Declan barred from the Dellow Centre

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and Haringey Council making it as difficult as possible for us to get the benefits we are entitled to and already the Dellow Day Centre of Providence Row Charity run by the Sisters of Mercy is showing us the door! Declan was barred from the centre this morning (he has access in the afternoon for a cup of coffee!) and I will be too as soon as the DWP decides to lift the suspension on my Jobseeker’s Allowance (see previous blog dated 6 August “The Department for Work and Pensions is putting us back to the street”). It means Declan has now lost his breakfast and I have lost my lunch, since the cheese sandwich that the nuns give Declan with his cereal and three toast has been my lunch for many, many months.

Their website states: “With help from our supporters we continue to expand the range of services we have on offer at the Dellow Centre, enabling people to permanently break the cycles of homelessness and poverty” - that bit mustn’t apply to us, though. The reception manager didn’t agree with me either that a three-month lease subject to month’s notice at any time constitutes vulnerable accommodation. The Duke of Norfolk, the Patron of Providence Row, states in their Annual Report 2007-2008 that “the staff and volunteers at Providence Row follow their mission to help anyone who comes to them retain their dignity and health, and explore options for their future.” And just a bit below, one can read: “Helping clients find housing and accommodation remains a number one priority for us.” Well, I am puzzled.

Anyway, only last night I uploaded to the NAC website a new section in “What we do” called “Question the war on terror”; we feature on our homepage "Questioning the War on Terror" by Dr. Kevin Barrett, now the flagship of the site. Below is a video by award journalist John Pilger, which features in this new section. And below the video is a letter that Declan sent this afternoon to the CEO of Broadway Homelessness and Support, Howard Sinclair. Declan is once again copying the email to Superintendent Lorraine Cussen (see blog of 12 July “Police threaten us with physical force at the place we sleep, Salters”). In fact, as I said in the previous blog, Declan has an email from Superintendent Cussen, stating: “Thank you for taking the time to copy me into your current situation. I hope that Broadway have been able to assist you.”

"Breaking The Silence - Truth and Lies in the War on Terror" by John Pilger. Award-winning journalist John Pilger dissects the truth and lies in the "war on terror". Pilger investigates the discrepancies between American and British claims for the "war on terror" and the facts on the ground as he finds them in Afghanistan and Washington, DC. A Special Report (pdf) by John Pilger can be read at Bullfrog Films website.

And Declan’s email this afternoon to Sinclair:

Subject: Broadway assistance in claiming Jobseeker's Allowance

Dear Mr. Sinclair,

Previous correspondence refers. I reattach copy of my email of 14 May 2009 to the head of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, Archbishop Vincent Nichols, in his capacity as Archbishop of the Diocese of Westminster, to which belongs the Dellow Day Centre of Providence Row Charity run by the Sisters of Mercy. Paragraph 3(2) states as follows:

18 June 2008: I was robbed in the canteen of the Dellow Centre of all my and my wife's money and documents (crime reference no. 4215697/08); 24 June: I was informed at Bow Street police station that the case had been struck out due to the police being unable to obtain any CCTV footage whatsoever from Providence Row Charity.

With regard to the reinstatement of my joint claim for Jobseeker's Allowance (JSA) - which originally ran from July 2005 until it was terminated on 27 September 2006 because I did not "sign on" two days before I was due to so on 29 September - Broadway Homelessness and Support gathered on 31 July 2009 more specific details from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) about my benefits claim of 17 July. I was informed by Broadway City Outreach team that although my part of the claim had been processed (and subsequently paid), my wife's part of the claim is currently suspended because the DWP has lost her National Insurance Number (NINO) and, as a consequence, she needs to be issued with a new NINO before her part of the claim can be paid.

As first stated in my email to you of 6 August, I am in receipt of a letter of 4 August from Haringey Council advising that the Council cannot process my claim for Housing Benefit/Council Tax Benefit until they have more information to work out my benefit. I must (i) tell them my partner's National Insurance Number and provide proof that it belongs to her/him, for example, a letter or form issued by the DWP or HM Revenue and Customs, and (ii) provide current proof of my partner's Jobseeker's Allowance (Income Based)/(Contribution Based) in the form of a recent letter from the DWP showing my current address or a recent bank statement showing the most up to date payment being paid directly into their account. I have also pointed out in a number of emails to you that the Council states that I must give all this information to them within one month of the date of same letter, or my claim for housing benefit (to be treated as made on 17 July) will not be paid and I will have to reapply.

As you are aware, it has been my understanding since 4 August that (a) Broadway Homelessness and Support expect to receive the letter of invitation from the DWP for the NINO allocation appointment ASAP, given my wife's original NINO has been "lost" by the Department, and (b) Broadway City Outreach team has been informed by the DWP that the fact that we were unable to retrieve any personal identification documents following the aforementioned robbery at the Dellow Centre will not militate against my wife, and that her Big Issue vendor badge (badge no. 1170) will suffice in the circumstances. With regard to the former of these understandings, I note that Broadway Homelessness and Support has yet to receive this letter.

This has now become an extremely serious situation for my wife and me, and may, should it continue much longer, see us back sleeping rough at Salters' Hall. To further compound the situation, this morning I was denied access to food in the Dellow Centre because, according to Mr. Keith Armitage, Reception and Support Services Manager, they have been informed by Broadway Homelessness and Support that I "have a flat with access to a kitchen". (I am seeking written clarification from the Dellow Centre of the situation with regard to my wife, whose benefits have been suspended, before lodging a formal complaint against the Sisters of Mercy with the Archbishop of Westminster on the grounds of unlawful discrimination and seeking legal representation to pursue my claim.) Tomorrow my wife and I will turn up at Broadway Homelessness and Support head office to seek assistance in applying for a second crisis loan in her name, our accumulated debt to the DWP of £210 as from 20 July notwithstanding. I wrote to Broadway City Outreach team on Friday requesting an appointment for tomorrow for this purpose, and have just received a reply, stating: "We have a busy morning tomorrow and I am having trouble finding someone to be in the office to assist Maria with her Crisis Loan claim."

In September 2006 the DWP terminated our benefits because I did not sign up early enough – even though both my wife and I were doing so in a timely fashion; and I exhausted the appeals process: my case was dismissed by the High Court (Judicial Review), Court of Appeal and European Court of Human Rights, despite that I was denied the internal appeal process by procedural impropriety on the part of the enforcement authority. That we are now dealing with another obvious "mistake" (however deliberate) - namely, the losing of my wife's NINO by the DWP - I cannot imagine what would motivate the officials to prevent me from successfully establishing a joint claim leading to my landlady being paid the full amount of backdated housing benefit.

You will note that I am taking the time to once again copy Superintendent Lorraine Cussen of Snow Hill Police Station into my current situation. As you are aware, it was Superintendent Cussen who, as the supervisory police officer overseeing Operation Poncho II within the City of London Police, suggested that I seek the assistance of Broadway Homelesssness and Support (see attached email of 13 July 2009 from Superintendent Cussen). I am also copying this email and attachments to, among others, the former Law Lord, Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Master of the Salters’ Company c/o the Clerk to the Salters’ Company at clerk@salters.co.uk.

Please would you acknowledge receipt.

Yours sincerely
Declan Heavey

cc The Rt. Hon. Yvette Cooper MP, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Master of the Salters’ Company
His Grace Archbishop Vincent Nichols, Archbishop of Westminster
Mrs. Jo. Ansell, Chief Executive of Providence Row Charity
Superintendent Lorraine Cussen, Snow Hill Police Station

Declan assaulted in the local internet café

Yesterday evening Declan once again took a trip to a police station, this time to Limehouse PS which is the nearest one to our local internet café off Whitechapel Road.

He went in the middle of one of these summer storms and had to wait for almost an hour to talk with an officer, but he wasn’t deterred: the internet café in question is the only place around in which I can install a program so I can upload pages to the NAC website – I should be able to log in to my SiteGround account with my username and password but I am blocked from doing so (see blog of 9 May “SiteGround confirms our website has been hacked”).

This particular bloke is well known to Declan, and we are pretty sure from his drinking on computers that he is a resident of the Salvation Army’s Booth House hostel for homeless men, located around the corner from the internet café (and across the road from the huge East London Mosque and London Muslim Centre). Declan has also submitted a written complaint to the manager of the internet café against the guy for racially aggravated harassment just hours before we had a major run in with police at our sleeping pitch (see blog of 17 June “More police intimidation at the place we sleep, Salters”; for two Google map photos of where we sleep see blog of 5 June “Salters back in the spotlight”).

