If we, the "public", can do this without any training whatsoever then it should be a quick read of a PDF.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
The behaviour of UK police officers.
- Thread starter Nessie
- Start date
Rolfe
Adult human female
The attempt to have Watson declared a vexatious litigant seems to have hit some bump in the road. I don't know the details. I'd take a modest bet that it's some variation on "I'm trans, you're transphobic if you cross me."
Mojo
Mostly harmless
I'm not seeing anything on BAILII or Find Case Law beyond a couple of judicial review claims against Greater Manchester Police ([2025] EWHC 332 (Admin)/[2025] EWHC 954 (Admin) and [2026] EWHC 1076 (Admin)). Both were dismissed, but neither was found by the court to be totally without merit. It usually takes more than this to have a civil restraint order imposed. Are there other court applications that aren't showing up there for some reason?
Yeah someone complaining about stuff to the police isn't a vexatious litigator, that only applies to someone bringing forward civil cases. I think in this case the issue is that police from different forces either don't have access to the previous complaints recorded by another force or don't bother to check them. Then you have the fact that whilst one posted comment may not fall under the various legislation it could be part of a pattern of (for example) abuse or harassment - this is why the police may need to investigate even a single complaint:
The act defines harmful digital communications as any electronic communication that causes serious emotional distress to an individual. It outlines ten communication principles that prohibit digital communications that:
– Disclose sensitive personal facts about an individual.
– Are threatening, intimidating, or menacing.
– Are grossly offensive to a reasonable person in the victim’s position.
– Are indecent or obscene.
– Are used to harass an individual.
– Make a false allegation.
– Contain matters that are published in breach of confidence.
– Incite or encourage anyone to send a message to someone with the intent to cause harm.
– Incite or encourage another individual to commit suicide.
– Denigrate an individual by reason of their color, race, ethnic or national origins, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or disability.
We need to be careful we don't throw the baby out with the water; I want the police to take action if someone is being harassed by a domestic partner or being subjected to abuse by someone or subjected to grossly offensive material etc., so it is a balancing act. I suspect the individual under discussion knows how to "push the buttons" so to speak to get the police to sit up and take attention. But even if the police are led to think there is a serious breach they do seem to overreact in the first place. This of course only covers a very small number of "bad behaviour" by the police, dwarfed by the racism, sexim and so on.
The act defines harmful digital communications as any electronic communication that causes serious emotional distress to an individual. It outlines ten communication principles that prohibit digital communications that:
– Disclose sensitive personal facts about an individual.
– Are threatening, intimidating, or menacing.
– Are grossly offensive to a reasonable person in the victim’s position.
– Are indecent or obscene.
– Are used to harass an individual.
– Make a false allegation.
– Contain matters that are published in breach of confidence.
– Incite or encourage anyone to send a message to someone with the intent to cause harm.
– Incite or encourage another individual to commit suicide.
– Denigrate an individual by reason of their color, race, ethnic or national origins, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or disability.
We need to be careful we don't throw the baby out with the water; I want the police to take action if someone is being harassed by a domestic partner or being subjected to abuse by someone or subjected to grossly offensive material etc., so it is a balancing act. I suspect the individual under discussion knows how to "push the buttons" so to speak to get the police to sit up and take attention. But even if the police are led to think there is a serious breach they do seem to overreact in the first place. This of course only covers a very small number of "bad behaviour" by the police, dwarfed by the racism, sexim and so on.
Rolfe
Adult human female
The KCs who were going after him seemed to think they had more than enough. I'd need to search Colin Wynter's Twitter timeline for the list, he was collating them.
Wudang
BOFH
Well it's a good job our courts are so well resourced and there's so much slack in the system. </s>
catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 37,106
Christopher Poulter and Kevin Biggs were convicted in 1976 of stealing mailbags from a wagon in Clapham goods yard; their convictions have finally been quashed by the UK Court of Appeal after new evidence was introduced regarding disgraced police officer DS Derek Ridgewell.
Biggs died in 2004.
Ridgewell was jailed in 1980 for seven years, after being convicted of stealing more than a million pounds in goods; he was found to have framed numerous young black men, mainly for his own crimes. Three officers claimed to have seen Poulter and Biggs taking the mailbags and fleeing by car.
Poulter and Biggs were the fourteei and fifteenth people to eventually have their convictions quashed due to Ridgewell’s misconduct.
www.theguardian.com
Biggs died in 2004.
