Wednesday, 13 July 2011

Corrupt Police & IPO-How they aided a crook.

THE CORRUPT LIARS OF THE MET AND THE USELESS CIVIL SERVANTS OF THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONERS OFFICE, WHO LIKE THE IPCC SEEM ONLY TO BE IN EXISTENCE TO PROTECT THE POLICE AND THE IPO. SO THEY TOO ARE CORRUPT BECAUSE IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THEY ARE DOING THIS KNOWINGLY AND DELIBERATELY. THUS PROTECTING THE POLICE AND DENYING ME JUSTICE

How many of you have watched those wretched Met Coppers on TV blagging and lying their way through the MP's questioning them. What an utter shower they all are.

Now folks this is coming from the very same mob of bastards that HAMPERED MY TRYING TO GET JUSTICE AND MY ASKING THEM TO INVESTIGATE BUSBRIDGES FORGERY AND PERJURY!! Talk about HYPOCRITES and what did they do, but hamper my efforts and in collusion with the IPO. Is it any wonder I couldn't get them to act on irrefutable evidence when they just went and colluded with another bunch of civil servants?

THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONERS OFFICE.
A few posts back I told you about how the ICO to whom I had complained about the Met and the Dorset Police, the IPO and the Parliamentary Ombudsman, all hiding from me documents that they all sent each other when I had tried to get the Met to investigate Busbridge. It really only involved TWO documents that I definitely knew existed. One the email the IPO sent Sgt Brimicombe of Dorset Police and two, the advice the IPO gave Sgt Downs at Camden Station to HELP him refuse to investigate. He admits in an email which is on this blog, that they gave him this advice.
In both cases I believe that the IPO will have disseminated to both the DPS & the Met, lies about whether forgery and perjury had been committed. I am also sure that they will have thrown in a load of derogatory remarks about me on a personal level.
This ICO mob gave me their decision re the Dorset Police a few weeks ago and how they were a bunch of whiter than white darlings who had done absolutely no wrong. I wrote about that a few posts back. Today I got their decisions about my complaints that all had refused me under the FOIAct and the DPAct and I talk now about the IPO & the Met.
The ICO have deliberately misread my complaints about both parties and in both cases they have twisted the requests I gave them in such a way as to be able to say that what I had asked for, was not able to be given to me. Yet what they say I had asked for is not what I had asked for, as I in the course of writing to both the Met & the IPO had honed my request down to those two specific documents. Originally I had asked for any documents they had that concerned me and in the case of the IPO what they had said to the Met and in the Mets case what they had said to the IPO or had received off the IPO and I specifically mentioned this one document. (the advice that the IPO gave Sgt Downs.)
In the case of the IPO I was specific about the email that they admitted they would send to the DPS. Yet what they, the ICO have done is spoken to the IPO and obviously have been fed lies by them which is what they do all the time. They try to say I did not apply under the right Act when the fcat is that I applied for the same under BOTH Acts and they say that information I had asked for could be openly seen under the Trade Marks journals which are open to the Public. This is a complete lie as what I asked for had nothing to do with any of the 8 hearings, so would never be found on any files open to the public. This is how these bastards work, by lying all the time and giving the ICO excuses so they can find for their mates in another government department. They are all shagging each other these civil servant bastards and covering up for each other.
In the case of the Met I even had to pay £10 in order to get any info off them under the DPAct. Yet when do the ICO even mention this so it's as if I am being told I did not apply under the right Act.
In both requests to the IPO & the Met I had simply asked to see both these documents which would have had in them matters to do with my request to get the Met to investigate all the forgery and perjury Busbridge had committed. All my letters about this are on this blog, so you can see for yourself what I asked for. Then the ICO deliberately complicate matters by constantly switching their remarks from one Act to the other and back again. The fact that there are TWO Acts that basically deal with matters that I think are the same. Some Wanker in Parliament who thought up these Acts (in order to fool the Public that they could actually make civil servants give up incriminating documents) has I think deliberately made matters in such a way that the powers can obfuscate all ways and tie you up in knots over what Act are you asking under? That is why I asked the same questions under BOTH Acts and they still lie through their back teeth and refuse you those documents. The whole thing is yet another sham and con on the Public.
In my case they have deliberately refused to give me those documents and the ICO have backed them up and as it is obvious the ICO have talked to the IPO it is also obvious that the IPO have given them a pack of lies. You can see how the ICO have been indoctrinated by the IPO as on the beginning of their decision document on the IPO, they state on page 2, under 'BACKGROUND', in 3 paragraphs, remarks about subject matter that I did not give the ICO. This is because they detail that I had a long running dispute involving trade marks etc etc, which they can only have got from some IPO mouthpeice. None of that is any business of the ICO and has absolutely no bearing on what I had asked to be divulged, as you will see from what I had asked to see. This proves beyond doubt that the ICO have been heavily involved in discussions about me on a personal level. ONCE MORE THE IPO HAVE INDOCTRINATED ANOTHER GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT THAT I HAVE GONE TO TO GET JUSTICE.....OTHERS INCLUDE THE DPS, THE MET, THE PARLIAMENTARY OMBUDSMAN AND SO ON.IT IS ALL A SHAM AND DISGRACEFUL and they are able to get away with it, time and again. They wouldn't if I were rich!
Their remark that I have been 'involved in a long running dispute' is said by them, to make me out as a litigious person. Yet who started all the legal actions?..ROBERT BUSBRIDGE, IN 2002 WHEN HE APPLIED TO REGISTER THE MARK THAT I OWNED AND AT THE SAME TIME APPLIED TO HAVE MY TRADE MARK MADE INVALID. ENOUGH SAID????
Now that is pretty well all the actions I could take to get Justice and they have run their course. I will next week get all the latest documents onto this blog and you can read for yourself what has gone on in my latest efforts to get Justice from a number of quarters. (The Attorney General and the ICO.) I will type out explanation remarks for each document that has been lately generated.
There will also be documents from my battle to get the Attorney General to get the Police to investigate Busbridges forgery and perjury. You will be able to see what that **** is all about too. Another useless sickening asshole filling his pockets with Public money and refusing to help those who he is supposed to serve and by a litany of excuses and outright lies. Yet another civil servant covering up for his fellow tossers. You will see how devious he and his minion McGinty has lied as laid out in my recent post. How I am told over and over how he cannot involve himself, but tucked away I am told that if I can prove by evidence I send him, then he could take steps, yet when I do exactly that all I get is a continuation of excuses. It is all there in black and white if you care to read it all.

No comments: