I want to bring a private prosecution against a police

Perverting the course of justice

On the 23 Nov 2013, Dc Craig Moylon was sent an email from Mills Reeves Solicitors disclosing a number of documents, he deliberately removed several key documents one of which was a hand Witten admission by a defendant that showed my innocent. I had also declared this document existed in 3 interviews and within my defence case statementIf that document had of been disclosed the police would not have been able to continue with the prosecution against me but the chances are that his whole case would have collapsed

If you want to switch to the phone my number is +44 (0) 1223 501143

I was paid money by the main defendant in 2007 and the prosecution argued that I acted with the main defendant for financial benefit. It is very complicated as the trail lasted for 3 months.The point is that the police are under a duty to disclose anything that could add in the defence of a defendant, further once a defendant files his case defence statement they are under a further duty to revisit there disclosure. There could be no doubt in the officer mind what damage the discovery of this document would do to his case. He disclosed all the other documents but withheld this important evidence

Weather it showed my innocence or not is irrelevant, that time has passed.We are now dealing with the officer deliberate action to disclose material that would/could aid a defendant in his defence. Please read the attached it may help

When bring a charge one has to take into account the prosecutions, Full Code Test, which has two stages: (i) the evidential stage; followed by (ii) the public interest stage.The first stage, we have hard evidence from Mills and Reeves Solicitors that they made the disclosure to DC Moylon on the 25 Nov 2013 and we have all the documents disclosed in the case including the unused and the documents which do not include the key documents given to DC Moylon on the 25 Nov 2013.

You have gone quite on me ????quiet

with respect explain how my innocence or guilty has anything to do with a police man perverting the course of justice????. I sent you a 4 page document which should help you understand the issue.I wanted help in drafting the charge

it shows that main defendant had lied and he was a creditor, but please Joe you are so off base herenone of this would make sense unless you had sat through the trialwhat you are talking about would only be relevant to an appeal which is a completely separate issue

I think that your responses showed a lack of knowledge or understanding as to what is at issue here. Guilty Innocent is irrelevant. A man can be guilty of an office but if an officer deliberately withholds evidence, that is a separate crime which he should answer for. Perverting the Course of Justice can carry's a life sentence in prison, such is the serious nature of the offence, a point I feel was lost on you. Please do not debit my card.Its not that I disagree with your advise its you did not give any.

I want to bring a private prosecution against a police officer for Perverting the Course of Justice. At this point I would like assistance setting out the charge. It is an indictable offenceCharges:
That you Mr. Craig Moylon of Greater Manchester Police [address] did between the 1st November 2013 and the 20th March 2014 Pervert the Course of Justice by deliberately removing evidence before disclosing the documents to the defendant. contrary to section..........There is a 4 page document which will help you understand the charge I am setting out

No your wrong. Private criminal prosecutions are started in the magistrate court. This is an indictable offence and can ONLY by tried in the Crown court.So far I am advising you lot lol

Sir I have sent a 4 page document that deals with all of these points twice and now again to you. Please take 5min to read it.I cannot explain in a short exchange like this how important this evidence was, so I ask that you accept when I say that it was of enormous importance. This was a hand written document sent to me personally in 2008 and I thought was lost to the passage of time. When Dc Moylon found a copy of this document he would have grasped immediately the serious consequences for his case against me. Out of the 100 or so documents disclosed to DC Moylon by Mills & Reeve solicitors there are only the hand written letter and a few other typed letters that made reference to the hand written letter removed all the other documents were disclosed.I Need help setting out the charge for Perverting the Course of Justice

Police standards refused to record the complaint because "the event which I complain about took place in 2013-2014 and are therefore older than 12 months and outside the statutory time limit to make a complaint"IPCC, can only review if the police decision was within the law which they said it wasI seek justice because this officer deliberately removed evidence that went to the hart of my defence

I am not asking for your advise as to weather I should or should not take this action, that decision I have already made. I will be issuing an indictment in the magistrates court within the next few weeks.joe I can tell you that the case against me was very week, the judge in his summing up said "you have heard the evidence against Mr. Robertson and you must ask yourself is it safe to convict him" the only question is why did he receive that payment of 50,000. There was massive disclosure issues throughout the trial which resulted in the summing of DC Moylon and the head of Manchester CPS Mr. Ben Sothern and by order of the judge the dismissal of Mr. Southern and the appointment of independent counsel to review the unused material which resulted in the further disclosure of over 2000 documents.The main defendant (AK) ran a cut throat defence in which he alleged that he did not owe me any money at the time of the offence (April 2007). My counsel was aware of the hand written confession given to me by AK because I made them aware of it. but it is now 2013 some 6/7 years later and I cannot locate this hand written letter. Believing at the time that I was the only person to have the letter I did not know were else to look. When AK gave evidence he was cross examined forcibly on this point and he denied that he owed me funds.He pleaded not guilty and his defence amounted to blaming everyone else and he repeatedly said that he had no connection to a payment made by his solicitor of 50,000 and he said that I must have got it from the fraud as he owed me nothing.At sentencing the judge said "as for you Mr. Robertson it is not clear what part you played" It took the jury 5 days to convict me.I was interviewed 3 times 2008, 2009 and 2011 on all occasions I made it clear that AK was debtor that owed me money. I was asked if I would be a witness for the prosecution which for my own reason I said no. The trial process had started in that the other defendants had been to magistrates court and then to CMH at Crown court and I was summoned to join the indictment. In my defence case statement as part of my defence I state that AK owed me 150,000,000 and that I had been paid 50,000 from AK solicitor.When DC Moylon found this hand written confession from AK confirming that he owed me 150,000,000 he knew the importance of this document to my defence and was duty bound to disclose it. When disclosing the material DC Moylon signed a statement contained a declaration of truth when it was in fact an outright lie. his deliberate act is not a singular but the plural... his duty extended to disclosing any material likely to aid a defendant in his defence regardless of the consequences to his investigation. breach of duty
1. At the time of viewing the document in the offices of Mill Reeve Solicitors
2. on the 25/11/2013 when he physically received the hard copy
3. pre trial disclosure (trial started 6/1/14)
4. When signing the declaration stating he has now disclosed all the relevant documents.
5. In cross examination
6. At the time the disclosure issues at trial became clear
7. At the time independent Counsel was appointed to review the undisclosed material
8. Any other time up until the jury returned there verdictThis is the comments of a judge in a much lessor offence by a police man:-
Judge Richard Twomlow jailed Davies, who admitted perverting the course of justice, for six months and told him: “The statement contained a declaration of truth when it was in fact an outright lie.
“Such an offence committed by a serving police officer is a complete dereliction of duty. The public trust in the police can be a fragile one and incidents like this completely damage the reputation of the police force.”

after all that and still no help lol

you asked how does it aid my defence???? I have just explained above the letter confirms
1. that AK was a Debtor and lied on oath
2. That the 50,000 paid to me was in fact part of this debitWith this evidence the judge would not have made his ONLY negative point in his summing up
The jury would have seen that AK was lying and more likely to have believed me
It would have been confirmation of what I had said in 2008, 2009 and 2011 so my interviews would have more credibility
The list goes on and on. It was for the jury to hear all the evidence and reach a decision, not for DC Moylon to cherry pick which evidence to disclose that best matched his investigation.

What I cant convey is that no one but DC Moylon accused me of this crime, there were no witness only him. The case was so weak that at one point there was talk of abandoning the case against me. I just need the charge set out correctly so that I have it on my summons

The only evidence against me was that I was paid 50,000 from AK solicitor, there was no proof at that time that AK owed me money and the conclusion was that he did not owe me money and therefore I must have been party to the fraud in order to have received the payment.This letter shows i was telling the truth when I said that AK was a debtor and that AK lied, but THINK.... this letter supported what I had said in 2008,2009 and 2011 can you not see the importance of this document

It does not need to prove my innocence it is enough that it confirms the evidence I gave which gave which in turn gives more credibility to the other evidence. Please read the attached its only 2 pages