Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

Anonymity - What Do You Think?

Roy catchpole

Senior Patron
Verified
Joined
Oct 31, 2018
Messages
313
Reaction score
208
Status
Other
A millionaire businessman has been granted a secrecy order preventing the disclosure of his identity over allegations of sexual harassment, assault and bullying in an employment case.
Thoughts on this please. Mine are that it ought not to be the privilege of millionaires, but a right of every person to remain anonymous until found guilty. The legal system encourages these ridiculous arrangements.
I also think that once a person has been found not guilty or the case has been dropped because of no evidence, there should be a legal requirement that employers reinstate these innocent persons. With no questions asked. The (professional and not amateur) legal system has done its job.

This is the way in which those moralists who argue against this by quoting the demand that 'justice not only be done but be seen to be done' can be satisfied. It's not good enough to say with some feminists that a few male casualties is acceptable in the greater cause of female liberation. It is not acceptable. Nor is it fair that Cash buys Confidentiality. Such an arrangement is both corrupt and corrupting.
 
Last edited:

millroly

Patron
Verified
Joined
Jul 1, 2019
Messages
54
Reaction score
22
Location
the Exeter Area
Status
No Further Action
They'll do what many employers do. Kick them out of the door for a spurious reason, a breach of a 'Code of Practice' etc, and wait for the claim for 'unfair dismissal'. In many cases the trauma of things prevents the accused pursuing this route. Most 'mortals' do not have the monies needed to pursue them, I was lucky having a 'semi-wealthy' father, who gave me monies to make a claim against my employers - who were part of the 'No smoke without fire' pedlars! They offered me 3 months salary compensation, I agreed, as my advising solicitor said I would not be awarded much more from a tribunal.
 
Last edited:

Fredzie

Regular
Verified
Joined
Nov 9, 2018
Messages
31
Reaction score
17
Status
No Further Action
All people accused of these crimes should be granted anonymity until after trial I believe. Or at least until trial. Because what about when it doesnt even get to trial!!?! ...
 

millroly

Patron
Verified
Joined
Jul 1, 2019
Messages
54
Reaction score
22
Location
the Exeter Area
Status
No Further Action
I feel incredulous that our legal system protects, for life, those who claim they are 'victims', (in reality until a case is proven they are only 'complainants'). Even when at a later stage they are exposed as fantasists. I think it is iniquitous that we do not protect those who are the 'accused' (who are too often referred to as the 'Perpetrators'). It is horrific that senior police officers are allowed to go on public 'witch hunts' and call for other, so called 'victims', who claim an association with the person who is accused, after the public 'witch hunt' proclamations. It's like going along a public street and shouting "Has anyone lost a twenty quid note?" expecting absolute honesty!

In one of my darker moments, which included the emergency services, an older Police officer went completely 'off script' and said "You would have been better served if you had been prosecuted, Mr.F . . . ". I was NFA'd and during the period of my bail, as someone who was known nationally throughout the Special Needs/Special Education industry for my achievements, it was very difficult to keep a lid on it. It took expensive legal representations to have all negative entries referring to me, that were listed on 'Google', removed. Today it is quite easy and periodically I do a search on my full names, known names and associations; and so far I have not found too much!
 
Last edited:

Roy catchpole

Senior Patron
Verified
Joined
Oct 31, 2018
Messages
313
Reaction score
208
Status
Other
I feel incredulous that our legal system protects, for life, those who claim they are 'victims', (in reality until a case is proven they are only 'complainants'). I think it is iniquitous that we do not protect those who are the 'accused' (who are too often referred to as the 'Perpetrators'). It is horrific that senior police officers are allowed to go on public 'witch hunts' and call for other, so called 'victims', who claim an association with the person who is accused, after the public 'witch hunt' proclamations. It's like going along a public street and shouting "Has anyone lost a twenty quid note?" expecting absolute honesty!

