TreborBrown

google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j… This article highlights several problems with @policescotland investigating themselves. They have been in possession of a criminal complaint since November 2023 about 2 named officers, formerly of the Counter-Corruption Unit (CCU), committing documented on-duty corruption in 2007 / 2008, possibly with the involvement of a senior supervisor within the unit, one who was already under investigation at the time. Both officers were subsequently promoted, one at least twice. There are multiple evidential strands proving their conduct, which was laid out in a report supplied to @policesotland in November 2023, over 11 months ago. This included document, and page, references to avoid any possibility of their conduct being ‘missed’ AGAIN, there having been a 2011 investigation of their conduct which cleared them of any criminality. The identified conduct included, but was not confined to, concealing exculpatory evidence, reporting exculpatory evidence as inculpatory, allowing witnesses to make knowingly false statements, and the complete fabrication of evidence it is known, and which was known to them, did not exist. Their conduct spanned police procedures, phone, and e-mail, evidence, and entered into more than one area of criminality. Although these matters were originally reported to @policescotland in 2010 / 2011, and an ‘investigation’ took place, it concluded no criminality had taken place. This was achieved by omitting many evidential strands proving it had, said investigation having been ‘overseen’ by 2 senior officers from @policescotland Professional Standards Department (PSD). The 2010 / 2011 investigating officer concealed several evidential strands proving the 2 named officers were corrupt to a mathematical certainty imo, indicating he too may have been corrupt, before he was conspicuously promoted, perhaps having been ‘bribed’ to clear them. After leaving @policescotland he went on to carry-out serious case reviews for the Scottish government. Given his propensity for error, if it was error, and evidence concealment, he should never have been near the role he was allowed to undertake after retiring, or as a senior detective officer before he retired. His 2011 report clearing the named CCU officers was supplied to @policescotland PSD who sent it to @COPFS. Despite a litany of easily proven wilful falsehoods, a senior member of @COPFS staff accepted it without question, failing to uncover, and / or report, as the case may be, even one of its falsehoods, exonerating 2 clearly corrupt police officers of any criminality, or the third who had deployed further corruption to clear them. Despite being examined for potential misconduct, no allegations followed. As a result of reporting the corrupt officers conduct, the officer reporting it was then subjected to criminal, and misconduct, investigations which spanned the entire period between 7/4/11 and 31/8/16. The officer was subjected to multiple criminal, and misconduct, allegations for reporting the conduct of corrupt police officers, and subjected to a process, whereby an attempt was made to cause him to plead guilty to allegations, which depending on how you view them, existed outside the criminal justice system for anyone who was not a police officer, or did not exist at all, except within the referred to process. This process was only deployed against police officers, was likely illegal, and / or professional misconduct, for anyone involved in its operation, and in any case was unfair to anyone / accused person(s) subjected to it. This process appears to have involved @policescotland, @COPFS, and @scotspolfed lawyers. An unknown number of police officers were subjected to it. It is possible (likely) some lost their jobs, and others received differing levels of other penalties, due to having accepted legal advice which was not in their interest. Said process may well constitute an attempt to pervert the course of justice, by advising accused police officers to plead guilty to allegations which in essence did not exist, and never would, or could, amount to a criminal prosecution without their guilty plea, obtained by providing them with knowingly incorrect legal advice to plead guilty to allegations which sat outside the criminal justice system for anyone who was not a police officer. Whilst @scotspolfed lawyers provided this advice, not the @scotpolfed directly, it is hard to accept they were not aware of this conduct, and serious questions must be asked about their procedures and governance if they were not, given their membership indirectly pay for said legal advice. At an employment tribunal in Glasgow in 2021 several @policescotland officers, some very senior in rank, gave evidence totally in contradiction of @policescotland contemporaneous note of the reason for the investigation of the officer reporting the corrupt police officers in 2010 / 2011, including the author of the document. This conduct appears to indicate more than one of them may have perjured themselves. This was reported to @policescotland in November 2023 also. As with the 2010 / 2011 investigation, no arrests have so far been made. No-one has been interviewed under caution regarding their alleged conduct. No statement has been taken from the person reporting the conduct. This conduct is ongoing under the ‘oversight’ of a @policescotland officer of ACC rank. Is the current investigation to be a further attempt to cover-up the documented corruption of CCU officers in 2007 / 2008, whose conduct appears to have been designed to conceal the circumstances of a death, whilst framing a police officer who was not involved for causing it, the officer who cleared them in 2011, who continued to conceal the circumstances of the death, and a separate, unrelated, abduction, possibly with a domestic element, both of which were reported to him, other concerning police conduct since, including the possibility of several officers perjuring themselves, and engaging in conspiracy to do so, the foregoing apparently being supported by @policescotland lawyers. As there is a transcript of the 2021 Tribunal, whether perjury occurred or not should be easily detected. There is no indication this evidence has been, or will be, seized, despite @policescotland thinking the officer bringing the claim’s notes are relevant to their investigation. CRIME, FRAUD EXEMPTION appears to apply, meaning their transcript can be seized as evidence. Allowing @policescotland to carry-out an investigation of the greatly summarised allegations here, and allowing them to decide what evidence is relevant and can be seized, in circumstances where it might reveal criminality by several (ex-) police officers, seems to lack any notion of openness, transparency, or there being any oversight of their investigation. That is before the 2010 / 2011 attempts at a cover-up are taken into consideration, and their earlier supply to @PIRC, @COPFS, Glasgow employment tribunal of a knowingly false transcription of audio recorded evidence, are factored into such a consideration. @policescotland may deny it was knowingly false, but the volume, and more importantly the nature, of the identified ‘errors’ were too specific to be the product of anything other than a deliberate act, when examined against the alleged conduct the investigation was examining. In any case, a corrected transcript was accepted by @policescotland which differed greatly from the one they prepared for the hearing. Any half-competent investigation of the foregoing would easily uncover the alleged conduct. The process of @policescotland investigating their own wrongdoing must cease, if there is to be any real oversight of their activities, otherwise they will simply continue to cover them up. Despite these matters having apparently been brought to the attention of the Chief Constable of @police Scotland at least 3 weeks ago by @fultonsnp I am still none the wiser who the officer investigating the corrupt police officers is, have had no contact, or updates, from them, provided no statement to them, or been requested to do so, regarding a highly sensitive investigation, which is 11 months old already, but ridiculously full of documentary evidence. EXACTLY WHO IS POLICING THE POLICE, BECAUSE IT IS APPARENT THEY CANNOT BE TRUSTED TO DO IT PROPERLY THEMSELVES? WHAT IS A PERSON REQUIRED TO DO TO GET CORRUPT POLICE OFFICERS ARRESTED? @BBCNews @BBCScotlandNews @STVNews @MailOnline @dailyrecord @heraldscotland @ScottishSun @theSNP @jackiebmsp @SP_Justice @scottishparliam @JohnSwinney @RussellFindlay1 @BBCMarkDaly @AnasSarwar @John__Glover @WingsOverScot @BBCPanorama @Channel4News @C4Dispatches

google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j… This article highlights several problems with @policescotland investigating themselves. They have been in possession of a criminal complaint since November 2023 about 2 named officers, formerly of the Counter-Corruption Unit (CCU), committing documented on-duty corruption in 2007 / 2008, possibly with the involvement of a senior supervisor within the unit, one who was already under investigation at the time. Both officers were subsequently promoted, one at least twice. There are multiple evidential strands proving their conduct, which was laid out in a report supplied to @policesotland in November 2023, over 11 months ago. This included document, and page, references to avoid any possibility of their conduct being ‘missed’ AGAIN, there having been a 2011 investigation of their conduct which cleared them of any criminality. The identified conduct included, but was not confined to, concealing exculpatory evidence, reporting exculpatory evidence as inculpatory, allowing witnesses to make knowingly false statements, and the complete fabrication of evidence it is known, and which was known to them, did not exist. Their conduct spanned police procedures, phone, and e-mail, evidence, and entered into more than one area of criminality. Although these matters were originally reported to @policescotland in 2010 / 2011, and an ‘investigation’ took place, it concluded no criminality had taken place. This was achieved by omitting many evidential strands proving it had, said investigation having been ‘overseen’ by 2 senior officers from @policescotland Professional Standards Department (PSD). The 2010 / 2011 investigating officer concealed several evidential strands proving the 2 named officers were corrupt to a mathematical certainty imo, indicating he too may have been corrupt, before he was conspicuously promoted, perhaps having been ‘bribed’ to clear them. After leaving @policescotland he went on to carry-out serious case reviews for the Scottish government. Given his propensity for error, if it was error, and evidence concealment, he should never have been near the role he was allowed to undertake after retiring, or as a senior detective officer before he retired. His 2011 report clearing the named CCU officers was supplied to @policescotland PSD who sent it to @COPFS. Despite a litany of easily proven wilful falsehoods, a senior member of @COPFS staff accepted it without question, failing to uncover, and / or report, as the case may be, even one of its falsehoods, exonerating 2 clearly corrupt police officers of any criminality, or the third who had deployed further corruption to clear them. Despite being examined for potential misconduct, no allegations followed. As a result of reporting the corrupt officers conduct, the officer reporting it was then subjected to criminal, and misconduct, investigations which spanned the entire period between 7/4/11 and 31/8/16. The officer was subjected to multiple criminal, and misconduct, allegations for reporting the conduct of corrupt police officers, and subjected to a process, whereby an attempt was made to cause him to plead guilty to allegations, which depending on how you view them, existed outside the criminal justice system for anyone who was not a police officer, or did not exist at all, except within the referred to process. This process was only deployed against police officers, was likely illegal, and / or professional misconduct, for anyone involved in its operation, and in any case was unfair to anyone / accused person(s) subjected to it. This process appears to have involved @policescotland, @COPFS, and @scotspolfed lawyers. An unknown number of police officers were subjected to it. It is possible (likely) some lost their jobs, and others received differing levels of other penalties, due to having accepted legal advice which was not in their interest. Said process may well constitute an attempt to pervert the course of justice, by advising accused police officers to plead guilty to allegations which in essence did not exist, and never would, or could, amount to a criminal prosecution without their guilty plea, obtained by providing them with knowingly incorrect legal advice to plead guilty to allegations which sat outside the criminal justice system for anyone who was not a police officer. Whilst @scotspolfed lawyers provided this advice, not the @scotpolfed directly, it is hard to accept they were not aware of this conduct, and serious questions must be asked about their procedures and governance if they were not, given their membership indirectly pay for said legal advice. At an employment tribunal in Glasgow in 2021 several @policescotland officers, some very senior in rank, gave evidence totally in contradiction of @policescotland contemporaneous note of the reason for the investigation of the officer reporting the corrupt police officers in 2010 / 2011, including the author of the document. This conduct appears to indicate more than one of them may have perjured themselves. This was reported to @policescotland in November 2023 also. As with the 2010 / 2011 investigation, no arrests have so far been made. No-one has been interviewed under caution regarding their alleged conduct. No statement has been taken from the person reporting the conduct. This conduct is ongoing under the ‘oversight’ of a @policescotland officer of ACC rank. Is the current investigation to be a further attempt to cover-up the documented corruption of CCU officers in 2007 / 2008, whose conduct appears to have been designed to conceal the circumstances of a death, whilst framing a police officer who was not involved for causing it, the officer who cleared them in 2011, who continued to conceal the circumstances of the death, and a separate, unrelated, abduction, possibly with a domestic element, both of which were reported to him, other concerning police conduct since, including the possibility of several officers perjuring themselves, and engaging in conspiracy to do so, the foregoing apparently being supported by @policescotland lawyers. As there is a transcript of the 2021 Tribunal, whether perjury occurred or not should be easily detected. There is no indication this evidence has been, or will be, seized, despite @policescotland thinking the officer bringing the claim’s notes are relevant to their investigation. CRIME, FRAUD EXEMPTION appears to apply, meaning their transcript can be seized as evidence. Allowing @policescotland to carry-out an investigation of the greatly summarised allegations here, and allowing them to decide what evidence is relevant and can be seized, in circumstances where it might reveal criminality by several (ex-) police officers, seems to lack any notion of openness, transparency, or there being any oversight of their investigation. That is before the 2010 / 2011 attempts at a cover-up are taken into consideration, and their earlier supply