Can we still rely on the police to protect us?

If you’ve been told by a police officer that you’ve broken the law – with some reservations you might accept it.

You may offer a defence  – or suggest some mitigating circumstances – in which case the officer might tell you they will have to consult the force’s legal team and get back to you.

If the officer later confirms that, despite those circumstances, you have indeed broken the law – and even helpfully includes the relevant passages of legislation – you would probably accept that you had indeed broken the law.

If you’re like me, you would probably hold up your hands and say “guilty as charged.”

Well this happened to me recently, when a Cheshire Police officer telephoned  – and advised me that by publishing items on ilovemacc relating to the (provable) criminal activities of certain individuals whilst they were running a business owned by me – I was guilty of harassment.

Worse, the previous month I had taken these same people to court submitting extensive evidence to Stockport County Court in support of my claim. I won the case and that evidence is now deemed to be in the public domain. However, Cheshire Police told me if I was to post that evidence online I would be guilty of further harassment. Anyone else could read it and/or post it, but if I did so I could be arrested and charged.

In mitigation of ‘my crime’ I’d explained to the officer, confirmed in the articles themselves, that my sole intention in publishing this information was to prevent their criminal actions continuing – by warning other unsuspecting victims what crimes these people had already committed.

I went on to say that the people I had written about had themselves bombarded social media discussions and The Macclesfield Express’s website with outrageous and libellous accusations about me.

I was assured by the officer that the legal position would be clarified. I was expecting that I may be asked to go into the police station to provide a written statement relating to my actions – but no. It appeared to me that for the second time in twelve months a decision had been made by Cheshire Police – without having made any enquiry or attempt to establish the facts.

The following day the same officer confirmed by email that I was guilty of harassment and had broken the law – and the relevant legislation was provided for me.

This is what was written:

I have now spoken to one of our legal team who has stated that even know[sic] the court records are obviously part of public record if you were to then publish it on a different forum, that would amount to harassment and a continued course of conduct. Meaning you would still be committing the offence.The definition of harassment states

Sections 1 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 make harassment an offence.

1(1) A person must not pursue a course of conduct-
(a) which amounts to harassment of another, and
(b) which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other.

We can evidence that you know that it amounts to harassment as I have spoken to you and advised you of that.

Also in relation to just adapting the article this wouldn’t be enough. This is because the damage has already been done and the (complainants) name has been linked to it so they will rightly so under the letter of the law feel harassed by the article in any shape or form still being in the public domain. So after obtaining advice I will have to tell you to do a complete removal of the entire article/related articles ASAP and certainly within 24hours.

Extremely frustrated, but believing what I was being told – and anxious to remain on the right side of the law – I immediately took down the ‘offending’ items from the website.

Thankfully, one of the many thoughtful people who have contacted me, offering their sympathy and help, decided to take a closer look at the legislation.

What they uncovered shocked me to the core.

What’s been happening over the past 18 months has nearly broken me and my family. The hell we’ve been put through has at times seemed interminable – with no possible way out. Were it not for my wife, constantly dissuading me from ‘having a couple of drinks to help me sleep’, I would by now probably be an alcoholic wreck.

Having been consistently lied to and accused of all sorts of horrors by those I was endeavouring to expose the last thing I could have anticipated was to discover that I’d been unjustly accused (possibly knowingly) by Cheshire Police.

I’d been falsely accused, probably even been internally recorded as being proved guilty of the crime of harassment – when they must have known that wasn’t the case.

The extract of the legislation they sent me indicated I was indeed guilty – but they’d chosen to ignore (or delete) the following paragraphs – I’ve highlighted in bold – essential paragraphs – the bit about crime prevention – the bit that indicated I’d not committed a crime or done anything wrong. For me, the important bit.

Sections 1 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 make harassment an offence.

1.—(1) A person must not pursue a course of conduct—
(a) which amounts to harassment of another, and
(b) which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other.

(2) For the purposes of this section, the person whose course of
conduct is in question ought to know that it amounts to harassment of
another if a reasonable person in possession of the same information
would think the course of conduct amounted to harassment of the other.

(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to a course of conduct if the person who pursued it shows-
(a) that it was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime,

I’m guessing that my ‘crime’ will by now have been added to Cheshire Police’s crime stats – as a solved crime – another box ticked.

The items posted on ilovemacc included criticism of Cheshire Police for their failures during an incident in March 2017. I have to wonder if their decision that I was guilty of harassment had more to do with having these criticisms removed from public view – rather than preventing future crimes.

I emailed the officer concerned with the unedited copy of the legislation. I queried why the paragraphs relating to my situation appeared to have been removed. I also re-stated that at the time initial contact had been made with me, I had stated that I had little hope of recovering anything that was owed to me and that my sole intention of publishing what I had done was to prevent those concerned continuing with their criminal actions – in the hope that it could prevent future criminal acts. In the light of seeing the ‘full’ legislation I could not possibly be guilty of harassment. I suggested Cheshire Police’s initial accusation appeared to have been economical with the facts and requested a response in writing.

