Police corruption and being above the law

Derek Canning LLB [HONS] made this Freedom of Information request to Independent Office for Police Conduct This request has been closed to new correspondence. Contact us if you think it should be reopened.

Response to this request is long overdue. By law, under all circumstances, Independent Office for Police Conduct should have responded by now (details). You can complain by requesting an internal review.

Derek Canning LLB [HONS]

Dear Independent Police Complaints Commission,

Please supply all the information that you hold on the matter highlighhted in the newspaper article especially in relation to the police being above the law and how this relates to Northumbria police and Yorkshire police.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/corrup...
Corrupt police can't be touched
Jason Bennetto Crime Correspondent
Thursday, 10 July 1997
• Share
• Print
• Email
• Text Size
o Normal
o Large
o Extra Large
SPONSORED LINKS:
Ads by Google

Become A Police Officer
Study Criminal Justice onlinewith U. of Phoenix. Learn more.
www.CriminalJusticePhoenix.com

Become A Police Officer
SWAT, K9, Narcotics, CSI & More.Online Degrees For Police Careers
www.Public-Service.US/PoliceCareers

Police Officer Schools
Request free info from schoolsoffering police training programs!
police.do-something.com

Become A Police Officer
Become a Police Officer Online!Full Financial Aid Available.
www.CashForCops.net
The chief constable of the country's second biggest police force has corrupt officers working for him but is powerless to sack them.
Edward Crew, head of West Midlands Police, said that some of his staff would have been automatically dismissed for dishonesty if they worked for a supermarket, but he was forced to keep them on because of protective practices.
"There are people working in this force that wouldn't be employed by Sainsbury's," he told The Independent. His concerns are shared by other chiefs throughout the country and the police complaints watchdog, who are urging the Jack Straw, the Home Secretary, to change the law.
Mr Crew, and fellow chief constables in England and Wales, have asked Mr Straw to reduce the standard of proof to allow forces to sack police officers considered corrupt or grossly incompetent. At present, it is extremely difficult to remove anyone - last year only 98 were sacked. To sack a police officer, evidence that proves "beyond reasonable doubt" that they are guilty is needed - a far higher standard than in civil cases or industrial tribunals. Instant dismissals are also prevented except in the most exceptional cases.
Mr Crew said: "In Sainsbury's, if they have a man whose hand is caught in the till they will release [sack] them. I couldn't do this, I have to prosecute and prove it beyond reasonable doubt. There are a very small number of officers in this force, and in the police service nationally, who I suspect of having been involved in serious breaches in the criminal law, where it's not possible to obtain evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt they were involved in that behaviour."
He continued: "I have officers in this force who should not be serving police officers. If we were assessing their standards of behaviour to the standard required of other employers, these people would not be working."
He added: "I have officers who have been to court and have been found not guilty of criminal offences by a jury and they continue to serve in this force because I cannot, in the current arrangement, [use] evidence that was given to the court."
Earlier this week, the West Midlands Police became the second force to set up a confidential internal telephone hotline for staff to pass on information about suspected corrupt officers. The call for reform of the system by Mr Crew, and the Association of Chief Police Officers has the support of the independent Police Complaints Authority (PCA). The Home Secretary has agreed to re-examine the issue.
The Police Federation, which represents all ranks below superintendent - the vast bulk of the 127,000 officers in England and Wales - is furious at the action by chief constables and have accused them of reneging on early promises.
Sir Paul Condon, commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, has already criticised what he believes is a growing trend among police officers accused of serious corruption and malpractice of avoiding disciplinary hearings by taking sick leave and retiring on grounds of ill health with index- linked benefits.
Mr Crew is also critical of the "double jeopardy" system, whereby evidence used against a police officer in a criminal trial cannot be re-used at a disciplinary hearing. The Crown Prosecution Service has privately admitted that it sometimes fails to bring charges against a police officer because it fears a jury will acquit him or her and thereby deny an opportunity for the evidence to be heard at a disciplinary hearing.
Mr Crew also believes that the high level of proof prevents him from sacking some officers who he believes have sexually harassed female colleagues.
Peter Moorhouse, chairman of the PCA, yesterday agreed that there are some corrupt officers who are being protected by the system, but said they were a "small minority". A PCA spokesman said: "We sympathise with Mr Crew and would like to see changes to the system."
The Police Federation argues that the police need extra protection against malicious complaints. Ian Westwood, vice chairman of the federation, said: "If chief constables believe officers are corrupt they should be dealt with at court and sentenced to imprisonment. We are concerned that people will be got rid of without proper evidence just because someone suspects they are corrupt."
Bent coppers, page 9

Yours faithfully,

Derek Canning LLB [hons]

Athena Cass,

1 Attachment

[Subject only] FOI delay letter.1002017.Mr Derek Canning.Dated.16.2.2010

show quoted sections

Dave Merccer left an annotation ()

Have you seen:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/th...

and related issues?

