(19) Never mistake arrogance for intellect. (D.B. Harrop)

The more I thought about the report from Senior CPS Prosecutor, Stephen Davies, which Wendy Elliot disclosed to me, the more suspicious I became. She obviously didn’t show me the full report, as, when you read it, there is no complaint!

But the language he uses within his report and his complete apparent generalisation about anyone involved in animals rights issues is quite shocking………and these are the victims he’s talking about, not the suspects!!!

“in similar terms, that those present had not investigated Hunt Saboteurs before”. We weren’t bloody investigating Hunt Saboteurs , we were investigating a case of animal cruelty by members of a hunt!!!

I have been watching on TV, ‘The Trial of Christine Keeler’ and I think parallels can be drawn to the outdated, bigoted attitudes towards victims. The difference being of course that the trial of Christine Keeler was over 50 years ago!!!

How did this fit in with The Ethical Principles for the Public Prosecutor, or for that matter with the Police Code of Ethics? What had been clear is that the support I had earned from the HIT and the remainder of The South Hereford Hunt had been lost by CID.

__________________________________________________________________

Back to the harassment that Jane and I had reported……

On 12th January Jane wrote the following to Superintendent Sue Thomas…..

__________________________________________________________________

Dear Supt Thomas, Crime Report 22EC/108211V/16

I am the victim of the above crime. My husband, Richard Barradale-Smith is the victim of a linked crime where false and malicious lies of two alleged affairs were made. One of these was reported to us by a family friend and the other via Hereford CID. Unfortunately it would appear that police believed these lies which your CID department investigated without apparent consideration that Richard may have, in fact, been a victim of these lies! He has told me of an interview conducted by DI Taylor in December where he was apparently not allowed to leave Hereford Police Station until he had answered the questions! Richard was not under arrest at the time. Are your staff allowed to behave in this way? It does not seem possible. Richard has told me that ‘Local Police Sergeant’, who is investigating our crimes, updated him yesterday. ‘Local PS’ has apparently asked DI Taylor for the source of evidence from which they investigated the alleged affair. DI Taylor has refused to tell ‘Local PS’ this information. Can you tell me why this is please? This refusal to reveal the source is obstructing this police investigation into these crimes of harassment in my opinion. I would appreciate an early reply to my questions and concerns as it is now over a month since I first reported this to the police. Kind regards Jane Barradale-Smith

__________________________________________________________________

On the same day, Jane had a response…..

__________________________________________________________________

Complex set of circumstances!!!! Mmmmmmm.

So, Superintendent Thomas is confirming that the ‘interview’ by DI Taylor was conducted on behalf of PSD. Jane wrote to PSD to ask if this was correct. They didn’t respond!!

Jane and I were still quietly confident that this mess would get sorted out, and hopefully quickly!!!!


Post Navigation:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: