Neil Wilby Media

An infamous and proven liar, stalker and harasser, widely known as ‘The Ormskirk Vigilante’ (read why here), has been put firmly his place over one of his latest on-line vendettas.

On one of the many outrageous websites run by The Vigilante, styled as ‘UK Corrupt Police’, an article was published earlier this week attacking a number of Greater Manchester Police officers over their handling of alleged crimes reported by him and, of course,  the inevitable conduct complaints that followed.

It is a depressingly familiar story of truth stretching, harassing, contrived victimhood, vexatiousness and police time wasting that has previously led to Paul Ponting, a 53 year old Liverpudlian, being restrained by his home police force, Lancashire Constabulary, under a permanent court injunction in March, 2020 (read more here). A public menace, he is said to have wasted thousands upon thousands of policing hours and, just as one example, that force holds over 5,000 pages of material about or by him.

This is the outcome of The Vigilante’s complaint to GMP’s Professional Standards Branch that is at the heart of this week’s UK Corrupt Police blog:

“Dear Mr Ponting

“Complaint Against Police

“I refer to the complaint you made against Greater Manchester Police (GMP) which was recorded under the above reference number in accordance with statutory guidelines.

“Following an initial assessment conducted by the Professional Standards Branch it was determined that the matter, having been recorded ,was suitable to be dealt with in a reasonable and proportionate manner, otherwise than by investigation

“The overarching summary of your complaint is that GMP made an information only report that [name redacted] had called Social Services to say you were a [redacted for legal reasons] and as a result your friend had a visit from a social worker expressing concerns.

“While dealing with this matter I have liaised with Social Services myself, read the incident and crime reports, spoken to the investigating officer and liaised with CID.

“As a result of the report, GMP recorded two crimes under National Crime Recording Standards (NCRS) for Malicious Communications and Harassment as alleged by the victim.

“These were CRI/KK/000xxxx/23 and CRI/KK/000xxxx/23.

“In an ideal world, GMP would be able to fully investigate every crime reported to us, however due to the volume of reported crime and incidents and levels of officers available to undertake this, this is not feasible and therefore we assess crimes on the criteria of vulnerability, threat, harm, risk and solvability.

“An officer was allocated and after initial enquiries, the investigation was reviewed by a Detective Sergeant in CID. It was on the basis of the review that the crime was closed no further action.

“Social Services have their own requirements to fact check and assess information. Although they have received an anonymous contact, it is for them to check the validity and devise a suitable course of action. I cannot speak for them. I have checked with Social Services and the call is confirmed anonymous. Therefore, we have no immediate lines of enquiry.

“I am aware there is an ongoing issue between yourself and [name redacted], and so this information has been passed to Lancashire Constabulary.

Yours sincerely

Inspector [name redacted]”

On any objective review, that is a measured, proportionate response by the PSB inspector, covering all the bases (the officer’s name is redacted over health and safety concerns and to protect from further harm).

Not least, in the light of the fact that Ponting (i) is currently restrained by an interim court injunction from referring directly or indirectly to the person he has reported for alleged crimes against him (ii) is currently restrained by conditional police bail over allegations that he has stalked, harassed and assaulted the same person (iii) makes malicious communications and falsehoods on an almost daily basis against others (iv) has been the subject of many other similar allegations in the past, revealed by a simple Google search. Although none appear proven (v) has classified the call as ‘malicious’ when the evidence shows it was a safeguarding call acted upon by Social Services.

It is those matters that are most likely to be at the core of the referral by GMP back to their Lancs counterparts. It is also apparent, from information now available in the public domain, that senior GMP officers at the rank of chief inspector and superintendent reviewed the criminal complaints and/or the officer misconduct complaints made by Paul Ponting.

Indeed, it is perfectly feasible that consideration of this matter has gone higher still as GMP’s Deputy Chief Constable, Terry Woods, was an assistant chief constable at Lancs when the injunction proceedings were in train against Ponting.

GMP Chief Constable, Stephen Watson, is also ex-Lancs, having served that force for 18 years after starting his career there in 1988. DCC Woods also holds the Command Team portfolio for PSB and cannot have failed to note, with dread, the name ‘Ponting’ on his radar, once again.

But, whichever way that falls, Ponting has now publicly accused the PSB inspector of ‘intentionally lying and undeniable corruption’ on his ‘UK Corrupt Police’ website. It will be interesting to see if The Vigilante can avoid civil proceedings, or criminal action, by GMP over what appears to be a malicious and highly defamatory claim.

A claimed judicial review application by Ponting, already in train and challenging the PSB outcome, he says, would also appear doomed to fail: The legal test is: Was the decision made one reasonably open for the decision-maker to take. It is very difficult indeed to contemplate a circuit judge, reading the PSB inspector’s decision letter, deciding that it wasn’t.

Judicial review is a strict process almost always confined to errors in law. It is not a forum for re-runs of complaints or criminal reports made in palpably bad faith. The risk for Ponting is a hefty adverse costs order made against him by the court; a matter with which he is familiar having been forced to pay Lancs Police £30,000 to cover their legal fees at the end of the injunction proceedings. That would add to the woes of his company being in serious trouble and ‘on the brink of collapse’, he says (read more here).

GMP is a force very well known for taking legal clashes all the way to court or tribunal, irrespective of cost, and will no doubt be aware of the precarious financial position of Ponting’s company and exploit that as any any other litigant would do in the same circumstances.

One former GMP officer, who did not wished to be named over fears of reprisals, has told Neil Wilby Media:

“The force is already sick and tired of Paul Ponting.

“There’s now health and safety concerns over officers who’ve a misfortune of dealing with what’s been described to me as ‘the gobby scally’s constant hectoring and whining’.

“Up and down the ranks it’s well known what he did to our friends over in Lancs.

“What he’s written about our officers this week on his blog is disgusting, particularly the [gender redacted] inspector just doing [gender redacted] job.

“I hope the fourth floor at HQ will deal with him and nip this in the bud”.

Paul Ponting consistently denies any wrongdoing about each and every matter raised against him. Even when there are court findings against him. As one local commentator astutely notes: “Paul has to be right. Every time. That’s it. The whole basis of his stalking and harassing vendettas. Everyone else, it seems, is either wrong, a fool, corrupt or falsely accused of heinous wrongdoing”.

He is offered the usual courtesy of right of reply via this link. A significant public interest matter that could be addressed in that reply is why the ‘Ponting’ name has been dropped from his Twitter account.

UPDATE: No right of reply received from Paul Ponting, but an interesting virtual mailbag has included news of the return of the eponymous blog who first coined the handle, ‘The Ormskirk Vigilante’. It has posted today for the first time in four years. Welcome back.

Follow Neil Wilby on Twitter (here) and Neil Wilby Media on Facebook (here) for signposts to any updates.

Page last updated: Wednesday 18th July, 2023 at 19h25

Thank you for reading and a polite request: If you feel this article is of value and in the public interest, and wish to make a contribution to the running costs of this website, it would be very much appreciated. Donations can made securely (and anonymously if required), via Buy Me A Coffee at this link or via PayPal at this link.

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 via this link. Provided your response is not defamatory it will be added to the article.

Picture credit: Twitter

© Neil Wilby 2015-2023. 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.

Picture credit: Designed by Freepik

© Neil Wilby 2015-2023. 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.