As Declan told the officer who took the report, he is sick and tired of homeless who seem to think that when it comes to us they have some sort of carte blanche to say and do pretty much what they like: Declan has been assaulted in the middle of the night in a winter shelter run by the West London Churches, crime reference no. 6002035-07 (see here); we have both been assaulted in the Methodist Church-run Whitechapel Mission (see here for Declan, crime reference no. 4204886/07; and for me here, crime reference no. 4217341/07); we have been robbed of all our money and documents in the Catholic Sisters of Mercy Dellow Day Centre, crime reference no. 4215697/08 (see here); Declan has been further assaulted in the Catholic Manna Day Centre, crime reference no. 3021917/08 (see here) and the Dellow Centre, crime reference no. 4204029/09 (see here); and Declan has even had a homeless arrested for a threat to kill, crime reference no. 7221/07 (see blog of 8 September 2007 “Application to the European Court of Human Rights” para. 30).

Not one of these cases has resulted in a prosecution. And it’s not just because there never seems to be any witnesses. The robbery of all our money and documents, for example, was struck out due to the police being unable to obtain any CCTV footage whatsoever from the Dellow Centre (see here). Then there is Declan’s case against one homeless man, against whom he has three crime reference numbers, which was struck out due to the police being unable to obtain the identity of the suspect from the Dellow Centre even though they do know his details (see here). In fact, since 10 April last year, Declan has been washing in the street as a result of harassment and intimidation by homeless people in the Dellow Centre and Manna Centre, the only two day centres available to us since our barring two years ago from the Whitechapel Mission due to concerns about our safety (see blog of 14 May of “Letter to Archbishop Vincent Nichols”).

So now Declan has yet another crime reference number to add to his bourgeoning collection, 4215223/09 for common assault (caught on CCTV). This is the chronology Declan handed to police last night:

CHRONOLOGY

(1) 16 JUNE | 4.30-4.45pm the customer of the Internet cafe ("the customer") is continually abusive towards me, seemingly drunk; I am the only other person on an upstairs computer and regrettably did not write down actual words shouted across the floor at me. | 4.45pm I report the abuse to a member of staff downstairs who then requests of the customer where he sits that he quieten down. | 4.45-4.50pm the customer continues his tirade in abusive outbursts ("you have no fuckin' manners", "you are an Irish grass", etc). I do not know how the customer knows that I am Irish, but I suspect he is homeless and resides in the Salvation Army Booth House, a hostel for homeless people across the road. | 4.50-5.10pm I sit downstairs waiting for a computer to come free - impossible to work upstairs in the sole company of the customer. The member of staff requests from me a written complaint that he will present to the Manager. The member of staff informs me that the customer has already been barred for drunken behaviour, but was readmitted by the manager following his plea and promise of good behaviour. | 5.10pm I leave the internet cafe, no computer having come free. I read to the member of staff my "Chronology (1)" before leaving and inform him that I will drop a copy to him on my return. | 6.00pm I hand the member of staff "Chronology (1)", as requested.

(2) 27 JUNE | 5.05pm the customer vacates his computer at the same time as I make my way downstairs to pay for an extra three hours. As soon as I turn to go back upstairs, he proceeds to come down. Sensing trouble, I wait for him to pass. Rather than walk straight out the door or around me to the counter (which would have been no trouble at all), he comes straight at me, hitting my right shoulder with his right shoulder to move me out of the way of his chosen direct route to the counter. He makes some quick comment to the member of staff and leaves. I comment to the member of staff that this guy has just assaulted me with a shoulder charge, to which the member of staff replies that he has no idea what this guy's problem is. | 5.30pm I hand the member of staff a copy of "Chronology (2)", as previously requested. I ask for the address of the local police station, to drop them a copy of this chronology.

[5.45pm on leaving the internet café, the member of staff presents me with a business card for Limehouse police station, and confirms that the assault would have been caught on CCTV.]

Declan appeals to the Independent Police Complaints Commission

As I stated in yesterday’s blog, things 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). Last night around midnight we were harassed by three workers from the homeless organisation Broadway. It was of course two workers from the same organisation who visited us with two police officers on the night of 28 May in what turned out an encounter of surreal proportions (see blog “Last night something surreal happened”). Declan and I did all our talking that night and had no interest in pointless conversation, but these three guys did not seem too happy about it.

“We’re reading your blog and just wonder if you would be willing to air your views to two of our mental health workers that I have here with me,” one of them blurted on being ignored, like all of a sudden we were sleeping not in Britain, but in Russia! (Declan has actually been to the police already about one of these workers for harassment and intimidation; he retains a With Compliments slip dated 29 April from Bishopsgate police station wherein PC Thomas, 409CP, registers his name against front office clerk Claire Stevenson’s description of the guy’s behaviour as “intrusive” and “inappropriate”.)

Well, if they are reading my blog, they shouldn’t bother coming back any time soon: as I have written in previous blogs, I was told recently in the canteen of Catholic Sisters of Mercy Dellow Day Centre that I should “lap dance for donations” (for more on the Dellow in particular, see blog of 14 May “Letter to Archbishop Vincent Nichols”).



Tonight the BBC is showing “Famous, Rich and Homeless” about five celebrities who undertook ten days of sleeping rough, soup runs and hostels in a bid to put homelessness in the spotlight. Bruce Jones told The Sun how he lost control of his emotions when he walked through the front door of his luxury home in Alderley Edge, Cheshire, to be reunited with wife Sandra. He says: “She gathered me in her arms and I’m not ashamed to say that I broke down and wept like a baby.” I suppose our survival of sleeping rough for over two and a half years is pretty amazing. Add to that that I am maintaining a blog, developing a website and we have a petition to the UN on therapeutic cloning that has been already signed by 24 Nobel laureates, and I would say it is probably unique. Not to mention that we have also been through the High Court (see here), Court of Appeal (see here), and European Court of Human Rights (see here).

To add insult to injury, it 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 now been dismissed. Apparently DC Nigel Anderson, in the Directorate, still hasn’t the first clue what Declan is complaining about (see previous blog). Well, this is Declan’s appeal this afternoon to the Independent Police Complaints Commission - an automated generated acknowledgement confirmed they have received the email:

Subject: Complaint

Dear Sir/Madam,

I refer to the attached copy of my email and attachment of 22 June to DC Nigel Anderson, in the City of London Police Professional Standards Directorate, regarding the behaviour of two City of London police officers on the night of 16 June at Salters' Hall, St. Alphage Highwalk, Fore Street, Moorgate, London (CAD 10903).

I wish to appeal to the Independent Police Complaints Commission on the grounds that, in the absence of hearing further from the Professional Standards Directorate, I have not been given enough information about what the investigation has found.

My wife and I are of no fixed abode and have been sleeping rough in the City of London since 3 November 2006. (We slept in the same porch until a trellis gate was installed on 4 September 2008; as from 12 September, our sleeping pitch has been located at Salters' Hall.)

Please would you acknowledge receipt by return email.

Yours sincerely,
Declan Heavey

Yet more police intimidation at the place we sleep, Salters

This morning Declan again wrote to City of London Police Commissioner Michael Bowron – his letter to him yesterday was copied to the City of London Police Professional Standards Directorate, one step off the Independent Police Complaints Commission (see previous blog).

Last night at 1.00am we were woken rudely by a female police officer, PC 111CP from Snow Hill police station, who said that pursuant to Operation Poncho II we must move ourselves and our things away so that the two City of London Corporation street cleaners that were with her could wash and disinfect the porch floor – located ... on a derelict highwalk! In his email to Commissioner Bowron, presented below, Declan also takes issue with this police officer on her record of the stop. (See blog of 5 June “Salters back in the spotlight” for two Google map photos of the sleeping pitch.).

Normally on a Friday Declan takes a round trip walk of two hours to the Catholic Manna Day Centre for a bite to eat for lunch – something he decided was wise to skip this morning. For more on the Manna, see blog of 14 May “Letter to Archbishop Vincent Nichols”; essentially this letter covers harassment and intimidation, and robbery, in the RC Sisters of Mercy Dellow Day Centre, but in it Declan also refers to being assaulted in the Manna and our barring from the Methodist Church-run Whitechapel Mission due to concerns about our safety after I was assaulted in an unprovoked attack in the canteen of the premises two years ago, almost to the day.

