Thursday, 20 December 2012

Melanie Ford Senior Casework Manager Independent Police Complaints Commission

On Wednesday, 19 December 2012, Mr Cercel receives the result of the complaint he raised against Mr Larkin, complaint which was investigated by Melanie Ford, Senior Casework Manager at the Independent Police Complaints Commission:


Friday, 7 December 2012

CONCLUSION

      Mr Cercel was victim of criminal offences and other human rights infringements by police officers of West Mercia Police Force – Worcester Police Station since 13 August 2011.

Between 13 August 2011 and 10 January 2012, Mr Cercel tried achieving equality and respect for his human rights by himself, without any help from any agency.
As it was obvious he will not succeed, since 30 January 2012 he started contacting and involving the I.P.C.C.


The I.P.C.C. has not followed procedures and failed to record “the more serious complaint” but sent it back to the Professional Standards Department of the police force to be dealt with as a “local resolution”.


At a later stage, the only result of the decision of involving the I.P.C.C. was that being aware of the investigation against them, the police officers started humiliating more and more the victim.
We can assume that at this stage the police officers (probably from past experience) were aware that nothing will happen to them.

The decision of Mr Andrew Larking took on 29 November 2012 seems to confirm this assumption.


TO CONCLUDE:
Mr Cercel was exposed to criminal offences, exposed to aggravated discriminative behaviour and “institutional racism” by members of West Mercia Police Force.

He was told that the only body that can take action against them is the I.P.C.C.

Months later, enduring a very humiliating wave of revenge from police officers who in their pride wanted to show him that he is less of a human being in comparison to them, Mr Cercel received humiliating correspondence as a result of his complaint, a response that could easily afect anyone`s health condition: “the police officers have not evicted you, that is your perception”.

This proves that foreigners have their racial vulnerabilities exploited in the United Kingdom both by civil offenders and by the bodies that should prevent those events from happening.


Monday, 3 December 2012

Internal Investigation Unit Independent Police Complaint Commission

On 3rd December 2012, Mr Cercel receives confirmation of his complaint against Mr Andrew Larkin.


EVIDENCE:

Internal Investigation Unit Independent Police Complaint Commission

On 30 November Mr Cercel complaints to the IIU of the IPCC against Mr Andrew Larkin and provides evidence against him and requests that he be taken to the Crown Prosecution Service to be criminally prosecuted.


EVIDENCE:

HATE OFFENDER Mr Andrew Larkin Independent Police Complaint Commission

As he was still in a state of shock, as the response of Mr Larkin meant that every HATE OFFENDER will continue to harass Mr Cercel and infringe his human rights, realising that the best way to get answers to his questions is by email, Mr Cercel emails Mr Larkin.

EVIDENCE:


Shortly after, Mr Larkin replies:

RACIST Mr Andrew Larking IPCC

Upon reading the findings of Mr Andrew Larkin, Mr Cercel calls him – as he was advised – to enquire about the shocking new he just received.


Please pay attention to the following discovery:

“Mr Cercel was not illegally evicted by police officers, as they just came to the house to prevent a breach of peace – we all know that the landlords were very aggressive and shouting and threatening – and that intervention ended with Mr Cercel being made homeless so that the landlords could be calmed down so that there would be no breach of peace”.


YOUTUBE EVIDENCE:

RACISM Mr Andrew Larkin Independent Police Complaint Commission

On 29 November 2012, Mr Andrew Larkin emails the victim explaining that his appeal has not been upheld as he has wrongfully been reporting “civil issue” and also because these are “civil issues” but not criminal ones, it was accepted for the police officers to disregards procedures and expose him to discriminating behaviour.


EVIDENCE:


LETTER
see page "Beyond Any Doubt"