Church and State blog: Declan responds to the City of London Police Professional Standards Directorate

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Declan responds to the City of London Police Professional Standards Directorate

It very much seems that Declan's complaint last Thursday to the City of London Police Professional Standards Directorate against two City of London police officers, having been further issued with false records in relation to their encounter with him and me at our sleeping pitch two nights previous, has fallen on deaf ears. Yesterday Declan received three emails from DC Nigel Anderson, in the Directorate, and in every single one the detective makes out that he hasn't the first clue what Declan is complaining about.

Things in fact are very much on the boil, particularly at our sleeping pitch, Salters' Hall (see blog of 5 June “Salters back in the spotlight” for two Google map photos of the sleeping pitch). The Salters’ Company describes itself as a Great City Livery Company very largely devoted to charity; it also plays an important part in the system of local government in the City of London, reflecting its historical roots. The company not only fund raises for science education (Declan's petition to the United Nations on research cloning of embryos and stem cells has now been signed by 591 scientists and academics, who include recognised authorities from the world’s leading universities and research institutes, as well as 24 Nobel laureates, and this despite several months of serious spamming), but runs a project for the homeless.

This is the third email Declan received yesterday from DC Anderson:

Subject: Complaint

Mr Heavey

Thank you for your response but I am still none the wiser.

I need to know exactly what it is that the officers did or didn't do that you disagree with. Did they make specific comments to you or your wife, or was it something else?

I also need to know what false records were you issued with and can i have a copy, please?

Thank you

Nigel Anderson

And this was Declan's response, to which he has yet to receive a reply of any description - it was written very much with the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) in mind:

Subject: Complaint

Dear DC Anderson,

I understand from the attached copy of your third email to me of even date regarding my complaint to the City of London Police Professional Standards Directorate that you still have no idea what I am complaining about: in your second email you wrote: "Having read the correspondence that I have I need to establish exactly what it is you are complaining about"; and in this third email: "Thank you for your response but I am still none the wiser".

I again regret that, with respect to what I am complaining about, I have nothing to add to the first paragraph of my email to Commissioner Bowron of 18 June, which states the following:

Thank you for your email of even date signed by Darren Pulman, Staff Officer to the Commissioner, acknowledging receipt of my email of 17 June regarding stop at Salters' Hall (CAD 10903 of 16/06/09). I wish to make a complaint against the officers' behaviour: this morning at Bishopsgate police station I was further issued with false records in relation to said stop.

This email to Commissioner Bowron goes on to reconfirm the details of the stop on the night of 16 June when two City of London police officers from Bishopsgate police station, PC 208CP and PC 671CP, were summoned by two security guards to the sleeping pitch I share with my wife at Salters' Hall, St. Alphage Highwalk, Fore Street, Moorgate. You write: "I need to know exactly what it is that the officers did or didn't do that you disagree with. Did they make specific comments to you or your wife, or was it something else?" I further regret that I have nothing to add to the third and fourth paragraphs of the aforementioned email to Commissioner Bowron, which provide as follows:

I reconfirm that at 10.00pm on the night of 16 June two City of London police officers from Bishopsgate police station, PC 208CP and PC 671CP, were summoned to our sleeping pitch at Salters' Hall by two security guards from the company Guarding UK who were patrolling (a derelict) St. Alphage Highwalk. PC 208CP informed my wife that he was not in need of a court order and that she had to vacate the porch, and highwalk, immediately. My wife refused as a result of having nowhere else to sleep, the upshot being that the two police officers and two security guards left, PC 208CP informing me on leaving that if I wanted our copies of the record of the stop to which we were entitled I should call into the police station in the morning to collect them.

On both my wife's 386 and my 386, PC 208CP writes that this stop occurred on "St. Alphage Highwalk"; as I brought to his attention at the time of the stop, in the porch and over my wife's head there was a notice which reads: “CCTV Surveillance. Salters’ Hall. Images are being monitored and recorded for the purposes of crime prevention and public safety. The scheme is controlled by the Salters’ Company.” PC 208CP also writes on both 386s that the outcome of this stop was that "persons moved on"; neither my wife nor I moved on: we slept at Salters' Hall on the night of 16 June, last night, and will do so again tonight as a result of having nowhere else to sleep.

You asked in your second email what I am seeking to achieve from making this complaint ("I would also like to establish what it is you are seeking to achieve from making the complaint"). I beg to again point out that, at the very least, I now have an "Exhibit B" titled "Complaint dated 18 June 2009 to the City of London Police Professional Standards Directorate" with appendices for the solicitor appointed to my wife in the event of the arrest she been repeatedly threatened with pursuant to Operation Poncho II. My wife will further request of this solicitor that he/she defend her case under the Human Rights Act 1998 with reference to said complaint and, if necessary, appeal accordingly.

You ask me for a copy of the false records I was issued ("I also need to know what false records were you issued with and can I have a copy, please?"). I would be happy to send you a copy of the two 386s in question by post. Could you please provide me with the postal address to which these 386s should be sent?

As I stated in my previous email, I would very much like to receive by email the literature to which you referred in your second email this afternoon ("Have you had the opportunity to read any leaflets issued by the IPCC about the complaints procedure. If not I can supply them either in hard copy or by email!"). Perhaps you would be so kind as to also provide me with this information by return email.