In one of my darker moments, which included the emergency services, an older Police officer went completely 'off script' and said "You would have been better served if you had been prosecuted, Mr.F . . . ". I was NFA'd and during the period of my baised a Raisedil, as someone who was known nationally throughout the Special Needs/Special Education industry for my achievements, it was very difficult to keep a lid on it. It took expensive legal representations to have all negative entries referring to me, that were listed on 'Google', removed. Today it is quite easy and periodically I do a search on my full names, known names and associations; and so far I have not found too much!
I like the twenty-quid quip. So right. Raised a smile.
 

Patrick

Barman
Staff member
Verified
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
455
Reaction score
393
Location
Gloucestershire
Status
Acquitted
In one of my darker moments, which included the emergency services, an older Police officer went completely 'off script' and said "You would have been better served if you had been prosecuted, Mr.F . . . ".
Just to add - this cop, like 99% of all known cops, couldn't find his own arse with both hands.
No matter what stage you get to - some idiot will be like the Irish sage offering directions to the nearest town to a traveller stopped on the road - "you shouldn't start from here".

I used to think we'd be better off if our case had gone through court and exposed her lies and the police lies as perjury, got an official NOT guilty verdict. I now recognise that the system is designed to protect the law officers and screw you royally as a defendant, no matter at what stage they lose the argument. We would never have got rid of the headlines that said, in effect, "Paedophile Ring / dirty old men go on trial" And as Roy has found out - you are still presumed guilty by all the employing/child protection bodies that matter just for going to a trial.

If Roly - you had got to a courtroom, given your caring role, you would undoubtedly have been worse off than you are now - you did the right thing in preventing adverse publicity being first thing on Google.
So there is that crumb to hang on to.
 

millroly

Patron
Verified
Joined
Jul 1, 2019
Messages
54
Reaction score
22
Location
the Exeter Area
Status
No Further Action
Supposedly, there are no national or localised records about me with reference to any DBS declaration by the Police. It has been tested and in 2016 a very kind charity, working on my behalf, called for an enhanced DBS and it came back squeaky clean! I am one of very few people in the country who has had my PNC entries and local 'Unify' (other names are used for the under the desk databases) records wiped (supposedly!) . Explaining my 'no work' record of the last 7 years is the real nub. Then you add into the cauldron mix my losing all my professional connections and many friends, has left me nearly but one, without reference! Not too many employers will employ anyone without a reference (or two or three!).
 
Last edited:

Patrick

Barman
Staff member
Verified
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
455
Reaction score
393
Location
Gloucestershire
Status
Acquitted
That was a worthwhile pursuit then...but at what a cost, as you say...

I was offered a job with a sympathetic charity I had volunteered for, working with vulnerable clients - they applied for enhanced DBS in February 2018 - I was sent my DBS in August - and it had the incident from the accuser's perspective written out - clearly a massive attempt to imply my guilt and no mention of how she was completely discredited and the (massive, it even had a name - "Operation Violet Oak") case against five of us ignominiously dropped. They merely added at the end of this slander, "the CPS decided to offer no evidence"
I immediately objected.
You can make what they call "representations" - mine included that there was a major lie clearly added by the police for effect and that anyone reading this would simply miss the facts and concentrate on hearsay as enhanced or even invented by the police.

In April this year - with no explanation or answer to my emails detailing how the police had clearly lied and the only possible motivation was malicious - I got a completely clean DBS check...
Of course the job I had been offered was long ago gone - as were any prospects of any other, I'm 63 and worn out by their insane and malicious processes. All I have left is fighting them - to get some justice enforced against them - and to get some money back for loss of earnings, loss of computer gear and compensation for life destroying illness and stress.

Self employment is the only earnings based income I have any chance of now anyway.
 

millroly

Patron
Verified
Joined
Jul 1, 2019
Messages
54
Reaction score
22
Location
the Exeter Area
Status
No Further Action
I believe that I only had my data 'wiped' with entries (links) from each constabulary - Devon & Cornwall Police and North Yorkshire Police - after they were embarrassed at breaching the UN Convention of Human Rights covering the detainment of prisoners and detainees. This is the convention the UK government signed in 1948 to protect individuals from abuse. They had after all tortured me through failing to provide food and drink through 14 day light hours. This was proven during a 'Local Resolution' inquiry and my complaint was upheld. There were many other failings as well. I have had several approaches by legal people asking how I did it, because their clients although found innocent, could not get their records wiped. There is no magic formula or uniform process. I have copies of letters , addressed to my doctors and my MP, from Chief Constables, claiming that all data has been wiped. I think they were ready for a significant and embarrassing court case. Sadly my father who paid some legal bills could not stretch to the £30,000 plus (starter) fees to fight against the Police Federation.

