Outstanding Formal Complaint
Dear Cheshire Constabulary,
10 Months ago you began your investigation into my complaint and since that time still I await your conclusions.
You will recall how Inspector David Snasdell had emailed me November 2012 advising me that the officer I and my neighbours had believed assisted us in matters of anti social behaviour and parking claimed no recollection of doing so. Inspector Snasdell claimed the officer PCSO Kat Stock had also informed him that she had never visited me at my home in connection with any of these matters. Stunned at what the Inspector had written me I forwarded to him 5 emails PCSO Stock had sent me which confirmed her responding to and investigating my complaint. One of the emails confirmed her visiting me at home. Disappointingly both Inspector Snasdell and PCSO Stock then broke of all further communication with me in this matter.
You will agree it does seem most unreasonable for your Force to take 10 Months to interview and investigate two Police officers. Please advise when I am likely to learn the outcome of my complaint.
I look forward to hearing from you in due course.
Yours faithfully,
Robert A Pickthall
Dear Mr Pickthall,
I refer to your recent request for information under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000, as set out below:
10 Months ago you began your investigation into my complaint and since
that time still I await your conclusions.
You will recall how Inspector David Snasdell had emailed me November 2012
advising me that the officer I and my neighbours had believed assisted us
in matters of anti social behaviour and parking claimed no recollection of
doing so. Inspector Snasdell claimed the officer PCSO Kat Stock had also
informed him that she had never visited me at my home in connection with
any of these matters. Stunned at what the Inspector had written me I
forwarded to him 5 emails PCSO Stock had sent me which confirmed her
responding to and investigating my complaint. One of the emails confirmed
her visiting me at home. Disappointingly both Inspector Snasdell and PCSO
Stock then broke of all further communication with me in this matter.
You will agree it does seem most unreasonable for your Force to take 10
Months to interview and investigate two Police officers. Please advise
when I am likely to learn the outcome of my complaint.
Our response is as follows:
Your request does not constitute a valid request for information in
accordance with section 8 of the Act.
You are fully aware of the channels of communication open to you for the
enquiry you are making. You are also aware that your complaint has been
addressed and your appeal is being dealt with. You should therefore await
the outcome to be communicated to you.
Regards
John Gannon
Information Compliance
Professional Standards Department
Tel: 01606 364176
Dear Cheshire Constabulary,
Mr Gannon you are fully aware I have made no appeal but a repeated request to be provided an outcome to my formal complaint that remains on going for 10 Months.
You have received a legitimate request from me to supply me copies of CWAC Cllr Helen Weltman's, CWAC F.O.I Officer David Finlay, Weaver Vale Housing Trust Ltd Director Marianne Richards,Moulton Parish Council Clerk Philip Sanders statements accusing me of forwarding them malicious correspondence and harassment.
British Justice entitles me to know exactly what these people had said against me and so far your Force repeatedly refuses to provide me that information.
Sir you are fully aware how after a 3 Month investigation the Crown Prosecution Service concluded that there was insufficient evidence to prosecute me. It is the opinion of many people including my Solicitor that had the CPS found any evidence of wrong doing it would have prosecuted me. I again ask you provide me copies of my accusers statements if in fact those statements ever existed.
I formally request the Constabulary provide me a formal review of your extraordinary decision.
Yours faithfully,
ROBERT PICKTHALL
Dear Mr Pickthall,
I refer to your correspondence below requesting an internal review of our response to an FOI request, ref 5119, one of three, that you have recently submitted.
You are quoting the wording of a different request to the one which we have responded, you quote wording from FOI ref 5106.
The request we have responded to, ref 5119, is not a valid request under the Act. We will therefore not be conducting an internal review.
Regards
John Gannon
Information Compliance
Professional Standards Department
Tel: 01606 364176
____________________________
Cheshire Constabulary HQ
Winsford
Cheshire
CW7 2UA
Dear Cheshire Constabulary,
Mr Gannon thank you for highlighting my error in responding to 5106 instead of 5119 my apology.
Sir 5 Months ago I was arrested by officers from your force who then having searched my home took away with them x3 computers,diaries,address books. In total the officers had access to over 3,000 of my different communications, it took only 3 Months for the CPS to conclude there was insufficient evidence to prosecute me.
In the matter of your two officer's there are only 5 emails but emails which provide irrefutable evidence proving one or both officers attempting to pervert the course of justice. 10 Months later, allegedly, I am told these officers continue to be investigated.
As to the matter of my accusers and their statements it is indeed your prerogative to refuse my request and also my request for a review of your refusal,likewise it is my prerogative to complain to the Information Commissioner.
Yours faithfully,
ROBERT PICKTHALL
We work to defend the right to FOI for everyone
Help us protect your right to hold public authorities to account. Donate and support our work.
Donate Now