This is Declan’s email to the Commissioner, just acknowledged safely received by his PA, Sara Coker, who says there will be a response forthwith:

Subject: My complaint against the City of London Police

Dear Commissioner Bowron,

I refer to your email of 18 June signed by Darren Pulman, Staff Officer to the Commissioner, acknowledging receipt of my email to you of 17 June regarding stop at Salters' Hall (CAD 10903 of 16/06/09).

I attach copy of my email of complaint to you of 18 June (and attachments) against the City of London Police, having been further issued on the morning of 18 June with false records in relation to said stop. This email was copied to the City of London Police Professional Standards Directorate.

As you are aware, my wife and I are of no fixed abode and have been sleeping rough in the City of London since 3 November 2006. (We slept in the same porch until a trellis gate was installed on 4 September 2008; as from 12 September, our sleeping pitch has been located at Salters' Hall, Fore Street, Moorgate.)

I wish to confirm that at 1.00am last night PC 111CP from Snow Hill police station insisted pursuant to Operation Poncho II that my wife and I move out of our sleeping pitch at Salters' Hall to allow two City of London Corporation street cleaners to wash and disinfect the porch floor - located at (derelict) St. Alphage Highwalk, Fore Street. When my wife requested a court order to which she is entitled, PC 111CP informed her that she knew nothing about court orders but my wife needed to vacate the porch nonetheless. My wife refused to move as a result of having nowhere else to sleep, the upshot being that PC 111CP left with the two street cleaners; the street cleaners did not wash and disinfect the porch floor, and my wife and I went back to sleep in the porch.

Before PC 111CP left I took issue with her on the location cited on the copies of the record of the stop we were issued: PC 111CP insisted on "St. Alphage Highwalk, Salters Hall", arguing that she was standing on St. Alphage Highwalk; in fact, the location of the stop was "Salters' Hall, St. Alphage Highwalk, Fore Street", as evident from the CCTV notice I drew to the police officer's attention above my wife's head, stating: “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.”

I beg to again point out that 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 (my 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.

In the event of error in transmission, please note that the order of attachments is as follows:

bowron(18.6.09).htm
bowron(17.6.09).htm
cussen(13.6.09).htm
cussen(12.9.08).htm
cussen(10.6.08).htm
broadway(15.6.09).htm

Please would you acknowledge receipt.

Yours sincerely
Declan Heavey

More police intimidation at the place we sleep, Salters

Last night I was lucky enough to avoid being escorted by two police officers to a police van at the place we sleep – the back of Salters' Hall, a porch located on a derelict highwalk (see blog of 5 June “Salters back in the spotlight” for two Google map photos of the pitch).

At around 10.00pm – Declan is about to nod off to sleep in his sleeping bag and I am reading a book – two security guards from the company Guarding UK approach us. They flash their lights into my face and as bluntly as possible one of them tells me that they are patrolling the highwalk and they want us off it, right away. I point out that we have been sleeping at Salters’ Hall since last September, on the highwalk since January, and the porch is owned by the Salters’ Company over which they have no jurisdiction. All falls on deaf ears, and within ten or so minutes two police officers are on the scene (incident no. 10903).

By now Declan has all our stuff out of the porch and is separating things for what we believe will surely be my arrest – last September I was arrested by four police officers for a breach of the peace because I refused to move on as a result of having nowhere else to sleep (see blog of 11 September “I am arrested for ‘breach of the peace’”); last Friday night I was also threatened with arrest by another police officer who wanted us to move ourselves and our things away so that two City of London Corporation street cleaners could wash and disinfect the porch floor (this skulduggery is carried out under what the City of London police call Operation Poncho II, see previous blog).

PC 208CP and PC 671CP from Bishopsgate police station are adamant that we have no option but to leave the highwalk, and no, PC 208CP says, the police don’t need a court order to force us to vacate the highwalk! Anyway, I refuse to move and we very much repeat the things we said on the night of the 28 May when two police officers from Snow Hill police station and two workers from the homeless organisation Broadway visited us (see blog “Last night something surreal happened”) - Declan made a couple of hilarious comments, as usual, particularly relating to his washing on the street since 10 April of last year because of harassment and intimidation by other homeless at the RC Sisters of Mercy Dellow Day Centre and the Catholic Manna Day Centre (see blog of 14 May “Letter to Archbishop Vincent Nichols”).

PC 208CP informs us on leaving with the two security guards that if we want our copies of the record of the encounter/stop (called 386s) to which we are entitled, Declan should call into the police station in the morning to collect them because he doesn’t have any with him! The police station had nothing for him this morning, though.

This visit from the police just happened to come on top of an afternoon of variety for Declan. First, he had to email Asab Ali, the manager of our local council’s Idea Store Whitechapel library – located only a few minutes from the huge East London Mosque and London Muslim Centre – regarding the library’s MIMEsweeper software blocking access to his Google Mail account due to “Porn Detected”. (Only a few weeks ago I was bullied by two security guards into vacating the computer I had booked the previous day, which I refused to do, see blog of 13 May “Letter to the Leader of Tower Hamlets Council”.)

Then he had to submit a written complaint to the manager of the local internet café against a homeless man from the Salvation Army’s Booth House hostel for homeless men across the road, such was the extent of the unprovoked and loud verbal abuse he was subjected to sitting among the upstairs computers – “you have no f*ckin’ manners”, “you are an Irish grass”, etc.; of course, Declan has no idea how this guy knows he is Irish!

For the record, this is the email Declan sent this afternoon to City of London Police Commissioner Michael Bowron on the incident last night:

Subject: CAD 10903 (16/06/09)

Dear Commissioner Bowron,

I refer to the attached copy of my email to you of 13 June (and attachments) regarding Operation Poncho II and wish to confirm that I retain a stamped With Compliments slip dated today from Bishopsgate police station, stating:

On wed 17/06/09 at 08.00 Mr Declan Heavey attended Bishopsgate police station to collect 386 in relation to stop at Salters Hall (CAD 10903 of 16/06/09). Copy not found. Mr Heavey intends to return on 18/06/09 in the hope of collecting said 386.

As you are aware, my wife and I are of no fixed abode and have been sleeping rough in the City of London since 3 November 2006. (We slept in the same porch until a trellis gate was installed on 4 September 2008, and as from 12 September our sleeping pitch has been located at Salters' Hall, Fore Street.)

I can confirm that at 10.00pm last night 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 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 encounter/stop to which we were entitled I should call into the police station in the morning to collect them.

I reconfirm that at 1.00am last Friday night PC 493CP from Snow Hill police station insisted pursuant to Operation Poncho II that my wife and I move out of our sleeping pitch at Salters' Hall to allow two City of London Corporation street cleaners to wash and disinfect the porch floor. When my wife refused as a result of having nowhere else to sleep, she was told by PC 493CP that she would be arrested if she did not vacate the porch. Again my wife refused, the upshot being that one of the street cleaners poured disinfectant around where she remained outstretched in her sleeping bag. With that, PC 493CP and the two street cleaners left the highwalk.

Perhaps I should mentioned here that the homeless organisation Broadway, in an unsolicited email to my wife and me on Monday (also attached), and in quoting from my wife's blog of 11 June "Harassment at the place we sleep, Salters", acknowledged by implication the content of her blog of 29 May "Last night something surreal happened", thereby sealing my wife's defense for a court subject to the Human Rights Act 1998.

In the event of error in transmission, please note that the order of attachments is as follows:

cussen(13.6.09).htm
cussen(12.9.08).htm
cussen(10.6.08).htm
broadway(15.6.09).htm

Please would you acknowledge receipt.

Yours sincerely
Declan Heavey

'Endemic' rape and abuse of Irish children in Catholic care, inquiry finds

“An official report into abuse – physical, sexual and emotional – in Catholic schools in Ireland produced a harrowing picture yesterday of ill-treatment which it described as endemic,” says the Independent this morning. The government-appointed Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse - which carried out a nine-year investigation into allegations of sexual and physical abuse in reform schools, workhouses, orphanages, children’s homes and other childcare institutions – found that “Catholic priests and nuns for decades terrorised thousands of boys and girls in the Irish Republic, while government inspectors failed to stop the chronic beatings, rape and humiliation”, says the Guardian.

