Lancashire police refused to investigate one of their police constables for perjury (Contrary to the Perjury Act 1911) that led to the unsafe conviction of an innocent man. The conviction was eventually overturned on appeal after the perjury was discovered.
The Independent Office of Police Complaints (IOPC) incorrectly supported the Lancashire police ‘unlawful decision‘ not to investigate ‘one of their own‘ for a serious criminal offence.
The IOPC has already conceded to their unlawful decision however, due to the Legal Framework within the Police Reform Act 2002, the decision can now only be quashed by the Courts.
This is a costly exercise that the IOPC has thankfully agreed to cover all of these legal costs…. with ‘YOUR MONEY’ (taxpayers money).
The total cost of this entire exercise will be made public in due course, as will the full content of the complaint made to Lancashire police.
The exposure of the complaint will show how it is evident that Lancashire police Professional Standards Department (PSD), intentionally attempted to ‘protect’ a police officer from committing a serious criminal offence.
It will then show how Lancashire police PSD, knowingly abused the correct IOPC process by knowingly assigning the appeal body as the Police and Crime Commissioner (keeping the complaint ‘in-house’) rather than the IOPC.
Once this abuse of process was overturned, the complaint exposure will show how the IOPC then supported the unlawful decision made by PSD requiring this Judicial Review.