Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe under fire over evidence shredding claim (and a letter to the London Assembly Police Committee about Operation Grange)

Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe under fire over evidence shredding claim
 
Green Party's Baroness Jenny Jones questions Scotland Yard Commissioner's integrity after new claims by whistleblower
 
By [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], Home Affairs Correspondent
3:59PM GMT 08 Jan 2016
 
Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe’s honesty has been publicly questioned by a Green party peer after allegations emerged that Scotland Yard shredded dozens of files about her just days after she demanded to know their contents.
 
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], a Green Party life peer, said she would be forced to change her view of the Metropolitan Police Commissioner’s integrity if the claims - by a senior Scotland Yard detective - were proved correct.
 
Sgt David Williams went public after claiming the Met had failed to act over concerns that up to 30 files on Baroness Jones were shredded and computer files deleted after she asked to see them.
 
Lady Jones, a member of the London Assembly, is deputy chairwoman of a committee which scrutinises the Met’s activities.
 
Two years ago it emerged she had been put on a police database designed to track campaigners regarded as “domestic extremists”.
 
Lady Jones said: “Sir Bernard should have acted immediately and told me what had happened when this was first raised.
 
“This new development concerns me and if it these allegations are true they change my view of Sir Bernard as an honest police officer.”
She added: “I met the domestic extremism unit on June 12, 2014, and David Williams alleges that on June 18 he saw officers destroying evidence. If true, it’s outrageous.”
 
Sgt Williams, who has worked in the domestic extremism unit for five years, disclosed the claims in a four-page letter to Lady Jones.
 
He described seeing “three officers engaged in physically destroying a number of police records by shredding”.
 
He went on: “I believe all of these records related to you. There were in excess of 30 reports.
 
“One of these officers then began to electronically delete a number of police records from a police database. Again, I believe these records related to you.”
 
Sgt Williams wrote that the Met had failed to investigate his allegations that his fellow officers’ actions amounted to a “cover up” designed to stop the peer learning the full extent of the unit’s monitoring of her activities.
 
“I didn’t become a police officer to monitor politicians or political parties, nor to pay casual disregard to policy and procedure,” he said, adding that he feared the Met would seek to discredit or suspend him following the disclosures.
 
A Green Party spokesman said: “We already know that the political activities of Baroness Jenny Jones and other elected Green politicians have been secretly monitored by the police.
 
“These fresh allegations - that some of those files have been erased in a highly irregular fashion – are deeply concerning and demand thorough investigation.
“If proved correct, it brings into question the entire democratic accountability of the police and their role in protecting all of our basic rights.”
 
Two years ago it emerged that Scotland Yard destroyed a massive database on police corruption gathered over the previous decade by a covert unit set up to root out serious corruption in the Met, code-named CIB3, or the “Ghost Squad”
 
The [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]— the racist murder of [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] in 1993 and the axe murder of the private detective Daniel Morgan in 1987.
 
The new allegation that Scotland Yard has shredded inconvenient or embarrassing evidence will be distinctly uncomfortable for Sir Bernard because it is claimed to have taken place during his “watch” at the Yard.
 
A Met Police spokesman said: “No evidence supporting the allegations that there had been any inappropriate destruction of documents was indentified [sic].
 
“In fact the lead detective in the case, who spoke to all potential witnesses as part of their investigation, found that the unit was responding positively to demands to improve its document retention procedures by destroying information that it had no need to retain and that therefore, should not be retained.”
 
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Doug D wrote:Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe under fire over evidence shredding claim
 
Green Party's Baroness Jenny Jones questions Scotland Yard Commissioner's integrity after new claims by whistleblower 

The Metropolitan Police Force is irredeemably corrupt as surely all members and regular guests visiting this forum must be aware by now.  We need another 'Sir Robert Mark-type' figure to clean the Augean Stables and put all the corrupt officers in jail.