In early 2014, a UK Professor in Criminal Law from Exeter University, highlighted the basic position (to me) that . . . .

"It is notoriously difficult to salvage a reputation after an erroneous arrest, and there are few, if any, opportunities for redress."

A position which was supported by a former Conservative government minister, who had been falsely accused of a sexual act, describing to me much of the battle I would endure, if I wanted to challenge the Police's actions. He said "You never get any redress with the Police and if you do, it will be insignificant. It is likely to be a massive feat of endurance along the way", (All very depressing). He went on to ask did I have "the stomach to pursue the police. As they will pull out all stops to protect their colleagues and position (no doubt their institution as well), refuse to divulge information under the guise of 'data protection' and will delay, delay and delay responses in the hope that statutory time limitations would come into effect, preventing any real discussion". . ." with the worse case scenario (for anyone challenging the behaviour of an officer) was the retirement of officers placing themselves beyond investigation and questioning in complaints procedures".

Further to this a barrister argued "Any police lies or deceit are difficult to expose, unless they are subject to subpoena issued through a public inquiry court jurisdiction of the 'Hillsborough Inquiry' level". 'Local resolution' inquiries are finitely in their control and determine what evidence is released.

'Boy O'boy' How right they were. This is a plain iniquity and an affront to any natural justice and any fairness.
 
Last edited:

Matt

Brewmaster
Staff member
Verified
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
151
Reaction score
161
Location
Derby
Status
Wrongfully Convicted
I was just about to ask you how you went about having your records wiped @millroly, I believe that there is usually a very strict time limit after arrest (or perhaps release) in which to apply, and even then you must prove your innocence, which as we all know is notoriously difficult.

I know first hand the battle you face when the police go into defensive mode and try to protect their own, evidence is suppressed and sometimes goes missing, disclosure is incomplete and officers cover each other's backs. At risk of digression I've found the same thing with the social services and family courts, despite being ordered - certain documents were never disclosed as they would have directly implicated a police officer in misrepresenting matters.

One allegation against me is reported by the police with no less than six different storylines, the original witness statements that would have provided the definitive account (in favour of my defence) was, yes you guessed it - never disclosed. I tried to complain, but was bullied by an officer on the phone who told me he wasn't going to investigate my concerns and therefore recorded that I had 'withdrawn' the complaint.
 

millroly

Patron
Verified
Joined
Jul 1, 2019
Messages
54
Reaction score
22
Location
the Exeter Area
Status
No Further Action
'The IPCC (now assumed IOPC - as it changed its name just under two years ago, much because the public had lost faith in the IPCC), has 'non independent rules. It hands everything to Police to sort out, under a local resolution process. This means the Police (normally a line manager) investigating one of their own. Like so many others, who have complained against serious issues, I found that the Police have pulled out all stops from the beginning to persuade me that withdraw from my complaint or ultimately, they claiming that I do not have a valid complaint. The upheld complaint against North Yorkshire Police, with regards to them not providing me food and liquid, started with a suggestion that I withdrew my complaint purely on the grounds of 'most people who make complaints do not proceed after reflection', I became bloody minded on the assumption that I started something I was going to finish! Then I challenged Devon & Cornwall (six months later) as they had denied that they had called for my arrest. There was clear evidence this was the case. Their initial response was of equal comment, suggesting I withdrew my complaint if they had not received an acknowledgement within 14 days. It is a game they play. My comment back was 'surely I would not make complaints of such magnitude, without serious thought to the outcome'. The next correspondence was 83 days later (nothing interim and a complete breach of IPPC regulations governing the timings of responding).
 
Top