Several hours later I received this response:

As per our telephone conversation I can assure you I did not intentionally remove anything and I was not economical with the truth. I sent you the legal definition under the “points to prove” for Harassment. The below includes subsections which are not relevant because I don’t believe and nor do our force solicitors that you were publishing the articles to prevent a crime. If you wanted to prevent a crime you would have reported the matter to Police as a matter of  urgency and not published their name on the internet as a first port of call.

I fail to understand the logic here. I’d reported a crime of breaking and entering back in March 2017 see:

When did our laws stop protecting us?

and the police declined to act. To be honest I had little faith in the police acting at all. Having now been the victim of several further – more serious crimes – how would me reporting them to the police (after they had happened) prevent them from happening? Publication was aimed at preventing future criminal behaviour against others – not what had already happened to me.

Following my dialogue with the police officer regarding the charges of harassment I went along to Macclesfield Police station – to report the crimes of fraud, forgery, theft and threatening behaviour. I was advised that an officer would visit me the today (Friday, 2nd February 2018) at 3 pm.

The officer duly arrived, apologising for being early, but I got the distinct impression he wasn’t going to be hanging around for long. I suggested he initially read my evidence submission to the court hearing, of 19th December 2017, to bring him up to speed with all the crimes that I was wishing to report. He thumbed a couple of pages of the multi-page document I’d given him – before advising me that he already knew what he needed to. To be honest it appeared to me that his mind had already been made up, before he’d even listened to my complaints. I wasn’t asked any questions, he didn’t seek to interview me – or even take a statement. It was pretty evident he’d reached his own conclusions before he’d even met me. And if the question should arise, my wife who was present will corroborate all of this.

He went on to state that all the issues – including the theft of nearly £50,000 of bakery equipment – was a civil matter. When I raised the issue of threatening behaviour he asked why I’d not reported it before. I told him that the lack of interest when I reported the breaking and entering in March 2017 gave me little confidence in a positive response. When I referred to the forgery of documents to obtain a financial benefit and the fraudulent issue of cheques, in full knowledge they wouldn’t be honoured – both of which are criminal acts – he suggested I visit a solicitor. If the solicitor deemed that there was a criminal element they would refer it back to the police.

Equipment taken from Brassington’s

A brief search on the CPS website suggests to me that the following has taken place: Fraud by false representation (Section 2), Fraud by abuse of position (Section 4), Fraud by failing to disclose information (Section 3) and Obtaining services dishonestly (Section 11).

At this juncture I determined it would be pointless carrying on, I thanked the officer for his time and he left. He’d probably been with us no more than ten minutes.

Inevitably, I’ve just about had it – with the people that have almost broken me – and with Cheshire Police. The former, who appear to use the laws meant to protect us to ensure they are left Scott-free to continue pursuing their criminal existence – and the latter who to all intents and purposes appear to be only to ready to assist them in masking details of their crimes.

I’ve written to, and got precisely nowhere with, Cheshire Police, the Independent Police Complaints Commission, the Chief Constable of Cheshire,  the Police and Crime Commissioner for Cheshire Constabulary (the man who’s department is costing council taxpayers circa £1 million a year and is currently doing the rounds bleating about financial shortfalls from the government) – even HM Inspectorate of Constabulary – none of them were interested in establishing whether a crime had been committed or whether Cheshire Police had failed to act according to the law; none of them cared about discovering the truth – or the potential damage to any number of innocent victims, past or future. Not my job matey!

I should add that contact with local MP, David Rutley, elicited communications from the Inspector of Constabulary and the Minister for Trade. Whilst neither could help, Mr Rutley’s helpful and very concerned response was the only positive element in this whole saga.

Friends have told me that most people in my situation would have given up ages ago. Even family members, fearful for my and their own safety following threats of violence, have encouraged me to call an end to it.

Let the perps get away with it, free to continue in their criminal ways, to carry on destroying yet more livelihoods? Not a chance.

I’m adamant that they must be prevented from wrecking the lives of more innocent people – which they almost achieved with me – and, I have to assume, countless other small business people and their staff.

Were we living in Stasi controlled East Germany in the 1960’s or a banana republic none of this would come as a surprise. But this is Cheshire in 2018.

All my life I’ve had the greatest of respect for the police, doing a very tough job  in very difficult circumstances – especially as I’ve had several members of my family in the police force.

Sadly, following the events of March 2017 – when Cheshire Police officers again came to a conclusion, without securing any evidence whatsoever – and the similar response to events of the past ten days – that well of respect has been thoroughly exhausted.

I’m extremely grateful and very touched by the many messages of support I’ve received. In particular the ‘legal eagle’ who did something I should have done – checked the statute book to confirm that I’d been given the facts by Cheshire Police – a mistake I hope won’t be repeated.

Granville Sellars

Addendum

Some weeks later I took this up with a criminal lawyer – he was absolutely appalled – but not entirely surprised.

Regarding the harassment charge he told me there wasn’t a court in the land that would find me guilty of harassment. But, that wouldn’t stop Cheshire Police arresting me.

I told him a night in the cells in the name of truth wouldn’t put me off.

It won’t be that easy he told me – they’re such a vindictive bunch they will arrest you on a Friday afternoon – when the courts are closed. There’ll probably be no room at Winsford so you could find yourself in HMP Walton for the weekend – until a court hearing could be arranged.

That’s our local police for you in 2018.