The commission’s original judge, Mary Laffoy, resigned from her post in 2003 over claims that the Irish department of education – which was in charge of inspecting the orphanages and industrial schools – was refusing to hand over documents to her. Judge Sean Ryan, who took over as chair the commission, said that when confronted with evidence of sex abuse, religious authorities responded by moving the sex offenders to another location, where in many instances they were free to abuse again.

One of the things we do in the NAC website is Expose church-state programmes. So far, we have exposed two such programmes: British child migrants and Magdalene laundries. In fact, one of our Action alerts is to the Congregational Leader of the Sisters of Mercy – institutions run by the Sisters of Mercy were also part of the culture of abuse, the report found – to demand an end to Sisters of Mercy-run laundries; a 2003 Guardian article, titled “In God’s Name”, noted that “the same Catholic orders who operated Magdalene Laundries in Ireland ran laundries in North and South America, Australia, France and are now concentrating their efforts in Asia and Africa”.

We run on the site an incredible Channel 4 documentary on the Magdalene asylums in Ireland titled “Sex in a Cold Climate” (see below). The documentary is almost an hour long; unfortunately, I haven’t seen it in its entirety because I have less than three hours of computer time in our local council’s Idea Store Whitechapel library: we frequently run into trouble in this library; only last week I was bullied by two security guards into vacating the computer I had booked the previous day, which I refused to do (see blog of 13 May “Letter to the Leader of Tower Hamlets Council”).



I should perhaps add here that Declan and I get our breakfast from Monday to Friday - my food for the entire day - in the Sisters of Mercy Dellow Day Centre. We also frequently run into difficulties in this day centre (see blog of 14 May “Letter to Archbishop Vincent Nichols”).

Letter to Archbishop Vincent Nichols

This morning Declan ventures for the first time in months into the men’s washroom of the Dellow Day Centre of the Catholic Sisters of Mercy Providence Row Charity, and I get fondled by a homeless man!

Declan is just gone when this homeless comes along side me and rubs his hand across my shoulder and down my arm. I shout at him to go away and hit him with the newspaper I was reading. A few minutes later he is back: this time, he touches me inappropriately, right underneath a CCTV camera. I am in disbelief: there are other homeless about the living room; a nun at the kitchen counter and another at reception; and there are two or three workers buzzing about. I am back shouting at him again, and this time a member of staff comes. About 10 minutes later, I am informed by a member of staff that this homeless has been asked to leave for the day, and I ask the guy to put my complaint on record.

This afternoon Declan emailed the new head of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, Archbishop Vincent Nichols, in his capacity as Archbishop of the Diocese of Westminster, to which the Dellow Centre belongs; our concern that we may be barred from this day centre is not unfounded: on 18 June 2007 we were barred from the Methodist Church Whitechapel Mission by the minister’s wife after I was assaulted in an unprovoked attack by a homeless woman in the canteen - the barring was due to concerns about our safety!

For the record, this is Declan’s email to Archbishop Nichols:

Subject: Providence Row Charity

His Grace Archbishop Vincent Nichols, Archbishop of Westminster.

Your Grace,

I refer to my most recent email of 13 April (attached) to the former head of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, His Eminence Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, in his capacity as Archbishop of the Diocese of Westminster, to which the Dellow Day Centre of the Sisters of Mercy Providence Row Charity belongs.

This morning my wife was inappropriately touched and fondled by a client of the Dellow Centre, right underneath a CCTV camera, and despite that there were other people around her and staff about. She made a complaint to a member of staff, Mr. Keith Armitage, and requested of Mr. Armitage that he make her complaint a matter of record. She was subsequently informed by another member of staff that the homeless man was asked to leave for the day.

I can confirm that I continue to wash in the street as a result of harassment and intimidation by homeless people in the Dellow Centre and the Catholic Manna Day Centre (whose building is provided rent-free by the Archdiocese of Southwark), which I have been doing since 10 April last year; and my wife has been doing since 27 February. Since my initial letter of complaint to Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor of 21 April 2008 (almost two weeks after I took to washing in the street), the following are just a handful of incidents from these two day centres:

(1) 16 May 2008: I reported a homeless man to the Metropolitan Police for racially aggravated harassment in the men's washroom of the Dellow Centre (crime reference no. 4212667/08);

(2) 18 June 2008: I was robbed in the canteen of the Dellow Centre of all my and my wife's money and documents (crime reference no. 4215697/08); 24 June: I was informed at Bow Street police station that the case had been struck out due to the police being unable to obtain any CCTV footage whatsoever from Providence Row Charity;

(3) 19 June 2008: the day after the robbery of all our money and documents in the Dellow Centre, I reported a homeless man to the Metropolitan Police for assaulting me while I was queuing for food in the Manna Centre (crime reference no. 3021917/08);

(4) 6 November 2008: I submitted a written complaint to the Chief Executive of the Providence Row Charity, Ms. Jo Ansell, against a homeless woman for the verbal abuse of both my wife and me from the reception desk of the Dellow Centre;

(5) 24 February 2009: I reported a homeless man to the Metropolitan Police for assault in the canteen of the Dellow Centre (crime reference no. 4204029/09); 25 March: I was informed by email from Limehouse police station that the case had been struck out due to the police being unable to obtain the identity of the suspect from the Providence Row Charity “even though they do know his details”.

I should again point out that my wife and I were barred from the Methodist Church Whitechapel Mission on 18 June 2007 by the minister's wife due to concerns about our safety following an unprovoked assault on my wife (crime reference no. 4217341/07). Despite that the Whitechapel Mission's website states that homeless people are not barred or excluded and that I wrote by registered post to the minister himself and to the head of the Methodist Church in the UK, Rev. Graham Carter, neither my wife nor I were readmitted.

Please would you acknowledge receipt.

Yours sincerely,
Declan Heavey

Letter to Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor

In the blog of 3 April “Still blocked by Facebook”, I published an email Declan received from Detective Paul De-Krestser of Limehouse Police Station suggesting that he calls police immediately when he next makes sight of the homeless guy against whom he has three crime references numbers so that he can be arrested; the Dellow Day Centre of the Catholic Sisters of Mercy Providence Row Charity is not divulging the identity of this guy to police even though they know his details. Well, this morning in the Catholic Manna Day Centre Declan saw him. In fact, the guy seemed quite pleased to be seen, Declan kept bumping into him here and there. So Declan decided to take the five-minute walk to the local police station.

Of course, the police officer couldn’t assure Declan that he wouldn’t get himself barred for bringing the police to the Manna Centre – “we don’t run the place,” PC 396MD told him – so he decided to skip Det. De-Krestser’s advice and update instead the head of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, in his capacity as Archbishop of the Diocese of Westminster, to which the Dellow Centre belongs. (Our concern to be barred from one or both of these day centres is not unfounded: on 18 June 2007 we were barred from the Methodist Church Whitechapel Mission by the minister’s wife due to concerns about our safety after I was assaulted in an unprovoked attack by a homeless woman in the canteen.) For the record, this is Declan’s email this afternoon to Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor:

Subject: Providence Row Charity

His Eminence Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, Archbishop of Westminster.

Your Eminence,

I refer further to the email of acknowledgement of 25 June 2008 that I received from your Personal Secretary, Sister Damian McGrath, stating: "I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your email concerning Providence Row Charity. The Cardinal is out of the country at the present time but he will see your email on his return next week."

I wish to bring to your attention that I continue to wash in the street as a result of harassment and intimidation by homeless people in the Dellow Day Centre of the Sisters of Mercy Providence Row Charity and the Catholic Manna Day Centre (whose building is provided rent-free by the Archdiocese of Southwark), which I have been doing every weekday morning since 10 April last year; and my wife has been doing since 27 February.

In order to avoid being barred through no fault of my own, I do not venture into the washroom in the Dellow Centre and this morning thought it best to leave the Manna Centre, having been stalked both inside and outside the centre by the homeless man against whom I have three crime reference numbers (see (2), (4) and (7) below) – the breakfast provided by the Dellow Centre is the only food available to my wife for the entire day Monday-Friday; I walk a two-hour round trip virtually every weekday to the Manna Centre to avail of the free lunch provided to homeless people.

