I sent a new copper a video of me being harassed via a ring doorbell....

And the result was simply another clear example of institutional ableism, which further demonstrate just how widespread these problems truly are, as I said before, this demonstrates clearly that the entire SNT is rotten to the core.

The new investigating officer from, from a different safer neighbourhood team, (so should not be prejudiced against me) asked me to submit any video evidence of recent harassment my way of abuse of video equipment.

So, I sent him 9 different videos, each one depicting a clear and obvious example of invasion of privately/harassment by abuse of video equipment, covering about a 12-week period.

I attached the videos and  filled out that the description explaining why I believed the evidence I was submitting demonstrated harassment.

I separately emailed over an itemised inventory, explaining in more detail exactly what is being exhibited and why way each demonstrates evidence of continued and wanted assessment behaviours including stalking/harassment.

This is part of the text that I submitted along with one of the videos:

"12/11/2022 12:32 ~ 12:41

MH and ND making repairs to equipment on the border garden, close to our house, this video demonstrates clearly that Mr ******* is both using his ring doorbell for ubiquitous surveillance, as he can be heard aggressively taunting us, and in so doing, he is also using this equipment to harass and intimidate. 

As unequivocally demonstrated by Mr *******'s running commentary, his ring doorbell can see our everyday legitimate comings and goings & activities very close to the house. 

This use is contrary to all ICO guidance, and in my opinion, fills all the legal tests, as it is highly unlikely anyone would reasonably consider this usage to be either fair or transparent. 

In my opinion, such use falls outside of legitimate interest, furthermore, using the two-way communication function to harass and make specific threats of future damage is itself also incredibly problematic, as this behaviour was objectively intended to create fear alarm and distress and it also caused me to hit my thumb with my hammer due to the distraction."

Sounds great so far doesn't it? Nice and simple for a change, a new investigation officer asked for specific evidence, I provided him evidence to demonstrate the offences with all necessary detail.

Well, no, I should have known better by now, ultimately, it was never going to be so easy.

Here is the text of an email I go back a few days later.

"Can I also clarify if the time and date is correct on the video footage from the front of your property? As from within that footage you are seen to be placing some kind of electrical device which emits a sound frequency in the front flower bed along the property boundary."

So just to be clear what's happening, once again, I *provide clear and unambiguous evidence* of offences committed *against me*, the victim of crime,.....

And the only response I get from the investigating officer, who was meant to be supporting my claim of harassment, ignores all of the obvious crimes being committed by the other guy and focuses instead on what *he believes* is I am doing wrong, and of course, trying to perpetuate this *ludacris fiction* that I am in some way, somehow, antagonising the other guy.

It would seem that, apparently I am committing the unforgivable sin of maliciously and with malice of forethought, repairing equipment that the other guy *has deliberately* smashed.

Where as, the other guy, apparently seems to have somehow acquired the right to *spy on me* and use his doorbell for the *purposes of harassment*.