Police decide to lie on record but I GOTCHA!

I wrote a letter of our ordeal at the airport to the Chief Superintendent. I put down all the facts and was not devious or tried entrapment. I told him that I had recorded the whole incident but obviously he did not believe me or thought I was bluffing. He then replied and gave the senior officer's (who was involved in the incident) version of the said incident. In the reply he states that the officer states and I quote :-

"He says the interaction with yourself and other passengers was very amiable and appropriate. He stated that he was not aware of any specific reason for detention as far as the Police were concerned and had any person decided to get up and leave he would simply have allowed that to happen. The only reason for his presence was to support UKBA and prevent any Breach of the Peace"

I cannot understand why he would put this on record after I had warned him that I had recorded the incident. Here is 2 portions of the recording containing the threat of arrest if we tried to leave:-



  1. Ha ha, unbelievable! l'd like to play that Chief Super at poker!

  2. that chief is a fuckwit

  3. Terrible POLICE OFFICERS, remember there is NO LEGAL DUTY TO ASSIST POLICE.

    see Rice v Connolly 1966 judgment.

    The gigs up plod, the public are becoming more aware of law than those who are charged with upholding it. But thats no bad thing. Guess you have detection rates to hit.

    No wonder the public trust in you will continue to weaken as we all know you have to filter info to your cps buddies .

    Why not get the POLICE to write all their questions down and consider giving a response.

    Other than that, remain silent as is your right, under common law, which is protected for you in human rights legislation .

    Poor old Plod thats all they can threaten to use, we'll arrest you ! haha, start building bigger cells then fellas, as theres a tsunami of law men coming at you from here on, who will all insist on SEEING ALL EVIDENCE before responding to any of your concerns. Your gonna have your bluffs called !

    PACE AND BIKKIES please , now write down all your questions and present with all evidence . ta ta......

  4. Remember folks, this is an ongoing situation. l've replied to the Chief Super pointing out that his officers version is untrue and have evidence to prove it. No doubt he will reply and now ask for this evidence, something he should've done in the first place.

    l'd also like to re-iterate that the police were not our target so to speak. That's why we didn't push the police at the time of the incident. The UKBA are our target and shortly we should be able to post UKBA's response to our 'complaints'. This is quite interesting in itself because we actually didn't make any formal complaints to UKBA ... UKBA did it for us! They too, like the Chief Super, have not asked for the recordings of the incident.

    Interesting times! :)

  5. When will the police learn that the public are wising up?

  6. 'Kinell.

    "We're not stopping you but if you cross that line we'll arrest you."

    Blatant lies and an abuse of power, washed down with a dose of pig-headed stupidity. Policing a 21st century Britain.

  7. Fuxake.

    Remember though, that the police are not there to protect you. They swear an oath to the crown, not to the great unwashed.

    They may well protect and serve, it's just not YOU that they are protecting and serving.

    It's queenie.


  8. Britain is the most DISGUSTING country in the world - police and UKBA officers are racist, rude, filthy and openly abuse their power - then they have a complaints procedure to deal with the nonsense. What I dont understand is - despite all the bloody policing UK does - why they still have the 1) highest per capital violent crime rate in Europe, 2) LOWEST quality of life in Europe, 3) Highest rate of HATE crimes in the world and so many other social problems even amongst native british people. WHat a hell to live in that country - I lived there 2 years and moved to continental europe where no one behaves like this - and no one harasses you like this. In no other country in this world have I been watched on a CCTV dressed up in my prada clothes and bvlgari sunglasses looking like a Model walking around with a gucci bag - and suspected to be a shop lifter for absolutely no apparent reason. The police was watching me on CCTV for 45 mins then came up to me and stopped me asking to see proof of receipts of all the shopping i've done - and when I showed it to them - they said oh sorry we were watching you on CCTV and thought you may "appear" to be a shoplifter - why because I am so bloody well dressed so obviously I must be stealing all those clothes....jeez.....thats what you get for living in a country of CHAVS who have no style or class but a shitload of attitude. Yes I am a foreigner - not a muslim though but mediterranean background and yet questioned, harassed, intimidated so many times at UK borders and by the UK police - as a jetsetter - I travel around the world and nowhere else in europe have I faced such nonsense - in the rest of europe they stop and question "poorly dressed" people but in UK they question well dressed people because in that country they think everyone is a criminal or a terrorist. Maybe it has to do with Britain's own colonial past of being Glorified theives and terrorists themselves. The only kind of immigrant who really wants to go and live in UK now is a filthy immigrant who needs to misuse the system and do a lot of shit - the rest of us don't even want to spit on Britain anymore. The pope's cardinal called it a 3rd world country and in my eyes it is worse than a 5th world dictatorship....is britain even really a democracy?? Then why does it feel like a communist state with all that policing?? I would never step foot in that country again - they dont deserve my money.. not even a single penny more.


"In the eyes of the Tribunal the review letter contained several preconceptions, prejudgments and non-sequiturs"

"the absurdity of this reason is demonstrated by simply stating it"

"We therefore find that Mr Sked misdirected himself as to the Policy in carrying out the review and his decision is therefore one that no reasonable review officer could have arrived at."

... commonly known here at N2D as 'Skeds' ... that is to say these are Judges comments regarding UKBA Review Officer Ian Sked's reasons for rejecting peoples appeals against seizures.

Comments are now moderated to keep out spam and those with malicious intent. The author of this blog is not liable for the content of any comments ... period!