Victimisation and Attempted Prosecution by Jobcentre

[FitzWilliam]

THE SECURITY GUARD IS GONE!!!! :D:D:D:D

 

I've been dying to say that for weeks!

 

This is definitely confirmed, and she is gone for good. The handover period was on Thursday and Friday when she and her replacement were there both days.

 

She continued her offensive behaviour to the last, causing a huge scene in the jobcentre on Thursday; and she called the police to escort her from the building on her last day ...

 

I've just phoned my friend with the good news and we're off now to spread the word.

 

Busy day ahead. Update later ...

[FitzWilliam]

More good news today.

 

My friend just got a letter signed by a woman called a 'Specialist Welfare Benefits Advisor and Senior Case Worker'. It's a reply to an telephone enquiry we made in September to a local lawcentre.

 

What the advice boils down to is, Yes, you have a good case to claim for your wrongly sanctioned money, plus interest and extra money for 'hardship or distress'. And you are in a position to instruct a solicitor to sue for compensation for being charged and taken to the magistrates' court.

 

Since making that enquiry my friend has found a solicitor, who we are seeing again on Friday.

Edited October 9, 2009 by FitzWilliam
To correct factual errors

[FitzWilliam]

The security guard handed over to her successor on Thursday and Friday last week.

 

Her last two days were full of incident. And she even tried to get the police to arrest me …

 

Thursday 1 Oct 2009

 

As I walked past the jobcentre in the morning I noticed there were two security guards, including the regular guard. I concluded it must be a handover.

 

Later that morning my friend said he needed to go to the jobcentre and we arrived at noon, fifteen minutes before they closed for lunch. He went up to the new guard in the lobby.

 

On seeing this, the female guard came stomping over and pulled the new guard away. She took him over to the carpeted area and told him my friend is forbidden from talking to any Sekuritass staff. I saw this happen. She had an intense and angry demeanour, and the other guard looked bewildered.

 

It's not true of course. She was forbidden by the jobcentre to speak to him - and to at least two other jobseekers who'd complained about her.

 

There was a flurry as staff jumped out of their seats. A few moments later both guards had been ordered off the floor and two members of staff came over and apologised to my friend. They told him he could talk to the new guard, there was no problem about that, and said there was going to be ‘a different regime’ from Monday.

 

In the afternoon we both returned as it was my signing day. When the female guard saw us she disappeared from the floor. We were both in there for well over half an hour and she never reappeared. Another member of staff came and talked to my friend in the lobby. She was remarkably friendly, just chatting inconsequentially to him about the sunny weather.

 

As we walked down the road my friend said he couldn’t believe how friendly the staff were being with him. They’ve been coming over and chatting to him on several occasions I’ve seen. It's like he's their golden boy.

 

Friday 2 October 2009

 

Both security guards were there again. This time it was my friend’s signing day and so he turned up at about 3.40 p.m. As he arrived the male guard was standing at the podium and the female guard was sitting at a nearby desk.

 

As soon as my friend approached the male guard the female guard called him over and told him that my friend wasn’t allowed to talk to him. Again! And she knew it wasn’t true! I was not there to see this, but my friend said the male guard looked ‘really ****ed off’. [Ed: that was a mild epithet beginning with 'p'.]

 

At closing time, 4 p.m., I decided to sit on the bench on the other side of the road to see what kind of send off the security guard got on her last day. My guess was that no other staff would wave her off, and I was interested to report here what happened.

 

Other staff left but she did not appear. At about 4.40 p.m. two police cars came down the road. One pulled up at the petrol station next door and the officer walked into the jobcentre. The other pulled up on the pavement outside the jobcentre and the officer came across the road and spoke to me.

 

He said the security guard had phoned the police to complain I was harassing her. I said I was sitting in a public place and had no criminal record. He indicated that I was within my rights and gave no indication that he intended to arrest me.

