# SPLIT FROM Incident & Outcome



## classic33 (12 Dec 2010)

*Incident Description:*
Coming home from work, approx 1900. 
Having just let a bus pull out onto the main road I was on, I continued to cycle across the junction. Coming level with the "out" side of the junction. Aware of a vehicle, no lights, moving towards the junction. Halfway across this part & I then realise that he is now pulling out onto the road, with me in front of him. Wide junction so he could be going either way.
I end up getting shoved sideways, ending up on the bonnet of the car with the bike being pushed in front of the the car. Left leg trapped between car & bike frame & left foot still stuck in the pedal.

Two calls made to the police, one when the car had reversed off me & I'd managed to get back on my feet. The second a 999 when the driver, smelling of drink, approached telling me to stop calling the police. Police attended, although they later denied ever being there. Driver failed the breathalyser test.

Driver gave false details to the police, Car neither taxed nor insured at the time of the incident. Later found out that the driver wasn't insured either.

*Any other information:* (i.e. post the link to the video, google map etc)
Picture shows the full width of the junction

*What action did the police take:
*Police denied being there at the scene on the night. One officer even made a statement to that effect. Police not interested afterwards, "I was only a cyclist". Subject to hoax & malicous calls made by serving members of the police force over the incident. One set of calls were attributed to an Inspector, (By an Acting Chief Inspector).
"Warned" against trying to & trace the driver or the owner of the vehicle. Fell on death ears as I ended up giving the police information on both. 

*What action did the CPS (PF) take:*
N/A
*What action did the court take:*
N/A
*Any other comments:*
Just prior to the case going to court, the owner named the driver on the night. Possibly as a result of this, his side decided against going to court and paid out. They were going to take me to court over the incident. It took a further six months before the police decided to settle their side of the case with me. Admiiting that what they had done to me shouldn't have been allowed to happen in the first place. Nor should it have been allowed to carry on once reported. 

Link removed, picture showing the junction inserted instead.


----------



## Moderators (13 Dec 2010)

Split this off from Magnatom's original "Incidents and Outcomes" thread due to requests. Hopefully will get a copy of this put back into that thread too.


----------



## Jezston (13 Dec 2010)

What ... wait ... wow _what?!?_

You were knocked over by a drunk driver, the police turned up ... then when you chased it up they denied attending? And then started harrassing you?!? What kind of hoax calls are we talking about here?

Was the driver a policeman or something?

How did it end up in court, through civil proceedings after managing to find out who it was?


----------



## As Easy As Riding A Bike (14 Dec 2010)

"Wow" was my reaction as well, when this was posted in the other thread.

Has to have been a copper driving for that kind of "follow up", surely.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (14 Dec 2010)

serving officer? unlikely. ex-copper with mates/relatives still on force? possibly. Snout? Quite likely.

I wonder what events led up to the owner deciding to name the driver.....


----------



## turnout (14 Dec 2010)

They should make a film of this except in the film the cyclist tracks down the bent coppers and kills them with a pedal spanner.


----------



## Bristol Dave (14 Dec 2010)

I was just reading on another 'site that the police drink-driving campaign was going well. This thread is a real shocker! I'm glad you got some sort of compensation if not some sort of justice.

BD


----------



## classic33 (14 Dec 2010)

Similar thoughts crossed my mind with regards the driver, later found out where he worked. Unable to prove that he had any relatives within the force. 

I have the names of four police officers involved, PC, DC, Inspector(name supplied by a Acting DCI(now DCI).

Non-existent address given to the police on the night, by the driver. Queried this later & told that it didn't matter. Accident never logged with the Accident Clerks, so they have no record of it.

The only good piece of evidence to work with was the car registration, firmly implanted in my mind & part of it visible in the leg. Car found by chance the following week.

Paperwork in the form of the producer, was never issued on the night. Found by the same person(DCI), a year to the day after he said it had never been issued?


----------



## kevin_cambs_uk (14 Dec 2010)

Shocking, police response is shocking

Can you go to the Police complaints commission? like that woman did who was bashed in the cell and was caught on CCTV?


----------



## ComedyPilot (14 Dec 2010)

classic33 said:


> *Incident Description:*
> Coming home from work, approx 1900.
> Having just let a bus pull out onto the main road I was on, I continued to cycle across the junction. Coming level with the "out" side of the junction. Aware of a vehicle, no lights, moving towards the junction. Halfway across this part & I then realise that he is now pulling out onto the road, with me in front of him. Wide junction so he could be going either way.
> I end up getting shoved sideways, ending up on the bonnet of the car with the bike being pushed in front of the the car. Left leg trapped between car & bike frame & left foot still stuck in the pedal.
> ...



Get on to the IPCC immediately....that is terrible.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (14 Dec 2010)

ComedyPilot said:


> Get on to the IPCC immediately....that is terrible.






classic33 said:


> *Incident Description:*
> Coming home from work, approx 1900.



Well, it happened over a hundred years ago, so they're unlikely to do much about it now.


----------



## ComedyPilot (14 Dec 2010)

Rhythm Thief said:


> Well, it happened over a hundred years ago, so they're unlikely to do much about it now.



Missed that.......


----------



## classic33 (14 Dec 2010)

ComedyPilot said:


> Get on to the IPCC immediately....that is terrible.



Been there & the best they were able to do was record the fact that the police force in question failed to record the complaint made against them. Matter passed back for the force in question to deal with.

In the end up two officers already known, afore mentioned Inspector & DCI, dealt with the complaint. Nobody they spoke to remembers saying anything.


----------



## classic33 (14 Dec 2010)

Jezston said:


> What ... wait ... wow _what?!?_
> 
> You were knocked over by a drunk driver, the police turned up ... then when you chased it up they denied attending? And then started harrassing you?!? What kind of hoax calls are we talking about here?
> 
> ...



Two calls asking me to go down to the station to see a police officer, who wasn't on duty when I got there. One informing me that the investigating officer had died & no records had been kept, so there was nothing further they(the police) could do on the matter.

One from a person later identified as the Inspector. I was asked why did I want to do what I was doing & what did I hope to get out of it.

Most of the calls made in the early hours of the morning, using information that only the police should have had.

Civil action against the driver was what got it to the court stage. Don't know what made the owner name the driver on the night though, given the time since the incident.


----------



## CopperBrompton (15 Dec 2010)

If you are not satisfied with the outcome of the internal police complaints-handing, you are entitled to take it back to the IPCC.


----------



## classic33 (15 Dec 2010)

Trikeman said:


> If you are not satisfied with the outcome of the internal police complaints-handing, you are entitled to take it back to the IPCC.



Given thats its now two years since the response from the police saying that no officer remembered speaking to me, I considered that the matter had closed. Also chose to have the matter resolved at a local level. In the end up it was a bit like "On The Beat" starring the late Norman Wisdom. With ever more senior officers coming out to see me. 

It became clear that the police were embarrassed with what had been allowed to happen & what some officers had done to me, no names given, & that they were now closing ranks, I left it to internal affairs & Professional Standards to sort out.