Ridgewell was jailed in 1980 for seven years, after being convicted of stealing more than a million pounds in goods; he was found to have framed numerous young black men, mainly for his own crimes. Three officers claimed to have seen Poulter and Biggs taking the mailbags and fleeing by car.
Poulter and Biggs were the fourteei and fifteenth people to eventually have their convictions quashed due to Ridgewell’s misconduct.
Court quashes 1976 theft convictions over link to corrupt London police officer
Christopher Poulter and Kevin Biggs, who died in 2004, exonerated of mailbag theft after new evidence emerged
www.theguardian.com
Just a singular bad apple, that was the past, lessons have been learnt.
Andy_Ross
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 86,075
BBC story...
Jenny Wiltshire, a solicitor who has represented many of Ridgewell's victims, said it was a "disgrace" that BTP had taken so long to find those affected.
"It is now half a century since these two men were found guilty of a crime they did not commit," she said.
"The British Transport Police knew for certain that the police officer whose evidence sent them to jail was corrupt just four years after they were convicted, and probably a lot earlier."...
www.bbc.co.uk
Jenny Wiltshire, a solicitor who has represented many of Ridgewell's victims, said it was a "disgrace" that BTP had taken so long to find those affected.
"It is now half a century since these two men were found guilty of a crime they did not commit," she said.
"The British Transport Police knew for certain that the police officer whose evidence sent them to jail was corrupt just four years after they were convicted, and probably a lot earlier."...
Men convicted on corrupt officer's evidence cleared 50 years on
Det Sgt Derek Ridgewell lied about two men being involved the theft of mailbags in Clapham in 1976.
www.bbc.co.uk
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
Lynsay Watson is both a vexatious litigant and a vexatious, serial complainant who knows exactly how to work the system to maximize disruption to the lives of people he hates, and had his former colleagues dancing to his tune.
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
Just another couple of bad apples in the barrel?
Celebrity police officer Paul Street has been jailed for four years after asking for an intimate video of a female suspect.He was found guilty of two charges of misconduct in a public office after being investigated for creating a "toxic" culture in WhatsApp groups.
He had previously admitted two offences of unlawful disclosure of personal data relating to information and screenshots he sent to his partner in 2020
Street encouraged colleagues to “bully” a teenage detainee and asked a workmate to send him a sex video of a female suspect,
Nah, just a one off, right @Nessie ?Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2012
- Messages
- 16,799
I have never said any of the bad apples were one offs. You just made that up. I have argued that the daily reporting of bad apples being disciplined and removed from the force, is evidence the police are cleaning up their act.
Mojo
Mostly harmless
Vexatious litigants
List of vexatious litigants, banned from starting court cases without permission.
Astonished there are so few given how far back the listing goes - to the 1950s.
Last edited:
Mojo
Mostly harmless
Judges are generally reluctant to restrict access to the courts, for a number of reasons including Article 6 of the HRA.
There are also Civil Restraint Orders.
Rolfe
Adult human female
Vexatious litigants
List of vexatious litigants, banned from starting court cases without permission.www.gov.uk
We know he hasn't (yet) been formally declared a vexatious litigant. I heard there was some sort of setback to the process that was being started. Probably some variant of "I'm trans!" "Oh in that case madam, do whatever you like."
Mojo
Mostly harmless
I doubt that a court would accept that as an argument.
The standard that seems to be set for imposing a Civil Restraint Order is that repeated applications have been found by the courts to be "totally without merit".
I couldn't see this in any of the judgments I was able to find.
Would you support the notion, nay assertion, that I've made previously? That being, that every officer, at some point in their career, turns/turned bad even marginally?
Y'know what I mean, things like getting a wee bit heavy during the arrest? Gilding the lily a touch on a report? Looking the other way? Taking a cheeky personal freebie? Maybe neglecting to declare the odd unmanageable debt or CCJ to hide a moderate conflict of interest?
How about shagging another officer in a patrol car like officer Hamish X from the XXXXXX force back in the 80's? He got caught and nothing was done. Maybe that was because his relative, inspector Alex X (now deceased) went a wee bit bad himself and helped smooth things over.
Things like that Nessie.
Last edited:
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
Someone can be regarded/thought of as a vexatious litigant even if they have not been officially declared so on court.Vexatious litigants
List of vexatious litigants, banned from starting court cases without permission.
Last edited: