Written by a former Greater Manchester police officer, retired Inspector David Sutcliffe, an email circulated amongst key influencers in regional and central government has piled even more pressure on beleaguered Mayor Andy Burnham and his chief constable, Ian Hopkins.
Others caught in the crossfire are Deputy Chief Constable Ian Pilling, about much has already been written elsewhere on this website (read more here), and the most senior civilian in the force, Assistant Chief Officer Lynn Potts.
This is the full text of the email, published on social media on 14th December, 2020, edited for typos, syntax and legal reasons [text in square brackets]:
“Home Secretary / Greater Manchester MPs,
“You will all be aware of the recent national criticism of Greater Manchester Police and their crime recording and victim care issues. I noted that GM Mayor Andy Burnham and his Deputy, Bev Hughes, both feigned ignorance as to this issue. This can only be due to laziness, incompetence or [alleged] corruption, or a combination of all three.
“In 2014, I was a police inspector with numerous commendations for bravery/leadership and arrests made. I was mentioned in a Parliamentary debate after being the first inspector in the country to utilise the Dispersal Order and Premises Closure powers. Also, unlike [some] senior officers, I worked on operations and went out on my own and arrested people.
“After refusing an officer extra overtime, I was then subjected to a number of criminal allegations. The IPCC investigated and exonerated me on all counts, whereupon I tried to rid the [Greater Manchester] Police of [allegedly] corrupt individuals. They, however, and a number of senior officers (who had potential criminal culpability) were never subjected to any scrutiny and all documentation they have was either lost/destroyed or is being illegally withheld.
“I have spoken in person to Mr Burnham about this [alleged] corruption, posed a public question at one of his “Ask the Mayor” sessions (about his lack of scrutiny of senior officers and their actions within GMP), which is recorded on the internet, and sent him numerous documents detailing blatant criminality within the Force.
“Burnham and Bev Hughes’s response is [allegedly] to ignore everything. The persons perpetrating criminality were sent the evidential documents by Bev Hughes to reply to. So incompetent is she that she got those whom the allegations were against to provide the information for her reply!!!
“DCC Pilling, the man in charge of Professional Standards (and the crime recording issue) within GMP, has [allegedly] ensured that all evidence relating to his Department’s criminality, and that of senior officers with potential criminal allegations against the, has been destroyed/lost, or illegally withheld.
“Pilling authorised the promotion of senior officers who had potentially [and allegedly] committed serious criminal offences and ensured that investigations in relation to serious criminality by GMP officers had been quashed – and that as to whether racial bias had [allegedly] been a factor as to whether an officer was investigated.
“ACO Lynn Potts (who had a major part to play in this debacle) and the Chief Constable have also not disclosed any documents, as required to do so under GDPR.
“Hughes and Burnham have also [allegedly] broken the law in relation to non-disclosure under GDPR.
“Pilling’s attitude is typical of the arrogance and [alleged] criminality that pervades within the senior echelons of GMP: “lets go to court”, where they can waste public money to protect the indefensible.
“I have previously pointed out to Andy Burnham that more money has been spent hiding corruption in this case than would have been required to solve the city’s homelessness problem. Mayor Burnham espouses the rights of the people of Liverpool , but when it comes to the people of Greater Manchester he uses the same tactics as he constantly criticised South Yorkshire Police for, to obstruct justice.
“Burnham / Pilling/ Hopkins/ Hughes ( who are all of the main protagonists in this [present] crime recording debacle), you are all unfit to hold public office and your adherence to the Nolan principles is [allegedly] non-existent. Your attempts to evade any culpability are sickening.
“I am sure that you will pay lawyers to try to silence me. But instead why not publicly debate the issue? Let’s reveal all the evidence (including that you have illegally withheld) and let the people of Greater Manchester judge. We could do this next week!!!! You can get your well paid advisors and researchers to assist you and I will tell the truth!!!! If not, I hope that next year’s Mayoral elections are not cancelled, so that I will have a public platform to expose your ineptitude.
“I have attached a copy of the IPCC report in relation to my personal exoneration and as you can see that there are a number of potential liars initially exposed and I can assure you that there are even more involved in the subsequent “cover up”.
I hope this assists, David Sutcliffe.”
Those familiar with the inner workings of GMP and the Mayor’s office, including me (writes Neil Wilby) will not be, in any way, surprised at the contents of Mr Sutcliffe’s blistering condemnation. An officer highly rated by those who served with him in Stockport (J) Division.
Disclosure failings by both are well-evidenced, repeated and scandalous. Either by way of the Data Protection Act, General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) or Freedom of Information Act. The simple fact is, proven many times over, that Messrs Burnham and Hopkins place themselves above Parliament and it’s long overdue for the House to redress the balance and put the operations of both into special measures.
As for the rest of the Sutcliffe allegations; incompetence, corruption, cover-up, cronyism and racism, Burnham and Hopkins (or Mrs Hughes or Pilling) cannot feign ignorance of them, either. Particularly, by way of this piece, ‘Catalogue of Policing Scandals that shame the two-faced Mayor‘ (read in full here) published in August, 2019.
Grounded in its entirety upon protected disclosures to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) made by a well known police whistleblower.
The headline of the first linked piece was very apposite in present circumstances: ‘The Beginning of the End‘. For that is what it is, for both the Mayor and chief constable. Their positions are untenable as public confidence ebbs away and the Home Secretary has expressed serious concerns, in writing, over the actions, or more accurately, inactions of both.
Burnham’s response to Priti Patel was to claim that an excoriating report by Her Majesty’s Inspector of Constabulary, the latest in a lengthening line and at the centre of the most recent scandal, also one of many, “presented an unfair picture”.
The Mayor also, incredibly, sought to defend the disastrous IT Transformation Programme, known colloquially as iOPS. The system has been plagued with problems since its much-delayed launch in July, 2019. A budgeted cost of £27 million is expected to, eventually, be closed off at a figure closer to £100 million (read more here).
Serving officers claim on social media that some of the software problems relating to operational matters are incapable of remedy. The force, and the contractors responsible for installation, commissioning and maintenance, deny that such problems exist.
Within hours of this article being published, the local and regional press reported another complete outage of the iOPS system, with call centre operators once again having to take down crime details on pieces of paper. In the force’s response, which sought to downplay the issue, the word ‘victim’ did not appear
Page last updated: Wednesday 15th December, 2020 at 1245 hours
Corrections: Please let me know if there is a mistake in this article. I will endeavour to correct it as soon as possible.
Right of reply: If you are mentioned in this article and disagree with it, please let me have your comments. Provided your response is not defamatory it will be added to the article.
Picture credit: PA
© Neil Wilby 2015-2020. Unauthorised use, or reproduction, of the material contained in this article, without permission from the author, is strictly prohibited. Extracts from, and links to, the article (or blog) may be used, provided that credit is given to Neil Wilby Media, with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.