My reason for posting the details of what happenned were that I could almost feel the frustration in what Magnatom was saying in one thread & to keep the thread this first appeared in going. Something tells me he wants as many as possible.

A bit taken back by the result of posting it though.


----------



## the snail (15 Jan 2011)

classic33 said:


> A bit taken back by the result of posting it though.



The original incident sounds nasty, lucky to walk away from it. The behaviour of the police sounds criminal, if they covered up and then tried to intimidate you, they should go to prison


----------



## classic33 (16 Jan 2011)

Orional was bad enough as you say, however the way in which the police acted afterwards towards me got my "back up" to say the least. It only made me fight harder to get answers from them.

None of the officers with whom I spoke remember saying anything to me, as a result the police were unable to do anything, about their actions. They know who they are, however I was told that they were unable to pass that information onto me. I already had four names, which I didn't tell them.

The other interesting thing I found out last week. One of the officers involved read this post on the origional thread.


----------



## asterix (17 Jan 2011)

classic33, this happened in Tunisia, right?


----------



## classic33 (17 Jan 2011)

asterix said:


> classic33, this happened in Tunisia, right?



No, in the UK, just two counties away from your location


----------



## Tenorman (17 Jan 2011)

classic33 said:


> No, in the UK, just two counties away from your location



Would that be north, south or west? If south it would be worryingly close to me, and I already have a pretty low opinion of some of the local plod!


----------



## classic33 (17 Jan 2011)

Well, if you go East or West you'll end up in either the North Sea or the Irish Sea before you get to a second county.
Historically its the same county, which was split into three ridings. I think your three counties away from his(asterixs') location.

As for a low opinion of some of the police, given How they left me feeling I don't feel my opinion could go any lower. A point made when I was asked to take part in a "customer satisfaction survey". How the answers were received at HQ I don't know


----------



## As Easy As Riding A Bike (17 Jan 2011)

classic33 said:


> The other interesting thing I found out last week. One of the officers involved read this post on the origional thread.




How do you know that?


----------



## classic33 (17 Jan 2011)

WheelyGoodFun said:


> How do you know that?



Handing in a bike (in good condition), that had been found, to the police, he commented on the fact that he'd seen it. 

I still see some of those involved from time to time. Times such as this when I was handing the bike in.


----------



## asterix (17 Jan 2011)

classic33 said:


> No, in the UK, just two counties away from your location




Too close for comfort..


----------



## JoysOfSight (19 Jan 2011)

Makes you wonder - for the many riders who have video now, would you come out with it immediately, to stop them messing you around, or keep it to yourself and let the police really hang themselves (i.e. after you have it in writing from someone senior that nobody attended, send the video of them attending to the press).

I suppose it depends what you want to achieve.


----------



## classic33 (19 Jan 2011)

JoysOfSight said:


> Makes you wonder - for the many riders who have video now, would you come out with it immediately, to stop them messing you around, or keep it to yourself and let the police really hang themselves (i.e. after you have it in writing from someone senior that nobody attended, send the video of them attending to the press).
> 
> I suppose it depends what you want to achieve.



Given that I was fully intending to take the case(collision) to court, to have the police turn round & tell you that they never attended the scene wouldn't have been very helpful. Minor break in the chain of evidence at the least. 

When the calls started I just wanted to know why the person(s) making the calls were doing so & what they were trying to achieve. Being told that you'd "be thrown in a cell" simply for wanting the driver details doesn't help either. The latter from the officer who attended on the night, who later denied ever having spoken to me & offerred his log book, in evidence, showing the night in question. Which ironically put him where he said he'd never been. Police call log, obtained later also put him at the scene

They would not have taken that kind of behaviour from me, so why should I have to accept it from them. 

Had it gone to court then he would have had to account for both his whereabouts on the night, logbook discrepancies and why/how he never spoke to me at any time. He did give me the details as given by the driver on the night gave him. Also spoke to him at the station, which is when I was told I'd "be thrown in a cell" simply for wanting the driver details. Strong verbal reminder given at the same time that I wasn't the detective in the room, he was. Reply to that was simple. So long as the police withold the information then I'd continue to dig for more on my own. At this stage he had the driver details but refused to pass them on.


----------



## classic33 (19 Jan 2011)

Same junction two years & three days later.


----------



## Ste T. (19 Jan 2011)

Funnily enough, last night I was watching a recording of channel 4's Red Riding. 

Looks like you got off lightly. Who knows how far this corruption goes.


----------



## Valy (20 Feb 2011)

Jesus... that is beneath the dirt. Should be hung up by their pea sized balls.


----------



## classic33 (21 Feb 2011)

Valy said:


> Jesus... that is beneath the dirt. Should be hung up by their pea sized balls.




Not all of them were male. Or are we talking abought the driver?


----------



## Valy (23 Feb 2011)

Oh I see, the police then. 

*Insert comment similar to my original but with females here*


----------



## CopperCyclist (17 Sep 2013)

That's horrific. I wouldn't care how long ago that was, I'd be pursuing the complaint. That example truly does go beyond merely bad or lazy police work into the reasons of criminal! 

Surely if the driver failed the breath test he was arrested, and if so they couldn't possibly deny being there? If they didn't arrest him even though he failed the breath test that's certainly grounds for dismissal, and the breath kits register every use. 

Forget 'closing ranks', there should be enough there for any professional standards department to work with, and I can assure you, they are 100 percent independent from the original officers. 

Seriously though, occasionally I read stories on here and think 'lazy officer making us look bad'. Sometimes I even think 'the storyteller isn't telling us the full picture here'. Rarely do I read something like yours which leaves me dumbfounded and disgusted. That level of corruption (most appropriate word I think) is NOT normal in any way, and shouldn't be looked on as such.


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

CopperCyclist said:


> That's horrific. I wouldn't care how long ago that was, I'd be pursuing the complaint. That example truly does go beyond merely bad or lazy police work into the reasons of criminal!
> 
> Surely if the driver failed the breath test he was arrested, and if so they couldn't possibly deny being there? If they didn't arrest him even though he failed the breath test that's certainly grounds for dismissal, and the breath kits register every use.
> 
> ...


The driver gave a non-existent address, which when pointed out was met with the answer its not their(the polices) problem. He'd failed the breath test, not arrested but was allowed to continue on his way home, a further 7 miles away. More or less where I'd just come from.
Car was spotted, by chance, whilst using a bus the following week. I got off, went back to the car and made a note of the fact that it had not VED, damage to front end & bonnet. Went through the phonebook that night & matched a name with the address. Contacted them & was told that the car belonged to their daughter, who didn't want to speak to me. Number left for her to call, when she felt like talking.

No producer was issued on the night. But it was later found, three years to the date on which I was told it was never issued, by the same officer who said it was never issued. He was now a D.I..

Officer attending in a van, to the 999 call, from a station just down the road from the drivers address, about 100 yards away.
I think my every second sentence was "F**K It", I hurt like hell & annoyed at what had just happenned. This officer would later deny attending on the night, but he never reported the collision. He was a DC when last seen & spoken to in an interview room at the local central station. Only the one tape placed in the machine, built to take two. I was able to give him the drivers name, correct address, address on the night of the collision, age & D.O.B.. Employer & where he actually worked. The fact that he was now a father & that it was a daughter, not a son.
At this point it was more than clear to me that he wasn't pleased at what I'd told him. At this point, the threat of being thrown in a cell until I'd time to think about what I was trying to do, was made. I "Was not the detective in the room, he was" my reply to that was "that until those who were supposed to be doing the work they were paid for. I'd carry on with what I was doing". At this point the "interview" was over, he removed the tape, placing it in his pocket, before telling me to leave the station, "or else".

Calls had been made, by the police, informing me that this officer had died the year before. Only information given to the police used/given in these calls.
An "Inspector" phoned asking me about my latest letter. He gave his name & even spelt it out for me. Contacted the police HQ & asked when "Inspector" .................... was next on duty, to be met with the expected answer that there was no officer with the name given on the force let alone in the station he claimed to be working from. That was the third false/non existent officer spoken to. Where were they coming from? Is it not illegal to impersonate a police officer? Questions that were asked, but never answered.

I have the names & addresses of the two officers who attended on the night. Found out without the help of the police. As well as those of two others involved. Should a member of the public be made do what I did or put through what I was, because they were "only a cyclist"?

The officer who attended in the van on the night & the "Inspector" both went onto inform Professional Standards, that the matter had been resolved, I was happy with the outcome & they had informed me that the case was now closed. That was two years after the incident(Officer Attending) & just short of three years for the "Inspector".

And there is one on here who wonders why some of the police near me, are held in low esteem by me.


----------



## gaz (18 Sep 2013)

Truly shocking!


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

I may have read more into it than was actually there, but I never let it sidetrack me. Went with what could be proven, physically. Address, street didn't appear on any street map & the nearest match had an elderly couple there. Real address, near the police station, where the officer responded to the 999 call from cast further doubt on it.
Same officer lived not too far away at the time. But giving that sort of information to him, wouldn't have gone down to well. I think!
The irony of it all, in one way, was the fact that everyone seemed to live or have been sent from nearby where I worked at the time. The opposite end of my commute at the time.


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (18 Sep 2013)

If it was me I'd be looking up the number of the IPCC.


----------



## Boris Bajic (18 Sep 2013)

classic33 said:


> The driver gave a non-existent address, which when pointed out was met with the answer its not their(the polices) problem. *He'd failed the breath test, not arrested but was allowed to continue on his way home, a further 7 miles away*. More or less where I'd just come from... etc.


 
Classic33, I'm jolly glad this has been highlighted and will now receive (or already has) the full attention of the authorities.

I confess I have never heard of a motorist failing a roadside breathalyser and not being arrested on the spot. I cannot even imagine the conversation between the officer administering the test and the driver. One hates to say this to a cyclist, but it's not just a teensy bit imagined, is it? If not, I apologise for the slur. 

Will we be reading about ths in the press? There are certainly TV, radio and print journalists who'd give their right arm for a story like this.


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> Classic33, I'm jolly glad this has been highlighted and will now receive (or already has) the full attention of the authorities.
> 
> I confess I have never heard of a motorist failing a roadside breathalyser and not being arrested on the spot. I cannot even imagine the conversation between the officer administering the test and the driver. One hates to say this to a cyclist, but it's not just a teensy bit imagined, is it? If not, I apologise for the slur.
> 
> Will we be reading about ths in the press? There are certainly TV, radio and print journalists who'd give their right arm for a story like this.


I'm sensing you don't quite believe it possible. I didn't when I was informed that he'd failed the roadside test, but was allowed to continue home. A further six miles on three busy A roads. Informed of this fact by the officer who responded to the 999 call. Test was carried out in an unmarked police car on the opposite side of the road. I was given the same test on the roadside, on the opposite side.
I take it your aware of when it was split from the origional thread!


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

I was suprised, when I found out, that he'd been allowed to drive away in car with no VED, confirmed by the DVLA, no insurance & no insurance to drive a car that wasn't his.
That he'd failed the roadside breath test was the icing on the cake. I was removed from the scene whilst he was being tested, so wouldn't have been there to see him fail it. Case was open & shut, so I thought upon the DVLA confirming the details given to them.
In grey added when edited.


----------



## gambatte (18 Sep 2013)

Hmm anyone know any journos we can link this thread to?


----------



## wilkotom (18 Sep 2013)

gambatte said:


> Hmm anyone know any journos we can link this thread to?


 
The thread's 3 years old. I doubt any journos would be interested.


----------



## Boris Bajic (18 Sep 2013)

classic33 said:


> I'm sensing you don't quite believe it possible. I didn't when I was informed that he'd failed the roadside test, but was allowed to continue home. A further six miles on three busy A roads. Informed of this fact by the officer who responded to the 999 call. Test was carried out in an unmarked police car on the opposite side of the road. I was given the same test on the roadside, on the opposite side.
> I take it your aware of when it was split from the origional thread!


 
I have nothing invested on this, so I can't really get too worried about it. True or not, it does entertain. If true, I hope any scars are healed.

I see that the thread dates from 1842 or similar. The driver sounds like a chap called Lucan who used to play cards with me. I haven't heard from him for years; some misunderstanding about a nanny.

All in all, it is so far divorced from what I've seen of policing in the UK and so full of allegegations of simply dreadful and criminal behaviour by the police that I find I can't read it without a wry smile and the thought that if this was quite as you describe it you wouldn't be restricting yourself to a cycling forum.

If it happened as you describe it, you will succeed in getting it sorted and getting the malefactors (in the police) identified and prosecuted. If it didn't happen as you describe it, I wish you well but suggest you stick in future to alien civilisations putting things up your backside and messing with your head. You'll always get a lot of buy-in with that stuff.

Either way, you do seem to be living in interesting times.


----------



## glenn forger (18 Sep 2013)

CopperCyclist said:


> That's horrific. I wouldn't care how long ago that was, I'd be pursuing the complaint. That example truly does go beyond merely bad or lazy police work into the reasons of criminal!
> 
> Surely if the driver failed the breath test he was arrested, and if so they couldn't possibly deny being there? If they didn't arrest him even though he failed the breath test that's certainly grounds for dismissal, and the breath kits register every use.
> 
> ...



Agreed, this level of collusion and corruption is shocking, protecting their own, from the looks of things.


----------



## CopperCyclist (18 Sep 2013)

Regarding everything you've said here, I can only relay that if it is all accurate it shows a shocking level of misconduct in a public office at the minimum, and you should be back on to the police complaints. IPCC or professional standards, it really doesn't matter. 

Given what you accuse, it's not appropriate for a local investigation by the same station and it wouldn't be allowed. They also wouldn't care if three years have passed.


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> I have nothing invested on this, so I can't really get too worried about it.
> 
> I see that the thread dates from 1842 or similar.
> 
> ...


