Lancashire police Inspector accused of Perjury and Misfeasance in public office

A Lancashire police Inspector is accused of Perjury, contrary to s.5 of the Perjury Act 1911, and the Civil tort of Misfeasance in public office.

The Perjury offence has been reported; an incident number has been assigned, a crime reference number is still being considered over one week after the report, and the review is being undertaken by a Chief Inspector who has sight of the evidence.

The Inspector wilfully made a statement that he signed as a declaration of truth, and submitted it to the Magistrates Court to support an application against a suspect to extend police bail conditions.

The suspect has provided conclusive and substantial evidence to the Court (and to the Inspector) showing that the Inspector has intentionally and knowingly lied about matters that he was fully aware of.

The alleged victim has committed criminal offences against the suspect, yet the Inspector failed to notify magistrates of the facts he is aware of, instead making a fanciful (but false) statement that he has no idea why the suspect is, in any way, aggrieved.

The inspector also has added that he believes the suspect was ‘getting pleasure‘ from speaking out about his grievances.

The Inspector failed to notify the Magistrates that the alleged victim had recently admitted (in other legal proceedings) to making a malicious call to Social Services, stating that the suspect has been arrested for indecent images of teenage girls on his phone [and that] he has a history of it.

The Inspector failed to notify the Magistrates that the alleged victim is under criminal investigation, contrary to s1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988 for making that call.

The Inspector failed to notify the Magistrates that the suspect has been notified of no further action (NFA) for one of the allegations against him by the alleged victim, and that that particular investigation is being re-investigated over the alleged conduct of the alleged victim.

The Inspector failed to notify the Magistrates that the alleged victim was shown to have decieved police and the Courts (alleged to have been knowingly) over an unsubstantiated accusation  that the alleged victims phone number was unlawfully acquired and used to make false business calls, it was discovered (and shown to the court) that the mobile number was published on the alleged victims own business website for clients, and that this was the source of the business calls received.

Lancashire police have been asked for their comments related to this article, which will be published.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*