Since my initial letter of complaint to you of 21 April 2008 (almost two weeks after I took to washing in the street), I reconfirm the occurrence of the following incidents:

(1) on 28 April 2008, I submitted a written complaint to the Chief Executive of the Providence Row Charity, Ms Jo Ansell, against a homeless man for verbal abuse in the canteen of the Dellow Centre;
(2) on 16 May 2008, I reported a homeless man to the Metropolitan Police for racially aggravated harassment in the Dellow Centre's men's washroom (crime reference no. 4212667/08);
(3) on 18 June 2008, I was robbed in the canteen of the Dellow Centre of all my and my wife's money and documents (crime reference no. 4215697/08); on 24 June, I was informed at Bow Street police station that the case had been struck out due to the police being unable to obtain any CCTV footage whatsoever from the Providence Row Charity;
(4) on 19 June 2008, the day after the robbery of all our money and documents in the Dellow Centre, I reported the same homeless man referred to in (2) above to the Metropolitan Police for assault while queuing for food in the Manna Centre (crime reference no. 3021917/08);
(5) on 30 June 2008, I submitted a written complaint to Ms Ansell against a homeless woman for verbal abuse in the canteen of the Dellow Centre;
(6) on 6 November 2008, I submitted a written complaint to Ms Ansell against the same homeless woman referred to in (5) above for verbal abuse from the reception desk of the Dellow Centre;
(7) On 24 February 2009, I reported the same homeless man referred to in (2) and (4) above to the Metropolitan Police for assault in the canteen of the Dellow Centre (crime reference no. 4204029/09); on 25 March, I received an email from Detective Paul De-Krestser of Limehouse Police Station stating that the case had been struck out due to the police being unable to obtain the identity of the suspect from the Providence Row Charity “even though they do know his details” (see attachment). (Detective De-Krestser suggests that I call police immediately when I next make sight of the suspect so that he can be arrested.)

This morning I was informed at Southwark police station that if the suspect referred to in (2), (4) and (7) above was arrested at the Manna Centre, the police could not prevent me from being barred from the premises. On 18 June 2007, my wife and I were barred from the Methodist Church Whitechapel Mission by the minister's wife due to concerns about our safety following an unprovoked assault on my wife (crime reference no. 4217341/07). Despite that the Whitechapel Mission's website states that homeless people are not barred or excluded and that I wrote by registered post to the minister himself and to the head of the Methodist Church in the UK, Rev Graham Carter, neither my wife nor I were readmitted.

Please would you acknowledge receipt.

Yours sincerely,
Declan Heavey

Declan seriously threatened in the Catholic Manna Centre

This morning at 9.15am, while in the Catholic Manna Day Centre, Declan was seriously threatened by a homeless guy. One moment he is sitting down reading a book as he waits for a shower cubicle to come free, the next a Pole is spitting Polish into his face with a clenched fist within a foot of his left cheek – pretty menacing. Somehow Declan managed to get out from under this guy and left the washroom. He put in a complaint with a member of staff but we still left, Declan without as much as a bite to eat. I didn’t get a chance to shower either, which was unfortunate because the women’s washroom at the Catholic Sisters of Mercy Dellow Day Centre has been closed for a few weeks now.

Of course, there is nothing new about Declan being threatened by homeless, even assaulted, in these two day centres - in the previous blog “Still blocked by Facebook”, I publish a letter from Detective Paul De-Krestser stating that the Dellow Centre won’t divulge the identity of a guy, who assaulted Declan in their canteen, to police even though they know his details. Nevertheless, we remain concerned we may be barred from either or both of these centres through no fault of own (we have already been barred from the Methodist Church Whitechapel Mission due to concerns about our safety). Hence, the following email this afternoon from Declan to the head of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, in his capacity as Archbishop of the Diocese of Westminster, to which the Dellow Centre of the Providence Row Charity belongs.

Subject: Providence Row Charity

His Eminence Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, Archbishop of Westminster.

Your Eminence,

I refer further to the email of acknowledgement of 25 June 2008 that I received from your Personal Secretary, Sister Damian McGrath, stating: "I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your email concerning Providence Row Charity. The Cardinal is out of the country at the present time but he will see your email on his return next week."

I wish to bring to your attention that I continue to wash in the street as a result of harassment and intimidation by homeless people in the Dellow Day Centre of the Sisters of Mercy Providence Row Charity and the Catholic Manna Day Centre (whose building is provided rent-free by the Archdiocese of Southwark), which I have been doing every weekday morning since 10 April last year. In order to avoid being barred through no fault of my own, I do not venture into the washroom in the Dellow Centre and this morning (Sunday) thought it best to leave the Manna Centre without so much as a bite to eat, having been seriously threatened by a homeless man in the men's washroom – the breakfast provided by the Dellow Centre is the only food available to my wife for the entire day Monday-Friday; I walk a two-hour round trip virtually every weekday to the Manna Centre to avail of the free lunch provided to homeless people.

I reconfirm the following since my initial email letter to you of 21 April 2008:

(1) on 28 April 2008, I submitted a written complaint to the Chief Executive of the Providence Row Charity, Ms Jo Ansell, against a homeless man for verbal abuse in the canteen of the Dellow Centre;
(2) on 16 May 2008, I reported a homeless man to the Metropolitan Police for racially aggravated harassment in the Dellow Centre's men's washroom (crime reference no. 4212667/08);
(3) on 18 June 2008, I was robbed in the canteen of the Dellow Centre of all my and my wife's money and documents (crime reference no. 4215697/08); on 24 June 2008, I was informed at Bow Street Police Station that the case had been struck out due to the police being unable to obtain any CCTV footage whatsoever from the Providence Row Charity;
(4) on 19 June 2008, the day after the robbery of all our money and documents in the Dellow Centre, I reported the same homeless man referred to in (2) above to the Metropolitan Police for assault while queuing for food in the Manna Centre (crime reference no. 3021917/08);
(5) on 30 June 2008, I submitted a written complaint to Ms Ansell against a homeless woman for verbal abuse in the canteen of the Dellow Centre;
(6) on 6 November 2008, I submitted a written complaint to Ms Ansell against the same homeless woman referred to in (5) above for verbal abuse from the reception desk of the Dellow Centre.

On 24 February 2009, I reported the same homeless man referred to in (2) and (4) above to the Metropolitan Police for assault in the Dellow Centre's canteen (crime reference no. 4204029/09); on 25 March 2009, I was informed in an email from Detective Paul De-Krestser of Limehouse Police Station that the case has been struck out due to the police being unable to obtain the identity of the suspect from Providence Row Charity “even though they do know his details” (see attachment). (Detective De-Krestser suggests that I call police immediately when I next make sight of the suspect so that he can be arrested.)

I should again point out that my wife and I were barred from the Methodist Church Whitechapel Mission on 18 June 2007 by the minister's wife due to concerns about our safety following an unprovoked assault on my wife by a homeless woman in the canteen of the premises (crime reference no. 4217341/07). Despite that the Whitechapel Mission's website states that homeless people are not barred or excluded and that I wrote by registered post to the minister himself and to the head of the Methodist Church in the UK, Rev Graham Carter, neither my wife nor I were readmitted.

Please would you acknowledge receipt.

Yours sincerely,
Declan Heavey

Still blocked by Facebook

I just wanted to update my Facebook situation which basically is exactly the same as yesterday (see previous blog), getting a warning and then I am blocked from adding folks from the people you know tool – this time I was stopped after 16. Actually, a FB group has now been formed "Support Lola Heavey - Stop Facebook Banning Her", which can be accessed here. The point of the matter is that I do value my FB account a great deal. For example, as a result of comments that FB friends have left on my wall regarding articles and videos I have posted, the NAC website now includes a new section in “What we do” called “Oppose fundamentalism and extremism” for all three of the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Muhammadanism (Islam)) and Hinduism. My FB friends have a tremendous amount of talent (and humour) and Declan and I would very much like to bring what we can of it to NAC. I don’t think I should be penalised for this! A quotation from Carl Sagan, which a FB friend just posted on his wall, says it all:

Fundamental changes in society are sometimes labeled impractical or contrary to human nature: as if nuclear war were practical or as if there were only one human nature. But fundamental changes can clearly be made. We are surrounded by them. In the last two centuries abject slavery, which was with us for thousands of years, has almost entirely been eliminated in a stirring world wide revolution.

Anyway, this morning was my first time back begging in the local train station (see previous blog). It is actually illegal in the UK to ask people for some change, so as soon as I have a couple of pounds I am gone: we don’t spend any money, except on a few toiletries and the occasional £3 for seven hours in the local internet café (I only get three hours on my membership card in the local library). Of course, I am quite familiar with this begging thing (see, for example, blog of 5 April 2008 “Declan narrowly escapes being assaulted”).