Yours sincerely,
Declan Heavey

Church and State

MAYOR OF LONDON RSI PROPERTY
DAY 406 IN A WEEKLY PERIODIC TENANCY
SUBJECT TO A SECTION 21 NOTICE

(SEE PARA. 3 BELOW)

1. Our 308 Honorary Associates include 20 Nobel Prize laureates. Declan and I are engaged in a project that deals with the publication of issues significant to social policy in a number of key areas, e.g., climate change, population, futurism, atheism, and free speech. Established as Network for Church Monitoring, a non-profit company limited by guarantee, our main publication, found at the website, Church and State, calls attention to subjects, not the least which have been critical of the interaction between religious and secular institutions. We have been the target of numerous threats and actions, e.g., the former resulting in threats to Declan's life, and the latter, which have led to vandalism. The various incidents are on record with the police and other official agencies.

2. There are no less than 63 Nobel Prize laureates on the Church and State website from 20 Honorary Associates, eight articles, nine book excerpts and 33 petition signatories. (For example, one Nobel laureate signed our Nobel petition in support of human embryonic stem cell research and gave us permission to excerpt from one of his books.) Our list of associates also includes 18 US National Medal laureates, and six Turing Award laureates (the equivalent of the Nobel Prize in computer science). We have published one article and excerpted from the books of seven members of the British House of Lords. And there are 31 knighted professors on the site from 13 Honorary Associates, one book excerpt and 21 petition signatories. These figures are despite the never-ending assault on our email (this link reveals the targeting of our emails to, among others, a close colleague in Washington, DC as well as space advocates and Nobel laureates).

3. This is Day 406 for us living under the threat to life of a 'no fault' eviction by Peabody Trust.[1] We live in a Mayor of London's Rough Sleepers Initiative (RSI) property. Peabody's appalling new terms of tenancy have forced us into an unstable weekly periodic tenancy that poses a threat to Declan's life and inhibits our ability to exercise our rights. Declan accumulated quite a history with the Housing Ombudsman Service before he received the Ombudsman's decision not to investigate a referral from Lyn Brown MP on jurisdictional grounds. The Ombudsman was asked to consider whether or not our tenancy has been renewed like for like; and whether, if not, it should be in light of the landlord having accused us of not signing a like-for-like agreement. The Equality and Human Rights Commission will not accept a referral of discrimination from Ms Brown, the Commission's helpline (EASS) having grossly distorted the complaint against Peabody. We no longer have pro se access to the courts (see next paragraph).

4. This eviction matter came before District Judge Ruth Fine at the Central London County Court on 30 June 2020, when both counsel for St Mungo's (the charity in effective control of our tenancy) and Declan presented their positions. Declan lost the case and was ordered to pay £1,850 in costs. A publishing colleague in America cleared these costs within 24 hours of my blog post about this hearing for strike out on a related issue that was the essence of the claim, i.e., that St Mungo's would take a phone call to confirm that we are clients of the Mayor of London's RSI programme. Within a week of the hearing, St Mungo's had agreed to take this phone call for us both, the Court having ruled that they were not obliged to do so despite our circumstances. This time we escaped bankruptcy (counsel for St Mungo's asked for £3,407.50 in costs), but consider that to seek pro se access to justice in the courts has become far too dangerous for us. Declan currently has before the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman the decision of the Information Commissioner that allows St Mungo's to continue processing coercive support plans without our knowledge or consent and that also poses a threat to his life.

5. When it comes to traffic, we have had 10.7 million hits in the past three years on Facebook; however, I left the platform on 13 March 2021 for one year rather than risk being banned for life. It is indisputable that with any sort of level playing field Church and State would have far exceeded 2.5 million hits last year. In addition to a large variety of blocks without explanation, Facebook had so severely restricted our Page's distribution by October 2020 that it was almost as good as an unpublished page.[2] Currently, we are up to their 85th block since 1 December 2015, and as usual without an explanation. This block records as one half of their 3rd double block in the first five weeks of this year that lasted 60 days. Our traffic has also been curtailed by over 2.5K blocks on access to Church and State since 26 July 2016, including 29 full distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks since 17 May 2019 that have lasted for as long as 54 hours at a time.[3] About 70% of our hits are from Americans.

"This is precisely the hard hitting kind of response needed to clarify the unfair way Facebook is treating your highly reputable site." Don Collins, Founder, International Services Assistance Fund, Washington DC

Last updated: 26/06/21

_________________________

[1] Once a fixed term has elapsed, the landlord has the option to seek eviction even if the tenant has upheld their obligations in full (though of course the landlord must still apply for and obtain a county court order).

[2] 17/10/20: We have permission to publish this ISAF letter of 30 September to Facebook COO Sheryl Samberg. Facebook has so severely restricted our Page's distribution since 4 September that it's almost as good as an unpublished page

[3] Since October 2019, we have been defining a full DDoS attack as having such a high volume of up to 4-minute blocks on access to Church and State that we don't bother recording them all.

Church and State blog

Tuesday, June 23, 2009

Declan responds to the City of London Police Professional Standards Directorate

About me

My Picks

Church and State

Blog Archive