to @PIRC, @COPFS, Glasgow employment tribunal of a knowingly false transcription of audio recorded evidence, are factored into such a consideration. @policescotland may deny it was knowingly false, but the volume, and more importantly the nature, of the identified ‘errors’ were too specific to be the product of anything other than a deliberate act, when examined against the alleged conduct the investigation was examining. In any case, a corrected transcript was accepted by @policescotland which differed greatly from the one they prepared for the hearing. Any half-competent investigation of the foregoing would easily uncover the alleged conduct. The process of @policescotland investigating their own wrongdoing must cease, if there is to be any real oversight of their activities, otherwise they will simply continue to cover them up. Despite these matters having apparently been brought to the attention of the Chief Constable of @police Scotland at least 3 weeks ago by @fultonsnp I am still none the wiser who the officer investigating the corrupt police officers is, have had no contact, or updates, from them, provided no statement to them, or been requested to do so, regarding a highly sensitive investigation, which is 11 months old already, but ridiculously full of documentary evidence. EXACTLY WHO IS POLICING THE POLICE, BECAUSE IT IS APPARENT THEY CANNOT BE TRUSTED TO DO IT PROPERLY THEMSELVES? WHAT IS A PERSON REQUIRED TO DO TO GET CORRUPT POLICE OFFICERS ARRESTED? @BBCNews @BBCScotlandNews @STVNews @MailOnline @dailyrecord @heraldscotland @ScottishSun @theSNP @jackiebmsp @SP_Justice @scottishparliam @JohnSwinney @RussellFindlay1 @BBCMarkDaly @AnasSarwar @John__Glover @WingsOverScot @BBCPanorama @Channel4News @C4Dispatches

google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j… This article highlights several problems with @policescotland investigating themselves. They have been in possession of a criminal complaint since November 2023 about 2 named officers, formerly of the Counter-Corruption Unit (CCU), committing documented on-duty corruption in 2007 / 2008, possibly with the involvement of a senior supervisor within the unit, one who was already under investigation at the time. Both officers were subsequently promoted, one at least twice. There are multiple evidential strands proving their conduct, which was laid out in a report supplied to @policesotland in November 2023, over 11 months ago. This included document, and page, references to avoid any possibility of their conduct being ‘missed’ AGAIN, there having been a 2011 investigation of their conduct which cleared them of any criminality. The identified conduct included, but was not confined to, concealing exculpatory evidence, reporting exculpatory evidence as inculpatory, allowing witnesses to make knowingly false statements, and the complete fabrication of evidence it is known, and which was known to them, did not exist. Their conduct spanned police procedures, phone, and e-mail, evidence, and entered into more than one area of criminality. Although these matters were originally reported to @policescotland in 2010 / 2011, and an ‘investigation’ took place, it concluded no criminality had taken place. This was achieved by omitting many evidential strands proving it had, said investigation having been ‘overseen’ by 2 senior officers from @policescotland Professional Standards Department (PSD). The 2010 / 2011 investigating officer concealed several evidential strands proving the 2 named officers were corrupt to a mathematical certainty imo, indicating he too may have been corrupt, before he was conspicuously promoted, perhaps having been ‘bribed’ to clear them. After leaving @policescotland he went on to carry-out serious case reviews for the Scottish government. Given his propensity for error, if it was error, and evidence concealment, he should never have been near the role he was allowed to undertake after retiring, or as a senior detective officer before he retired. His 2011 report clearing the named CCU officers was supplied to @policescotland PSD who sent it to @COPFS. Despite a litany of easily proven wilful falsehoods, a senior member of @COPFS staff accepted it without question, failing to uncover, and / or report, as the case may be, even one of its falsehoods, exonerating 2 clearly corrupt police officers of any criminality, or the third who had deployed further corruption to clear them. Despite being examined for potential misconduct, no allegations followed. As a result of reporting the corrupt officers conduct, the officer reporting it was then subjected to criminal, and misconduct, investigations which spanned the entire period between 7/4/11 and 31/8/16. The officer was subjected to multiple criminal, and misconduct, allegations for reporting the conduct of corrupt police officers, and subjected to a process, whereby an attempt was made to cause him to plead guilty to allegations, which depending on how you view them, existed outside the criminal justice system for anyone who was not a police officer, or did not exist at all, except within the referred to process. This process was only deployed against police officers, was likely illegal, and / or professional misconduct, for anyone involved in its operation, and in any case was unfair to anyone / accused person(s) subjected to it. This process appears to have involved @policescotland, @COPFS, and @scotspolfed lawyers. An unknown number of police officers were subjected to it. It is possible (likely) some lost their jobs, and others received differing levels of other penalties, due to having accepted legal advice which was not in their interest. Said process may well constitute an attempt to pervert the course of justice, by advising accused police officers to plead guilty to allegations which in essence did not exist, and never would, or could, amount to a criminal prosecution without their guilty plea, obtained by providing them with knowingly incorrect legal advice to plead guilty to allegations which sat outside the criminal justice system for anyone who was not a police officer. Whilst @scotspolfed lawyers provided this advice, not the @scotpolfed directly, it is hard to accept they were not aware of this conduct, and serious questions must be asked about their procedures and governance if they were not, given their membership indirectly pay for said legal advice. At an employment tribunal in Glasgow in 2021 several @policescotland officers, some very senior in rank, gave evidence totally in contradiction of @policescotland contemporaneous note of the reason for the investigation of the officer reporting the corrupt police officers in 2010 / 2011, including the author of the document. This conduct appears to indicate more than one of them may have perjured themselves. This was reported to @policescotland in November 2023 also. As with the 2010 / 2011 investigation, no arrests have so far been made. No-one has been interviewed under caution regarding their alleged conduct. No statement has been taken from the person reporting the conduct. This conduct is ongoing under the ‘oversight’ of a @policescotland officer of ACC rank. Is the current investigation to be a further attempt to cover-up the documented corruption of CCU officers in 2007 / 2008, whose conduct appears to have been designed to conceal the circumstances of a death, whilst framing a police officer who was not involved for causing it, the officer who cleared them in 2011, who continued to conceal the circumstances of the death, and a separate, unrelated, abduction, possibly with a domestic element, both of which were reported to him, other concerning police conduct since, including the possibility of several officers perjuring themselves, and engaging in conspiracy to do so, the foregoing apparently being supported by @policescotland lawyers. As there is a transcript of the 2021 Tribunal, whether perjury occurred or not should be easily detected. There is no indication this evidence has been, or will be, seized, despite @policescotland thinking the officer bringing the claim’s notes are relevant to their investigation. CRIME, FRAUD EXEMPTION appears to apply, meaning their transcript can be seized as evidence. Allowing @policescotland to carry-out an investigation of the greatly summarised allegations here, and allowing them to decide what evidence is relevant and can be seized, in circumstances where it might reveal criminality by several (ex-) police officers, seems to lack any notion of openness, transparency, or there being any oversight of their investigation. That is before the 2010 / 2011 attempts at a cover-up are taken into consideration, and their earlier supply to @PIRC, @COPFS, Glasgow employment tribunal of a knowingly false transcription of audio recorded evidence, are factored into such a consideration. @policescotland may deny it was knowingly false, but the volume, and more importantly the nature, of the identified ‘errors’ were too specific to be the product of anything other than a deliberate act, when examined against the alleged conduct the investigation was examining. In any case, a corrected transcript was accepted by @policescotland which differed greatly from the one they prepared for the hearing. Any half-competent investigation of the foregoing would easily uncover the alleged conduct. The process of @policescotland investigating their own wrongdoing must cease, if there is to be any real oversight of their activities, otherwise they will simply continue to cover them up. Despite these matters having apparently been brought to the attention of the Chief Constable of @police Scotland at least 3 weeks ago by @fultonsnp I am still none the wiser who the officer investigating the corrupt police officers is, have had no contact, or updates, from them, provided no statement to them, or been requested to do so, regarding a highly sensitive investigation, which is 11 months old already, but ridiculously full of documentary evidence. EXACTLY WHO IS POLICING THE POLICE, BECAUSE IT IS APPARENT THEY CANNOT BE TRUSTED TO DO IT PROPERLY THEMSELVES? WHAT IS A PERSON REQUIRED TO DO TO GET CORRUPT POLICE OFFICERS ARRESTED? @BBCNews @BBCScotlandNews @STVNews @MailOnline @dailyrecord @heraldscotland @ScottishSun @theSNP @jackiebmsp @SP_Justice @scottishparliam @JohnSwinney @RussellFindlay1 @BBCMarkDaly @AnasSarwar @John__Glover @WingsOverScot @BBCPanorama @Channel4News @C4Dispatches