I haven't posted since the end of December. As I had been reluctant to do so, as advised by my solicitors that any attack on the CPS or the police at a time when I was subject to the pending Magistrates' Court action could be counterproductive.

I am delighted to say that malicious action has now been withdrawn as against the public interest (in reality, because the evidence my solicitor has been exchanging with the CPS has made them realise what a poisoned chalice they were holding).

I am also delighted to say that our complaint to the CPS about hearing dates fiasco has been upheld. The CPS complaints process is real, unlike that run by the police. 

The date fiasco should be explained. At the initial Magistrates' Court hearing against me for self-defence April 2025, the date was fixed for my hearing for 23 April 2026. We then heard that the case against my assailant for his assault on me was fixed for 28 April 2026. The police and CPS were well aware that I could not attend either date because of my medical and disability needs. On neither occasion did the police check with either of us about availability of dates, so the case against my assailant was fixed for the 28th April 2026 without our input, a date when my father was due to be on his regular annual respite holiday in Portugal.

We immediately notified to the CPS, however they took no action until a couple of weeks ago, now being a year after the fact.

Unsurprisingly, the Magistrate couldn't be persuaded to move the date as it was by this point so close to the date and ignored my medical needs.

My father has had to cancel his holiday. A complaint was lodged with the CPS and has been fully upheld. It appears that, unlike the MET complaint process, the investigator actually conducted a proper inquiry and found the CPS and police answers were unsatisfactory. Apparently, at the time the date was originally fixed, the CPS told the magistrate that everything was clear up to the end of March. This made it seem that proper enquiry had been made about dates to be avoided.

It seems very likely they were misled by the SNT as no such question had ever been asked of us. Another case where SNT say what they wish to be the truth irrespective of the real facts. 

I had been really worried that the impact on me of fighting off this malicious action on the 23rd of April would have made me incapable of providing proper evidence on the 28th in the case against my assailant. With the dropping of the case against me, at least that problem has been solved. 

None of this alters the fact that there have been several raids on our garden over the last four months, which we can't fully evidence as having been committed by the assailant, because of the additional restrictions placed on our CCTV cameras.

We warned the judge at the time this was likely to happen but were ignored. Sadly we were told later that the judge in question is one who is alleged to believe that the police are always honest, true and accurate, and should be supported despite all the evidence to the contrary. Yet again in this case my assailant, through his ability to manipulate the police and, through the police, the judiciary, has used the civil justice system to act as his proxy in the continuing criminal offences against me. Criminalising the Victim.

The Hillsborough Charter might as well never have existed.