Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 3

From: t0mcahill@hotmail.

com
To: beverley.newman@kent.pnn.police.uk
CC: alan.pughsley@kent.pnn.police.uk; rehman.chishtimp@parliament.uk
Subject: Criminal Dereliction of Duty
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2014 18:35:17 +0000

Beverley.Newman@kent.pnn.police.uk
cc. Chief Constable: Alan.Pughsley@kent.pnn.police.uk
Member of Parliament for Gillingham: rehman.chishtimp@parliament.uk
Beverley Newman is Head of Legal Services. Her role is to strategically direct and
develop the provision of a quality legal service. Her team delivers expert advice to the
Chief Constable and the force.
Beverley's responsibilities include:

disclosure of police information


civil actions and claims
court processes
Anti-social Behaviour Orders, Sexual Offence
Prevention Orders, Proceeds of Crime Act and Crack House closures
indemnities
contracts

(Kent Police site: http://www.kent.police.uk/about_us/our_organisation/senior_staff/senior_staff.html)

Dear Beverly,
Re: CRIMINAL DERELICTION OF DUTY
Please avail yourself of the evidence that is in your possession and elevate this matter to whomever of
whichever rank you feel most appropriate under the circumstances when you have discovered all
thats involved. I require a contact with a full name who your force considers appropriately capable
and uncompromised, who is not intimidated by corrupt entities within your force, other police
forces, government entities or the Freemasons to liaise with. The fact that your officers have to date
conducted themselves in an evidently inadequate manner, and have refused in providing the most
elementary support does not put them in good stead as they become exposed to greater pressures
when the fuller picture becomes clear.
At this point, I write with regards your forces evidenced criminal defiance in the face of the law and
their further, openly criminal conduct relating to clear demands that you apply the law that it is
written. Not only have you made criminally misleading statements to my mother on the phone, you
have put some of these obstructive and evasive lies in writing, in defence of your inexcusable
attempts to not generate a crime reference number (CRN) for the obviously malicious visits to my
parents house made by Mr. Ian Puddick, and the visits the same week by an alleged Process Server
(PS), whoas a prerequisite to being allowed to practise as an officer of the court, is put through
rigorous training, about the illegality of his actions which it would appear hehas brazenly ignored
safe in the knowledge of your tacit endorsement.
Aside the 2013 visit and certain visits since by the same PS, it is totally without historical precedent
that persons have attended at my parents house to seek to communicate with or about me who were at

the point of the visit unknown to the inhabitants. I would add that I have not lived at the house for
well over a decade, in this my thirty-third year.
Please confirm:
1.
that you are aware of the Protection from Harassment Acts wide test of applicability in terms
of being a subjective test, determined by the interpretation of the alleged victim at the time of the
incident, and that of the proceeding protocol, which is for the police constable alerted to any such
alleged instance, which is generating a CRN and issuing a First Instance Harassment Notice
(FIHN), to be served on the alleged source of the alleged incident;
2.
why there has been no CRNs or FIHNs generated by your force, despite concerns being
raised, where these have been Instructed, implied as being relevant, or, are clearly applicable, in
line with a persistent campaign of unwanted pestering of an unlawful nature;
3.
why when challenged your officers have lied in misleading my mother to think that there has
to be a threat of violence, when this is definitely not a prerequisite;
4.
where any law that binds the public to call 101, with specific reference to your online nonemergency crime reporting facility;
5.
what is meant by the written statement that you do not accept Harassment and Stalking
complaints relating to third parties, when the Acts specifically detail that these are applicable in terms
of both alleged victims and any single / group of Harassers or Stalkers, and how this recoded idiocy
aligns with any applicable Conspiracy related offences;
6.
what is meant by your forces statement that you are largely helpless to investigate online
offences;
7.
why I was told in an email that I needed to use foreign police who dont speak English, to
contact Interpol to contact you, to deal with criminal activity in the jurisdiction of England and Wales
according to our nations binding legislation, happening in Kent, by people in Kent, against people
in Kent;
8.
where we can find your Data Protection Subject Access Request Forms if you would like for
these to be used by us to demonstrate your numerous recorded errors and lack of corporate oversight;
and,
9.

that you are capable of dealing with this incredibly simple matter, before you inevitably start

windging that its too complicated, when currently this is in fact a totally straight forward obligation
over which you have no discretionary authority.
I have more evidence to present of a much more serious nature, but am not going to allow any further
proliferation of this to unsafe, povenly corrupt and incompetent persons who are too afraid to even
provide their names and are already posing a clear prime face case for Misconduct in Public Office
and Perverting the Course of Justice.
Ignoring me may seem like a clever move within a policemans limited intellectual parameters, but
as you begin to understand why this Harassment is taking placewhether as youre duty bound to as
is hereby demandedor via highly critical third parties, above your head and the public, I can assure
you that this is anything but. The man whos behind the PS, Puddick, and more than one member of
his Harassment Gang, lead the world to believe that they are ant-police corruption advocates, who
have all made public statements damning the police which are widely circulated, two of whom post
the internet with such stories and updates every day. The PSs empoyers solicitor advocate has both
authored the Acts in question and has been published widely as having unprecedented access to the

police which I hope youll understand makes this a highly politically sensitive issue within the
police

as

well

as

in

general.

Underlying the aforementioned, the issues become a lot more sinister, depraved, politically charged
and serious, but such matters are not that which my family or I seek to involve you with at this
juncture, with you proving so corrupt. We just want you to do your job without creating any further
obstruction, so that things can take their proper course. All of the recorded correspondence which
you will require will be from me, at:
t0mcahill@hotmail.com; or,
my mother on:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
by or to phone number: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
I provide the number for you to check the calls made in relation to this matter. I do not in any way
consent to any further idiots calling and lying about what you do or dont want to do when what they
are obliged to do is very clear, and not a matter of debate. You have forfeit your right to any implied
trust. All future dialogue must be in writingemail being our preferred method, also being the only
way which I am currently obtainable.
Please feel free to contact me with any problems that you have aside moaning about irrelevances
which have no bearing on your obligations. My only regret is that the force have prejudiced our
relationship prior to your involvement. Thank you in advance of lawful compliance.
Yours Sincerely,
Tom Cahill
This message will be published shortly alongside any other material which demonstrates your dereliction of duty.