patrick-loweUKIP 2015 Moulsecoomb and Bevendean councillor candidate Patrick Lowe, is the latest to declare his intention to stand in the 2016 Sussex Police and Crime Commissioner elections.

Famous for being thrown out of a community meeting on the orders of Labour Councillor Anne Meadows for being ‘disruptive’, local printer Patrick Lowe once championed Katy Bourne in the 2012 PCC election, before deserting the Conservative Party for UKIP.

In a recent interview with BBC Sussex political reporter Ben Weisz, Lowe is quoted to have called Katy Bourne a “liquidator” of the police.

Perhaps he knows something we don’t, considering the strange anomaly that according to Companies House, the status of Sussex Police HQ stands as ‘DISSOLVED.’

Once a staunch supporter of Katy Bourne, Patrick Lowe has done what he does best and having turned coat is clearly plunging the dagger into his former friend’s back.

As we all know, a ‘Liquidator’ is a person appointed by the shareholders or unsecured creditors, to manage the winding up of a firm by selling off its assets. Who then assumes control of the business, collects and auctions off its free (un-pledged) assets in a reasonably short time, pays the unsecured creditors from the proceeds of the sale, and (if any money is left) distributes it among the shareholders in proportion to their shareholdings.

sussex police dissolved

Clearly evident that Katy Bourne has failed in her duty to hold the Chief Constable to account, useless at setting the Police Priorities and disingenuous in setting the Police Precept; it makes sense that her role has been of a ‘liquidator’ all along.

Part of her inner circle and having campaigned on her behalf during the 2012 PCC elections, Patrick Lowe would have been aware of the real agenda and having chosen his words wisely, spilled the beans to mark his first public interview declaring his intention to stand in the Sussex PCC elections.

While Patrick Lowe may complain that he’s being victimised for his ‘political beliefs,’ the truth could be as simple that he’s a turncoat and tell-tit.

With absolutely zero experience of policing its going to be interesting to see how his campaign progresses and how he performs in the coming PCC hustings.

The PCC elections are set for May 5th and nominations close on April 7th at 4pm.

Read more: Who’s Standing in the 2016 PCC Elections?


Team Setchfield – A Matter of National Importance.

Katy Bourne is a Liar!

Katy Bourne & Sussex Police – If you can’t Beat ‘Em, Ignore ‘Em and Block ‘Em.

Team Setchfield – A Letter of Support.

Three New Cases to Shame Sussex Police.

Is Sussex so Dumb to Believe Katy Bourne?

Patrick Lowe Kicked out of Public Meeting because of his Political Beliefs.



let-them-eat-cake-katy-bourne“Police and Crime Commissioner Katy Bourne has raised the precept by £10.49 since taking office.”

Elected the first Police and Crime Commissioner for Sussex, Katy Bourne was put into the privileged and prestigious position of completing three tasks, to which she would be paid a handsome sum of £85K a year, complete with an office and team of people costing a further £1 million a year to assist her.

  • Holding the Chief Constable to account.

  • Setting the Police Priorities

  • Setting the Police Precept (Tax)

Since 2012 I’ve demonstrated conclusively that Katy Bourne has failed to hold the Chief Constable to account. There is no doubting this. If you haven’t been reading then you really have been missing a trick. On more than a dozen occasions I’ve put forward the contention that Katy Bourne failed to hold the Chief Constable Martin Richards to account, by allowing him to retire early in face of serious misconduct charges.

This contention has been reported to all the national and local press organisations, namely:

  • The Telegraph Newspaper

  • The Guardian

  • Sky News

  • ITV News

  • Channel 4 News

  • BBC South Today

  • Latest TV

  • Brighton Argus

  • Brighton & Hove Independent Newspaper

  • Sussex Express.

Its been reported to all the members of the Police and Crime Panel, elected to hold Katy Bourne to account.

Though most importantly, its been reported to Katy Bourne and Giles York personally via email, Facebook and Twitter.

Never once have they disputed my contention, which in law demonstrates their contention that my contention is correct and truthful.

Now setting the Police Precept, we discover Katy Bourne is taking Sussex for fools, as she has done pretending to hold the Chief Constable to account.

(I’ll address Katy Bourne setting of Police Priorities later….)

Are the residents of Sussex so dumb to believe the diacrap (a new word I’ve created to describe the diabolical crap) that comes from Katy Bourne?