 

I said it was her last day. He said, ‘We thought she’d gone last week.’ And I said, ‘A lot of people thought that. They thought that at the local paper. But she was just using up a couple of days leave.’

 

The female guard then exited the jobcentre escorted by the other police officer and the male guard. She was carrying a cardboard box with her personal possessions and put it in the back of her car. She spoke to the officer for about 20 seconds and then drove off.

 

No staff were there to see her off, and no one waved goodbye. The only people who watched her drive away were me, the two police officers and the guard. And then we went our separate ways.

 

To the last she was true to form. But at least this malicious woman has finally been removed from the jobcentre she used as her personal playground for her bullying and lies.

 

Now she is gone

 

What’s happened at my local jobcentre these last two years is nothing short of scandalous. This disgraceful guard caused endless misery and upset by her malice. She wasted countless hours of police time and thousands of pounds of public money in her campaign of lies against innocent people.

 

My friend attributes her departure to his court victory, and I’m sure he’s right. I remember posting weeks ago saying I believed his acquittal made her position untenable and that it was only a matter of time before she left.

 

My friend was always in the right. He was an innocent man falsely accused by a woman with a known history of making false accusations. But he cleared his name with his acquittal and now his persecutor is gone.

 

‘Gone’. I just love the sound of that word right now. She is gone!

Edited October 6, 2009 by FitzWilliam

[Kouros]

I have just read through this thread. This is the only time in my life I have been happy to see CCTV. It was also appear that different Job Centres operate differently for travel loans.

[FitzWilliam]

I have just read through this thread. This is the only time in my life I have been happy to see CCTV.

 

Thanks for reading.

 

My friend and I and his barrister saw the CCTV for the first time a fortnight before the court viewed. It gave us all a tremendous boost because it revealed the huge discrepancies in the security guard's testimony.

 

Jobcentre CCTV is often used to prosecute people. But in this bizarre instance it was powerful evidence for the defence.

 

I wish I could put an edited version of it on the internet. We're hoping to collect the disc next week from the defence solicitors.

[FitzWilliam]

Update on meeting with solicitor

 

We had a good meeting with the solicitor this morning.

 

He's going to apply for Legal Aid for a case against the DWP for my friend's two wrongful sanctions and the debt and health problems that ensued. He intends to add a claim for loss of earnings for two years' wages at £14 an hour following the first sanction in April 2008.

 

He thinks the case is good, but says his experience of getting Legal Aid makes it hard to predict whether it will be granted. (He's been denied Legal Aid for clients when he thought he had a certainty, but won it when he though it was a lost cause.)

 

At a later date he's also going to apply for Legal Aid to sue the police for malicious prosecution. He thinks this will be harder to prove and that the chances of getting Legal Aid are not so good.

 

When we next see him, probably within a month, it will be to sign the first Legal Aid application.

[patrickq1]

you may find it hard prosecuting the police but it would be a dead certainty to take the police one to the police complaints authority ,this way you can then procceed with the malicious prosecution also the CPA are at fault for the sanctioning the court case in the first place,so they have a compensation fund (but worth checking)

i think it will be the secretary of state that you have to bring the action against and not the managers,also if you have exhausted the complaints procedure you can take it to ICE that is the independant case examiner who will more than likely rule in your favour and have the claim backdated etc....

good luck

patrick

ps. i am sure erikap will be able to advise you better on the correct procedures

[FitzWilliam]

Thanks Patrick,

 

I'm thinking I may print out this thread for the solicitor and highlight some of this advice about taking action against the police, etc.

 

I'll look into the things you mention myself as well.

 

As you can guess, we have a fairly limited amount of time with the solicitor. So it's been helpful to give him good case notes referenced to paperwork, and to share advice we've got on the forum.

 

[Ed: Actually, I cut and pasted some advice from here into my notes for the solicitor. E.g. Patma's advice about complaints against the police. And the solicitor is now using the notes which has saved much precious time.]

 

In my view the police and CPS handled things very badly, and the collapse of the prosecution shows up their mistakes. I'll look carefully to find the best channel for getting redress and compensation.

 

Lucky, we've got extra time to get the case against the police together.

 

Thanks again.

Edited October 10, 2009 by FitzWilliam

[patrickq1]

with the DWP you must now do a subject to access but to accompany this you must ask for a full audit trail of your account,this way you will find out excactly what they have on record and if any alterations have been made to your file it may now show up

patrickq1

[Patma]

Update on meeting with solicitor

 

We had a good meeting with the solicitor this morning.

 

He's going to apply for Legal Aid for a case against the DWP for my friend's two wrongful sanctions and the debt and health problems that ensued. He intends to add a claim for loss of earnings for two years' wages at £14 an hour following the first sanction in April 2008.

 

He thinks the case is good, but says his experience of getting Legal Aid makes it hard to predict whether it will be granted. (He's been denied Legal Aid for clients when he thought he had a certainty, but won it when he though it was a lost cause.)

 

At a later date he's also going to apply for Legal Aid to sue the police for malicious prosecution. He thinks this will be harder to prove and that the chances of getting Legal Aid are not so good.

 

When we next see him, probably within a month, it will be to sign the first Legal Aid application.

 

It sounds as though you've got a solicitor who's on the ball there, FitzWilliam.I think you were lucky to find him. Down where I live finding one who does legal aid is like looking for a needle in a hay stack and when you've found one chances are they don't tackle the sort of problem you need help with.

[seanamarts]

I have just read this and I am totally shocked at the behaviour of this awful woman, Thank you so much for posting this you should write a book about this it would make very interesting reading certainly had me on the edge of my seat wanting to know what happened next. I wish your friend all the luck in the world with his case and will wait in anticipation to the next installments. wish your friend well for me and sorry to hear what he went through.. you wonder why people work on the sly now especially in cases like this. God help her next employers and god help us all if she has become a bailiff, then again with that behaviour she would be struck out before she even learnt how to spell bailiff law

[FitzWilliam]

I have just read this and I am totally shocked at the behaviour of this awful woman. ... God help her next employers and god help us all if she has become a bailiff ...

 

Thanks Sean

 

We don't know what job she has now but we're sure she's not a security guard anymore.

 

We've been able to track her online through a games website she joined last month. We know she now works different hours. Last week she came online by 3.45pm and 4pm on two separate days so probably starts and finishes earlier each day.

 

She was offline on Sunday morning which makes me wonder whether she came back to town to make a police statement about me.

 

To judge by past form this is quite likely but the chances of a conviction are very slim.

 

I was watching her on DVD this evening after we collected the CCTV from the defence solicitors. It was an unpleasant reminder of an unpleasant woman. She was pretty out of control and my mind is now full of images of her stomping around and standing in front of my friend and pointing to the exit of the jobcentre.

 

I'm sure she will not improve her behaviour and I pity her new employer (assuming it is not still Sekuritass). She wrote insulting comments about the HR department of Sekuritass on the internet and made a police complaint about the jobcentre manager.

 

If I were a potential employer and knew that I wouldn't touch her with a ten-foot pole.

 

At least she's gone. (I just love saying that.)

 

Thanks for your support of my friend.

[seanamarts]

She certainly has some anger issues towards some people that needs to be addressed by a professional person. I can imagine as a child and in her teens she was a bit of a loner and was probably bullied, no excuse I know and I am certainly not defending her actions here. Whats the betting that she used to sit and watch all these police programmes like the bill and such like, tried to join the police force but what knocked back due to her lack of mental and physical skills.

These sort of people crave attention whether it being good or bad, they live in a fantasy world created by themselves because they live alone and do not have any social interaction, they can be likable people to start with and often people will hear horror stories that they have made up so people will feel sorry for them, but the layers of lies soon become transparent and people then start keeping a distance. What happens then is these people will start to cause trouble.. making up situations where they are the victim just to get back the attention. These people actually believe their own lies and can be vary dangerous not as in physical but their lies as in your situation can be very damaging and can cause duress like as in your friends situation. They have no empathy for their actions but still wallow in the attention that they have created because its attention and they are in the lime lite so to speak. If she is true to form I suggest you be very careful what you say and do in future as these people very rarely let things go and often go back to see the damage they have done. Any way sorry I rambled .. Good luck

[FitzWilliam]

She certainly has some anger issues towards some people that needs to be addressed by a professional person. I can imagine as a child and in her teens she was a bit of a loner and was probably bullied, no excuse I know and I am certainly not defending her actions here. ...

These sort of people ... will start to cause trouble making up situations where they are the victim just to get back the attention. These people actually believe their own lies and can be vary dangerous ... as in your friends situation. They have no empathy for their actions but still wallow in the attention ...

 

I think that a lot of what you say is right. She's a very mixed up person.

 

I agree that her frequent tendency to make out she's a victim is a form of attention seeking, and I believe she probably has a very weak conscience.

 

What's made her such a nightmare is that she's falsely represented herself as a victim of male aggression (by at least two men), racial prejudice and homophobia (by at least three men).

 

In a climate of moral panic on issues to do with gender, race and sexuality it made the jobcentre very reluctant to criticise her or take action against her.

 

Her history before 2007

 

We know quite a lot about her past. She was grammar school educated till 16, so is reasonably intelligent. She was in the army for five years (WRAC, 1977-82) coming out as a private. Then she worked in accountancy for several years, but only at a low level.

 

She became a security guard in 2004. We know she used to work as a guard at the jobcentre in her home town before coming to our jobcentre in about May-June 2007.

 

When she worked at her local jobcentre she had a half-mile walk to get there. But during the two years she worked in our jobcentre she had a 50-mile round trip by car each day.

 

I've been suspicious as to why she was moved to another jobcentre so far away. My guess is that she caused problems and got moved (but I have no hard evidence).

 

If that's what happened - and her employer thought the move would sort things out - then subsequent events proved them tragically wrong.

 

Ethnicity

 

The issue of her racial background and racial accusations is bizarre. She had an Indian grandmother but looks like a white woman. (Sebastian Coe is also a quarter Indian and people are surprised to learn it.) She was born in London and speaks with a London accent.

 

In Jan 2008 she falsely claimed to have been targeted with a racial insult by a man saying to her he was 'not a ****ing foreigner'.

 

The fact she is so fair skinned made it difficult for her to convince people that she was a victim of a racist insult. She does not look or sound like a foreigner.

 

She had told him to remove his hat in the jobcentre. He had a cold and would not take it off. He asserted that he was an Englishman living in a free country and was therefore entitled to wear it.

 

When the police were called she got him arrested by claiming he had sworn, racially insulted her and threatened her. But he was de-arrested after the intervention of the jobcentre manager, who was sitting opposite him and heard what he really said.

 

I've seen the DWP Incident Reports relating to this. The security guard says the man said, 'I am English, not a ****ing foreigner,' and that this was 'aimed at' her because she is of 'mixed race'.

 

The jobcentre manager writes of 'his statement re being an Englishman in his own country'. Obviously that is very close to what the man really said.

 

The guard kept notes on a memo pad during the incident, attached to her Incident Report. There she made no mention of racism, swearing or a threat. That contemporary account is spontaneous and truthful; she only began lying when the police arrived.

 

The guard also overheard the man say to the jobcentre manager, 'What's going to happen about my claim? Because I'm supposed to be signing on today.' She told the police he'd said, 'If this affects my money, I will be back to cause trouble.'

 

That was in Jan 2008. In Dec 2008 she falsely accused another man of threatening her. Deja vu.

 

Her social life

 

To judge by Facebook the great majority of her friends are members of a gay club in a large town near where she lives.

 

She lives in a civil partnership with another woman; but it's regretable she's tried to use her lesbianism as a weapon (at least twice in 2008 and 2009).

 

Using ethnicity as a weapon is called 'playing the race card' so I guess that using homosexuality as a weapon is 'playing the gay card' or 'playing the ? card'. Certainly these cards are dealt from the bottom of the deck.

 

* * *

 

Anyway, thanks Sean for your comments. I've struggled a lot to understand the workings of the mind of this woman, and I find her character and behaviour hard to fathom.

 

We've entered the interesting realms of the 'nature versus nurture' debate with this security guard. No, former security guard!

 

I don't know to what extent her character depends on her past life experiences or to the way she was born. I think some of her problems arise from being a low achiever; and giving her a uniform and authority over jobseekers just made things worse.

Edited October 14, 2009 by FitzWilliam

[FitzWilliam]

Breaking news. The jobcentre Incident Reports arrived today. At last!

 

My friend phoned me just now and I'm going to meet him in about half an hour to look at them.

 

We got documents from the defence solicitor yesterday, inc the CCTV.

 

* * *

 

Patrick,

 

Thanks for the advice. I'm going to prepare a SAR for an full audit trial and hopefully get it off in the post before the end of the week.

 

Patma,

 

Yes, the new solicitor seems very good. He's efficient and understands the case well. The big advantage is that it's in both his and my friend's interests to get in a good application for legal aid.

 

He's much better than the duty solicitor my friend ended up with after being arrested. He sat through the police interview doing a crossword in 'Trout and Salmon' magazine and never said a word.

 

I managed to get a brief meeting with him before the trial. I found him cynical and world-weary. He said my friend should accept the prosecution offer of pleading guilty to section 5 of the Public Order Act to avoid being tried for section 4a.

 

I told him I disagreed profoundly and supported his decision to fight the case in court.

 

Fortunately my friend got an excellent young barrister, still in pupillage. He was very dedicated to the case. We only saw him in person on the two days of the trial, but inbetween we sent numerous emails to discuss evidence.

 

He presented a fantastic defence, the prosecution collapsed, and the prosecutor complimented him before the court. I admired both the quality of his advocacy and his dedication to justice.

 

Hopefully more later on those Incident Reports ...

[FitzWilliam]

Incident Reports still missing

 

Grrrr.

 

Again we've got just a single set of Incident Reports, this time for 21 April 2008. The enclosed letter says, 'I regret I am unable to locate any forms for the other dates you mention.'

 

We gave specific dates of at least three other known incidents, including 16 Dec 2008 when the security guard accused my friend of threatening her.

 

The Data Protection Officer wrote direct to our jobcentre to ask for the records. Either they are deliberately holding back or the records are in one of the two other jobcentres that our local office is joined with.

 

In the past, Incident Reports from our jobcentre have ended up stored at one of these other jobcentres. I will write again to the Data Protection Officer to insist she check more thoroughly.

 

The letter notifying my friend he is marked as PV

 

We also received the letter notifying my friend of his PV marking, dated 7 April 2008 (following the incident on 4 April 2008, posting 27).

 

The letter from the jobcentre manager says:

 

Our records have been noted that you pose a potential threat to staff. Other parts of the Department and organisations that you have contact with, for example the Local Authority, have been notified of the fact ...

 

Curious, but a few weeks ago we asked a librarian to check whether the PV marker was on their system, but it came up a blank. The library is part of the local authority.

 

The new Incident Reports (21 April 2008 )

 

The new Incident Reports concern the incident when my friend went to the jobcentre to try and get his money to start work on 21 April 2008. He discovered that they had suspended his claim and because he had no money he lost the job.

 

(This was his first wrongful sanction. He had correctly signed off on 17 April, as the DWP later admitted in a letter to his MP.)

 

It shows that he saw a member of staff and the security guard in the screened area. The staff member writes:

 

He asked about his money so I told him he had been closed as fail to sign. ... He asked when he would receive his final payment, so I told him there was no money due. [He] then stood up and shouted at me, 'This is taking the p***. You lot of [expletives deleted] have stitched me up.' He also shouted, 'I am going to get you.'

