Just in From David Abbott
The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) have just upheld an appeal from David Abbott about the decision earlier this year by the Greater Manchester Police Authority to refuse Mr Abbott's complaint against Chief Constable Peter Fahy on the grounds of misconduct in public office.
After 4 years of unlawful behaviour on the part of the Professional Standards Branch of GMP in refusing to record David's complaints against Det Sgt Paul Barnard, David complained to the GMPA and cited the Chief Constable of GMP Peter Fahy as the person responsible under the Police Reform Act 2002 for handling complaints against officers in GMP. The GMPA decided that the complaint against Peter Fahy was not worthy of recording. The IPCC do not agree and have instructed GMPA to record the complaint. This follows the successful Judicial Review that David took out against the IPCC for previously not upholding David's appeal against the non-recording of his complaint against Barnard. They have now recorded it but David is still waiting after 6 weeks for information on whether or not they are going to investigate his complaints.
This has been a battle by David to force GMP to record his complaint against Barnard for Conspiracy to Pervert the course of Justice during the investigation of Kristian's case and during the trial. Why have GMP gone to such great lengths to avoid investigating the complaint? Because they know that the complaint has validity and will no doubt result in one of their officers being brought to justice and, more importantly, the overturning of Kristian's conviction and the restoration of his good name.
What about Peter Fahy? Well, just like any other officer he now has a complaint of misconduct in a public office recorded against his name. The GMPA now have two options. They are that they can refuse to investigate the complaint or to agree to investigate. If they refuse to investigate the complaint then David tells us that he will go to Court and ask for a Judicial Review against that decision. David can also take the Chief Constable to Civil Court for the same offence. Indeed David well may take out an action against Barnard for misconduct in a public office via the Civil Courts.
Just think, if GMP had obeyed the law and recorded David's complaint in the first instance and not broken the law by refusing to record it, then this latest blot on GMP's name would not have taken place. All too often in England public bodies have to be dragged kicking and screaming towards reality and the truth before they will behave properly. What happens next is up to the GMPA. Obviously the sensible and right thing to do would be to call in an outside force to investigate David's complaints as the PSB of GMP have shown themselves to be completely unwilling and worse, unfit, to act within the law in this instance.