Giles York is the chief constable of Sussex Police ....... taking over from a long chain of chief constables, including Paul Whitehouse, who was finally forced to resign after the Home Secretary insisted that he should go.
It is possible that Sussex Police is just a bunch of incompetent bunglers, taking our tax dollars and squirting them up the wall as they masquerade in police uniforms and enjoy driving striped cars with sirens and blue flashing lights. Sure, to many the chance to put on a uniform is irresistible. They might have joined the Fire Brigade or the Armed Forces who have equally attractive outfits - if that is their bag!
As to police work, that is another matter. It is more a case of doing ones best to fit in with other organizations who actually run the show. Some are drug dealers, some bankers, wealthy local individuals and a large number of council officers and maybe even a councillor or two.
The way this works is that the level of investigation - what one chooses to investigate, or not investigate to achieve a desired outcome. Many people will think that the Criminal Prosecution Service (CPS) call the shots, but in fact the real power is upstream, when conducting an investigation.
Any investigating officer can bury inconvenient evidence, turn a blind eye to other inconvenient evidence, ask a state witness to lose contradictory evidence or simply fabricate evidence. That is why there is a Code of Conduct, that unfortunately, and despite several re-issues and re-vamps, is largely ignored by corrupt forces.
THE CODE OF CONDUCT
Not many people get a reply to their correspondence even when reporting serious crimes, but this force will spend £10,000 of public money attempting to prosecute a person for goods to the value of £19.99, where that person is a thorn in the side of their chums at Wealden District Council.
On the other side of the coin, this force appear hesitant to investigate complaints involving £ thousands of pounds in connection with land fraud and manipulation of land values.
WEALDEN DISTRICT COUNCIL MALFEASANCE
In December of 2016 two members of the public independently reported serious abuses of positions of trust at this Council. So far those informants have not received replies from this Chief Constable.
A historic case of ingrained misuse of public office comes from Mr Chester Hudson reporting serious fraud involving Ian Kay and Mr Kay's father in law.
A crime that is in progress as of 12th December 2016 comes from Nelson Kruschandl reporting serious fraud involving documents obtained by deception being lodged on the Local Land Charges Register to cause loss, contrary to Section 4 of the Fraud Act 2006. The officers concerned include David Whibley, George White and in the background, Ian Kay, David Phillips, Douglas Moss and Thomas Hoy.
F.A.O. Giles York
13 December 2016
FORMAL COMPLAINT - SUSPECTED MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE
Please find attached copy of my letter to Wealden District Council dated the 9th of December 2016, together with exhibits, the content of which is self explanatory and may also to be taken as a Witness Statement, since I am willing to attend any Court to give evidence against the officers of
Wealden District Council in any prosecution.
SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE
There are too many cases that demonstrate failures in investigations, for this to be a coincidence. Certain individuals that fall foul of Wealden District Council almost invariably end up being wrongly imprisoned or otherwise with a criminal record. This is one of Weaden's favourite ploys for disposing of cases where they have been caught red-handed tampering with or otherwise falsifying evidence in neighbour disputes, where the Wealden have taken the side of the more influential citizen - instead of investigating matters impartially.
JOHN HOATH & CHRISTOPHER (CRIPPS HARRIES) HALL
The wrongful imprisonment of John Hoath is one of the most incredible miscarriages of justice occasioned by the Sussex Police .....
MISFEASANCE & MALFEASANCE
When an officer of the courts' omits to include evidence that he knows is relevant to a hearing, that is termed misfeasance in public office. Where an officer then tries to cover up his or her misfeasance (as did Ian Kay in the Stream Farm matter), that becomes malfeasance. The difference is that misfeasance is a civil wrong, whereas malfeasance is a criminal offence. The leading case precedent on malfeasance is: R. v Bowden 1995 Court of Appeal (98 1 WLR). In this case Bowden was a police officer who saw a crime in progress and walked away from it, calling in sick the next day to seek to cover up his wrongdoing.
If you are the victim of a wrongful prosecution or the police are refusing to investigate a crime you might think of taking your case to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), we would though advise that in serious cases of institutionalized corruption, that you should first lodge copy of your complaint with the Attorney General, Lord Chancellor and the Prime Minister of the day, who is responsible for running our administration under a mandate from the current Ruler of the United Kingdom.
EASTBOURNE HERALD 7 JANUARY 2015
Sussex Police Chief Constable Giles York has been awarded the Queen’s Police Medal in the New Year’s honours.
Katy Bourne was elected Crime Commissioner, taking office with an oath to serve the public interest. That is an oath that many are now questioning, where she appears to be serving Sussex Police instead of policing the organisation that has come under such flack for their blatant refusal to investigate so many complaints of malfeasance in public office.
BBC NEWS 30 JUNE 2014
Giles York has been confirmed as the new chief constable of Sussex Police, the Sussex Police and Crime Panel have announced.
Independent Police Complaints Commission
0300 020 0096
LINKS & REFERENCE
Vicarage Lane, Hailsham,
East Sussex, BN27 2AX T: 01323 443322
LINKS & REFERENCE
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.