 You will have course noted that it wasn't me that re-opened it. You say allegations, I can say written proof, provided by the officer concerned & his superiors.

You can live in your fantasy world, police it as you seem able, that doesn't concern me. You can also continue to use your best asset to its fullest extent. Its what you seem to be best at. Matter was invesigated and resolved at local level, the mistake I'll not make again. But the findings of that investigation are in a folder, with the rest of the paperwork that was printed off.

Not confined to just a cycling forum either
http://www.policeuk.com/forum/index.php?/topic/9384-false-details/?hl=mixymadman#entry310968
On there I had an ex police officer asking for details of an ongoing invesigation. That thread cannot be found.


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

CopperCyclist said:


> Regarding everything you've said here, I can only relay that if it is all accurate it shows a shocking level of misconduct in a public office at the minimum, and you should be back on to the police complaints. IPCC or professional standards, it really doesn't matter.
> 
> Given what you accuse, it's not appropriate for a local investigation by the same station and it wouldn't be allowed. They also wouldn't care if three years have passed.


County Police force consider the matter closed. There's disbelief that it did happen & I've been told what I can do on here with regards myself, I responded.
Log Number as given when I was informed that he'd failed the roadside test, but they let him continue home is FA/1626-25-03-2005. That number along with the vehicle registration number is firmly implanted in my mind, no need to go & look it up.


----------



## Boris Bajic (18 Sep 2013)

Take Coppercyclist's advice. Go straight to the IPCC.

The allegations you make are grave.

The conduct, if it happened, is outrageous.

You know the dates, the names and the detail. You have a file.

You owe it to society to right these wrongs.


----------



## Rancid (18 Sep 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> The conduct, if it happened, is outrageous.


its enough to make the skin crawl.


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> Take Coppercyclist's advice. Go straight to the IPCC.
> 
> The allegations you make are grave.
> 
> ...


 Already been, if you could be bothered to read. It was passed back to the force concerned to investigate.


----------



## CopperCyclist (18 Sep 2013)

classic33 said:


> Already been, if you could be bothered to read. It was passed back to the force concerned to investigate.



Allegations of that nature can't be investigated locally. That's more for impoliteness or other allegations. 

Your type of allegations cannot be locally investigated, so they either misunderstood, or the independent investigators found the allegations wanting and passed it back to force as a dissatisfaction of service complaint. 

If it's the first, make your complaint again to the IPCC.


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

I'll give it another go. But I'm not to hopeful their response will be different to last time.


----------



## glenn forger (18 Sep 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> Take Coppercyclist's advice. Go straight to the IPCC.
> 
> The allegations you make are grave.
> 
> ...




read the thread you idiot.


----------



## Boris Bajic (18 Sep 2013)

glenn forger said:


> read the thread you idiot.




Ooops! I didn't know I was meant to do that. Do I have to read all of it? 

Bother!


----------



## glenn forger (18 Sep 2013)

So the driver wasn't the daughter, but the onus would be on her to tax and insure the vehicle, so there are quite a few offences here.


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

This was considered to be the best they could do.

Dear Mr ...........This letter concerns your appeal against West Yorkshire Police which we
received on 24 November 2009.
The decision that your appeal relates to was given on 22 October 2009.
Your appeal was received more than 28 days after that decision. The
IPCC cannot usually accept appeals more than 28 days after a decision,
but we do have a very limited ability to consider appeals made late due
to 'special circumstances'.
"Special circumstances" are defined as any event where the appellant has
made all reasonable efforts, including making allowances for seasonal
delays in the postal service, to submit their appeal and any delay has
been outside of their control.
In order to be able to decide whether I can consider your appeal I must
receive from you within 7 days from the date of this letter an
explanation of why we have received your appeal late. I will then
consider your explanation and inform you whether I am able to continue
with your appeal.
If you have any questions please contact me.
Yours sincerely

Casework Administration
Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC)
Oaklands House
Washway road
SALE
M33 6FS
TEL : 0161 246 8584
E-Mail : @ipcc.gsi.gov.uk


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

glenn forger said:


> So the driver wasn't the daughter, but the onus would be on her to tax and insure the vehicle, so there are quite a few offences here.


The driver was the boyfriend of the owner, although on the night he wasn't. It was his car. If that makes sense.


----------



## glenn forger (18 Sep 2013)

Fobbed off by the cops then get called an alien abduction fantasist by some Internet clock lord.


----------



## glenn forger (18 Sep 2013)

classic33 said:


> The driver was the boyfriend of the owner, although on the night he wasn't. It was his car. If that makes sense.




Gotcha, right. the loose end is the motivation, I'd usually go for incompetence over corruption but there are too many elements to your experience, especially the veiled threats.


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

Dear Mr

You can make a complaint directly to the police force concerned or through the IPCC or another advice organisation. Whatever the route, all complaints, by law, must be recorded by the police force itself.
If you want to make a complaint you can:
* Go into any police station and ask for your complaint to be recorded. Done
* Contact any police force via phone, email or post.
* Contact your local Citizens Advice Bureau, Racial Equality Council, Neighbourhood Warden, Youth Offending Team or Probation Service, all of whom can provide information.
* Contact a solicitor or your MP and ask them to make a complaint for you.
* Nominate a person to act on your behalf (they must have your written consent).
* Write to the Chief Constable or Commissioner of the police service concerned, or to the police authority.
* Contact the Independent Police Complaints Commission at:
90 High Holborn
London, WC1V 6BH
Tel: 08453 002 002 (local rate)
Email: enquiries@ipcc.gsi.gov.uk Done

We will pass the details of your complaint to the police force concerned.
As well as your name, address and contact details, the main things that your complaint should cover are:
* What happened.
* When it happened.
* Who was involved.
* What was said or done.
* Whether there were any witnesses other than yourself and the person serving with the police.
* Where the witnesses can be contacted, if known.
* Details of any damage or injury which took place.
Kind regards
Customer Services Team
Independent Police Complaints Commission
020 7166 3000
www.ipcc.gov.uk


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

glenn forger said:


> Gotcha, right. the loose end is the motivation, I'd usually go for incompetence over corruption but there are too many elements to your experience, especially the veiled threats.


 I'm not a driver, but if you are stopped & asked to prove that you are the legal owner & you don't have the documentation asked for, do you, as a driver not get a set period of time in which to produce/present them to a police station. And isn't this request given in written form. An Acting Inspector would later confirm that this was never issued on the night & Three years, to the day, on which he said it was never issued, he himself, found it at the station.

The officer who took me home, was the responder to the 999 call. His claim of having issued a producer to the driver, whilst seeing to me. Female officer in unmarked car on the opposite side of the road dealing with the driver. Both of us tested, I passed & he'd failed. In the LBS when the call was made to me giving the first details of the driver & the fact that he'd been allowed on his way. Despite failing the test. Address checked when I got home, street didn't exist.
Car as said spotted & checked for any damage. Details given to the DVLA as at that point due to no insurance & the false details supplied by the driver, both the Untraceable Driver & Uninsured Driver forms would require completing. MIB request that both be filled. They'd decide which to use.
Driver located through my own means, much to the displeasure of the police.
Hoax & malicous calls made by serving officers. Officers who didn't exist making calls with regards a letter handed into the police station. Reading from those letters, so it couldn't have been anyone without proper access to such material. Unless I was now the standing joke in the station.

