This week (April 25-29) is National Stalking Awareness Week – an annual campaign developed by the Suzy Lamplugh Trust to raise awareness about the severity of stalking and focus on different issues related to the crime.
Stalking and harassment is when someone repeatedly behaves in a way that makes you feel scared, distressed or threatened. Stalking and harassment is a criminal offence.
Sussex PCC Katy Bourne looks at how Sussex is leading the way in tackling stalking. “We take stalking seriously in Sussex”
I have reported a stalker on several occasions to Sussex Police. Strangely Sussex Police have refused to record this as a crime or explain themselves. Seems odd that Sussex Police promote National Stalking Awareness Week when they don’t deal with a crime that they have evidence of ?
This week (April 25-29) is National Stalking Awareness Week. I have reported a stalker on several occasions to Sussex Police but they have refuse to record this as a crime. Do Sussex Police @sussex_police take stalking seriously in Sussex ?https://t.co/C9B7z3s0Sq
Immigration and Asylum Judge Sarah Pinder has come under scrutiny for her contributions to Free Movement, a website widely regarded as advocating for open borders,… Read more: Upper Tribunal Judge Sarah Pinder
In a move that has sparked alarm among civil liberties advocates, the Labour government in the United Kingdom is reportedly advancing plans to deploy artificial… Read more: Counter Disinformation Data Platform (CDDP)
The UK Home Office has released an updated version of the Crime Recording Rules for Frontline Officers and Staff, effective April 26th 2025. This 47-page document outlines the standardised procedures for recording crimes, ensuring consistency and accuracy across police forces in England and Wales. The guidelines aim to improve data integrity, enhance public trust, and support effective policing by providing clear instructions for officers and staff on the front lines.
The 2025 update builds on previous frameworks, refining the rules to reflect evolving crime trends, technological advancements, and feedback from law enforcement. It emphasizes the importance of recording crimes based on victim reports and available evidence, adhering to the National Crime Recording Standard (NCRS). The primary goal remains unchanged: to ensure crime data is victim-focused, transparent, and consistent, enabling better resource allocation and policy-making.
Core Principles
Victim-Centered Approach: Crimes must be recorded when a victim reports an incident, unless there is credible evidence to the contrary. The threshold for recording remains “on the balance of probabilities.”
Timeliness: Officers are required to log crimes within 24 hours of the report, barring exceptional circumstances.
Accuracy: The rules specify how to classify offenses, from violent crimes to cybercrimes, ensuring alignment with legal definitions under UK law.
Notable Changes in 2025
While the document retains much of its foundational structure, updates include:
Digital and Cybercrime: Expanded guidance on recording online offenses, such as fraud, harassment, and data breaches, reflecting their growing prevalence.
Hate Crimes: Strengthened emphasis on identifying and flagging hate-motivated incidents, with clearer criteria for officers.
Outcome Recording: Enhanced rules for documenting investigation outcomes, aiming to improve accountability and public reporting.
Practical Guidance for Officers
The document provides detailed scenarios and examples to assist frontline staff. For instance, it clarifies how to handle cases involving multiple victims or offenders, and when to record a crime as “attempted” versus “completed.” It also addresses common challenges, such as distinguishing between civil disputes and criminal acts.
Implications for Policing
These rules are part of a broader effort to modernize crime recording in the UK. By standardizing processes, the Home Office seeks to reduce administrative burdens on officers, allowing more time for active policing. The updates also respond to public and governmental calls for greater transparency in crime statistics, particularly amid debates over policing priorities and funding.
The Crime Recording Rules for Frontline Officers and Staff 2025 is a critical resource for law enforcement, balancing operational practicality with the need for reliable data. As crime continues to evolve, this framework ensures police forces are equipped to adapt while maintaining public confidence.
Immigration and Asylum Judge Sarah Pinder has come under scrutiny for her contributions to Free Movement, a website widely regarded as advocating for open borders,… Read more: Upper Tribunal Judge Sarah Pinder
In a move that has sparked alarm among civil liberties advocates, the Labour government in the United Kingdom is reportedly advancing plans to deploy artificial… Read more: Counter Disinformation Data Platform (CDDP)
In George Orwell’s seminal novel 1984, the Thought Police represent the ultimate tool of oppression, monitoring and punishing individuals not just for their actions but for their very thoughts. Orwell’s dystopian vision was a warning, a fictional exaggeration meant to provoke reflection on the dangers of authoritarian control. Yet, in 2025, that fiction seems to be inching closer to reality, as evidenced by a disturbing incident in Britain that has reignited debates about free speech, police priorities, and the creeping specter of thought control.
According to the Daily Mail article Knock knock, it’s the Thought Police, published on the 22nd February 2025, Helen Jones, a 54-year-old grandmother from Stockport, found herself on the receiving end of a police visit—not for committing a crime, but for posting criticism of local Labour councillors on Facebook. The councillors in question were embroiled in a scandal uncovered by The Mail on Sunday, involving a WhatsApp group where offensive messages, including a Labour MP’s wish that an elderly constituent would die were shared. Jones’s post called for their resignation, a sentiment many might consider a reasonable exercise of free expression. Yet, within 48 hours of a complaint, two plain-clothes officers knocked on her door.