I know the local press in Sussex are like lame sheep, compliant to the diacrap which comes from Sussex Police and Katy Bourne, but I would have thought the residents of Sussex would have possessed a bit more spirit and common sense.


An average £5 increase in the precept is to enable investment in two priority areas for policing:

1. Protecting children and vulnerable adults in Sussex from exploitation and abuse.

2. Digital forensic capability to retrieve, analyse and store information held on computers, mobiles and tablets.

Evidently Katy Bourne’s Police Priorities are in a mess because I would have thought protecting children and vulnerable adults from exploitation and abuse would already be covered.

Doesn’t it imply that as of now, Sussex Police aren’t protecting children and vulnerable adults from exploitation and abuse.

Mind you this can be proved in light of the recent reports of a Sussex Police officer ignoring the plights of a vulnerable adult having repeatedly pleaded for help following abuse, to the more disturbing reports of a police chief covering child abuse on the tiny island of St Helena, to Martin Richard’s involvement in the covering up of child-abuse in Adur district council and Katy Bourne’s chief monitoring Officer Mark Streater covering up the historical child-abuse.

Protecting Children and vulnerable adults from abuse and sexual exploitation should already be set in stone and the back bone of any police force. Its ridiculous to suggest a police force needs an increase in tax to pay for it.

As the Police and Crime Commissioner I’d have sacked the Chief Constable for not having this area of policing already covered.


Onto the second reason for a £5 increase in the police precept:

“Digital forensic capability to retrieve, analyse and store information held on computers, mobiles and tablets.”

A lot of jargon to hide the stark truth of accessing computers! As Katy Bourne delves deeper in her weekly newsletter;

“Sussex Police has seen a significant rise in demand for digital forensics services in the last four years. One particular recent case identified over a million indecent images on one device and another where 56,000 emails had to be analysed. Cases like these can take weeks of a specialist’s time to investigate and the precept increase will help support this work with an investment of £1.8m in digital forensics over the next year.”

What she really means is that Sussex Police are outsourcing the detective work of trolling through sacks of evidence and needs extra money to line the pockets of their Freemason friends who will be awarded the contract to carry out the work which the police had been doing themselves for decades.

Katy Bourne tells us;

“As well as a rise in demand for digital forensics we’ve also seen increased reporting in Sussex of Child Abuse, Rape and Domestic Abuse, and our level of understanding around Child Sexual Exploitation has grown significantly over the last two years.”

I beg to differ… As a sad reflection of the falling morality of our society, child-abuse, rape and domestic abuse has been a stable diet of any police force for decades. To imply these diabolic crimes have grown significantly over the last two years is ingenious at best and a down right lie at worse.

Another brain-washing trick that Sussex Police and Katy Bourne are using against the law abiding residents of Sussex is the fact that Sussex has enjoyed a historically low police precept, and as a result owe it to pay more.

Banding together to hoodwink the hard working residents of Sussex, Katy Bourne, Sussex Police and the councillors who ‘unanimously’ voted through the increase, are effectively penalising Sussex for being law-abiding citizens.

Described as a rural county, Sussex is predominantly covered with woodland, countryside and rolling meadows. Sussex has enjoyed low levels of crime compared to other parts of the country, because the geographically features of Sussex have brought about a pleasant and satisfying standard of life.

Generally people are happy living in Sussex and this is reflected in the crime levels. Hence the reason Sussex has enjoyed low police tax is because Sussex Police need to do less than other police forces across the country to serve and protect it’s customers. (Notice I used the word customers! Sussex Police like to see themselves as a business, of which we (the people) are customers and they (the police) as providers of the service.

The manner in which they remind us that Sussex Police have enjoyed a historically low police tax, gives the impression that Sussex has been lucky in getting something for nothing. This couldn’t be further from the truth.

Sussex is a law-abiding county which should be rewarded not punished…

I know that certain people consider my criticism of Sussex Police and Katy Bourne as a personal hate campaign. Some people consider my criticism as a ‘dismissive,’ while others consider it to be the jealous ramblings of a mad-man.

Nothing could be further from the truth…

When Katy Bourne writes, “The extra £5 a year (per Band D property) will provide an investment of £1.3m over the next year for 40 police officers and five police staff focusing on protecting vulnerable people,” its hard not to agree.