Two Chief Constables during this time, one died & his replacement has only recently been made stand down over his conduct elsewhere.

Complaints proceedure was followed, both the IPCC & West Yorkshire Police proceedures.


----------



## Hip Priest (18 Sep 2013)

It sounds like the sort of thing you read about in David Peace or Irvine Welsh novels.

Perhaps the car's owner was a popular face down the lodge.


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

5th October 2008

My Ref:1626/25/03/2005
Your Ref: PRK/DS/M1/00116/06
Your Ref: MI/00116/06
Your Ref: 11153 WA/F/10/1 CW
Your Ref: FOI-20089/23542
Your Ref: DP/07/2687
Your Ref: CO/00219/08

To whom it may concern
Having received your letter dated October 2008. I’ll start by answering your last point first. Given that West Yorkshire Police are only willing to “apologise” for what they have or haven’t done, not take any action. Where would be the point in appealing, it would only lead to further apologies being made. Not action taken over what has happened.

Given that this stemmed from the simple request for the details of the driver of the motor vehicle involved, and the point blank refusal of West Yorkshire Police to supply those details. Leaving it to myself to locate the driver, the vehicle & its owner. When found by me, this information was forwarded onto yourselves. I got “told off” for supplying this information. Also for obtaining it in the first place and that what I was “doing was wrong & should be left to the Police, as that’s their job not mine”.

I have been the victim of hoax calls perpetrated by West Yorkshire Police force members on more than one occasion. On this there have been clear cases of officers passing themselves of as another officer. Lied to & generally given the runaround by yourselves. Including one passing himself of as a non-existent officer.

I know of one false report submitted concerning this matter, made by an officer of the rank of Inspector or above. But not who that person was. Paperwork that one officer said wasn’t issued, was found three years to the day, almost to the hour after it was never issued. Nine months after the same officer had said it was never issued. It’s fair to say that if it was never issued, it couldn’t exist. No local station had any record of it being acted upon in the months following the incident. They were checked by myself.

On the night of the incident, I’m put on hold when reporting the incident. Led to me making a 999 call. No record of either call held by yourselves. No accident report filed. False details given by the driver to yourselves. “So what” was the attitude displayed on this matter by West Yorkshire Police. He’s given an address at least. One officer later claimed he wasn’t present at the scene on the night. Nowt wrong with that.

I could let my standards sink as low as those of West Yorkshire Police, but that would only make me as bad as you. Question that can be asked at this point is would you have let me do what you have done to me & expect an apology from me to suffice. To that question I think the safe answer is no.

Bear in mind it’s a force whose members have shown that they are willing to lie, attempt to intimidate & not willing to be held responsible for the actions of those who work within it. Nor do they appear to expect those who work within it to be held accountable, in any way, shape or form. You fall short of your own published standards & it’s acceptable! You simply apologise.
Respect & trust are two things that are earned, never just given to any one person or organisation. Because of what was allowed to happen & what happened, West Yorkshire Police have a long way to go before they can even begin to earn either from myself. Because of the actions of a few, the whole of the force have been tarred with the same brush.

I was asked once, was I after revenge or justice? Revenge would have been too easy, justice would have been got if the verdict was in my favour. What was wanted was simply that those concerned be held accountable for their actions. Just as you lay claim to. Nowt more than that. Revenge of sorts could easily have been obtained at any stage by simply placing the whole thing in the public domain. Let others comment on what has been allowed to happen. There is still that opportunity.

I placed too much trust in yourselves to “police” the matter. Trust which has been shown by yourselves to be mis-guided. Maybe now would be a good time to take a look at the standards you claim to follow & see the shortcomings. I was blamed in June 2006 for what I was doing I now blame you for what you did to me since the incident. Apology not acceptable.

One final point, where did the second sheet enclosed with your letter come from. It lacks names, dates & signitures.

Yours Sincerely,


The above, my response to the best West Yorkshire Police were willing to offer.


----------



## Boris Bajic (18 Sep 2013)

I'm very sorry Classic33... I do not know how to put this...

You are beginning to sound slightly troubled in the Marbles-Loss Department. There is an excellent Damon Runyon quote which goes something like this: "If that is not a daffy guy, then he will make a very good pinch hitter until a daffy guy comes along". It comes to mind when I read this thread.

I realise that that's a pretty rich comment coming from me, but I feel it is merited. It may take one to recognise one.

What colour is the pepper pot that talks to you when you're trying to sleep? If it's blue, you may have a problem.

(As an aside, reading your letter in a comedy Clint Eastwood drawl or full-on terminator Austrian English adds to the humour. It almost reaches Steward Lee stand-up levels.)

I hope I have helped but fear it may be altogether too late.


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

If you're talking to pepperpots, whilst trying to get to sleep, then I'd say your the one with the problem.
You're welcome to read the letter in whatever manner you see fit. What you cannot do is change the facts of what happenned. Which the police admitted to, and those concerned were giving a "serious talking to". The same sort of response when you complain to any organisation about its members. You're no different.


----------



## 400bhp (18 Sep 2013)

Is that a wind up letter?


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

400bhp said:


> Is that a wind up letter?


 No, that was a written response to the outcome of the Police investigation on themselves. Carried out by one of the officers named in the complaint.
Slightly annoyed at the fact that an officer named in the complaint, investigated the complaint & found that no-one, on the police side, had done anything wrong.


----------



## Cycling Dan (18 Sep 2013)

classic33 said:


> No, that was a written response to the outcome of the Police investigation on themselves. Carried out by one of the officers named in the complaint.
> *Slightly annoyed at the fact that an officer named in the complaint, investigated the complaint *& found that no-one, on the police side, had done anything wrong.


Whoa! That's not right! No one should be allowed anywhere near an investigating regarding them let alone lead it.
I've not read all of this as its a lot but has you tried the IPCC unless already tried( As said I have not read it all, first and last page).
This is a shocking experience you have been having. It makes my angry just reading it.
Its along time ago well before the camera revolution but this is a good example of where to have one.
From the reads of it all officers in that complaint should be chucked out the front door onto the kerb along with gross misconduct charges at the very least.
I am still taken aback from what I have just read.


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

Right or not, thats what happenned. And then people wonder why we as cyclists are treated as second class when on the roads. That was from when the IPCC had passed it back to the police to investigate.
I was the only one held to blame for doing anything wrong. That being the three formal requests, ignored, for the drivers information. Purely & simply as put by a DCI(investigating officer), that I'm only a cyclist.

Its a bit harder put up the letters that were sent by the police. Type it word for word & I'm bound to have someone say I'm making parts up.