On the subject of Jenny Jones, many will remember that Jenny Jones was quick off the mark as soon as Operation Grange was set up, making public statements questioning why significant police resources were being deployed on the Madeleine McCann enquiry. Here's what she was reported as saying as early as 17 May 2011:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

On 10 March 2015 I wrote to all nine members of the London Mayor's Policiing Committee.

The letter asked:

QUOTE
 
From: Anthony Bennett M.A.                                      66 Chippingfield
Tel: 01279 635789                                                        HARLOW
e-mail: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]                                   Essex
Mobile:  07835  716537                                                      CM17 0DJ
 
Jenny Jones, Deputy Chair, Police & Crime Committee                        Tuesday 10 March 2015
Greater London Authority
City Hall
The Queen’s Walk
LONDON       SE1 2AA

Dear Jenny Jones

re: Complaints: The remit and decision-making of Operation Grange (Madeleine McCann Review and Investigation): Criminal and Misconduct Issues

I write to bring to your attention a letter of complaint (attached) I have made to Dame Anne Owers, the Chair of the Independent Police Complaints Commission, about the conduct of Operation Grange and senior Metropolitan Police officers. I do so because this is a Metropolitan Police investigation, albeit set up in highly unusual, if not unprecedented, circumstances, and my understanding is that the Greater London Authority Police & Crime Committee have responsibility for the oversight, monitoring and review of major investigations such as this one.

My purpose in doing so is to ask if you and your committee would:

A - support the request for an independent investigation into the conduct of the Metropolitan Police of this Operation, from the Metropolitan Police Commissioner Officer down to all police officers of senior rank who have been engaged on this investigation, and

B - ask the Commissioner and relevant staff of senior level from Operation Grange to attend a meeting of your committee to submit a comprehensive report to you, accounting for all their actions to date in this investigation and to answer any questions members of the Police and Crime Committee may wish to put to them.

REST SNIPPED - UNQUOTE

Only two members of the Police Committee replied to my letter, and one of them was Jenny Jones, who said she would make sure this was discussed by the Committee.

Eventually I received the response below from the Chair of the Police Committee, Ms McCartney:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

How very dare you to besmirch such a fine upstanding Metropolitan Police representative, Sir Bernard Hogan Howe, with these nasty pernicious accusations of having "personal secret documentation destroyed" on Jenny Jones, as there is no evidence of these "files" being disposed of in the manner suggested, "the Met were just tidying up, what they no longer required to be retained?"

No matter how long it takes, there's aways someone who will whistleblow. 

plebgate wrote:No matter how long it takes, there's aways someone who will whistleblow. 

Hi plebgate, do you want to start a list of who will not whistle blow, Tapas 7/9, Brian Kennedy, Martin **nt, Sir Bernard Hogan Howe, Gordon Brown, Clarence Mitchell, David Cameron, Rebekah Brooks, Rupert Murdoch etc?

Yet another trial collapses at court after revelations of corrupt payments being paid to serving Metropolitan Police Officers and the authorities tried to "Prosecute the whistle blower"?  The whistle blower who had uncovered the illegal payments to serving police officers after the trial collapses costing thousands of pounds to the taxpayer.  Well done, Sir Bernard Hogan Howe in bringing about this prosecution, which has once again provided proof of what is actually happening on your watch, along with the discreditable DPP/CPS?
Your Halo is losing it's glow Sir Bernard,do not worry Theresa May has sorted out your retirement party, with guest of Honour, Rebekah Brooks popping out of the cake singing a duet with Dodgy Dave before his cousin Boris takes the poisoned chalice of the corruptables?

Vaz (HASC) and BHH performing at 2.15 today:
 
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Doug D wrote:Vaz (HASC) and BHH performing at 2.15 today:
 
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I cannot see oily Keith/Learned friends wishing to ask too many difficult questions to the Metropolitan Police Commander and cohorts, as Mr Vaz has expressed a wish to become the Speaker of the House in Parliament and will not want to put the cat amongst the pigeons in his quest to join the Establishment clique?

