave me in that meeting.
My God numpties stop treating me like a dick. I’ve had enough.
An apology is a start and a commitment to do the job is a good first step. Giles York talks the talk but does he walk the walk?
“Certainly my own attitude towards this is, if we have done something wrong, I will be proactive in the apology and I’d give and recognise we’ve done something wrong.”
Well, something evidently went wrong when both Joe Neilson and I were attacked at our election campaign office, only for ourselves to be arrested for assault and affray and locked up in a cell for 12 hours.
Don’t we deserve an apology?
Doesn’t John Lenard Walson deserve an apology for the fact Martin Richards actively covered-up child abuse, both historic and on-going, which in the process has denied him the justice and compensation he deserves?
Doesn’t John deserve an apology?
Doesn’t Chris Green deserve an apology for having cocaine fuelled SIA approved thugs, using Sussex Police in their capacity as “third-parties” to terrorise law-abiding citizens who do nothing else but stand up for themselves and their families?
Doesn’t Chris deserve an apology too?
“LOOK I’VE HAD ENOUGH OF THIS AND NOW I WANT TO RESIGN.”
For the first time ever, Katy Bourne and Giles York have discussed the early retirement of Martin Richards, their ex Chief Constable.
Giles Yorks sets the scene, “So the Home Office has given Guidance Direction that the balance around the decision of suspension and whether or not the officer wishes to retire or resign while they’re being investigated has shifted.”
Clearly distancing himself from his predecessor, Giles Yorks reveals for the first time what really happened behind closed doors.
“So before if an officer was being investigated for a complaint and he said, “Look I’ve had enough of this and now I want to resign,” we could make a judgement call and if it wasn’t for an offence that was so sufficient, then we may let them resign because it stops it being protracted, it stops it being bureaucratic.”
Which of-course was exactly what happened with Martin Richards.
Nine months before his due date, he evidently put his hands up and said “Look I’ve had enough of this and now I want to resign,” to which Katy Bourne, Giles York and other “independent” and “third-parties,” made a “judgement call” and based on the “sufficiency,” of the “offence,” a corrupt police officer was allowed to resign early and keep his dignity, good character and police pension.
Hence for the first time ever we now have confirmation that the Home Office have been forced to step in and give “Guidance Direction,” that:
“The change that has been made is that the officer cannot be allowed to resign, unless there are exceptional circumstances that let them do so.”
SO THERE YOU HAVE IT.
The hypocrisy of Katy Bourne knows no bounds as she jumps to the higher moral ground:
“Why should they be allowed to resign and have everything pushed under the carpet, nice and neatly, so I’m supportive of this change,” omitting to mention she allowed Martin Richards to resign and sweep everything under the carpet.
WHEN ARE THE HARD-HITTERS IN SUSSEX GOING TO REALISE SUSSEX POLICE ARE TAKING THE PROVERBIAL PISS?
“But we do deal with very contentious issues, we ask officers to go into very challenging scenarios and we deal with some really challenging people and on occasions we do end up with complainants who aren’t happy with the answer in the first instance and not happy with the way we’ve dealt with their complaint; and that is where the day ends. Because they’ve finished all of the processors available to us and sometimes you do need that bureaucracy because otherwise we will deal with people forever and a day, because they just have the inclination that they want to complain until they get a specific resolution from us.”
Doesn’t Mr Setchfield and Reagan deserve an apology too?