The problem I face is that I know Katy Bourne lies and am concerned this is yet another lie to deceive and manipulate us for their own nefarious ends…

After-all how can you trust a person who has failed in her duty to do a job which she is being paid £85K a year to do?

Katy Bourne said, “The increased precept will allow Sussex Police to invest in these “critical areas”. Well, if they were so critical, why haven’t they been addressed already.


  • Did You Miss Me?: This seems to be the sum total of Katy Bourne’s efforts since taking up the (very well paid) post.

  • Time to move: I’d pay £100 more if I knew it was being spent on policing

  • Drewboy301: Councillor Colin Fitzgerald is very right to highlight the giving with one hand and taking with the other. Watch as all the local Policing is cut and all that is left is a Force hiding behind computer screens telling us all not to worry !!

  • Idontbelieveit1948: So its going to cost £5 a year more to see no police in my neighbourhood now!

  • Jayp: What a joke this woman is, remove all this department from office and we wouldn’t have to pay a bean.

Katy Bourne justifies the increase with the nobel promise “I want to ensure that we increase the level of resourcing and skills to match the increased demand, and build on my previous investments in safeguarding hubs and dedicated sexual liaison officers.”

Based on the lies and deceit she and her staff have shown since 2012, implies to me that the increase in Police tax is ear-marked to line the pockets of their Freemason friends and continue to hide the corruption which runs deep in the heart of Sussex Police.

The law-abiding residents of Sussex need to wake up and look at Katy Bourne for what she really is… Namely a puppet of a criminal government intent on waging a class war against the hard-working people of Britain under the guise of austerity.

Stay tuned for my next instalment of Sussex Police corruption when I reveal for the first time, three new cases which the national and local press daren’t report and address.

Damn Sussex for being so dumb….







Mr Matt Taylor


HM Treasury,

1 Horse Guards Road,

London, SW1A 2HQ

Dear Cabinet Office,


I stood in the Brighton Kemptown parliamentary election as an Independent candidate promoting sustainable housing, alternative medicine and tidal energy.

I wish to appeal for a full refund of my £500 deposit for the following reasons:


On the 16th of January 2015 I was attacked by two assailants at my election campaign office in Peacehaven. Having called the police for emergency assistance I was arrested for affray and deprived off my liberty and freedom for the next 12 hours.

The episode was caught on camera and can be viewed below:



As a consequence of this; all my election fund was regrettably spent on solicitor and barrister costs, fighting the closure of my election office through the civilian courts.


Upon handing over the £500 deposit I did so with the understanding that I would be afforded the same opportunities as the other parliamentary candidates.

Shockingly I was excluded from two major hustings, in which all the other parliamentary candidates were invited.

At the Argus Hustings, organised by the local newspaper, I was excluded.

Read more: The Argus Travesty of Democracy.

I was again excluded from a Peacehaven Community School husting in which all the other parliamentary candidates were invited.


Due to the financial disaster of prioritising between saving my election office or printing leaflets, I did not take advantage of the free Royal Mail leaflet delivery service.


Everything that could have went wrong went wrong. If I had known that I wouldn’t be afforded the same privileges and courtesy bestowed upon the other parliamentary candidates, I simply would not have stood as an independent parliamentary candidate in the Brighton Kemptown election.

While I accepted I would not win the election, I hoped that with the same exposure as the other candidates I would at least win back my £500 deposit.

I came last in the vote with 69 votes, and believe I helped considerably is aiding and abetting Simon Kirby’s victory of 690 votes more than his nearest rival, Labour’s Nancy Platts.

The anti-promotional video below demonstrates that I helped secure a Conservative victory in Brighton Kemptown.

As a freelance content provider, £500 is a lot of money to needlessly lose.

Please may I appeal to your more generous nature and request a full refund of the £500 deposit I gave Britain PLC to stand as an Independent Parliamentary candidate for Brighton Kemptown.

If I had been afforded the same rights and privileges as the other candidates, I would have been happy and no appeal would have been submitted.

I trust you agree, that in light of the three reasons highlighted, it is only fair and proper that I should receive a full refund.

Read more: I’m broke, homeless and pissed off.

Many thanks for your time and I look forward with hope for your response, with a £500 cheque attached.

Yours Sincerely,

Matt Taylor