Greater Manchester Police conceded that Jones had committed no crime. No charges were filed, no laws were broken. Still, the visit left her shaken, too intimidated to post on social media again. “I’ve effectively been silenced,” she told the Daily Mail. Critics have likened the officers’ actions to those of East Germany’s Stasi, the notorious secret police known for stifling dissent through fear and surveillance. The comparison is stark, but it’s hard to ignore the parallels: a citizen targeted not for illegal acts, but for voicing an opinion.
This incident raises uncomfortable questions about the state of free speech in Britain. At a time when police resources are stretched thin—thousands of serious crimes, from burglaries to assaults, go uninvestigated due to lack of manpower—why were detectives dispatched to confront a grandmother over a Facebook post?
The speed of the response is particularly jarring. The Daily Mail notes that within two days of the complaint, officers were at Jones’s door, a stark contrast to the often sluggish investigations into violent offenses or property crimes. It suggests a troubling skew in priorities, where policing thoughts takes precedence over policing streets.
The “Hope you Die” WhatsApp scandal itself is a messy affair. It led to the sacking of Health Minister Andrew Gwynne and the suspension of Burnley MP Oliver Ryan and 11 Labour Councillors after their vile messages came to light.
Public outrage was swift, and Jones was far from alone in her criticism. Yet, her case isn’t isolated. The Daily Mail article points to a growing trend of police investigating social media posts, citing examples like columnist Allison Pearson, feminist writer Julie Bindel, and former policeman Harry Miller, whose name was logged in a non-crime hate incident database for his online comments. These cases suggest a pattern: authorities increasingly treating speech as a potential offense, even when it falls short of illegality.
What’s driving this shift? Some argue it’s the fallout of vague hate speech laws, which give police broad discretion to interpret what constitutes an offense. Others point to a cultural shift, where public criticism—especially of those in power—prompts swift complaints from offended parties, triggering police action. In Jones’s case, the complaint’s origin remains unclear, but the response was immediate and intimidating. It’s a tactic that doesn’t need to result in prosecution to be effective; the mere act of a police visit can chill dissent, as it did for Jones.
The implications are profound. If expressing frustration with elected officials online can summon detectives to your doorstep, what’s next? The Daily Mail quotes critics accusing the police of wasting resources on “thought crimes” while real criminals roam free. It’s a sentiment echoed across social media, where users have decried the incident as an overreach of power and a betrayal of public trust. The phrase “Thought Police” has trended, not as a literary allusion, but as a lived experience.
This isn’t to say police shouldn’t investigate genuine threats or incitements to violence—those have clear legal boundaries. But Jones’s post, by all accounts, was neither. It was a call for accountability, not a call to harm. The distinction matters. When authorities blur the line between policing actions and policing opinions, they risk eroding the very freedoms they’re meant to protect.
Orwell’s Thought Police didn’t just punish; they instilled fear, ensuring citizens self-censored to avoid scrutiny. Helen Jones’s story suggests Britain may be flirting with a similar dynamic. As she retreats from social media, silenced by the knock of a detective, one wonders how many others will follow suit. The Daily Mail article serves as both a report and a warning: when the state prioritizes thoughts over crimes, the dystopia Orwell imagined ceases to be fiction. It becomes our reality.
Immigration and Asylum Judge Sarah Pinder has come under scrutiny for her contributions to Free Movement, a website widely regarded as advocating for open borders,… Read more: Upper Tribunal Judge Sarah Pinder
In a move that has sparked alarm among civil liberties advocates, the Labour government in the United Kingdom is reportedly advancing plans to deploy artificial… Read more: Counter Disinformation Data Platform (CDDP)
In an unprecedented move to tackle the rising threat of converted firearms within the UK, a national amnesty has been initiated for specific types of blank-firing guns, commonly known as top-venting blank firers (TVBFs). The amnesty which started on the 3rd February 2025 and concludes on the 28th February, 2025, targets four Turkish-manufactured models that tests have shown can be readily converted into lethal weapons.
The National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC), in collaboration with the National Crime Agency (NCA), National Ballistics Intelligence Service and various police forces across the country, has launched this amnesty following alarming evidence that these guns have been implicated in criminal activities, including at least four homicides since 2023. The models in question, produced by Retay, Ekol, Ceonic, and Blow, were initially designed for non-lethal uses such as starting races or theatrical performances. However, their convertibility into functioning firearms has caught the attention of law enforcement.
The top-venting blank firers are used by criminals and can be converted into lethal firearms.
During the last two years, policing and the NCA has identified and disrupted several workshops used to convert these pistols into lethal weapons.
In the same period, large numbers of converted weapons were recovered across multiple locations, alongside thousands of rounds of blank calibre and modified ammunition.
One investigation recovered more than 400 converted weapons from a single crime group. There is a strong demand for them evidenced by the numbers imported and subsequent recovery from criminals.
Stopping the sale of these top-venting blank firers from being converted will go a significant way to help protect the public.
The primary aim of this amnesty is to remove these potentially dangerous weapons from the public domain, reducing the risk they pose when falling into the wrong hands. According to the NPCC, while gun crime in the UK remains relatively low compared to other countries, the conversion of these blank-firing guns into lethal weapons presents a significant emerging threat. Since 2021, over 800 converted TVBFs have been recovered in criminal circumstances, highlighting the urgency of this initiative.
