Law Enforcement – Letter Template

Template Letter  –  Law Enforcement

 

Notes :  Regarding documentation produced by the NPCC on “Operational Advice Responding to Hunting Incidents”.  This highly biased, non-impartial, one sided and highly questionable operational advice was written by “ DCC Paul Netherton” the leading officer currently investigating the Hunting Office webinars. It highlights that the NPCC main objective was not to control and prevent illegal hunting “Crime prevention” , but mainly to police hunts just for public disorder and what charges can be brought against people who monitors hunts, while mainly ignoring illegal hunting and all its associated crimes.

 

Please manually copy & paste  –  Recipients (each separately), Subject line, and Letter into your email browser.  

 

* It is best to separately email each recipient individually to reduce the risk of your email ending up in their junk folder, being bounced or blocked.

 


Step 1  :  Choose a recipient and then copy and paste into your email browser

 

Email to  :  Various Law enforcement bodies

 

info@npcc.pnn.police.uk

rebecca.lawrence@cps.gov.uk

privateoffice@cps.gov.uk

luke.pollard.mp@parliament.uk

enquiries@cps.gov.uk

correspondence@attorneygeneral.gov.uk

enquiries@lawcommission.gsi.gov.uk

general.enquiries@judicialconduct.gov.uk

nick.thomassymonds.mp@parliament.uk

david.lammy.mp@parliament.uk

kit.malthouse.mp@parliament.uk

sarah.jones.mp@parliament.uk

enquiries@apccs.police.uk

info@nationalruralcrimenetwork.net

homeaffcom@parliament.uk

contactus@college.pnn.police.uk

enquiries@policeconduct.gov.uk

tom.winsor@hmic.gsi.gov.uk

info@hmcpsi.gov.uk

webnews@mirror.co.uk

webnews@trinitymirror.co.uk

ben.rossington@mirror.co.uk

enquiries@peoples-press.com

granada.reports@itv.com

centralnews@itv.com

watchdog@bbc.co.uk

jane.dalton@independent.co.uk

Kerryanne@thecanary.co

c4investigations@itn.co.uk

dispatches@channel4.co.uk

panorama.reply@bbc.co.uk

theresa.villiers.mp@parliament.uk

angela.rayner.mp@parliament.uk

contact@hmic.gsi.gov.uk

IAComplaints@cps.gsi.gov.uk

suella.braverman.mp@parliament.uk

enquiries@napa.org.uk

**  Please also email your local police chief  **

  

Step 2  :  Copy & paste subject line into your email browser

 

Subject  :  Police Operational biased and non-impartial advice

 


 Step 3  :  Copy whole letter and paste into your email browser


Dear  sir / madam

 

Regarding documentation produced by the NPCC on “Operational Advice Responding to Hunting Incidents” which is standard operational directive for all police forces dealing with hunting incidents.

(Please see NPCC Operational Advice document, which includes our comments). 

file  :  NPCC Operational Advice Responding to Hunting Incidents.pdf

 

This operational advice was written by “ DCC Paul Netherton” the leading officer who’s force is currently investigating the Hunting Office webinars.

 

This document has been widely available to view for a number of years through a simple google search and has probably been seen by thousands of people.

 

Sections 1-6 is basically a copy and paste from the CPS website regarding legislation, however, …….. Section 7 onwards is more about DCC Paul Netherton’s personal input and setting out the police’s response. This unfortunately is where the non-impartial advice, unbalanced  policing and biased  operational directive starts creeping in.

 

How on earth this document got approved as police operations advice is shocking, as it’s highly biased, non-impartial and placing the main importance on “what charges can be brought against people who monitor hunts” while blatantly ignoring all the laws the hunts are breaking.

 

It highlights that the NPCC main objective was not to control and prevent illegal hunting “Crime prevention” , but mainly to police hunts just for public disorder and what charges can be brought against monitors.

This has been standard policing directive across the country regarding hunting. 

 

This highly biased advice documentation, now brings into question DCC Paul Netherton’s suitability and if their is a conflict of interest. 

Should DCC Paul Netherton be leading any investigation relating to hunting?

Or should this be an “Independent Inquiry/investigation”?

 

We are hoping this investigation into the webinars video will be fair, impartial and not a white wash as a cover for the high ranking officials involved. 

 

The whole of the country is now aware of the “Trail Hunting Lies & Smokescreens” and has made the Police/NPCC look total incompetent fools by accommodating this farce.

 

An independent review into the failings of police forces regarding illegal hunting should be conducted.

 

This operational advice is 17 pages long, so we have highlighted just some main points which we have found to be either :  misleading, biased, non-impartial, or failures which have enabled illegal hunting to continue.


(Please see NPCC Operational Advice document, which includes our comments). 

file  :  NPCC Operational Advice Responding to Hunting Incidents.pdf

This directive from the NPCC has highly contributed to the lack of police enforcement and prevention of illegal hunting and the police have to take responsibility for this.

 

We also feel that the Police’s relationship with the Hunting Office and the Countryside Alliance has been too close for the police to remain impartial and a review of the police’s relationship with these organisations is needed. 

 

In 2004 the Hunting Fraternity vowed that they would carry on hunting despite the ban and pledged civil disobedience to the Hunting Act.

 

For 15 years hunts have continued illegally hunting with intent under the guise of “Trail Hunting” and “Accidental Kills” which the police, CPS and Courts have naively accepted.

 

The police have been extremely gullible and naive buying into the “Trail Hunting Lies” and questions have been raised if this was intentional to enable a certain amount of illegal hunting to continue.

 Judging by the NPCC operational directive, especially the response section 7, strengthens this concern.

 

Why have the police not distanced themselves from these hunting organisations who :

 

  • Pledged civil disobedience. 
  • Regularly breaks the law with hundreds of prosecutions.
  • Deviously plots to create smokescreens that cover-up criminal intent.
  • Advises their members how to fool the police, courts and monitors.
  • Advises members how to commit perjury in court and get away with it.
  • Teaches “deceptive” tactics to “bypass” the law.
  • Teaches intent to commit a crime.
  • Deliberate intention of concealing an illegal hunting offence.
  • Conspire to pervert the course of justice.
  • Conspire to dispose of / tamper with evidence.
  • Extensive and reckless disregard for the law.

 

These are not just accusations, these are straight out the mouths of the hunting office officials, which cannot be denied how ever many times the hunting office tries to continue to lie and rebuff their own admissions.

 

There is absolutely no doubt they have purposely tried to cover their illegal intent and pervert the course of justice.

 

This brings the whole legal system and law enforcement into disrepute. 

 

The hunting fraternity first claimed that the webinars were fake (their usual defence lie), then they changed their defence to – the webinars have been taken out of context. 

 Link : Webinars Video 

Link : Transcripts of video 1 can be read here. 

Link : Transcripts of video 2 can be read here.
Link : HSA main article 


It is a fair assumption that people are going to judge them by what they actually said on video, heard by millions of people. 

There is no denying what was said, but still they are defiant claiming their admissions where taken out on context.

 

Policing is not just about catching criminals and prosecuting them, it’s also about preventing the crime in the first instance.

 

The police pride themselves on “Crime Prevention” but in 15 years of the Hunting Act the majority of police forces have failed dramatically to prevent illegal hunting and all its associated crimes.

 

The annual report on wildlife crime by the Wildlife and Countryside Link (WCL) an umbrella group of 57 organisations, reveals wildlife crime in Britain is rampant with “shockingly low conviction rates”.  

Experts say, the exploitation of wildlife is going unabated.

This is huge police failings, which it’s not surprising with their poor operations advice.

 

Fox, deer and hare hunting by hunts are some of the worst examples of police crime prevention failings.

 

The report condemns a “concerning lack of progress” by the National Police Chiefs Council wildlife crime strategy in reducing crimes and increasing prosecutions. 

 

The majority of police forces fail to even list foxhunting as a crime on their websites or in their wildlife crime strategy. This downplaying of the exploitation of wildlife is a great concern. 

 

Police often accuse those who monitor hunts of not handing in evidence of illegal hunting and choose to display this on social media instead.

Firstly : It’s not the job of the public to do the police’s job for them collecting evidence.

Secondly : It’s not surprising some monitors choose not to hand in evidence considering, the police’s directive, biased tendencies, and non-impartiality.  

 

On a rare occasion, you get a good police force that actually does intervene and stop hunts from their weekly bloodlust (Gloucestershire).

Cumbria Police Force must also be congratulated for their hunting awareness poster series.

We welcome this step in the right direction.

 

It is vitally important the police are seen to be impartial (not taking sides) and are non-biased in hunting matters to restore public confidence and trust.
This does not mean imparial to the point of not policing illegal hunting and all it’s associated crimes.

Currently on most police forces FB web pages, people are being blocked at an alarming rate if they dare to highlight this problem. It seems the police are desperately trying to down play illegal hunting.

 

A strengthened illegal hunting crime prevention strategy is urgently needed, especially now the release of the hunting office webinars videos. The whole country is now aware of the “Trail Hunting Lies & Smokescreens” and expect the police to rectify this problem they have contributed to.

 

Its probably best if the NPCC asks a non-biased impartial police officer to write operational advice next time.

 

And once again i stress, i hope this webinars scandal investigation is not going to be white washed.

 

The police have been accommodating the hunting fraternity for far too long and hunts have proven time and time again they are unable & unwilling to follow the law.  

 

 

Regards

Download this document file   :  NPCC Operational Advice Responding to Hunting Incidents.pdf