----------



## Cycling Dan (18 Sep 2013)

Let me get this straight, im new to the thread.
You were hit by a drunk driver who has nothing legitimate about the car.
Police deny everything that took place
You got the drivers info independently and the force had a bitch fit about it.
IPCC sent the complaint to the station to be investigated by the very person/persons the complaint is about.
Da fark has happened here. This is seriously wrong.
An example of why its bad to have the IPCC full of police. Just like the PRA which is full of the ceo's and fixers of the banks it regulates.


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

Cycling Dan said:


> Let me get this straight, im new to the thread.
> You were hit by a drunk driver who has nothing legitimate about the car.
> Police deny everything that took place
> You got the drivers info independently and the force had a bitch fit about it.
> ...


 That sums it up in fewer words than I used. But you're right.
Referred back to the police force by the IPCC. who then referred it back to the relevant station to investigate.


----------



## Cycling Dan (18 Sep 2013)

Did you get the bike and yourself sorted out? Is it just a case of the polices gross misconduct now?
Is this something your MP is interested? A MP with a pro cyclist agenda or at least not anti would be good.
I really wish you had it on cctv or something. Bitch slap them across their faces and publicly publish it across media outlets as a station of corruption, Im sure its something the media would dig. Trial by media does have its uses. 
Ah, I can only imagine your frustration and its probably not even half as close.


----------



## glenn forger (18 Sep 2013)

Kafkaesque.


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

Got myself & the bike sorted out. To me it became a clear case of what the police feel about cyclists. Second class.
My MP would have cyclists off the road tomorrow if she could. Until the next election.
I never went to the press, because I placed too much trust in the police to do their job. They did a grand job there.


----------



## Cycling Dan (18 Sep 2013)

Well I'm glad you and the bike were sorted out. I guess you know for next time and can take the step to shove it back in their faces if it happens again.


----------



## classic33 (18 Sep 2013)

I'm hoping there won't be a next time. As I suspect are the police. They know now I'll not accept the first answer they give me as the only answer.


----------



## glenn forger (18 Sep 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> I'm very sorry Classic33... I do not know how to put this...
> 
> You are beginning to sound slightly troubled in the Marbles-Loss Department. There is an excellent Damon Runyon quote which goes something like this: "If that is not a daffy guy, then he will make a very good pinch hitter until a daffy guy comes along". It comes to mind when I read this thread.
> 
> ...





> The audience inside was getting impatient and the women asked Our Old Man if he would mind stepping in and making a few remarks to fill in until the more distinguished citizen arrived. Our Old Man said, not at all, and he went in and took the rostrum, explaining to the audience that he was just a pinch hitter and would stop as soon as the star got there.



http://www.fadedpage.com/books/20121228/20121228.html

The quote is about someone stepping up to the plate and completing their duties, exactly the opposite of what you claimed. All you've added to this thread is crappy remarks about people being mentally ill and snide, cowardly insinuations. A poster here was hit by an uninsured driver and the police colluded in making a complete dog's breakfast of the inquiry. If you have nothing useful to add go and tell your children again how you don't care if their faces get scraped off, you are as much a failure as a father as you are as a poster here.


----------



## RedRider (19 Sep 2013)

Norman Bettison, West Yorks Police chief constable 2007-12 . Nothing would surprise on that one's watch.


----------



## Shaun (19 Sep 2013)

Let's not get into _personal _disagreements please ... *stick to the thread topic* and let @classic33 report any responses he's not happy with. 

Thanks,
Shaun


----------



## classic33 (19 Sep 2013)

Shaun said:


> Let's not get into _personal _disagreements please ... *stick to the thread topic* and let @classic33 report any responses he's not happy with.
> 
> Thanks,
> Shaun


Thanks for the reminder, but if a persons post is removed simply because I don't like it, it will only make that person try harder.
I've posted on a couple of threads where this was linked in purely so people can see that not all forces treat collisions between cyclists & other road users as they would if two motor vehicles were involved. Also because of the way the incident was treated, in my case, as an example of the importance of getting everything down on paper & keeping it in order.
Often its the stupid bits forgot about early on that can be turned back on you at a later date, as I found out.


----------



## classic33 (19 Sep 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> I confess I have never heard of a motorist failing a roadside breathalyser and not being arrested on the spot. I cannot even imagine the conversation between the officer administering the test and the driver. One hates to say this to a cyclist, but it's not just a teensy bit imagined, is it? If not, I apologise for the slur.


Apology accepted.


----------



## Boris Bajic (19 Sep 2013)

glenn forger said:


> http://www.fadedpage.com/books/20121228/20121228.html
> 
> The quote is about someone stepping up to the plate and completing their duties, exactly the opposite of what you claimed. All you've added to this thread is crappy remarks about people being mentally ill and snide, cowardly insinuations. A poster here was hit by an uninsured driver and the police colluded in making a complete dog's breakfast of the inquiry. If you have nothing useful to add go and tell your children again how you don't care if their faces get scraped off, you are as much a failure as a father as you are as a poster here.


 
Dear Sir Forger, you are very clever at the Internets and you deserve a House point, but the quote you offer is not the one to which I was referring.

I had (as I suspected and as I suggested) misquoted slightly. The true quote is as follows, not far from my guess but a million miles from your slightly unusual offering:

*"Personally, I always claim Cecil Earl is a little screwy, or if he is not screwy that he will do very well as a pinch-hitter until a screwy guy comes up to bat."*

It comes from a Runyon story called _'Broadway Complex'_. You may not be familiar with the work of Damon Runyon. He'd been a sports writer earlier in his career, so his work is full of sporting references. A _pinch hitter_ is a stand-in chap in a baseball team (who _steps up to the plate_ - another baseball expression). It's an image that would have been familiar to Runyon and his readers. It may not be so clear to you. He used the imagery often.

It is my view (based entirely on posts in this thread) that Classic33's story is at best embellished. My not-very-funny posts are attempting to show this. My broader observation is that a miscarriage as thorough and criminal as this would not have ended as it seems to have done and would not now be shrugged off and let go by a genuine victim who appears to have all the relevant files. I believe it is hokum and hogwash. I find that both funny and slightly sad.

I'm not sure how my children come into this. They (and their as-yet unscraped faces) seem to occupy your thoughts more than may be healthy. I'll give them your love.

Do dig out some Runyon and have a flick through it one day. Few comic writers better portray the urban realities of America in the Great Depression. His writings from his deathbed are also noteworthy.

It is my ardent hope that this has been helpful.


----------



## glenn forger (19 Sep 2013)

classic33 said:


> Got myself & the bike sorted out. To me it became a clear case of what the police feel about cyclists. Second class.
> My MP would have cyclists off the road tomorrow if she could. Until the next election.
> I never went to the press, because I placed too much trust in the police to do their job. They did a grand job there.



The CTC have a long list of cyclists who have been utterly failed by the police. The prejudice among the population against cyclists is widespread among the old bill:

http://road.cc/content/news/87423-c...t-devon-and-cornwall-police-attitude-cyclists

http://www.roadjustice.org.uk/sites...CTC Road Justice - the role of the police.pdf



> Aiden Forster,Bradford,WestYorkshire,
> July 2012
> Enthusiastic cyclistAiden was cycling up a hill when he was hit
> from behind by a 4x4 driver.Aiden suffered multiple vertebral
> ...



There are lots more in the second link.


----------



## Boris Bajic (19 Sep 2013)

2661809 said:


> Boris. You know that bit you like to put at the end of posts "I hope I have helped but I fear I haven't"? You aren't.


 
I'm touched that you think this a serious comment.


----------



## Shaun (19 Sep 2013)

Back on topic please ...


----------



## Boris Bajic (19 Sep 2013)

I'm not sure where I left the topic and I apologise (with reservations) if I did.

The OP's content in this thread is presented as fact. I find it otherwise. It seems in part to be dreamed, imagined or otherwise thought up. It seems not to match my experience of the workings of the IPCC. If it is the truth (in part) then it is a 'carefully redacted' truth.

As a good part of the content presented by the OP denigrates the Police and their attitude towards cyclists, I think it perfectly fair to write that some of the detail of the OP's posts has the whiff of fiction about it.

Some people find the accusations levelled by the OP thoroughly plausible and credible. I find them in part to be fanciful and mendacious. I may be wrong.

It is a dreadful business to be turfed off a bicycle by a car. I've experienced it and sympathise that far with the OP.

That far and no farther. I find the great dollops of furious, semi-literate gobbledegook about cover-ups and conspiracy slightly silly.

Others do not.


----------



## classic33 (19 Sep 2013)

@Boris Bajic, Maybe you can explain the proceedure for obtaining the drivers details, via a Formal Request. MIB Forms require that you make such a request, so that their forms can be completed.
At no stage did the police ever question "my version" of events. They even managed to back up what I had said with records & call logs held at the police station. Records to which I have no access. They managed to name two of the officers involved in the hoax calls, though they couldn't pass those onto me.

If you say "my version" "_of events seems in part to be dreamed, imagined or otherwise thought up," "or some of the detail of the OP's posts has the whiff of fiction about it"_ please explain where. Why would the police bother to investigate what someone had said if the person saying it had nothing to back up what was being said? They were only able to prove that it did happen, their records backing up what I was saying. As did records from a third party, & later by the officer involved, in writing.

Explain the process for making a complaint to the IPCC. What proceedure does a person have to follow for the IPCC to be able to investigate? And what can prevent them from doing so? I know now, but I found out the hard way. No training manual saying what had to be done, to work from.

If the police had any doubts over what was said, why did they not investigate their doubts? Proper proceedure was not followed & they acknowledged that fact. Hard to do otherwise, when 999 calls are recorded & the details of the Officer Attending/Responding are held on record.

Maybe the fact that it was now headed for court, got the officer to offer up "his version" of events. Had it reached court, he'd have been required to attend. Of that I was going to make certain. And two differring versions of events, supplied by the same officer, would be hard to explain in court. Given that only one version could be correct.

From where else could the relevant files have been obtained but from the police, the IPCC & MIB themseles.




Boris Bajic said:


> *I'm touched*


Quite possible, it'll explain some of your posts.


----------



## glenn forger (19 Sep 2013)

Ignore it classic, it's low-grade trolling, being offensive for the sake of it and seeking attention he's deprived of elsewhere.


----------



## classic33 (19 Sep 2013)

I'll wait and see if he's able to answer the questions asked.


----------



## Matthew_T (19 Sep 2013)

Sounds to me as if the police or relevant officers hate cyclists. And they are just tip-toeing around classic33 and trying as hard as they can to brush him under the rug. 

Fortunately, I have a disability. Which I notify the police of when reporting an incident. I dont know if this has had any affect in the past on the outcome of investigations but I havent experienced anything like that has been said in this thread. 

The moment I found out the driver failed the roadside breath test and was allowed to continue driving, I would have pursued that matter. At the scene, I would have got the names of attending officers (if I remembered to do that after the collision). I am the type of person who will persist if I know something is not right. On the roads, that can get me into bother, but in incidents like this where the police are breaking their own rules, a firm hand is needed. 

@classic33 The fact that the police told you that investigating the incident was not your job, I would have told them to stuff themselves (okay, I wouldnt have but I would have felt like saying it). YOU were involved in the collision. YOU were the victim. And YOU were the only one doing any work. 

The last incident I reported to the police, I used the incident statement template from here to write up a statement. When I took it to the police officer who was dealing with the incident, she was amazed at how professional the layout was. She actually thought I was a trainee police officer or clerical assistant. I just told her that I downloaded it from a website because it seemed to fill in all the blanks. 
I dont know what she thought of me, or if she believed me but it made her job easier when she was copying it over (pretty much word for word).


----------



## classic33 (19 Sep 2013)

They were told that I'd continue what I was doing, until they started doing the job they were being paid to do.
I was taken home, in the back of the police van, whilst the driver was still being questioned in the un-marked car. I only found out the following week that the driver had been allowed to continue on his way. Despite having failed the roadside test.
We were both tested, I'd no objection, its not the first time & I hope it'll be the last time.
It got worse as things went on. False details given by the driver, no producer issued by either officer attending. Collision was never reported to the Accident Clerks, as I was informed it should have been, therefore no log for the incident could be created by them. It was the job of the officer responding to the 999 call to report it to them, I was not allowed.

For those saying its a work of fiction, dreamt up, embellished or whatever. Please try this, locate Elland Terrace, Brighouse.
Address was spelt out, over the phone, and as given by the driver on the night. Three other people heard it being spelt out as I was in the LBS at the time, going over what damage the bike had sufferred.
My left leg, just over 24 hours after the collision.


----------



## Boris Bajic (19 Sep 2013)

Ouch! Your leg looks bad in the photo.

I won't answer your questions, Classic, because it is not my place to do that. It matters not a jot to me whether you are a deluded fantasist or someone who has been greatly wronged by the IPCC and a whole raft of serving police officers up to a fairly senior rank.

I believe the former.

If it is the latter, a newspaper or a TV channel will find you and get all investigative about it and right the shocking, distressing and disturbing wrong that has been visited upon you.

Along the way, several serving or former police officers wil be convicted and it will hit the news.

If I'm right, nothing will be heard of it again and we can all go back to worrying about alien abduction and mustard in our toothpaste.

If I read about the convictions that would SURELY follow so grave a case of criminal misconduct as this, I will apologise and even send flowers. 

If I do, it will be sincere. Until then, I wish you and your believers a happy fantasy.

Glenn Forger is quite right. You should ignore me. I think you knew that, but somehow you haven't been able to stop yourself from responding. From now on, I strongly recommend that you do.


----------



## RedRider (19 Sep 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> Ouch! Your leg looks bad in the photo.
> 
> 
> 
> a newspaper or a TV channel will find you and get all investigative about it and right the shocking, distressing and disturbing wrong that has been visited upon you.



