Dismissal meeting of 4.8.95 and the Transcript produced by the police needs to be aired to prove some Police Officers are totally unfit to wear the uniform - they abuse the power the uniform gives them. The facts I will be exposing cannot be questioned in any way as the wording will be copied from their own Transcript of that meeting...... and undoubtedly ex-Chief Supt. John Davidson (now I/C Security at Sunderland A.F.C.) will be smarting at this very moment as he knows what to expect....the truth and how he condoned blatant lies and deliberately perverted the course of justice that day....although I feel he was acting under specific instructions........... but where was his 'back-bone' - and integrity. The following letter was sent to ex-Chief Supt. John Davidson on 25.12.02 and any response from Mr. Davidson will be published - please note "criminal" names have been replaced with initials to hide their identity. Within the next few days further details will be published when or if I receive a reply from Mr. Davidson, and then you can all judge ex-Chief Supt. John Davidson for yourselves.
" Sent to Mr. John Davidson (Security Officer – Sunderland A.F.C., Stadium of Light) Wed. 25.12.02
Dear Mr. Davidson, Disciplinary Hearing 4.8.95
Since that fateful date I have relentlessly pleaded that the stigma of dismissal be erased from my good name, and only recently I have found it necessary to create a Website www.policeabuseofpower.co.uk to expose the corruption used by the police on that date.
Naturally your name must be highlighted throughout this exposure as you were chairman of that hearing, and must have been fully aware of your officer’s actions before and during proceedings. You obviously knew a statement was taken from Mr. F.D. on 8.6.95 and legibly “handwritten” by Sgt. 919 Atkinson……at the hearing this was changed into a “typed” statement and given to my Solicitor to base my defence. You must have known the reason for this switch – lies (conflicts) were detected in the “handwritten” version so it was decided to alter/falsify this by erasing the lies and then producing the “typed” version so that we could not accuse F.D. of lying and so completely destroy your only witness against me. As you know F.D. was a known (to you and your associates) local criminal but you still took his word against that of an employee with 15½ yrs. loyal service to the police. Apart from detecting these lies you or your officers deliberately altered/falsified this statement to pervert the course of justice which I am intent to prove. To make matter worse your officers ‘persuaded’ F.D. to make a “Question & Answer Report” (another way to put words you wish to hear into another mouth) after he first refused to make a statement – in other words they ‘manufactured’ this report. It has been established that F.D. again committed a crime on the evening of 30.7.95 (Gateshead Court Case No. 1681871 on 10.11.95) when he ‘messed officers about’ and true to nature lied again by trying to switch the blame to his “non-existent” brother…..and all this happened only 5 days before hearing…………you and your officers knew these facts but preferred to say nothing.
If mistakes had been made on 4.8.95 you had the opportunity to rectify matters at the Appeal of 20.10.95 but you stubbornly refused to ‘come-clean’ - but I now realize you were near to retirement and did not want to blot your copybook. Can you imagine the bitterness when I was ‘kicked-onto-the-scrapheap’ only 3½ yrs. before retirement age, not given time to even plan my retirement. Your prominence in this blatant “stitch-up” becomes clearer when pages 30 – 31 of the Transcript are viewed – and here I copy a paragraph written to local M.P. Joyce Quin on 11.4.2000 which clearly proves my point…..and your deep involvement in this matter
“Why did it take fully 16 (sixteen) weeks of constant letter writing (I do keep copies) before I received a copy of the original “hand-written” statement signed by Mr. F.D.? Because it had been falsified. Sgt. Atkinson must be “dimmer than a NAAFI candle” if he did not detect Mr. F.D. had made conflicting remarks in his 3 page (hand-written by Atkinson) statement on 8.6.95………clearly Ch. Supt. Davidson picked this point up during the hearing (pages 30 – 31 of their own transcript) and made two valid comments by asking Atkinson “The only thing I would ask Sergeant is that when you saw Mr. F.D. did you have any reason to doubt what he was saying” - and later “In that hour that you spent cos I know you made notes, but in that hour that you spent was there any conflict in what Mr. F.D. said in one part of the interview to any other part. Did he conflict with himself?” Sgt. Atkinson replied “None what so ever, no.” and in reply to Davidson’s second question he replied with a straight “No.” Clearly Ch. Supt. Davidson had a copy of the ‘untampered’ statement in front of him and detected the “conflict” - otherwise he would not have put this point to Sgt. Atkinson on two separate occasions. It is abundantly clear Ch. Supt. Davidson knew Sgt. Atkinson was lying but did nothing – he was so determined to keep me on the “fast track to dismissal” he deliberately obstructed/perverted the course of justice to do so.”
As it is the season of goodwill I give you ample time …..14 days to respond by meeting before publishing these facts on my Website.
Yours sincerely,
(Mr. Jim Richardson)"
“RIGGED” Appeal of 20th October, 1995...........My fight against "Stitch-up".
I was represented by Solicitor Mark Quigley (Sir Jeremy Beecham – partnership) at the “rigged” Appeal hearing of 20.10.95 and his time cost me precisely £685.90 - fully paid only days later (although he knew I was out of work, and with limited means, I was not offered Legal Aid) On 27.2.03 I faxed a letter to Sir Jeremy Beecham (see copy below) asking why his firm did not offer or provide Legal Aid for the Appeal of 20.10.95 and as this letter was not acknowledged I personally handed another copy into his Newcastle Office on 7.3.03 - and any subsequent reply will be published.
"Faxed to Sir Jeremy Beecham – 0191 261 7255 Thursday, 27th February, 2003
Dear Sir Jeremy Beecham, Legal Aid Applications
Since launching my Website (www.policeabuseofpower.co.uk) in August, 2002 I have received several letters informing me I should have been offered Legal Aid (Green Card) to cover all legal work carried-out on my behalf prior to the Tribunal hearing which commenced on 25th March, 1996. Records will show your colleague Mark Quigley represented me at an Appeal hearing (against dismissal) at the Gateshead Civic Centre on 20th October, 1995 and I was presented with a bill for £685.90 which was fully paid only days later. On the very day I paid the bill to Mr. Quigley at your office he handed me a list of names (Appeal panel members) and I immediately realised four of the names were familiar as they had been deeply involved in a previous Appeal of 30.11.94 (complaining that Fine Default Warrants were not getting collected/executed as per Courts instructions) and I informed Mr. Quigley that these 4 were part of a “rigged” and ‘biased’ 7 member panel deliberately formed to deny a fair and just hearing on that date. Naturally I spoke to Mark Quigley on several occasions before and after that Appeal but never once did he mention Legal Aid although he must have been aware of my financial plight at that time. The advice (and valued information) I have received recently as a result of my Website must be given serious consideration when it is a known fact my previous Solicitor Andrew Maughan (Peter Maughan partnership, Gateshead) gave me Legal Aid (Green Card facility) for all his work right up until 9.30 a.m. on 25th March, 1996 just prior to stepping into the Tribunal hearing room.
Solicitor Andrew Maughan fully explained the type of work he could perform under the Legal Aid system, pointing-out that work extending into the Tribunal Courts could not be covered by Legal Aid and that I must pay for those services daily in advance at the Tribunal. Naturally there is deep concern that a prominent Newcastle Lawyer did not offer or provide Legal Aid for the weeks up to 20th October, 1995 ….costing me dearly…. and yet a Gateshead Lawyer gladly offered and provided Legal Aid for all work prior to 25th March, 1996. I have informed my ‘friendly website advisors/informants’ that I would be writing for your responses on this very disturbing matter. Thanking you. Yours sincerely, (Mr. Jim Richardson)"
I instructed Mr. Quigley to note the names of the “rigged” panel sitting on 20.10.95 and when this list was produced by him to me on 21.10.95 or 23.10.95 (on the day I paid the bill) he was made aware of the 4 biased members and the significance of their presence on the panel (who were deeply involved in my previous Appeal of 30.11.94) but simply shook his head and did nothing when an Appeal against the formation of this 'rigged panel' was clearly justified.
With hindsight perhaps I was too hasty (stupid or naïve) choosing a colleague of Sir Jeremy Beecham (who was supremo of Newcastle City Council) to represent me against the nearby Gateshead M.B.C. with whom he must have had friendly relations.
The 7 panel members on 20.10.95 were messrs. Mahmood - Napier - Darke - Gordon - Spafford - Gannon and Brian Wilson who were all associated with the Northumbria Police Authority – and 4 of these members had been deeply involved in my Appeal of 30.11.94 (so how could they plead to be unbiased) when I complained (blew-the-whistle at an Appeal on 30.11.94) that Fine Default Warrants were not getting collected/executed, and because of their previous knowledge they should have stood down, or at least had the decency to declare their previous deep involvement and opposition to my views, and not been allowed to sit in judgement on that particular day.
The 4 members were Councillor David Napier – Mr. Ian Spafford (Solicitor to N.P.A.) – Mr. Frank Gannon (Executive of N.P.A.) and Mr. Brian Wilson (Clerk of N.P.A.) who should all hang their heads in shame for being so crooked and deceitful knowing they were acting in an unscrupulous manner. Later I will disclose details of their previous involvement so that you can judge their characters and whether this Appeal was “rigged” or not…..and naturally all these members have the opportunity to plead their innocence by way of my Guestbook provided at the end of this Site. Thank you for your interest!
| 