Declan has received an email from Limehouse Police Violent Crime Unit suggesting that he calls police immediately when he next makes sight of the homeless guy against whom he has three crime references numbers so that he can be arrested (see blog of 24 February Declan threatened with assault); the Dellow Day Centre of the Catholic Sisters of Mercy Providence Row Charity is not divulging the identity of this guy to police even though they do know his details. Declan has been washing in the street since 10 April of last year due to harassment and intimidation by other homeless, particularly in the Dellow (see blog of 8 February “Letter to Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor”), and it sure looks as if he won’t be seeing the Dellow’s washroom for a while yet. For the record, this is the email Declan received from Detective Constable Paul De-Krestser:

Re: Crime Reference Number 4204029/09

Dear Sir,

I am sending this letter by way of e-mail since I do not have a permanent residence to write to you. I hope that you are well.

With regard to your complaint of being assaulted, the circumstances of it make it very hard for the police to progress it effectively.

Firstly, even though you have had three unfortunate events involving the same suspect you do not know the identity of this suspect. Without knowing whom the suspect is it becomes impossible to arrest him.

Secondly, The Dellow Centre due to their professional considerations is not divulging the identity of the suspect to police even though they do know his details. The police service is not in a position to demand that the Day centre release the details of the suspect to us. Many of these organisations have their own confidentiality policies.

Thirdly, there are no witnesses to this event.

The only way, we can progress this investigation is if you can find out the name of the suspect and thereby identify who he is.

What I can suggest to you is that you call police immediately when you next make sight of the suspect so that he can be arrested and this matter can be investigated. You must maintain your safety.

Until such time this crime report will have to be closed.

Please reply to me with your thoughts.

Yours sincerely,

Paul De-Krestser DC

Letter of complaint to the chair of The Big Issue Foundation

The previous blog contains Declan’s letter to the head of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, in his capacity as Archbishop of the Diocese of Westminster, to which the Dellow Centre of the Sisters of Mercy Providence Row Charity belongs. This morning when he went to collect our new Big Issue badges - The Big Issue is a magazine sold by homeless people on registered pitches throughout the UK; we have been selling it since December 2006 - he was informed that my name was not on the Big Issue “List of vendors” and that I could not be rebadged. Below is Declan’s email letter of complaint to the Chair of the Big Issue Foundation, Steven Round.

Issue Foundation is the registered charity arm of The Big Issue organisation. According to the Foundation website, The Big Issue Company Ltd publishes the weekly magazine and sells it to Big Issue vendors (wholesale) “for the purpose of giving them the opportunity to earn a legitimate income, rather than having to resort to criminal activity such as begging and theft”. This is an extremely serious situation for me in particular, in that I am facing possible prosecution for begging.



In an unusual gesture L'Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper, carried a front-page article by the British Prime Minister Gordon Brown on 19 February. John Hooper, who reports for the Guardian from Rome and has spent more than two decades abroad as a foreign correspondent, writes: “The fact that a son of the manse [a minister’s son] should have been allowed to write where no statesman has written before says much about the unexpectedly close links between Brown and the Holy See. What has brought them together is a common concern for the developing world and what sources close to the prime minister say is his keen appreciation of the Vatican’s global influence.” Also in the Guardian, Michael White, a former political editor, comments in a piece entitled “PM is in the hands of the pope, even in relatively godless country”.

For the record, this is the email that Declan sent this afternoon to Round (it was written very much with my defense in mind should I ever be prosecuted for begging; even on appeal, if necessary):

Subject: The Big Issue

Dear Mr. Round,

I am writing further to the email I received from you on 4 November 2008 in your capacity as chair of The Big Issue Foundation regarding my complaint that if my wife and I have not purchased a minimum of 40 magazines each week for the four weeks commenced 6 October, from 10 November we would no longer be able to have a registered pitch - we would be allowed to carry on selling as long as we move on without complaint when the vendor who has registered the pitch arrives.

In the absence of a reply to the aforementioned complaint from the founder and Editor-in-Chief of The Big Issue, Mr. John Bird MBE, you wrote: "I am currently out of the country but have copied the chief executive of the Foundation". Nonetheless, and despite my reasons as to why my wife and I had been buying small amounts of magazines and our concerns about this matter, our pitches were made available to other vendors to register as from 18 November. On 10 September 2007, Mr. Bird wrote to me as follows:

I have employed many people over the years to do jobs related to the running of The Big Issue. I have never employed them to do my job; likewise I do not do their job. Please bear this in mind when you are composing your letters. You do not need to address your letters to me, as it is not my job. I would only get involved if you were utterly and totally let down by those whose job it is in The Big Issue. I hope this assists in your deliberations in pursuit of your claims.

I wish to bring to your attention that this morning, following my own rebadging to the end of August 2009, I was informed that my wife's name was not on the Big Issue "List of vendors" and that she could not be rebadged. I have brought this matter to the attention of the Big Issue Company by email, and await clarification.

I should again point out that I wrote to the Registrar of the European Court of Human Rights on 21 August further to my second application for priority under Rule 41 of the Rules of Court, as follows:

As explained in previous applications, my wife and I survive on the streets of London by selling The Big Issue, a magazine sold by homeless people on registered street pitches, and I have lodged numerous written complaints with The Big Issue Head Office in respect of my wife and myself being walked off our respective pitch by other street traders, including, inter alia, Big Issue vendors. You will note from my email and attachments to the Court of 16 August that not only may my wife be forced into begging (a criminal offence in England), but faces debadging by The Big Issue for so doing.

Please would you acknowledge receipt.

Yours sincerely
Declan Heavey
Badge no. 1163

New NAC website very much in the firing line

This morning Declan thought it best if we left the Catholic Manna Centre at 9.00am, for the third Saturday in a row (see blog of 21 January “Violence and economic strangulation”); on this occasion, Declan was man-handled in the men’s toilets by a homeless who insisted that he engage in conversation with him. We left without Declan getting a bite to eat.

Declan continues to wash in the street, which he has been doing since 10 April last year as a result of all the harassment he has received from other homeless: see, for example, blog of 16 May 2008 “More racially aggravated harassment in the Dellow Centre”; or blog of 18 June 2008 “Declan robbed in the Sisters of Mercy Dellow Centre”; or blog of 19 June 2008 “Declan assaulted in the Manna Centre”. On 18 June 2007, we were barred from the Methodist Church Whitechapel Mission by the minister’s wife due to concerns about our safety after I was assaulted in an unprovoked attack by a homeless woman in the canteen (see here). Declan has written on several occasions to the head of the Catholic Church in England and Wales, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, in his capacity as Archbishop of the Diocese of Westminster, to which the Dellow Centre belongs (see blog of 6 November 2008 “Letter to Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor”).

It seems that the new NAC website that I am building in support of embryonic stem cell research and therapeutic cloning at http://network.obxhost.net/index.html is still very much in the firing line: Declan had no problem accessing it this morning from the local internet café but I was once again unable to access it or the web host from our local council’s Idea Store Whitechapel (see blog of 23 January “Letter to the Leader of Tower Hamlets Council”). In fact, I still can’t, meaning I can’t upload an article by Steven Pinker entitled “The Stupidity of Dignity” (see below).

Pinker, world-renowned thinker and Johnstone Family Professor in the Department of Psychology at Harvard University (and an honorary associate of NAC and early signatory of Declan’s petition to the UN on therapeutic cloning), argues that the concept of dignity is natural ground on which to build an obstructionist bioethics. It’s not surprising, then, he wrote on 28 May last, that ‘dignity’ is a recurring theme in Catholic doctrine: The word appears more than 100 times in the 1997 edition of the Catechism and is a leitmotif in the Vatican’s recent pronouncements on biomedicine. In its most authoritative declaration on bioethics for more than 20 years, the Vatican released on 12 December a 32-page document titled “Dignitas Personae” (the dignity of a person).

As I stated in the previous blog, we received our first donation last Monday and I believe this may be influencing things: perhaps to discourage somebody else for doing the same. For example, this morning I emailed 35 scientists and academics in New York State inviting them to sign Declan’s petition to the UN on therapeutic cloning but received no autoreplies and no-one has signed – I received one undelivered email to my spam box. To date, the petition has been signed by 589 scientists and academics, who include recognised authorities from the world’s leading universities and research institutes, as well as 24 Nobel Laureates.