 

She cites obscene language. My friend of course had discovered his last payment had not been made; left penniless, he could not afford to travel to his new job.

 

Still, it's useful as a record of the refusal to pay him the money they had sanctioned due to their mistake. It should be helpful for the solicitor.

 

* * *

 

Will we ever get those Incident Reports for 16 Dec 2008? The solicitors applied for them before the court case, and we have now tried twice to get them. I want to see these records.

 

I saw a copy of the security guard's Incident Report for 16 Dec, which the defence barrister got from the prosecution. I took some notes from it which are referred to in the next posting.

Edited October 14, 2009 by FitzWilliam

[FitzWilliam]

We have the CCTV

 

After that I will cheer myself up by writing a bit more about the CCTV, which we got yesterday.

 

I watched it again and can now see more clearly how powerfully it corroborates my friend's account of events in Dec 2008. I saw a few things I had missed, so this is an improved version of my previous account.

 

First, a quick recap of the security guard's testimony and my friend's:

 

The security guard's version of events

 

In her Incident Report the guard said:

 

[He] clenched his fists and arm muscles and stepped towards me.

 

And in her later police statement she said:

 

I again asked [him] to leave and this was enforced by [the jobcentre manager]. [He] then clenched his fists, his arms were by his side, and had an angry look on his face. [He] stepped towards me, and I thought he was going to hit me. ...

 

The incident has left me feeling frightened, concerned for my safety and colleagues.

 

In court her account became more elaborate:

 

She repeated her assertion about the manager having 'enforced' her order for him to leave. And she testified that he had clenched his fists, flexed his arm muscles, and stepped towards her.

 

But now she added extra detail that he had also pushed his face at her and caused her to move or sway backwards. She demonstrated the clenched fists and arm muscles, holding her arms by her side, and she leant towards the defence barrister to show the face pushing.

 

In addition, she said she was afraid my friend could be waiting for her one evening as she left to get in her car.

 

My friend's version

 

In court, my friend denied any threatening actions towards the guard. He also denied that the manager had 'enforced' the order for him to go. He said she'd told him he could use the jobpoints.

 

The CCTV

 

In the CCTV we see my friend sitting at one of the public phones and the jobcentre manager is standing by him talking. The security guard is hovering around and then comes over, evidently to order him out.

 

My friend gets up and then picks up some papers and a pen from by the phone. He talks to the manager a bit longer and then walks between the two women folding up the papers. The jobcentre manager wanders out of shot.

 

A moment later he is standing near the guard and he puts the folded papers in his coat pocket with his right hand. Then with his left hand he points directly to the jobpoint and takes a step towards it. The guard moves sharply across to block him. He stops in his tracks - his hand is still in his pocket.

 

The guard then speaks to him repeatedly pointing to the exit. He backs off and heads for the door looking annoyed.

 

The jobcentre manager comes swiftly after him. She speaks to him outside for about 30 seconds and then they come back together.

 

The guard meantime has returned to her podium opposite the exit. When she sees them come back in she comes marching out and stands there looking angry and pointing to the exit.

 

The guard then goes to her desk where she calls the police. My friend uses the jobpoint for a minute or two while the manager stands by him. He and the manager then walk together to the carpeted area of the jobcentre (he can only go there if invited by staff because he is marked PV).

 

The manager shows him to take a seat and a some moments later returns with some papers for him. They both walk to the exit together and he leaves.

 

The manager then goes to the guard's desk and appears to remonstrate with her with her arms going up and down. Another member of staff sitting nearby raises her head to watch.

 

The action freezes at this point as the CCTV ends.

 

* * *

 

I had not previously noticed the papers he picked up and folded and put in his pocket. And I'd forgotten all the pointing to the exit by the guard.

