Freedom of Information request revealing the Ministry of Justice's involvement in criminally falsifying documents with Humberside Police as an accomplice deleted by WhatDoTheyKnow

1. Deleted by WhatDoTheyKnow
Criminal allegations of malfeasance and fraud
involving a false claim made by the MoJ
Pippa Clementine made this Freedom of Information request to Humberside Police
Pippa Clementine 29 March 2020
Dear Humberside Police,
Humberside police refused to record a crime initially when it was reported on 7 January 2017.
It was eventually instructed to do so by the then Independent Police Complaints Commission
(IPCC) on 28 July 2017, after a protracted period taking the matter through the statutory
complaints and appeals process. The matter was a serious (proven) case involving the
dishonest claims of a civil servant with the Ministry of Justice.
The matter (complaint/crime) was recorded on 9 August 2017 as follows:
"The complainant states the police have failed to investigate criminal allegations of
malfeasance and fraud involving a false claim made by Justices' clerk for Humber and South
Yorkshire that 10 items of post had been sent to him between the 19/12/2013 to 22/07/2016
which the complainant claims never to have received, and believes they were dishonestly
constructed later to satisfy enquiries made by the judicial ombudsman. The complainant
considers these matters should be investigated by Humberside Police as a Crime."
It was confirmed in writing on 17 September 2017 by a Detective Inspector that he had been
referred the matter to deal with. From then up until the outcome (date of letter 25 May 2018) he
communicated by email regarding the investigation on 3 occasions. Within those emails it was
shown manifestly that he had no intention of pursuing all reasonable lines of enquiry. For
example, he wrote to confirm that he had identified the person within the Justice clerk system
who he needed to speak with (he already had this information) and asked for other information
which he had already been provided with.
Another anomaly casting doubt as to the seriousness with which the investigation was being
pursued was an email purportedly sent by the Judicial Ombudsman (JACO) which stated that it
had "been approached by Humberside Police in connection with a complaint of corruption that
[had been] made regarding the North East Lincolnshire Council, including that [the
complainant] had not received letters that the Council had sent".
Enquiries should have been made about the missing letters purportedly sent by the Ministry of
Justice (MoJ), not the council. The outcome letter also supports that there was a fundamental
misunderstanding about what was required to be investigated on account of references to
enquiries made "with a number of Officers from North East Lincolnshire Council' and "Andrew
Hobley from the Local Government Ombudsman". Also the evidence which proved the
allegations beyond reasonable doubt was not even mentioned in the 25 May 2018 outcome
https://tinyurl.com/tw8w7ku
Q1. What experience does the Detective Inspector have that made the force consider he was
suitably qualified to investigate this matter
Q2. What field of expertise does the Detective Inspector normally work in

2. Yours faithfully,
Pippa Clementine
Humberside Police
To: Pippa Clementine (Account suspended) Date: 30 March 2020
Good Morning,
Section 8(1)(b) of the FOIA requires that a request for information must include the real name
of the requester. If the requester; fails to provide a name; can't be identified from the name
provided (for example because they have only used their first name or initials); or, is using an
obvious pseudonym, then the request won't meet the requirements of section 8(1)(b) and will
technically be invalid.
For a request to be valid, the requester must provide enough of their real name to give anyone
reading that request a reasonable indication of their identity. This means that if the staff
processing the request cannot identify the requester from the name provided, that request will
be invalid.
Whilst it is not routine that we would seek identification, we have determined that that on this
occasion owing similarities to previous requests we require your identification to proceed with
this request.
Kind Regards, Information Compliance Unit