How the Gun Amnesty Works
During the amnesty period, individuals who possess any of these four models can surrender them at local police stations without facing prosecution for the illegal possession of these now-banned firearms. This leniency is intended to encourage those who might have these guns for legitimate, non-criminal purposes to hand them over.
The guns will not only be removed from circulation but will also be analysed to see if they have been involved in previous criminal acts, thereby potentially aiding in ongoing investigations.
Public Response and Implications
The response from the public has been cautiously optimistic. Many see this amnesty as a chance to rectify unintended possession of these newly classified illegal firearms. There’s an acknowledgment among communities that while these guns might have been bought legally or even as souvenirs from trips, their potential for misuse is now too significant to ignore.
Law enforcement officials, including Assistant Chief Constable Tim Metcalfe, the NPCC Lead for the Criminal Use of Firearms, have stressed the importance of public cooperation. “This initiative is about protecting our communities by ensuring these firearms don’t end up being used for criminal intent,” Metcalfe stated. “We urge anyone with these weapons to do the responsible thing and surrender them.”
Legal Implications Post Amnesty
Post-amnesty, the possession of these TVBFs will be strictly prohibited, with severe penalties including up to 10 years in prison for those caught with one. This crackdown is part of broader efforts by UK law enforcement to control the proliferation of firearms and reduce gun-related crimes.
The amnesty also serves as a reminder of the broader issue of firearm conversion in the UK, prompting discussions on the need for tighter regulations on the import and sale of blank-firing guns and other similar devices.
Immigration and Asylum Judge Sarah Pinder has come under scrutiny for her contributions to Free Movement, a website widely regarded as advocating for open borders,… Read more: Upper Tribunal Judge Sarah Pinder
In a move that has sparked alarm among civil liberties advocates, the Labour government in the United Kingdom is reportedly advancing plans to deploy artificial… Read more: Counter Disinformation Data Platform (CDDP)
A Non-Crime Hate Incident (NCHI) in the UK refers to any incident where an individual or group perceives that they have been subjected to hostility or prejudice based on race, religion, sexual orientation, disability, or transgender identity, even if no criminal activity has taken place. Here are key points about NCHIs:
Definition: It is defined as any non-crime incident which is perceived by the victim or any other person to be motivated by hostility or prejudice. This perception does not require evidence or justification from the victim regarding the hostility.
Purpose: NCHIs are recorded by the police to monitor community tensions, potential risks of escalation into more serious incidents or crimes, and to provide data for understanding patterns of prejudice or hostility.
Recording Criteria: Not all perceived hate incidents are recorded as NCHIs. There are specific criteria:
The incident must disturb an individual’s, group’s, or community’s quality of life or cause concern.
The incident must meet an additional threshold if personal data is to be recorded, indicating a real risk of significant harm or future criminal offence against individuals or groups with the same characteristic.
Legal Implications: While NCHIs do not result in criminal charges, they can appear in enhanced Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks, which might affect employment opportunities, especially in sectors requiring such checks.
Freedom of Speech: Recent guidance and legal reviews have emphasized balancing the recording of NCHIs with the protection of free speech, ensuring that trivial, irrational, or malicious reports do not lead to the recording of personal data unless necessary. The Free Speech Union published An Orwellian Society: Non-Crime Hate Incidents and the policing of speech.
Public and Legal Scrutiny: There has been scrutiny over NCHIs, with concerns that they might infringe on free speech or be used maliciously. Changes in guidance now aim for a more proportionate approach where NCHIs are only recorded when deemed absolutely necessary and not merely based on someone being offended.
The scale of the investigation has now become clear, with officers from the Metropolitan Police, Sussex Police and Essex Police all having handled the complaint over the past year.
The Telegraph understands that the post was reported to the Metropolitan Police as a potential breach of the Malicious Communications Act in November last year. The case was then passed to Sussex Police, which marked it as a possible non-crime hate incident (NCHI) as well as a potential malicious communication.
Sussex Police passed it to Essex, where Pearson lives.
Incidents such as the Allison Pearson tweet are supposed to be part of a broader effort to address and monitor hate-related issues in society without necessarily involving criminal law and sanctions. They can still have implications for the individuals involved due to the recording of such incidents by the police.
Immigration and Asylum Judge Sarah Pinder has come under scrutiny for her contributions to Free Movement, a website widely regarded as advocating for open borders,… Read more: Upper Tribunal Judge Sarah Pinder
In a move that has sparked alarm among civil liberties advocates, the Labour government in the United Kingdom is reportedly advancing plans to deploy artificial… Read more: Counter Disinformation Data Platform (CDDP)
The “High Sheriff” is an independent non-political Royal appointment for a single year only. There are 55 High Sheriffs serving the counties of England and Wales. The post is unpaid (except for a nominal court attendance allowance), and the general expenses of the office are borne personally by the holder.
There is a High Sheriff for each county in England and Wales, although the Shrieval Counties (“Shrieval” means anything to do with a Sheriff) no longer align with administrative areas, this creates a mix between the traditional counties and more recent local authority areas.
Historical Role: The office dates back to Anglo-Saxon times, originally appointed to enforce law and order in a shire (county). The ‘Shire Reeve’ was responsible to the king for the maintenance of law and order within the shire, or county, and for the collection and return of taxes due to the Crown. Of the 63 clauses in the Magna Carta of 1215, no less than 27 relate to the role of the Sheriff and from 1254 the High Sheriff supervised the election to Parliament of two Knights of the Shire. Over centuries, the role has evolved significantly.
Current Duties: Today, the High Sheriff has mostly ceremonial and social responsibilities rather than law enforcement duties:
To lend active support to the principal organs of the Constitution within their county – the Royal Family, the Judiciary, the Police and other law enforcement agencies, the emergency services, local authorities, and church and faith groups
To take an active part in supporting and promoting the voluntary sector and giving all possible encouragement to the voluntary organisations within a County, particularly those involved with crime reduction and social cohesion.
To ensure the welfare of visiting High Court Judges, to attend on them at Court and to offer them hospitality
To make a meaningful contribution to the High Sheriff’s County during the year of Office and to uphold and enhance the ancient Office of High Sheriff
To support the Lord-Lieutenant on royal visits and on other occasions as appropriate
Appointment: High Sheriffs are appointed annually but serve in a different year from when they are nominated due to a unique system.
It is the responsibility of each High Sheriff to provide the names of people suitable to serve in the future. These names are added to the list of Sheriffs, and every November at a ceremony in the High Court the Lord Chief Justice and three other judges formally add as many new names for each county as are needed to ensure that there are Sheriffs in nomination for each of the next three years. A Sheriff needs to own property in the county for which he or she is nominated. The following March The King, at a meeting of the Privy Council, formally selects one of the three nominated Sheriffs to serve for the next twelve months by literally pricking a hole through his or her name on the List with a bodkin.
Title: The title is “High Sheriff”, not “Sheriff”, which distinguishes it from historical or fictional roles like the American sheriff or the ancient English sheriff with broader law enforcement powers.
Symbolism: High Sheriffs have traditional symbols like the Badge of Office and might carry a ceremonial sword, which represents their historical role in maintaining law and order.
The position Of High Sheriff maintains a link to the past, preserving traditions while adapting to serve modern community needs. High Sheriffs often work to enhance community cohesion and support local law enforcement and emergency services in non-executive capacities.
Immigration and Asylum Judge Sarah Pinder has come under scrutiny for her contributions to Free Movement, a website widely regarded as advocating for open borders,… Read more: Upper Tribunal Judge Sarah Pinder
In a move that has sparked alarm among civil liberties advocates, the Labour government in the United Kingdom is reportedly advancing plans to deploy artificial… Read more: Counter Disinformation Data Platform (CDDP)
Drugs are being openly sold on the streets by drug dealers with seemingly little to no action being taken by the Police to deal with this. The streets also stink of weed.
I gave up ringing 101 and attending local policing meetings. It’s pointless the police seem more than happy for a large group of men to openly deal on the street every single day of the week and have them and their customers urinating and defecating in the streets.
Drug misuse harms the health and wellbeing of many people. There are a number of different criminal offences which should restrict the supply and use of harmful substances.
It is illegal to possess, supply and produce controlled drugs. It is also illegal to import or export drugs, or to allow your premises to be used for drug production.
The legal restrictions placed on the use of controlled drugs are aimed at preventing drug misuse. The principal offences relating to the misuse of controlled drugs are contained in the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (“the Act”) and most of the offences dealt with in this guidance are created by the Act. The primary objective of the Act is the control of the use and distribution of dangerous and harmful drugs. The Act classifies the drugs according to their relative degree of overall harm from misuse.
Controlled drugs fall into three different categories, Class A, B or C, according to their danger or how harmful they are. The sentences for drug offences are different for each class of drugs. Class A drugs are the most harmful, and will lead to a greater sentence.
A drug dealer is an individual who illegally sells or distributes drugs. These drugs can range from illegal substances like cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, or marijuana (in places where it’s not legally regulated) to prescription medications that are sold without a prescription or for non-medical use.
The Statute of Limitations establishes time limits within which legal actions can be brought against individuals or entities for various offenses. There is no time limit for prosecution in England and Wales for drug dealing offences.
On Sunday 22nd September 2024 @ 17:40 whilst I was on the Walworth Road/Camberwell Road in SE17 close to the 100% Holy Café, I witnessed 3 drug deals being carried out brazenly in the street. I later witnessed another drug deal in a local pub by one of the same individuals.
Several Met Police cars drove past (all being driven one handed) and I attempted to flag one down. The officer in passenger seat made eye contact but they decided to ignore me. I assume the officers were coming from Walworth Police Station 12-28 Manor Place SE17 3RL.
I regularly travel through South London and I regularly see drug deals on the streets. I never see any Met Police officers on foot patrol. Met Police patrol cars just drive by seemingly oblivious to crimes being committed on the streets.
If you’re concerned about drug-related crime in your area or think someone may be a victim of drug exploitation, please call us on 101.
If it’s an emergency, please call 999. If you have a hearing or speech impairment, use our textphone service 18000. Or text us on 999 if you’ve pre-registered with the emergencySMS service
I live in Crawley West Sussex and I regularly see drug deals on the streets. I never see any Sussex Police officers on foot patrol (anytime) or in police cars at night.
The suspects are usually illegally riding a speed modified e-scooter or e-bikes and have their face covered. Home delivery of drugs by car also seems very popular in some parts of town.
Superintendent Asghar EB821 can be contacted by email Imran.Asghar@sussex.police.uk. Maybe he would like to do something positive about drug crime on his “manor” ?
If you’re concerned about drug-related crime in your area or think someone may be a victim of drug exploitation, please call us on 101.
If it’s an emergency, please call 999. If you have a hearing or speech impairment, use our textphone service 18000. Or text us on 999 if you’ve pre-registered with the emergencySMS service
Drugs are being openly sold on the streets by dealers, in my opinion, with seemingly little to no action being taken by the Police (Met and Sussex) to deal with this. Is open drug dealing an issue in your area ? #Policehttps://t.co/DMblhIMXDs
Immigration and Asylum Judge Sarah Pinder has come under scrutiny for her contributions to Free Movement, a website widely regarded as advocating for open borders,… Read more: Upper Tribunal Judge Sarah Pinder
In a move that has sparked alarm among civil liberties advocates, the Labour government in the United Kingdom is reportedly advancing plans to deploy artificial… Read more: Counter Disinformation Data Platform (CDDP)
Facial Recognition (FR) technology can be used in a number of ways by the Police, including to prevent and detect crime, find wanted criminals, safeguard vulnerable people, keep the people safe. and to protect people from harm.
The typical uses of FR technology for policing are:
as a real-time aid to help officers to help them locate people on a ‘watchlist’ who are sought by the Police;
as an operator initiated tool for officers who decide they need to take an image of a person and then use Facial Recognition software to help them establish who that person is. This helps the Police even if that person provides false or misleading details. This use of FR can also help provide an identification of someone who is unconscious or seriously injured and unable to communicate who they are;
as a retrospective system to be used after an event to help officers establish who a person is or whether their image matches against other media held on databases.
Police and private companies in the UK have been quietly rolling out facial recognition surveillance cameras, taking ‘faceprints’ of millions of people — often without you knowing about it. This is an enormous expansion of the surveillance state — and it sets a dangerous precedent worldwide. We must stop this dangerously authoritarian surveillance now.
Live Facial Recognition (LFR) cameras are focused on a specific area so that when people pass through that area their images are streamed directly to the Live Facial Recognition system and compared to a watchlist.
All deployments are targeted, intelligence-led, time-bound, and geographically limited. It lets forces place their effort where it is likely to have the greatest effect. Before a deployment, the police will inform the public where they intend to use the technology and where they can obtain more information on its use.
Following a possible LFR alert, it is always a police officer on the ground who will decide what action, if any, to take. If the LFR system does not make a match with the watchlist, a person’s biometric data is deleted immediately and automatically. The watchlist is destroyed after each operation.
Retrospective Facial Recognition (RFR)
The images or short videos that are being searched after the event, are typically obtained from CCTV, mobile phone footage or have been supplied by members of the public. These images can then be searched for example against some of the Police’s custody image databases. If the system indicates a match then a human will always review this and they will decide if they think it is a match or not.
The use of operator initiated facial recognition which takes an image of a particular person and uses it to either (i) help policing establish who a person in the image is or (ii) establish where a person has previously appeared in other media held by the police
Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary uses Facial Recognition Technology in the following cases:
Live Facial Recognition (LFR) compares a live camera feed of faces against a predetermined watchlist to find a possible match that generates an alert.
Retrospective Facial Recognition (RFR) is a post event use of facial recognition technology, which compares still images of faces of unknown subjects against a reference image database in order to identify them.
Operator Initiated Facial Recognition (OIFR) is a mobile phone use of FRT technology, which compares a photograph of a person’s face taken on a mobile phone to the predetermined watchlist to assist an officer to identify a subject.
Auditing Britain published a video of his interaction with the Met Police and was rudely spoken to and the door to their Live Facial Recognition Van was regularly closed. Do the Met Police have something to hide ?
Immigration and Asylum Judge Sarah Pinder has come under scrutiny for her contributions to Free Movement, a website widely regarded as advocating for open borders,… Read more: Upper Tribunal Judge Sarah Pinder
In a move that has sparked alarm among civil liberties advocates, the Labour government in the United Kingdom is reportedly advancing plans to deploy artificial… Read more: Counter Disinformation Data Platform (CDDP)
Why did Sussex Police wait 9 days to inform the public ?Surely Sussex Police have a duty to let Sussex residents know that their Chief Constable has retired ?Not very transparent and almost as if the Police have something to hide.
In the same document pack, there is a copy of the letter Jo Shiner wrote to the Sussex PCC on the 14th June 2024. The Sussex PCC replied on the 25th June 2024. The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 requires a transparent and open process. Why did the PCC stay quiet until the 10th September 2024 ?
I am still perplexed how the Chief Constable of Sussex Police can retire (and be rehired next month by the PCC), an Acting Chief Constable be appointed and the people of Sussex (and the UK) were not told.
Confirmation Hearing for the Proposed Chief Constable of Sussex Police (Pages 37 – 58)
On 10 September, the Panel was formally notified of the proposal of Sussex Police and Crime Commissioner to appoint a Chief Constable of Sussex Police. The attached report by the Clerk to the Panel provides details of the Panel’s role in the confirmation hearing for the proposed appointment of the Chief Constable of Sussex Police. The appendices and annexes to the report comprise information from the Police and Crime Commissioner regarding the proposed appointment. The Panel is to ask the candidate questions relating to their professional competence and personal independence.
On the 1st October 2024 Jo Shiner was reappointed as the Chief Constable of Sussex Police until 2027 after a short break under the Retire and Rejoin scheme.
The latest HMICFRS inspection of Sussex Police PEEL 2021/22 was published on the 13th April 2023 ? Should we continue to reward failure ? Is Jo Shiner the best person Sussex Police have for the job ?
“This way she can start claiming her pension and, on her return get her full salary without any pension deductions. Nice work if you can get it. If she has retired the job needs to go through the correct selection process.”
There was no announcement on the Sussex Police News website…..however the reason for the BBC news article and announcement may become clear. ⬇
An email was sent to the Sussex Police Media Team on Monday 9th September in relation to a Facebook post about gifts of Samosa’s to Crawley Police. The email also asked questions about the Senior Leadership including Chief Constable Jo Shiner missing from the Sussex Police website……
From: Dom Watts Sent: Monday, September 9, 2024 10:06 AM To: media.hq@sussex.police.uk Cc: pcc@sussex-pcc.gov.uk; PSD.Main@Sussex.pnn.police.uk Subject: Crawley Police and the Gifts, Gratuities and Hospitality Policy – Facebook Samosa Gifts
Dear Sussex Police Media Team
(cc Katy Bourne Sussex PCC and Sussex Police PSD)
I am a citizen journalist at the Ministry of Injustice website and also a Crawley resident. I am currently writing an article in response to a post made by Crawley Police on their Facebook page (As below) on Friday 6th September 2024 about gifts of Samosa’s to the Police on World Samosa Day (5th September 2024).
This Facebook post is another terrible social media post by Crawley Police, and is not a great optic for the Police at a time of greater scrutiny in light of public claims of two tier policing.
1.3 As a guiding principle, Police Officers, Special Constables and Police Staff must not accept the offer of any gift, gratuity, favour or hospitality without prior approval from the JFVU. This allows an independent assessment of any potential compromise or conflict of interest.
1.4 Offers of a gift, gratuity or hospitality vary widely and could range from a reasonable display of gratitude and common courtesy, which does not breach integrity of any party, through to criminal offences such as a breach of the Bribery Act 2010 (legislation.gov.uk)
3.1 All gifts, gratuities and hospitality require approval from the JFVU before they can be accepted. Police Officers, Special Constables and Police Staff must complete an application form as soon as possible or within a maximum of 7 days from the receipt of the gift, gratuity or prior to any hospitality offered. The gift, gratuity or hospitality must remain with the applicant’s line manager, until approval has been given from the JFVU.
4.3 The Gift, Gratuity and Hospitality policy is intended to manage low value items only and as a guide an upper limit of £20 is considered appropriate.
Could you please provide any comments on the following please :-
Was advice Sought from the Joint Force Vetting Unit (JFVU) in accepting these gifts ?
Have these gifts been recorded by the JFVU ?
Did Superintendent Nick Dias or Chief Inspector Will Keating-Jones accept the gifts ? Was it another officer ?
Does the photo show all the samosa’s that were gifted ? How many Samosa’s were gifted ?
Was the health and safety of the Front Line officers considered when accepting these gifts ?
What is the benefit to policing in accepting these gifts ?
Do senior officers in Sussex Police regularly take time away from policing to accept freebies and photo opportunities ?
Could you please arrange for this page to be updated along with any missing bio’s. Can you please share any publicity photos of these senior officers ?
@PSD.Main@Sussex.pnn.police.uk If any offences have been committed by Superintendent Nick Dias, Chief Inspector Will Keating-Jones or any other officers, could you please furnish me with a crime number and PSD reference.
To be clear, I am not a racist or from the far right. My aunt is of Asian descent and makes brilliant Samosa’s !
Thanks for your time and I look forward to your response.
Regards
Email to Sussex Police Media Team 9th September 2024
Is news about gifts of Samosa’s more important to the public than the retirement of the Chief Constable ?
An email response was received from Sussex Police Media Team……..
From: <xxx.xxx@sussex.police.uk> Sent: Monday, September 9, 2024 12:19 PM To: Dom Watts Cc: pcc@sussex-pcc.gov.uk; PSD Main <PSD.Main@sussex.police.uk> Subject: RE: Crawley Police and the Gifts, Gratuities and Hospitality Policy – Facebook Samosa Gifts
Good afternoon Dom,
Thank you for your email. I hope this gives some clarification regarding the samosas which were received at Crawley police station from Ashwin Soni, Director of Diverse Crawley.
Samosas were delivered to police and other emergency services by Ashwin to help celebrate World Samosa Day.
Ashwin is a valued member of the community as well as a member of multiple independent advisory groups who work closely with Sussex Police.
This kind gesture was gratefully received by Superintendent Nick Dias and Chief Inspector Will Keating-Jones, who is the Hindu Faith lead for Sussex Police, as part of their ongoing engagements with the local community and stakeholders, a core part of senior officers’ duties.
The gift of around 40 samosas was inputted on the Gifts Register and forwarded to vetting for awareness.
Thank you for highlighting information on our website.
Will Keating-Jones was promoted to Chief Inspector, which will be reflected on the website. Superintendent Imran Asghar’s rank is correct.
In relation to the Chief Constable, please can I direct your request to the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Sussex?
I hope this answers any questions you may have. If you require any more information, please do let me know.
Many thanks
Email response from Sussex Police Media Team 9th September 2024
A follow up email was sent to the Sussex Police Media Team and the Sussex Police and Crime Commissioner
From: Dom Watts Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 10:08 AM To: <xxx.xxx@sussex.police.uk>; pcc@sussex-pcc.gov.uk Subject: RE: Crawley Police and the Gifts, Gratuities and Hospitality Policy – Facebook Samosa Gifts Importance: High
Good Morning xxx
Many thanks for your speedy reply, for clarifying the correct procedure was followed in relation to the “gifts” and for updating the Sussex Police Senior Leadership page.
I see that the reason for your response “In relation to the Chief Constable, please can I direct your request to the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Sussex?”
was answered by the BBC @ 1.32pm the same day
@pcc@sussex-pcc.gov.uk Why did Sussex Police wait 9 days to inform the public ? Surely Sussex Police have a duty to let Sussex residents know that their Chief Constable has retired ? Not very transparent and almost as if the Police have something to hide. Could you please reply to me separately about this ?
Jo Shiner, Sussex Police Chief Constable, formally retired on the 31st August 2024 but will return in a month !
Why did Sussex Police wait 9 days to inform the public ? Not very transparent and almost as if the Police have something to hide? #Policehttps://t.co/8jZt4TcA49
The Sussex Police and Crime Panel met on Friday 27 September 2024 (10.30am start) at County Hall, Lewes. The deadline for residents to submit written questions is 12 noon on Friday 13 September 2024…..
From: Dom Watts Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2024 9:16 AM To: pcp@westsussex.gov.uk Subject: Written questions to the Sussex PCP Meeting 27th September 2024
Dear Sussex Police and Crime Panel
The deadline for residents to submit written questions is 12 noon on Friday 13 September 2024.
I am perplexed how the Chief Constable of Sussex Police can retire (and be rehired next month by the PCC), an Acting Chief Constable be appointed and the people of Sussex (and the UK) were not told.
Why did Sussex Police wait 9 days to inform the public via the BBC ? Surely Sussex Police have a duty to let Sussex residents know that their Chief Constable has retired ?
Is there something to hide ? Not very transparent and almost as if the PCC/Police have something to hide.
My questions to the Sussex PCP have been accepted….
From: Ninesh Edwards <xxx.xxx@westsussex.gov.uk> On Behalf Of Police Crime Panel Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2024 3:46 PM To: Dom Watts Cc: Tiffany Taylor ; Jack Bacon Subject: Your written Question
Hello again Dominic,
I can confirm that your question(s) have been accepted as written questions for the meeting on 27 September.
The PCC’s written response will be published just before the meeting (available via the link given in 3. below) and the members of the Panel can ask supplementary questions at the meeting, having read the Commissioner’s response.
You can follow the meeting live on 27 September via the webcast here: https://eastsussex.public-i.tv/core/portal/home. The meeting is being held in public, but the public can only observe (i.e. not participate). The meeting will be in Lewes, East Sussex, and will start at 10:30.
The papers for the meeting will be published here (on or around 19 September): https://sussexpcp.gov.uk/meetings/. As stated above, the report for the “Questions for the Commissioner” item will be updated on the morning of the meeting, to include the PCC’s written responses.
Jo Shiner Biography before Appointment as Chief Constable
Jo Shiner joined Sussex Police as Deputy Chief Constable at the end of 2018. She started her policing career in Norfolk in 1993, serving up to the rank of Chief Superintendent before transferring on promotion to Kent as Assistant Chief Constable in 2014.
Jo’s career in the police spans 28 years, during which time she has undertaken a wide variety of roles. These have predominantly been operational, both in uniform and within the Child and Adult Protection Unit, CID and as a firearms, public order and critical incident commander.
As Deputy Chief Constable, Jo is responsible for the smooth and effective running of Sussex Police, and delivering the services that the communities deserve. As part of this she is passionate about supporting local groups and addressing issues that really matter to our communities.
In January 2020 she took over the NPCC National Lead for the policing of Children and Young People. She is also the NPCC National Lead for police fitness.
Immigration and Asylum Judge Sarah Pinder has come under scrutiny for her contributions to Free Movement, a website widely regarded as advocating for open borders,… Read more: Upper Tribunal Judge Sarah Pinder
In a move that has sparked alarm among civil liberties advocates, the Labour government in the United Kingdom is reportedly advancing plans to deploy artificial… Read more: Counter Disinformation Data Platform (CDDP)
Police and crime commissioners (PCCs) are directly elected politicians and are responsible for overseeing the non-operational aspects of policing. Their journey began in 2012 when they replaced the old police authorities. Since then, it is said that PCCs have been diligently working to secure an “efficient and effective” police force for their respective areas.
In England and Wales, PCCs are elected by the public to hold the police force to account on their behalf. PCCs aim to cut crime and deliver an effective and efficient police service within their police force area. Police and Crime Commissioners: make sure the police force budget is spent effectively.
Election: PCCs are elected by the public. On the 2nd May 2024, elections took place for 37 police and crime commissioners (PCCs) who set policing priorities and hold to account police forces across most of England and Wales. Police & Crime Commissioner elections are held every 4 years.
Coverage: They represent every police force area in England and Wales, except for London, Greater Manchester, and West Yorkshire (where elected mayors hold these powers). Different arrangements exist in the City of London. Scotland and Northern Ireland have separate policing structures due to devolution. Police and crime commissioners for each police area listed in Schedule 1 to the Police Act 1996 (police areas outside London).
The Powers and Functions of PCCs
Appointing and Holding to Account:
PCCs appoint and, if necessary, dismiss the chief constable. This role is critical for maintaining effective leadership within the police force.
They hold the chief constable accountable for delivering the police and crime plan, which outlines local policing priorities.
Setting Objectives and Budgets:
PCCs set the police and crime objectives for their area through a comprehensive plan.
They also determine the force budget and decide on the precept which is a council tax charge specifically for policing.
Collaboration and Coordination:
PCCs bring together various community safety and criminal justice partners to ensure that local priorities are aligned.
While they’re not responsible for operational policing (that remains with chief constables), they play a crucial role in coordinating efforts.
Operational Independence:
The relationship between PCCs and chief constables is guided by the Policing Protocol Order 2011. It emphasizes safeguarding operational independence while allowing PCCs to fulfil their statutory roles.
Additionally, the Policing and Crime Act 2017 introduced the possibility for PCCs to take on responsibility for fire and rescue governance, becoming a police, fire, and crime commissioner (PFCC).
secure an efficient and effective police for their area
appoint the Chief Constable, hold them to account, and if necessary dismiss them
set the police and crime objectives for their area through a police and crime plan
set the force budget and determine the precept [the amount people pay through council tax for policing]
contribute to the national and international policing capabilities set out by the Home Secretary
bring together community safety and criminal justice partners to make sure local priorities are joined up.
How to complain about a Police and Crime Commissioner
To complain about your Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC), PFCC, mayor or deputy mayor for policing and crime, contact your local police and crime panel. Your local council will provide contact details.
Each police force area has a Police and Crime Panel to provide checks and balances in relation to the performance of the Police and Crime Commissioner. The role of the Panel is to scrutinise the performance of the Commissioner and ensure transparency.
The Panel provides checks and balances in relation to the performance of the PCC. The Panel does not scrutinise the Chief Constable – it scrutinises the PCC’s exercise of their statutory functions. While the Panel is there to challenge the PCC, it must also exercise its functions with a view to supporting the effective exercise of the PCC’s functions. This includes :-
(a) the power of veto (outside the Metropolitan Police District), by a two-thirds majority of the total Panel membership, over the level of the PCC’s proposed precept;
(b) the power of veto (outside the Metropolitan Police District), by a two-thirds majority of the total Panel membership, over the PCC’s proposed candidate for Chief Constable;
(d) the power to review the draft Plan and make recommendations to the PCC who must have regard to them;
(e) the power to review the PCC’s Annual Report and make reports and recommendations at a public meeting, which the PCC must attend;
(f) the power to require relevant reports and information in the PCC’s possession (except those which are operationally sensitive) to enable them to fulfil their statutory obligations;
(g) the power to require the PCC to attend the Panel to answer questions;
(h) the power (outside the Metropolitan Police District) to appoint an acting Police and Crime Commissioner where the incumbent PCC is incapacitated, resigns or is disqualified, and
(i) responsibility for complaints about a PCC, although serious complaints and conduct matters must be passed to the IOPC in line with legislation.
A Police and Crime Panel does not have the power to examine the decisions reached by the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) and/or their office in respect of such reviews, and is not the correct body of recourse to challenge such decisions made the PCC and/or their office. Such decisions can be subject to judicial review.
Immigration and Asylum Judge Sarah Pinder has come under scrutiny for her contributions to Free Movement, a website widely regarded as advocating for open borders,… Read more: Upper Tribunal Judge Sarah Pinder
In a move that has sparked alarm among civil liberties advocates, the Labour government in the United Kingdom is reportedly advancing plans to deploy artificial… Read more: Counter Disinformation Data Platform (CDDP)
This week (April 25-29) is National Stalking Awareness Week – an annual campaign developed by the Suzy Lamplugh Trust to raise awareness about the severity of stalking… Read more: National Stalking Awareness Week – Sussex Police
The UK Home Office has released an updated version of the Crime Recording Rules for Frontline Officers and Staff, effective April 26th 2025. This 47-page… Read more: New Crime Recording Rules for UK Frontline Police Officers and Staff
Immigration and Asylum Judge Sarah Pinder has come under scrutiny for her contributions to Free Movement, a website widely regarded as advocating for open borders,… Read more: Upper Tribunal Judge Sarah Pinder
In a move that has sparked alarm among civil liberties advocates, the Labour government in the United Kingdom is reportedly advancing plans to deploy artificial… Read more: Counter Disinformation Data Platform (CDDP)