 

The bit about the carpeted area was a last minute thing we noticed. Talking in the park a couple of days before the second day of the trial my friend happened to mention that he could only go to the carpeted area if invited because of his PV marking.

 

I zapped off an email to the barrister about it and he made good use of it in court when the CCTV was showing.

 

The barrister also reminded the bench about the guard's claims of clenched fists, flexed arm muscles, etc before showing the CCTV. It was obvious that my friend was wearing a big coat in the footage, and I liked the questioning of my friend that went something like:

 

What kind of coat is it?

It’s a big padded coat.

And are the arms tight fitting?

No.

Loose fitting?

Yes, loose fitting.

 

He didn't labour the point because everyone in court obviously saw the significance of it.

 

* * *

 

Of course, the really bizarre thing about the CCTV is that the security guard gave it to the police as an exhibit for the prosecution!

Edited October 14, 2009 by FitzWilliam

[FitzWilliam]

New documents from the defence solicitors

 

We collected a package of records from the defence solicitors two days ago.

 

We now have extra police records, inc CCTV and interview tape, and some complaint letters by my friend to the DWP, some of which I hadn't seen before.

 

Two throwing-out incidents by the guard in 2008

 

The complaint letters give more details about him being twice thrown out of the jobcentre by the security guard in 2008:

 

In a letter of 12 Sep 2008 he writes:

 

I was informed not to cross line where lino turns into carpet ... I was told to move right away from partner ... my partner could not believe what she was seeing ...

 

[Name] the security officer shouted out im not aloud near staff or to speak to staff. I feel I am being discriminated against ...

 

I was evicted from Jobcentre for saying JSA1 form to my partner so she knew what form to get. [Name] the security gaurd came storming towards me and evicted me from premises. ...

 

I get treated like a dog ... they are unprofessional at there Job & Bullies just using the power that the government has given them.

 

And on 7 November 2008 he writes of being thrown out again by the guard:

 

I went in there with ... paper work showing there is help renewing tickets. I asked security gaurd to see if I could see member of staff ... member of staff started shouting and said come back next week. ...

 

It was at this point security gaurd started having a go at me by saying I was shouting across the room ... [because of course he was marked PV and could not leave the lobby to approach staff.]

 

At this point I was evicted from 7 11 08 building staff member did not even look at paper work. I was perlite all the time.

 

I did go back to door of Job Centre for a complaints form but security gaurd refused to bring one to me as I was to frightened to go back in the building in case im accussed of something more serious.

 

* * *

 

Those last words were sadly prescient. He wrote that five weeks before the security guard phoned the police to accuse him of threatening her ...

 

This same throwing-out incident was also what prompted a member of staff to complain about the guard, as we discovered many months later.

 

Did no one see the warning signs? Quis custodiet ipsos custodies?

Edited October 14, 2009 by FitzWilliam

[FitzWilliam]

Screencaptures of the CCTV for this thread?

 

I just had an interesting idea after seeing the CCTV again. I think it would be good to get some screencaptures of the CCTV that catch the main action, then post them here.

 

I've just spoken to a friend who's a semi-professional photographer and he thinks we can do it on his laptop. We will photoshop the faces to blur them.

 

The action is pretty physical. Lots of pointing and gesticulating, so a few select images should show what happened. It would make a good storybook of about 15-20 pictures with captions.

 

I'm going to see him next Wednesday. I'll try and get the images and then post them here (or perhaps on another site if I can't upload).

 

Nice little project for me, and a chance to learn something new ...

[patrickq1]

not advisable to post them on here also be careful not to post to much info until after court procceedings etc..otherwise it could go against the claimant and until such time as compensation has been negotiated...better safe than sorry ok fitz

patrickq1

[FitzWilliam]

Screencaptures of CCTV

 

Thanks Patrick. I think you're right that it's better not to post screencaptures yet.

 

My photographer friend sucessfully made a copy of the CCTV for me, and I did a load of screencaptures.