Derek Canning LLB [HONS]

Dear Athena Cass,

still waiting, the corruption goes on

Yours sincerely,

Derek Canning LLB [HONS]

Dave Merccer left an annotation ()

time to inform:

casework(@)ico.gsi.gov.uk ?

possibly the ICO will also become fed up of the Incompetent Police Complaints Club and take action

regards

DM

Phil Johnston,

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Canning,
Please find attached to this e-mail my response to your request (as
below).

P Johnston
IPCC

show quoted sections

Derek Canning LLB [HONS]

Dear Phil Johnston,

My case and complaint relates to 1995. Given what you have said please answer my letter dated April 2009.

Yours sincerely,

Derek Canning LLB [HONS]

Phil Johnston,

You refer to a letter dated April 2009. Further information is required
before this letter can be identified. I look forward to hearing from
you.
P Johnston
IPCC

show quoted sections

Derek Canning LLB [HONS]

Dear Phil Johnston,

I have sent a letter dated 10 April 2009 many times yet I have not had a reply. If you were to unblock my email I could send you the letter again to you.
Below is the first page from the letter in question. There a total of 164 pages in relation to the letter that is being ignored. The letter was in red type to emphasize the content of the letter.

'IPCC ANITA LENNON 12 February 2009
Complaint against the IPCC
xxxxxx
xxxxxx
xxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxx

10 April 2009.

The Complaints Officer
Independent Police Complaints Commission
90 High Holborn
London
WC1 VBH

Dear JEMMA CASEY/PHILIP JOHNSTON

Ref: Complaint against the IPCC

Thank you for the disclosure material and your letter dated the 3 April 2009. Given the content of the evidence I feel so shocked that I am compelled to pass comment and ask questions even before I have finished my final complaint in relation to the crimes of the police and Shorrock.

It is interesting to note that the only letter that you sent me by mistake [Mrs S] reflects my views of the IPCC to some extent and others. If I may explain you have sent me a total random member of the public complaint who I have never met and the person reflects my views. This has to be more than just coincidence. Given this fact please disclose the following evidence:
1] The number of people who have made complaints in the last 13 years to the IPCC about the RSPB and how many have resulted in criminal prosecutions?
2] How many complaints have been made about the activities of the police and other organisations in the last 2 years and how many complaints have resulted in police officers being prosecuted and non police officers?
3] What percent of complaints resulted in criminal actions over the last two years?
4] What percentage of people was happy and not happy with the way their complaints were investigated and the outcome over the last two years?
5] Why DID THE IPCC change its name to the IPCC?'

Yours sincerely,

Derek Canning LLB [HONS]

Phil Johnston,

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Canning,
I note from our records that your request for information contained in
your letter of 10/04/2009 was answered by the IPCC on 12/05/2009. On the
same day you requested an internal review and a response to that request
was sent on 26/06/2009. I attach the relevant correspondence which was
sent by e-mail to [email address]

If you still believe that your letter of 10/04/2009 has not been
answered by IPCC please specify in what respect you believe this to be
the case.

P Johnston
12/07/10

show quoted sections

Derek Canning LLB [HONS]

Dear Phil Johnston,

What percentage of internal reviews have the iPCC up held?

Yours sincerely,

Derek Canning LLB [HONS]

Phil Johnston,

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Canning,
I refer to your request, as below.

Please find attached to this e-mail my response to your request. Please
ensure that you quote the above reference number in any subsequentr
correspondence about this request.

The link contained in the letter is:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/fr...
5#incoming-86905

Philip Johnston
IPCC

show quoted sections

Derek Canning LLB [HONS]

Dear Phil Johnston,

I have checked the avenues that you recommended but to no avail as I have just found a lot of information that cleverly goes no where. Given what I just said please just state the number of internal reviews that have been up held and what percentage have been turned down.

Yours sincerely,

Derek Canning LLB [HONS]

Phil Johnston,

3 Attachments

  • Attachment

    email 180510 P Johnston IPCC to Mr Wise whatdoheyknow.com YOUR REQUEST FOR INFORMATION response to request att1 Wise T 1001996 decision ltr.pdf

    71K Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    letter 270510 A Kelly IPCC to T Wise whatdotheyknow.com Untitled.PDF.pdf

    217K Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    email 070710 P Johnston IPCC to T Wise whatdotheyknow.com Re Freedom of Information requests att1 Wise T 1001996 ltr after IR decision.pdf

    66K Download View as HTML

Dear Mr Canning,
Please see attached correspondence which was sent to whatdotheyknow.com
in response to a request concerning IPCC internal reviews made via that
web site. For the reasons given in the letters, this represents all the
information the IPCC is required to disclose to you in response to your
request for the percentage of IPCC internal reviews which have been
upheld.

Philip Johnston
IPCC

show quoted sections