Helen Lovatt – Investigator 8107, who works in the Investigations Team for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire & Hertfordshire Professional Standards Department, has confirmed that they use secret internal documents in what should be a transparent complaints process.
Helen Lovatt has made a decision that a complaint made against several officers have no indication of misconduct, and in a response to the complained seeking a rationale for the illogical decision, she said
The decision should take account of the facts being asserted by the complainant, alongside any readily available evidence and does not focus solely on what the complainant says those facts are.
The alleged behaviour is then assessed against the Beds, Cambs & Herts assessment of behaviour guide. Based on this the Appropriate Authority has agreed that at this time Special Procedures are not engaged as the threshold is not met. As previously stated, this decision will remain under review during the investigation.
After requesting a copy of the assessment behaviour guide, Helen Lovatt responded.
In relation to the assessment of behaviour guide, this is an internal document that is only relevant to the person conducting an assessment and is not provided to the complainant as part of the complaint process.
The IOPC publish the rules and procedures (Statutory Guidance) for complaint investigation, and nothing in the IOPC guidelines refers to any secret assessment of behaviour guide.
The complaint is of corruption and abuse of power, and there is no readily available evidence to the contrary, yet, Helen Lovatt refuses to consider misconduct.
Helen Lovatt is investigating the complaint against Tanya Shotbolt, who was tasked with undertaking an investigation resulting from a costly Judicial Review that Bedfordshire police desperately failed to defend.
Bedfordshire police had refused to investigate a sick old man named George Vella for committing Malicious Communications against several people. Since this time, the dirty old man has abused a teenage girl online and gloats when police take no action.
The Judicial Review outcome was that Bedfordshire police were to review their decision not to interview or prosecute this dirty old man.
Tanya Shotbolt performed this review, and without even considering ANY OF THE EVIDENCE, Tanya Shotbolt made a determination that Bedfordshire police did nothing wrong.
A complaint was made to Bedfordshire police, who (as expected) failed to uphold the complaint, but an appeal to the IOPC was successful and directed Bedfordshire police to investigate correctly.
Now, Helen Lovatt is involved in the cesspit of corruption, and she says she can see ‘no indication of misconduct‘ from Tanya Shotbolt, who abused her power to dispose of an investigation by completely ignoring crucial evidence.
This is evidence that a High Court Judge said, “The offence is a prosecutable offence“, yet, Bedfordshire police turned a blind eye, and all the minions of PSD are doing what they do best and covering for police misconduct.
George Vella has a criminal conviction for photographing children in a garden, but he still claims he has no convictions involving children.
Bedfordshire police are digging themselves deeper and deeper to protect George Vella, which begs the question, why?
Helen Lovatt and her superior, Mark Fava (Herts police) are now subject to police complaints alleging corruption.
How was the hearing ? perhaps want to study law a bit more so you understand what evidence would make a conviction likely ?