Referral to IOPC/IPCC concerning Martin McGartland complaints against CC Winton Keenen

Martin McGartland made this Freedom of Information request to Northumbria Police and Crime Commissioner This request has been closed to new correspondence. Contact us if you think it should be reopened.

The request was refused by Northumbria Police and Crime Commissioner.

Martin McGartland

Martin McGartland

10 April 2019

Dear Vera Baird,

You / your office have disclosed (better late than never - not very transparent) a copy of ONLY your / OPCC Northumbria completed IOPC/ IPCC referral form (I say ONLY because you / your office are refusing to disclose the complete referral application that i requested from you. What are you / your office hiding?).

Within the referral it states:

"This complaint was initially addressed by the PCC by way of local resolution after Mr McGartland was subsequently provided disclosure on the report provided by the Resolving Officer, ACC Bacon regarding her findings. As a result, Mr McGartland's complaint was subsequently not-upheld, a decision which was subsequently appealed to the IOPC. The IOPC upheld the appeal from Mr McGartland as it was deemed that the complaint was not suitable for local resolution. Therefore, given the findings of the IOPC, the OPCC feel the matter ought to be referred. Mr McGartland gives no evidence to substantiate his allegations, yet the IOPC felt it should be subject to investigation' This disagreement between the OPCC and the IOPC has resulted in this being referred to the IOPC for action and resolution."

I want to make a few points - place on the record - that;

1. The IOPC / IPCC informed you (and their decision was) that your / ACC Bacon's use of local resolution (LR) did not meet the required criteria (as I said when you first informed me of your intention to deal with it by way of LR - but you / ACC Bacon were too keen on protecting CC Keenen and covering up my complaints). That LR outcome, as I stated it would, resulted in a spectacular Whitewash and cover up.

2. The IOPC/IPCC (who dealt with the case on all the papers / evidence as you / ACC Bacon) made the decision to Uphold my appeal of your / ACC Bacon use of LR.

That was because the complaints, as below, were so serious that they could not be dealt with by way of LR.

The IOPC / IPCC also ordered that my complaints against CC Keenen (included below fyi) be investigated. As you are well aware, QC Baird, that IOPC / IPCC decision is Final. It can only be overturned by a court and as a result of judicial review (you can see where I going with this). The IOPC /IPCC have confirmed to me by telephone within the past week or so that the decision is 'Final' that my complaints against CC Keenen 'Will' have to be investigated.

3. The IOPC / IPCC also recommended that the investigation of my complaints against Winton Keenen should be investigated by an external police force, not by you / OPCC Northumbria and or Northumbria Police (any of CC Keenen's officers).

As above and fyi, my complaints against CC Keenen are serious (and I am clear should have been referred to IOPC/IPCC when they were first made - but were not) they include:

Nature of the allegations:
1. That Mr Keenen wrote a report which he sent to the IOPC/IPCC which was deliberately misleading.
2. That Mr Keenen deliberately covered up information regarding the initial media releases in order to protect colleagues and the force as a whole.
3. Has failed to act in accordance with the Code of Ethics (integrity).
Note: The above allegations are as included within your referral form. I rely on my complaint in full (which are more detailed) and the evidence which I supplied in support of my complaints.
4. Will you now be appointing an external force to investigate the complaints against Winton Keenen *as the IOPC / IPCC has recommended) if not, please explain why not?

Note: For the record, and due to previous history, I would never agree nor accept an investigation by you, your office / staff (because you can not be trusted, cover up after cover up when it concerns me / my cases. All to protect CC Keenen). And it follows, Winton Keenen is CC of Northumbria and he can not be investigated by his own force / officers. That being reason, I suspect, for the IOPC / IPCC recommendation an external police force investigation.

The above comment, as included within your referral, that;

'Mr McGartland gives no evidence to substantiate his allegations' is not only completely false... but the same information evidence considered by IOPC/IPCC resulted in their above decision and their ordering a full investigation of my allegations .

If, as you are claiming, you believe that CC Keenen has done nothing wrong. And if you also believe that there is no evidence... Why then are you (Ms Baird) not agreeing to an external police force investigation (as IOPC / IPCC have recommended)?

For the record, the evidence which I have submitted is power.

Under the FOIA I would like to know;

A, What are the reasons for making the referral to IOPC / IPCC in this matter?

