Lancashire Police gag this website
The truth hurts and is too embarrassing for them
If you are a regular visitor to this site, you may be wondering why many of the articles previously published about Lancashire Police have disappeared.
The simple answer is Lancashire police took underhanded steps (criticised by the judiciary) for a ‘without notice’ injunction to stop articles being published about them, and to attempt to have any existing articles about them removed, (without any review), simply put… no Freedom of Expression is allowed.
A total gagging order is now in place protecting Lancashire police officers from being named on this site, irrespective of what they have done.
Lancashire police made no attempt to mediate before bringing this extortionate civil action against the editor acting under (Article 10 of the Human Rights Act), even though their one request in 2018 to remove an article was honoured. They have NEVER asked for any other article to be removed from the site.
So, Lancashire police have gagged the editor from naming;
- The officer who sexually assaulted him
- The officer who unlawfully pepper-sprayed him
- The officer who assaulted him while he was having a suspected heart attack
- Other officers that wronged him and his family so they could protect a police informant named Paul Turner.
- Officers involved in fraudulently giving away a police motorcycle
- Officer lying in court proven by CCTV
- The officers who targetted the editor’s 13-year-old child (and a civil claim is in progress)
The judge, in this case, was ‘irritated’ about the content of this website which also blogs about the ‘judiciary’ and Freemasons. The Judge could see NO WRONG DONE by Lancashire police…! He was intrigued about some freemason allegations.
The officer driving this legal action, on oath, told the Judge that the articles on this website had caused the most harassment, alarm and distress to any police officer he had ever witnessed. He was asked then why Police had brought no criminal charges seeing as though this was ‘such a serious offence‘.
This senior officer said he wanted to ‘avoid arresting the editor‘. Ironically, this same officer had sought ‘the power of arrest’ within the same injunction which was refused by the Court! The officer was then quickly reminded by the defence barrister that Lancashire police had already arrested the editor as many as 10 times and prosecuted him numerous times (costing him a small fortune) but had failed on every occasion to secure a conviction.
The editor has NO criminal convictions, no matter how hard Lancashire police have tried.
It was noted that the Judge seemed concerned over allegations made by this website against Judges and Freemasons. Something Lancashire police ensured was brought to the Judge’s attention, no doubt to get him onside.
The irony of this is, the editor made a covert recording of a very Senior Lancashire police officer, 3 years ago, which has been kept under wraps.
In this recording, this very Senior police officer confirmed many of the serious allegations against Lancashire police which were published on this website, confirming Lancashire police had ‘fucked up‘ (their words) and ‘should have prosecuted the police informant (Paul Turner)‘ who threatened to kill the editors wife and children and then went on a hate campaign including calling the editor a paedophile all over the internet for no other reason than to try to bring harm to the editor… but because the recording was made ‘covertly’ (which is what police do), the judge made a ‘song and dance‘ about it as if it was the crime of the century.
The senior officer said in the covert recording that he had asked all officers if there were any untruths on this website and none of the officers could find any lies in any of the articles, the judge was more interested in the recording being made covertly!? It seemed they were more concerned that they had been ‘caught out’.
The icing on the cake was that after everything Lancashire police had done to the editor (malicious prosecution, assault, sexual assault, lies, deceit etc), and also what this senior police officer had admitted to the editor, the judge blamed the editor for ‘breaching their trust” (and that was over 3 years ago)… This was just because the editor had stated he was not recording… (as if the editor would have got the detrimental recording any other way). Odd, as police routinely covertly record as part of evidence gathering…! (one rule for them…)
Seems this really is a police state as put to police in the hearing. Police can covertly gather evidence that would not ordinarily be gained any other way but they clearly want to be immune to the same methods and criticise those who use the same necessary steps to get the truth.
So, the editor is no longer allowed to blog about the officers, but will not stop blogging about Lancashire police.
The judge made glaring errors in his summing up, which the editor will correct for him if he would like, although we don’t think the judge is particularly bothered.
The case was, in part, covered by an independent reporter, John Brace who has published some of the hearing online, but he, unfortunately, did not attend court on the day the editor gave his evidence, so the reporting is a little incomplete but does give an insight into the case.
The icing on the cake was that the editor has now been ordered to pay Lancashire police’s legal bill of £30,000! This included over £3000 for travel costs! Really! Maybe they took a helicopter!
A GoFundme page will be set up in the near future to assist in paying this bill. This is ironic as the editor had previously taken legal action against Lancashire police and was awarded £35,000 for his losses. Lancashire police wanted their money back and this has been highlighted in their original cost schedule which was suspiciously similar to what they paid out.
In fact just this morning, with the all the financial worry the world is experiencing with the Coronavirus pandemic, Lancashire police’s legal team sent an email to the editor (who has had to furlough staff only this morning and Lancashire police actions will inevitably lead to permanent redundancies) saying ‘Our finance department will shortly be contacting you regarding the £30,000 costs you own to the Lancashire Constabulary as a result of the injunction hearing.’
The UK is fast becoming a police state. The articles published on this website may well have been embarrassing for Lancashire police officers, but they are all true and were published under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act.
The judge ‘pitied’ the officers, even those who blatantly lied under oath.
You cannot beat the state. They will beat you down if you stand up to them. (but we will keep fighting them)
Is this what the future for the UK holds?