A victim of crime who was also a victim of a malicious prosecution brought against him by Lancashire police was intentionally deprived of justice or help by Lancashire police after a vile attack by a self confessed police informant named Paul Turner.
During the malicious prosecution brought against the victim, the police informant was a witness, giving evidence for the police and lied under oath (see below).
During the lead up to the trial, the case was adjourned, on 3rd October 2014, unbeknown to the Police Informer who attended court on that date.
Paul Turner stormed out of Chorley Magistrates as he was not told of the adjournment, he went home and started posting malicious comments on the internet brandishing the innocent victim a paedophile.
This was reported to Lancashire police, as it contravenes the Malicious Communications Act as defined by CPS Guidelines. The victim could not believe what the police informant was doing! Lancashire Police ignored the victim’s reports of this crime for 6 months. The victim did not receive a reply from Lancashire Professional Standards Dept. regarding the posts until July 2015. Lancashire PSD fobbed off the complaint also.
After then making a formal complaint about being ignored for 6 months regarding one of Lancashire Police’s witnesses posting grossly offensive comments about the victim online, the complaint was ‘NOT UPHELD’, however this brought to light that 2 officers, both who had complaints about them at the time of the informants postings, decided the postings were not criminal.
These two officers were PS Stephen Eckersley asked DS Andy Langton. Both of these officers were subject to serious allegations by the same victim at the time! PS Eckersley had sexually assaulted the victim during the unlawful arrest. DS Andy Langton had fabricated a false harassment claim to assist in the malicious prosecution as well as divulged data about the victims children to Paul Turner who posted it all online. This fabrication of harassment by DS Langton was proven in court.
The decision the two officers came to, contradicts CPS guidelines for Malicious Communications. It is also a serious conflict of interest to the victim by the two Sergeants who were unlikely to make a decision in the victims favour.
Bizarrely, Inspector Charlie Cox agreed with PS Eckersley and DS Langton, that the Police informer spreading malicious rumours online during a trial in which he was a witness for Lancashire Police, causing danger to the victim was not criminal. Further, Inspector Charlie Cox also had a complaint against him at the time yet he was assigned to deal with this complaint!
How can 3 police officers, all of whom are subject to serious allegations by the same victim be allowed to make a decision which opposes CPS Guidelines for a criminal offence. It is alleged that they conspired to pervert the course of justice as Paul Turner is, or was a police informant and was the only independent witness for the police’s malicious prosecution. Paul Turner then committed perjury during the trial and police brushed it under the carpet when a complaint was made by the victim. This is currently under investigation by the IPCC who have insisted police should investigate.
For comparison, two individuals from Wolverhampton have both been charged with the exact same crime, against the exact same victim, using the exact same information gained from what Paul Turner had maliciously plastered all over the internet.
One of the individuals was charged and pleaded guilty to Harassment and Malicious Communication for posting comments calling the victim a paedophile. He was sentenced to a 10 week suspended prison sentence, 7 year restraining order, community service and a fine! The other individual has also been charged and due for his plea hearing on Friday 6th October.
So why would DS Langton, PS Eckersley and Inspector Cox say this was not a crime? This is what Judge Peter Barrie at Wolverhampton Crown Court said about the offender from Wolverhampton (re: paedophile comments):
“This is an offence of our time” and
“It was based on a completely misconceived belief that the other person had an interest in children and you were whipping up feelings against him. It was a free-for-all on the internet that was not only harmful but potentially very dangerous.”
Lancashire Police are intentionally perverting the course of justice by protecting a Police Informant from criminal offences, and doing all they can to criminalise an innocent man to protect this self confessed Police Informant, Paul Turner.
A further complaint has been submitted to Lancashire Police regarding the 3 officers concerned and their ‘opinions‘ of what is and isn’t criminal. The outcome of the complaint will be posted here in due course…