Taking what you say at face value, I think you overestimate the amount of time journalists have to look into stuff like this and underestimate the chilling effect of libel law. More than somewhat.


----------



## Boris Bajic (19 Sep 2013)

RedRider said:


> Taking what you say at face value, I think you overestimate the amount of time journalists have to look into stuff like this and underestimate the chilling effect of libel law. More than somewhat.



Is that a Runyon reference?


----------



## classic33 (19 Sep 2013)

Is that last piece a threat?
You want to call me delusional, but refuse to answer a set of very simple questions. Is that because you're not able?

Maybe you should refrain from pushing your luck. But if you are a serving/recently retired/dismissed police officer it shows how low standards have sunk. I also think that I've come across you elsewhere.


----------



## campbellab (19 Sep 2013)

Classic33 have you got a Crime Commissioner nowadays? Worthwhile to try another tack?


----------



## Boris Bajic (19 Sep 2013)

classic33 said:


> Is that last piece a threat?
> You want to call me delusional, but refuse to answer a set of very simple questions. Is that because you're not able?
> 
> Maybe you should refrain from pushing your luck. But if you are a serving/recently retired/dismissed police officer it shows how low standards have sunk. I also think that I've come across you elsewhere.


 

A threat? How can it be a threat? It goes like this: 

1. Glenn Forger (whose opinion is highly regarded on these pages) advised you to ignore me as I am an attention-seeking troll.

2. I agree with Glenn Forger. I tell you that Glenn Forger is quite right and you should ignore me.

3. I note that you seem unable to resist responding and recommend that you do. 

4. You ask me if this is a threat. It is not a threat. I am not threatening you. I am mocking you. Like this: Hahahahahahaha.

I am not pushing my luck. I have never served in any police force. I do not know anyone called Classic33.

You are starting to make me feel uncomfortable. But is an absurdist way. I do think there is something delusional in your posts. I may be wrong.

Speak to your Crime Commissioner. He (or she) will sort it out for you in a jiffy. Tell him (or her) I sent you. We go way back.

Meanwhile, do take Glenn Forger's excellent advice and ignore me. I keep spilling my coffee when I read your posts - and it is excellent coffee.


----------



## RedRider (19 Sep 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> Is that a Runyon reference?


I was showing off.
Back on topic @classic33 good luck finding some resolution with this.

Give it up Boris.


----------



## classic33 (19 Sep 2013)

campbellab said:


> Classic33 have you got a Crime Commissioner nowadays? Worthwhile to try another tack?


 Yes & if you're suggesting I send it to him I already have. All canidates in the election for this posistion were given a copy of my "working page". Not one responded.


----------



## Boris Bajic (19 Sep 2013)

RedRider said:


> I was showing off.
> Back on topic @classic33 good luck finding some resolution with this.
> 
> Give it up Boris.


 
Given up.


----------



## classic33 (19 Sep 2013)

@Boris Bajic, I'm more certain than ever that our paths have crossed in the past. Its the way you chose to word things, avoid answering direct questions & trying to pull people down to your level.
It'd just be a case of going through old paperwork to be certain.


----------



## 4F (19 Sep 2013)

Boris please stfu, you are coming across as a right tool in this thread and adding nothing to it.


----------



## Crankarm (19 Sep 2013)

To Classic, the treatment you have received from the police and IPCC in this matter is truly shocking. Their tactics would be in demand in Zimbabwe or some tinpot corrupt backwater of a country. Seems to me you still have a lot of bitterness which is understandable. You need to work out what you want to do. If you want to continue with this then I think you need to consider making really serious allegations of the officers involved and the local force concerned to some one who can investigate and who WILL take this seriously. This should get the officers suspended. You need to go to the top of the police, the current Chief Constable, also possibly the Home Secretary or the Attorney General. I would also consider contacting Channel 4 news with a view to a Dispatches programme or a feature on their news programme - police corruption. What happened to you is awful but what the police then did or didn't do is simply shocking.

As far as I can see from what has been writ by you there is failing to properly investigate SERIOUS offences when there is an over riding statutory duty to investigate, attempting to pervert the course of justice, aiding an offender, conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, harassment, misconduct in public office, bringing the police into disrepute and no doubt many other offences a good criminal barrister could advise you on. At some point you should make a freedom of information request to obtain details you have requested that the police have refused to provide. I think there is enough malfeasance and criminal intent here to send a few police officers to prison.

Either take constructive steps to pursue this or close it off and move on with your life.

Good luck.


----------



## Hip Priest (20 Sep 2013)

I think Classic had moved on, to be fair. It wasn't him who re-opened this historic thread.


----------



## cd365 (20 Sep 2013)

Boris if you believe this type of thing doesn't happen you should read up on Hillsborough.


----------



## Hip Priest (20 Sep 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> Ouch! Your leg looks bad in the photo.
> 
> I won't answer your questions, Classic, because it is not my place to do that. It matters not a jot to me whether you are a deluded fantasist or someone who has been greatly wronged by the IPCC and a whole raft of serving police officers up to a fairly senior rank.
> 
> ...



It took the Hillsborough families over 20 years of campaigning to uncover the truth about the disaster, and people still haven't been brought to justice. Their campaign involved the biggest UK peacetime loss of life in any of our lifetimes and their campaign was funded by thousands upon thousands of football supporters and well known celebrities and artists.

What makes you think that a lone cyclist making a complaint about low-level corruption over a driving offence would lead to prosecutions and media coverage?

I enjoy your posts very much but I think you've called it wrong on this occasion.


----------



## glenn forger (20 Sep 2013)

cd365 said:


> Boris if you believe this type of thing doesn't happen you should read up on Hillsborough.






> Ch 4 news:
> 
> 500 people have already got in touch with the Independent Police Complaints Commission just 48 hours after it asked to hear from anyone who gave evidence to the West Midlands Police about the 1989 Hillsborough football tragedy.
> 
> The IPCC has already discovered a mass of statements from police officers which were subsequently doctored.



the county next to classic33.


----------



## gambatte (20 Sep 2013)

Orgreave.....


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (20 Sep 2013)

gambatte said:


> Orgreave.....



NUM funds and Arthurs' house...


----------



## gambatte (20 Sep 2013)

Nigel-YZ1 said:


> NUM funds and Arthurs' house...


Yep. I’m definitely not one sided.

There were plenty of victims and plenty sitting pretty.

I had mates in companies supplying the pits. They had no say so in whether the strike went ahead. They just sat there as the order book dried up and they lost their jobs. I also knew lads on strike that spent their time running round the country collecting donations to help the miners. They came back with stories of what a great time they’d had.....

Then there’s the story of the plod brass who turned up at the colliery entrance picket in winter and saw a snowman. Told someone to get in a vehicle and knock it over.

Didn’t know it was built round a bollard...


----------



## Shaun (20 Sep 2013)

Hillborough _and_ the miners' strike ... I think this would be a good time to bring the thread to a close.

@classic33 if there are any updates you want to make in the future just PM me and I'll re-open it for you.


----------