B. What is the disagreement between the OPCC and the IOPC; ' This disagreement between the OPCC and the IOPC has resulted in this being referred to the IOPC for action and resolution.'
Please supply full details regards this part of the request. You have not included any details at all regards the 'disagreement' in your referral form.

C. Why are you holding up (reason/s please) the investigation of the complaints against CC Keenen when the IOPC / IPCC made their decision on 07 February 2019 (which is Final - can only be overturned by court / judicial review) that the complaints must be investigated?

I look forward to your reply.

Yours faithfully,

Martin McGartland

Enquiries, Northumbria Police and Crime Commissioner

Dear Mr McGartland,

Your request is the latest in a series of requests that appear to lack any serious purpose or value.

The ICO advises that public authorities do not have to comply with requests if they are deemed to be vexatious.

Your request when viewed objectively and taken in context, can fairly be seen as an attempt to further your campaign against the office of the Police and Crime Commissioner, Northumbria Police and its senior officers. It can therefore be classed as vexatious in nature.

The Act was designed to give individuals a right of access to official information with the intention of making public bodies more transparent and accountable. Your request has been classed as a misuse of this process and is clearly an attempt to disrupt the day-to-day business of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner. Despite efforts to provide you information, you have remained dissatisfied with responses supplied to you.

Whilst a requestor cannot normally be classed as vexatious, the history of a requestor can be a contributing factor when considering whether a request can fairly be classed as vexatious. This is certainly relevant in this case.

You have submitted numerous requests both to the OPCC and to Northumbria Police and many of your requests level unfounded accusations at public authorities and staff. Your requests also appear to be sent in a “scatter-gun” effort to fish for information to try to obtain some kind of data to score points against the Office of the Police Commissioner.

You are submitting frequent and overlapping requests about similar issues and any response provided inevitably leads to further requests. Such a step is seen as a deliberate attempt to cause disruption to staff within the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner who would have to be extracted from everyday duties should they have to be committed to responding to your requests on this subject.

Your request has been classed as manifestly unjustified, inappropriate and an improper use of a formal procedure. It can therefore be classed as vexatious in accordance with Section 14(1) of the Act and accordingly no response is required to be supplied.

You should therefore accept this as a formal refusal under Section 14 of the Act.

Please note that following this response, requests on this and related matters will be classed as vexatious and no acknowledgement or response will be provided.

Yours sincerely.

Kevin

Kevin Payne
Office of Dame Vera Baird QC
Police and Crime Commissioner for Northumbria

show quoted sections

Martin McGartland

Martin McGartland

24 April 2019

Dear Vera Baird / OPCC Northumbria,

Only you could make such a comment "that appear to lack any serious purpose or value." ... The request relates to an ongoing external police force review / investigation into the most serious allegations against NP officers and a cover up.

Your Lies and false comments that you make regarding; "Your request when viewed objectively and taken in context, can fairly be seen as an attempt to further your campaign against the office of the Police and Crime Commissioner, Northumbria Police and its senior officers. It can therefore be classed as vexatious in nature."
And; "You have submitted numerous requests both to the OPCC and to Northumbria Police and many of your requests level unfounded accusations at public authorities and staff."

You and your staff continue to suppress / cover up information (in serious breach of DPA (not once, twice or three times,,, but more) relating to me, my cases. You will say / do anything to protect Corrupt Winton Keenen, Team Winton and NP when it concerns my cases (and you continue to protect him from investigation - see my other requests). Anything I have said (and in public) is based on truth and facts. No one has taken action against me for defamation (I wonder why QC Baird) ... Answer - it is more than their jobs are worth.... they (as you are well aware) would have to answer questions under oath.... they don't want to do that...

I note you have STILL not give any details concerning your Lies / false claims of my "unfounded accusations at public authorities and staff"????? Its over to you Vera Baird QC / OPCC Northumbria ..... Now Put Up Or Shut Up. This has been circumvented so that questions I have asked will not be answered due to embarrassment of OPCC /NP.

I'm sooooooo looking forward to details (and maybe evidence - of which there is none) of any examples of "unfounded accusations at public authorities and staff.".... For the record I stand by each / every comment I have ever made in correspondence and or in public (because they are all true).

Yours sincerely,

Martin McGartland