Martin McGartland complaints against Chief Constable Jon Boutcher referral to IOPC/IPCC because ' it mentions Op Kenova'

Gwrthodwyd y cais gan Independent Office for Police Conduct.

Martin McGartland

25 June 2019

Dear Independent Office for Police Conduct,

This FOI request relates to Chief Constable Jon Boutcher and Conduct Complaint/s made against him by Martin McGartland.

A referral of the complaint/s was made to IOPC/IPCC by PCC/OPCC Bedfordshire on 13 May 2019. The IOPC/IPCC made an MoI decision on that referral on 20 June 2019 (to assist you with this request - Ref number is: 2019/119376).

Within that referral to IOPC/IPCC - and on page 3 - OPCC Bedforshire included the following (which is highlighted in yellow) ;

"Referral has been made as previous agreement with the OPCC/force with IOPC that if a Chief Constable complaint is received and it mentions Op Kenova - this must be referred to the IOPC."

Under the FOIA I am requesting the following;

1. A copy (copy of original please) of the 'agreement' which is referred to in that referral and also copies of all other documents, understandings between IOPC/IPCC and Bedfordshire PCC/OPCC and Bedfordshire Police. And those which relate to above/below / this request.

As well as the above, I would also like to know;

2. Why complaints, please supply reasons and rational behind it, against Chief Constable Jon Boutcher - which 'mentions Op Kenova - 'must' be referred to the IOPC.'?

3, Should the above be included (and why is it not) within IOPC/IPCC guidance.
What powers do IOPC/IPCC have and or rely on to enable them to make a decision that complaints against CC Boutcher which mentions Op Kenova 'must' be referred to them?
I am requesting copies of documents, agreements etc which relate to this part of the request.

I look forward to your reply.

Yours faithfully,

Martin McGartland

!Request Info, Independent Office for Police Conduct

This is an automated email please do not respond to it.

Thank you for your email.

If you have made a request for information to the IOPC, your email and any attachments will be assessed, logged and forwarded onto the appropriate department to prepare the response.

FOI & DPA Team

!Request Info, Independent Office for Police Conduct

Dear Mr McGartland

Thank you for your correspondence to the IOPC in which you made a request for information. This request is being considered under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).

We propose to respond to you on or before the 24 July 2019 in line with the timescales prescribed by the FOIA.

If you have any questions about this request please contact us. Please remember to quote reference number 1007739 in any future correspondence about this matter.

Yours sincerely

FOI and DPA Team
Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC)
PO Box 473
Sale
Manchester
M33 0BW

Tel: 0300 020 0096

www.policeconduct.gov.uk

Follow us on Twitter at: @policeconduct
Find out how we handle your personal data.
We now regularly publish practical advice and guidance for handling complaints in our magazine FOCUS

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Gadawodd Martin McGartland anodiad ()

IOPC / IPCC Covering up for (and protecting) the police in the Martin McGartland case....

Private Eye(Issue no 1500)12 July – 25 July 2019

Police Conduct

Summary injustice

So much for openness and transparency at the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC). It has been accused of a cover-up after seeking to impose an extraordinary non-disclosure agreement before a complainant could read even a summary of the investigation report into allegations he had made of police wrongdoing.

Martin McGartland has also been told he cannot keep a copy of the report, can only view it under supervision, and must hand over his mobile or any recording device before seeing it. Further, if he wants to get legal advice, his lawyers will have to sign a separate
secrecy order with the IOPC.

McGartland, as regular Eye readers will recall, is no ordinary complainant. The former undercover agent was shot at close range by the IRA in 1999 in Tyneside, where he was living under a false identity, after his cover was blown by Northumbria Police. Adding insult to life-changing injury, the force’s initial press briefing wrongly suggested the shooting was linked to the criminal underworld. McGartland has been involved in some kind of litigation or complaint process ever since – against both police and, subsequently, his former MI5 and Special branch handlers when they stopped funding his medical and psychiatric treatment. (eyes passim)

Having safely moved to another area, McGartland and his partner were terrified that they were facing another IRA revenge attack when they let their dog out late one night
only to be seized by balaclava-wearing men in black.

His partner’s screams drew neighbours into the street; and the “raiders” turned out to be police officers arresting the couple on suspicion of drug dealing and money laundering. Their house was turned upside down and their computers, phones and documents confiscated for forensic examination. Held for nearly 24hours, they were finally released on bail. It was several months before the couple had their possessions returned and were told there would be no further action.

It transpired that a family who had rented a house McGartland had bought with his criminal injuries compensation money as a holiday and rental property
- which he says both Special Branch and MI5 knew about - had indeed been involved in drug dealing. But, as McGartland says, it would have been easy for the police to see from correspondence and the couple’s bank records that their only recent contact with the family had been to chase up unpaid rent.

The couple launched a series of complaints against the police. These included unlawful arrest; failing to immediately identify themselves as police officers; using excessive force(McGartland’s partner suffered trauma and severe bruising to her arms and wrist); using balaclavas when dealing with a known traumatised IRA victim; obtaining a search warrant without telling the magistrate who the couple really were and that they were involved in ongoing litigation against MI5 and the Home office; and confiscating legally privileged information.