This is the document (three pages) I am waiting to upload:

New York State – Take action

This morning Declan thought it best if we left the Catholic Manna Centre at 9.00am, without even a bit to eat; only the third time we have done so since we learnt about the place back last Easter, and the second time in a week (see blog of 21 January “Violence and economic strangulation”). Declan continues to wash in the street, which he has been doing since 10 April last year as a result of all the harassment he has received from other homeless: see, for example, blog of 16 May 2008 “More racially aggravated harassment in the Dellow Centre”; or blog of 18 June 2008 “Declan robbed in the Sisters of Mercy Dellow Centre”; or blog of 19 June 2008 “Declan assaulted in the Manna Centre”. Oh, and on 18 June 2007 we were barred from the Methodist Church Whitechapel Mission by the minister’s wife due to concerns about our safety, after I was assaulted in an unprovoked attack by a homeless woman in the canteen (see here). Declan has written on several occasions to the head of the Catholic Church in England and Wales, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, in his capacity as Archbishop of the Diocese of Westminster, to which the Dellow Centre belongs (see blog of 6 November 2008 “Letter to Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor”).

With respect to the new NAC website in support of embryonic stem cell research and therapeutic cloning (see blog of 19 January “NAC website launched”), this afternoon we finalised our Take action, which is part of New York State under Law and Policy in the USA. We are not the only ones aware that on Monday the ethics committee of New York’s Empire State Stem Cell Board will meet and consider whether payments to women who donate their eggs for stem cell research should be permitted: Jesse Reynolds of the Center for Genetics and Society, a nonprofit public policy organisation based in California, is against and has written an opinion in Newsday.

This is our Take action (Richard Daines is the New York State Health Commissioner and chairs the Empire State Stem Cell Board):

Dear Commissioner Daines

I understand that at the state level the issue of compensation of oocyte (egg) donors is arising in the deliberations of New York’s Empire State Stem Cell Board which was created legislatively in 2007 to provide state funding for stem cell research. In this letter, I urge you and the other members of the Empire State Stem Cell Board Ethics Committee to permit compensation to women who donate their eggs for stem cell research that seeks to use somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) - sometimes referred to as “therapeutic cloning” to distinguish it from reproductive cloning research - to produce embryonic stem cells.

There is no sound, persuasive ethical reasons why New York State funds should not be available to compensate egg donors. This view was endorsed at the Ethics Committee meeting of 22 February 2008 by Dr Henry Greely, who is the Deane F and Kate Edelman Johnson Professor of Law at Stanford University and chairs the California Advisory Committee on Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research. He suggested New York should allow some compensation for gamete donation because it is not unethical for women to receive some compensation for their pain, suffering and time. However, he also recommended establishing some type of limit on the amount of compensation paid to donors.

On 27 June 2008, Dr Catherine Racowsky, Director of the Assisted Reproductive Technology Lab at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston and an Associate Professor of reproductive biology at Harvard Medical School, presented information to the Ethics Committee on the risks of ovarian stimulation, surgical risks, psychological risks, cancer risks, and risks to future fertility. Committee members were advised that Dr Racowsky served on the Institute of Medicine’s Committee on Assessing the Medical Risks of Human Oocyte Donation for Stem Cell Research (IOM Committee) that developed the report by the same name that was distributed to Board members in May.

Dr Racowsky concluded that with appropriate selection and careful monitoring of stimulation, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome should be preventable in all or almost all egg donors; that the anesthetic and surgery risks are very low; that there are potential psychological risks that can be addressed in most cases with appropriate counselling; and that most cancer studies are reassuring in not showing a strong association between fertility drug use and cancer rates, although some have shown increased risk with greater drug use or when patients have been followed over a longer period of time. In response to questions from Board members, Dr Racowsky stated that she thought egg donors should be compensated, but noted that how that is done is very tricky in light of the potential for undue inducement.

Moreover, Dr Carl Coleman, who is the Director of the Health, Law and Policy Program at Seton Hall Law School and was previously Counsel, and then Executive Director, to the New York State Task Force on Life and the Law, suggested to the members of the Ethics Committee on 4 September 2008 that thinking of an egg donor as a research subject makes sense and that the compensation for research subjects and IVF donors often includes consideration of the time, inconvenience, and discomfort, and in some cases, the risk.

It is important to include in the ethical analysis the potential for good that can come from SCNT. The Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research (CAMR) is the USA’s leading bipartisan pro-cures coalition. In a report released on 12 January 2009 entitled “A Catalyst for Cures: Embryonic Stem Cell Research”, CAMR states: “Somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) is another example of a technology with promise that has faced unexpected challenges. Oocyte availability, for example, has been problematic. Yet the challenges are worth overcoming. ‘SCNT is the only known procedure for completely and normally reprogramming a cell,’ says John Gearhart, University of Pennsylvania. Because SCNT is more efficient than iPS cell technology for reprogramming cells, and can be done without inserting new genes, continued studies of SCNT could help scientists find the linchpin to make reprogramming factors more efficient and effective. SCNT will also provide fundamental insights into how an egg reprograms that will teach a great deal about basic biology.”

Yours sincerely

Violence and economic strangulation

For two years we survived on the streets of London by selling The Big Issue, a magazine sold by homeless people on registered pitches throughout the UK. As I wrote in the blog of 17 November, our Big Issue pitches have been terminated (see blog of 11 November “Letter of complaint to the chair of The Big Issue Foundation Charity”). Although we can still sell the magazine on the pitches we had for two years, we have no priority whatsoever: we have to leave if the vendors to whom the pitches have been allocated come along, and not stand in on the pitches at all if a vendor is already there – the former was experienced by Declan this evening (a first in three weeks). The fact that we don’t have pitches any more is particularly serious for me, because I am facing possible prosecution for begging.

With respect to our campaign in support of embryonic stem cell research and therapeutic cloning, I announced in Monday’s blog that the website is launched at http://network.obxhost.net/index.html - the same morning Declan was virtually attacked by a rough sleeper outside the Catholic Sisters of Mercy Dellow Centre (see blog of 6 November 2008 “Letter to Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor”; Declan has written on several occasions to Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor, the head of the Catholic Church in England and Wales, in his capacity as Archbishop of the Diocese of Westminster, to which the Dellow Centre belongs). I am hoping to have finished uploading New York State within a few days, including a “Take action” in respect of payment for egg donation which the ethics committee of the Empire State Stem Cell Board is currently discussing. The Take action will make the case that donors should not be paid for their eggs, but rather they should be compensated for the burdens of egg retrieval (reference: Steinbock B. Payment for egg donation and surrogacy. Mt Sinai J Med 2004;71:255-265).

Letter to Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor

For the record, this is the email letter that Declan sent this afternoon to the head of the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, in his capacity as Archbishop of the Diocese of Westminster, regarding the Sisters of Mercy Providence Row Charity, of which the Dellow Centre is a part – Declan has in fact written on several occasions to Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor (see blog of 4 July “Second Request for Priority to the European Court”).

Subject: Providence Row Charity

His Eminence Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, Archbishop of Westminster

Your Eminence

On 25 June I received an email from your Personal Secretary, Sister Damian McGrath, stating: "I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your email concerning Providence Row Charity. The Cardinal is out of the country at the present time but he will see your email on his return next week."

I can confirm that I continue to wash in the street as a result of harassment and intimidation by homeless people in the Dellow Centre of the Sisters of Mercy Providence Row Charity, which I have been doing every weekday morning since 10 April. Only this morning I made a complaint against a homeless woman for verbal abuse after she shouted at length at my wife and I from the reception desk of the Dellow Centre; this client is known to Mr Mohammed Choudhury, a member of staff of the Providence Row Charity, to whom I made the complaint. (I understand from Mr Choudhury that such a breach of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003, while we were attending to our laundry in silence, was rightly ignored by the both of us and reported to him by me.)

As I stated in my initial email letter to you of 21 April, my wife and I are especially concerned that we could be barred from the Dellow Centre ("the centre") through no fault of our own – the breakfast provided by the centre is the only food available to my wife for the entire day; whilst I walk a two-hour round trip every weekday to the Manna Centre (whose building is provided rent-free by the Catholic Archdiocese of Southwark) to avail of the free lunch provided to homeless people there.

I reconfirm the following: (1) on 28 April, I submitted a written complaint to the Chief Executive of the Providence Row Charity, Ms Jo Ansell, against a homeless man for verbal abuse in the canteen of the centre; (2) on 16 May, I reported a homeless man to the Metropolitan Police for racially aggravated harassment in the centre's men's toilets (crime reference no. 4212667/08); (3) on 18 June, I was robbed in the canteen of the centre of all my and my wife's money and documents (crime reference no. 4215697/08); (4) on 24 June, I was informed in Bow Street police station that the case with respect to the robbery of all our money and documents had been "struck out" due to the police being unable to obtain any CCTV footage whatsoever from the centre; and (5) on 30 June, I submitted a written complaint to Ms Ansell against a homeless woman for verbal abuse in the canteen of the centre.

I should again point out that my wife and I were barred from the Methodist Church Whitechapel Mission on 18 June 2007 by the minister's wife due to concerns about our safety following an unprovoked assault on my wife by a homeless woman in the canteen of the premises (crime reference no. 4217341/07). Despite that the Mission website states that homeless people are not "barred or excluded" and that I wrote by registered post to the minister himself and to the head of the Methodist Church in the UK, Rev Graham Carter, neither my wife nor I were readmitted.

Please would you acknowledge receipt.

Yours sincerely
Declan Heavey

cc Ms Jo Ansell, Chief Executive of Providence Row Charity

A trellis gate is installed in the porch

In yesterday’s blog “Obama: Yes to stem cells, funding”, I announced that a spam box seems too good for Declan's email to scientists and academics inviting them to sign his petition to the UN on therapeutic cloning. Now the porch we have been sleeping in since 3 November 2006 seems also too good for us: when we got there last night (a little late because it was Declan’s 48th birthday), we found that a trellis gate had been installed – it was open so we bedded down anyway. This afternoon Declan wrote to the Registrar of the European Court of Human Rights further to his second request for priority of 4 July (the letter is published below).

A trellis gate is installed in the porch

It is our belief that Declan’s case to the Court is very much going backwards: in a letter of 22 November 2007 the Court stated that it was not necessary to consider Declan’s first request for priority of 8 September 2007 because it would be examining his application, also of 8 September 2007, “shortly, possibly by the end of January 2008”; seven months later, in a letter dated 16 June (see here), it is “as soon as practicable” - coincidentally, two days before Declan received this letter from the Catholic Sisters of Mercy Dellow Centre, his main bag, which contained all our money and documents, was robbed in the centre (see here).

Tonight, being Friday, we expect to find the gate locked and will head for the local train station to sleep for the night; I am very much resigned to being arrested there by the City of London Transport Police. Still, I am certain it will be safer for me in a cell than walking the streets with all my belongings. (I have my blog and the petition saved to two of my USB drives just in case more coincidences show up; they won’t be able to arrest Declan because he says he will leave the station.)

Professor of philosophy AC Grayling, one of Britain's foremost public intellectuals, wrote a piece for The Guardian of 21 August titled “The rise of Miliband brings at last the prospect of an atheist prime minister”, with the subheadline “In this climate of quarrels between religionists and secularists, there are very many reasons to hope for a non-believer at No 10”. He argues that atheist leaders will be sceptical about the claims of religious groups to be more important than other civil society organisations in doing good, getting public funds, meriting special privileges and exemptions from laws, and having seats in the legislature and legal protection from criticism, satire and challenge. “Despite appearances, the world is not seeing a resurgence of religion, only a big turning-up of the volume of religious voices,” Grayling writes. “This is itself a response to increasing secularism among people tired of the disruptions, obstructions and conflicts religion so often causes. Public acknowledgement of atheism by a senior politician who might soon lead his country is just one indicator of the fact that the tide is actually running in the opposite direction: and that is a welcome and hopeful sign.”

Declan’s email letter this afternoon to Registrar Erik Fribergh of the European Court (Erik.Fribergh@echr.coe.int):

Subject: Heavey v. the United Kingdom (Application no. 22541/07)

Dear Mr Fribergh

I refer further to my second request for priority of 4 July 2008 under Rule 41 of the Rules of Court, for consideration as supplementary to my initial application of 8 September 2007. (As explained in previous applications, my wife and I have been sleeping rough in the porch of an office building in the City of London since 3 November 2006, the Department of Work and Pensions having terminated my joint claim for Jobseeker's Allowance on 27 September 2006 because I did not "sign on" two days before I was due to do so on 29 September.) Under "Necessity of Expedition", this request for priority states in part:

The attempts by the City of London Police to move the applicant and his wife from the porch they sleep in at night to beyond the City boundaries, culminating in the current 'No sleeping' sign on the back wall of the porch, constitutes a violation of the applicant's effective right of application as established under Article 34. These violations constitute a grave threat of irreparable and serious harm.

Last night my wife and I returned to the porch to find an unlocked trellis gate. The Court will note from the aforementioned second request for priority that since 9 May 2008 my wife and I have been visited on a number of occasions by the City of London Police in the middle of the night and ordered to immediately move out of the porch to beyond city boundaries or be arrested; on 10 June I received an email from Superintendent Lorraine Cussen, of Snow Hill Police station, advising me to find accommodation with the help of Broadway homeless charity; and on 24 June we arrived back at the porch to find for the first time a City of London Police 'No sleeping' sign on the back wall (as previously stated, that night we were visited at 10.00pm by three workers from Broadway to be asked if we would go on benefits, which I declined because I would have to withdraw my application to the Court).

I submit that this trellis gate was introduced yesterday as no more than an alternative means for the City of London Police to move my wife and I on, and as such is a fabrication: there has never been a complaint against either my wife or I since we started to sleep in this porch almost two years ago; we bed down at 9.00pm, and get up every weekday at 4.30am - on Saturdays and Sundays we get up at 6.30am; neither my wife nor I drink or smoke; my wife cleans the porch floor almost every night; and the office building in question has its own front entrance around the corner. I also wish to emphasise that we have informed the City of London Police on numerous occasions that we have never found a more suitable place to sleep, neither within the City of London nor beyond its boundaries.

The subject matter of this trellis gate being locked when we return to the porch at night is of considerable concern to me because my wife and I will be forced to sleep in the local train station where she will be subject to arrest due to her refusal to put herself at risk of more ill-treatment by moving out onto the street.

Article 34 (formally Article 25) of the European Convention on Human Rights establishes a duty on Convention states not to hinder the effective exercise of the right to apply to the European Court of Human Rights. The Court has frequently emphasised that it is of the utmost importance for the effective operation of the system of individual petition that applicants or potential applicants should be able to communicate freely with the Court. Article 34 states that:

The Court may receive applications from any person, non-governmental organisation or group of individuals claiming to be the victim of a violation by one of the High Contracting Parties of the rights set forth in the Convention or the protocols thereto. The High Contracting Parties undertake not to hinder in any way the effective exercise of this right.

Under Article 34 applicants must not be subjected to any form of pressure from the authorities to modify or withdraw their complaints. "Pressure" includes direct coercion and flagrant acts of intimidation (of applicants, potential applicants, their families and legal representatives), but also any improper indirect acts or contacts designed to dissuade or discourage applicants from pursuing a Convention remedy. In assessing the degree of interference, the Court will take account of the vulnerability of the complainant and his or her susceptibility to influence exerted by the authorities, including any legitimate fear of reprisals, and in this regard I beg to refer to paragraph 22 of my application of 8 September 2007, wherein it states:

On 22 November 2006, the Dellow Centre recorded on the applicant's wife's registration form that St Mungo's, London's largest homelessness organisation, had informed the centre that neither the applicant nor his wife could be referred to a hostel "due to not being on any benefits".

In the case of Kurt v Turkey (No. 24276/94, 25.5.98, (1999) 26 EHRR 373), the Court found there had been improper pressure in violation of former Article 25, after the applicant alleged that she had been pressurised by the authorities to withdraw her application to the Commission.

I submit that the attempts of the City of London Police to move my wife and I out from the porch we sleep in at night to beyond the City boundaries, culminating in yesterday's installation of a trellis gate, constitute a violation of my effective right of application as established under Article 34, and respectfully request that the Court take this matter up with the respondent Government. I further request that the Chamber or its President decide to give priority to my application of 8 September 2007.

Yours sincerely
Declan Heavey