I’d just about finished writing
the third blog of 17th July when Mick
Barnbrook phoned and it seemed only natural to read some of it to him since it related his ongoing dispute
with the police following their blatant deviation from the truth in order to offer support for
I had written that Mick had been “suckered” by Chief Inspector Ian Broadridge who had submitted a complaint to the Directorate of Professional Standards (DPS) on Mick’s behalf. Mick made me change it because he felt sure that the CI had not deliberately tried to undermine his case.
Things moved quite fast over the following days and the situation is now clear. Mick Barnbrook now believes he was indeed suckered by Chief Inspector Ian Broadbridge.
On 16th June 2014 CI Broadbridge, knowing what was in Mick’s mind, invited him to make a criminal allegation against PCs Kelly and Arthurs and the Borough Commander Peter Ayling. Four days later the CI told the DPS that Mick was going to make a complaint about the two PCs. He didn’t have to but he chose to head off what Mick had planned. He said nothing about the Chief Superintendent and nothing about any allegation of crime.
The DPS referred that complaint back to Bexleyheath police station for investigation of misconduct and has refused to accept Mick’s bundle of evidence against the officers. However thanks to Ian Broadbridge not including his boss’s name in the complaint it looks as though the allegations against the Chief Superintendent may be allowed to stand.
Having fully considered the situation and in particular Broadbridge’s contrasting communications of 16th and 20th June, Mick concluded that Broadbridge is party to Perverting the Course of Justice. I strongly suspect that the PCs and their CI are all victims of a cosy deal between the Borough Commander and Bexley council, but guess whose name went to the DPS on 23rd July with another allegation of crime?
Meanwhile the DPS has acknowledged receipt of Mick’s allegations against Will Tuckley and the lying Cheryl Bacon, however in a telephone conversation they told Mick they wouldn’t be looking at it because the appendices are too extensive. If they stick to that line it will go straight to the IPCC.
Mick may harbour nostalgic recollections of a bygone age of policing but my own view of them is entirely uncompromising. I always assume that there is not a single serving officer who is not corrupt, at least in the sense that none can possibly stand up against the corruption that permeates down from the top.
In the more than twelve months since the Daniel Morgan enquiry panel was formed by the Home Secretary and to which I have family links, the police were supposed to have handed over 750,000 documents for examination. Their shredders, as is well known, have been working overtime and only 700 documents are so far available for inspection. That is not an unauthorised leak, it was reported by one newspaper, but it is true.
Corruption is unfortunately the norm within the Metropolitan Police.
Mick’s latest allegation is a useful summary of the current state of play and is relatively simple to follow, so I don’t see why it shouldn’t go on line. I’ll ask the man himself. Watch this space.