Initially the force cleared itself of blame. The couple’s appeal to the then Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) was upheld, and was then taken over by the IOPC. It has apparently produced a detailed 300-page report, but is only prepared to offer McGartland and his partner a summary to view. All McGartland has been told is that just three of his complaints have been upheld: excessive force used against his partner; failure to properly handle an “exhibit” taken from their home; and wearing balaclavas.

The couple have no idea why the bulk of their complaints have been dismissed, and are even more mystified why, in the interest of open justice and their rights to a full and fair investigation, McGartland cannot know the full reasons. So the Eye asked the IOPC. It said it would be “inappropriate” to comment on the specific case. However, a statement said that while its general position is to provide complainants with as much information as possible, “for reasons, including concerns about the welfare and safety of individuals, it’s not always possible to share all of the evidence gathered in an investigation”.

It went on: “In these circumstances we may make arrangements with a view to mitigating risks to enable the disclosure of as much information as possible. Such arrangements might include the redaction of material, the preparation of a summary, inspection and in certain circumstances, confidentiality agreements”.

A recent appeal Court ruling in an unrelated case said that “the presumption of openness applies in favour of disclosure… and any non-disclosure must be necessary because there is a real risk of the disclosure causing a significant adverse effect”.

As a leading QC told the Eye: “If the IOPC believe they have a sound legal justification for this decision they should explain it publicly and defend it rather than seek to impose what are frankly unenforceable obligations of secrecy on the complainant”.

It looks like Martin McGartland is heading back to the courts once again.

This Private Eye story can be found at the following page link: https://www.scribd.com/document/41645328...

!Request Info, Independent Office for Police Conduct

1 Atodiad

Dear Mr McGartland

Please find attached to this email our response to your request.

Please quote our reference 1007739 in any further correspondence.

Yours sincerely

Freedom of Information & Data Protection Team
Independent Office for Police Conduct
PO Box 473
Sale
M33 0BW

Find out how we handle your personal data on our website.

www.policeconduct.gov.uk 
Follow us on Twitter at: @policeconduct

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Martin McGartland

24 July 2019

Dear Mr McCoy (Operations Manager at the Corrupt IOPC / IPCC),

I must refer you to my previous replies (which you continue to ignore)when it concerns me, my cases). I repeat that your IOPC is Corrupt to the core when it concerns me, my cases. And all the IOPC / IPCC are good for / at is protecting and covering up for Corrupt police officers and forces, The IOPC / IPCC (including ex cops within) Botch 'investigations' (Whitewashes) and then conceal and cover up their findings, reports for same reasons. The police, as my case proves, will be protected by IOPC/IPCC no matter what (come what may). It is Corruption Chris.... But not as we know it,

You can say what you like (yes man) but no - one believes a word the the IOPC / IPCC say when it concerns me, my cases (and many others like mine). Now wise up and give your head a shake (Belfast speak) - Fyi: https://www.facebook.com/IOPCIsOnLifeSup...

https://www.facebook.com/Independent-Off...

https://www.facebook.com/IOPCIPCCONEANDS...

https://www.trustpilot.com/review/www.po...

Regards ICO: So far as the ICO is concerned .... well, where do I start.... Your Corrupt IOPC / IPCC lied to ICO and feed them all sorts of S*it. BUT - on that note,,, you (and IOPC / IPCC) are again copying and pasting same documents as last time, time before than (and that) - Lazy - and keep repeating the NP, IOPC/IPCC Lies. The Lights are On (wake Up Mr 'Yes-Man' McCoy) But there is Noooooo One at Home. Listen Dippy, This request relates to CC Jon Boutcher, Bedfordshire Police .... are you for real? The DN (as result of State, MI5, IPCC/IOPC, NP, SB Lies) relates to Corrupt Northumbria Police & Corrupt IPCC (IOPC). It has NOTHING at all to do with NP.

When the Corrupt IOPC / IPCC stop telling Lies about me, my cases ..... I will stop telling the Truth about the Corrupt (Cover Up Merchants for the Police) IOPC / IPCC.

I would remind you that the Corrupt IOPC / IPCC have not at any stahe (since 2006 to date) taking any type of legal action against me (#Cowards). Will they ever do so? Hell will Freeze Over .... they are Corrupt .... but they are not Stupid .... Heads would Roll.(they may still - Please God)

Now Suck it Up.....

Until Next Time.

Yours sincerely,

Martin McGartland

!Request Info, Independent Office for Police Conduct

This is an automated email please do not respond to it.

Thank you for your email.

If you have made a request for information to the IOPC, your email and any attachments will be assessed, logged and forwarded onto the appropriate department to prepare the response.

FOI & DPA Team

Gadawodd Martin McGartland anodiad ()

The IOPC / IPCC (and Ex police within) protect and cover up for corrupt police officers (police forces) and they cover up and suppress their flawed, whitewashed reports to do so.

Martin McGartland

Click on facebook page lonk for more information: https://www.facebook.com/IOPCIsOnLifeSup...

Gadawodd Martin McGartland anodiad ()

Jon Boutcher - Aka: Op Kenova - did NOT deliver on his promises that he made to Martin McGartland concerning the review of his 20 year unsolved attempted murder case.

Martin McGartland has said; "Jon Boutcher let me down, he continues to cover up his review findings, his report (which he promised would be disclosed to me). And he is also refusing to answer (and is ignoring) questions I have been asking him about his review of my attempted murder case": Facebook page link here; https://www.facebook.com/Jon-Boutcher-Ak...