 

By running the CCTV at eighth speed I was able to make screencaptures as it was playing. The result is very good. I was capturing the action every half-second in real-time and the images, when clicked through in sequence, create an excellent old-movie like film.

 

I'm going to edit the main action into sequence from the various cameras and put it all on a CD.

 

No arrest for me

 

It's now four weeks since the former guard made her 'harassment' complaint about me. I've not been visited by police and it doesn't look like anything is going to happen.

 

It looks like yet another one of her failed attempts to get the police to press charges.

[FitzWilliam]

Bizarre twist in this story

 

OMG! I can hardly believe what I found out yesterday ...

 

The former security guard is now employed by the DWP as frontline staff in a jobcentre!

 

When I signed on yesterday, I was dealt with by one of the new staff on eighteen-month contracts. She was sitting at the security guard's old desk.

 

I merely asked where the guard now sat, meaning the new guard, and she responded by saying, 'She's left now,' and then spilling out information about the former guard.

 

She said, 'She's on the other side of the desk now, doing what I'm doing at an office somewhere in [place name].'

 

She named a city on the other side of the county which has three or four jobcentres.

 

I was absolutely dumbstruck by this! The woman is a bully and a liar with a history of persecuting unemployed people! And the DWP have given her a job working in a jobcentre! :eek:

 

People signing on at our jobcentre made complaints about her to the CAB, to the jobcentre, to the DWP regional office, to the police, to Sekuritass, and to the local MP.

 

Is this a suitable person to employ in a jobcentre signing people on? Why on earth have the DWP employed this woman? Am I stuck in some awful nightmare?

 

The DWP promise 'we will take your complaints seriously' and 'use your feedback to improve our services'. And after receiving all those complaints about the security guard they then give her a job in a jobcentre! :-|

 

On the bright side

 

On the bright side, it may turn out that getting a job with the DWP was not such a good idea for the security guard ...

 

One thing the jobcentre used to say to people who had problems with the guard was that she wasn't their responsibility because 'she's not a DWP employee'.

 

But now she is a DWP employee ...

 

On top of this, the DWP have already given a commitment to accept a complaint about her ...

 

Between the two days of my friend's trial in July I wrote to the local MP. On my behalf he asked the DWP to send a representative to the trial. I'd said I was very concerned about the testimony given by the guard, and that I wanted the DWP to see the CCTV which so obviously confuted her lies.

 

The reply the MP received from the District Manager of the DWP was:

 

I feel it would be inappropriate for us to get involved in the case at this stage. If Mr. [Name] or his representative wishes to make a formal complaint to ourselves regarding the security guard, this would be fully investigated and appropriate action taken. However, this would obviously be dependent on the result from the court case.

 

Hmmm. Interesting. The DWP will fully investigate a complaint 'dependent on the result from the court case'. Well the result was that the prosecution collapsed and my friend was acquitted.

 

Not just an acquittal, a very spectacular and convincing acquittal.

 

It looks like we're in an unassailable position to put in a complaint, and the DWP have committed themselves to fully investigating it. I think we will address the complaint to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. And a copy to her shadow in the Tory Party ...

 

We have lots of evidence to offer. DWP Incident Reports, police statements and internet writings by the former guard - all containing palpable lies. Documents and CCTV that confute those lies. Lists of people who complained about her, including a DWP employee, and copies of letters of complaint.

 

I'm pretty sure the former guard must be on one of the new eighteen-month contracts with the DWP. She's done about three weeks so far. Let's see how much longer she can last.

 

My friend and I are going to put together the complaint in the next few weeks. It looks like 2010 is going to be an interesting year ...

[Jack Daniels]

fight the good fight with all your might

[FitzWilliam]

Thanks Jack.

 

She may live to regret getting a job in a jobcentre. And she's got a past that's going to catch up with her ...

[MIKEY DABODEE]

In our local Jobcentre we have a new female security guard

hope things will be different and not all are the same