Sir Bernard Hogan Howe didn't appear ruffled at any stage during the "Home Affairs Committee" 23 Feb 2016?
He in fact managed to deflect any criticism of him and the Police Force over the battering of investigating the Lord Brammel case,Operation Midland,by using the QC Richard Henricques referral that he had set up to look at how the investigation was investigated,which whatever findings was not for the public exposure,right to know,but it is funded by the Tax payer?
He was quite clever that whenever he was put in an awkward situation over Lord Brammel,Lord Britttain, he managed to alert the Committee about the Lord Janner investigation carried out by the above named QC, the panel of Learned friends quickly tried to divert this part of the procedures?
Sir Bernard only appeared to have squirmed when asked by a lady panelist of the right to remain anonymous of which he had abdicated as the correct procedure to follow in future, with how a Famous single pop star from the 1960's arrest/investigation had been leaked to the BBC, who had an Helicopter filming the event but Sir Bernard could not comment on a diifferent Police force behaved of how the person's name had come into the public domain and was about to be arrested/investigated of allegations of child abuse,disappearances,Yorkshire Police force where he leaned his trade?
BHH was perturbed about Operation Elvedon over the cost of this operation and the people convicted for offences being one person at a cost of 42 Million pounds to the tax payer,(BHH) then quoted how good a job the "Metropolitan Police Force" had undertaken into the hacking of Phones,but never once made a mention of how former Police officers supplied information to hacks from a defunct Sunday News Paper and the Daniel Morgan unsolved Murder from 1987?

Fair play to BHH who generally came across very well and made the members of the HASC look ill-prepared and pretty incompetent in a number of cases.

Don’t think we learnt anything new and however hard they tried (and repeatedly so by different members) he would not add to the meager apology given to Lady Brittan for the delay in advising her that the ‘Jane case’ was not going to go ahead and would not be drawn on the ongoing Brittan investigations.
 
Also had no intention of apologizing to Bramall, although I think he implied that there were no ongoing investigations into him. He also justified the 20 officer search on his property and any other searches (adequately imo) with the size of the property and the time scale needed to get it done. He also gave an example of the sort of things they have been able to find with historical searches re. Savile’s chauffeur, where they stripped off 5 layers of wallpaper in a property that he hadn’t lived at for many years, yet were able to find things written by the victim on the walls.
 
Whether the committee members just don’t listen to other questions and answers or are just too busy texting to pay attention, it was a poor showing by them and why ask questions about other police forces when you know darn well he is not (and cannot) going to answer for them?

I see another IPCC complaint may be instigated after a Black Family has suffered two tragic losses of life of two sons and the police sent in undercover surveillance Officers to spy on the family of Joseph Burke-Menviles,as a family liason Officer?

Lord Ptchford, to decide on whether or not the police Covert surveillance has a right to be heard by the Public in disclosure of under cover Police Officers using the Names of dead Babies as to person they were claiming to be as an Adult,is this legal?
I do not know if you have ever seen how the Police behave towards certain groups of people, seems to be most protesters,Anti Establishment,Anti Fox Hunting,Youtube amazing,see for yourself?
I do not know the current legal status of the Police allowance usage of,NCND(Neither Confirm,Neither Deny), but just suppose the Police were interviewing you under caution, detaining you and all your answers you gave to them was, NCND in answer to their questions, do you think they would be very co-operative with you, in this way of answering the questions?
Or do you feel that, after the Caution,"You have the Right to remain silent"?
(1) they would use all the legal powers of the Justice System to try to determine that you have not committed any Crime,gaining entrance to your abode whilst your in Custody?
(2) they would just say okay that's fine your free to go?
(3)Some how I do not think the usage of number 2 would quite fit in with any Police Investigation and they would probably put you out on bail with significant restrictions that they could determine as necessary to prevent you likely to committing any offence in Society?

I know the Police are in a no win situation on certain issues with regard to today's ever changing Policing environment,but I think if that both parties at what ever scenario were to be respectful,to each other, it could help every one to get along better in determining who are the possible Criminals or is that Utopia?