Neil Wilby Media

A notorious 54 year old Liverpudlian, widely known as ‘The Ormskirk Vigilante‘ (read more here) is in the legal wars, yet again.

Paul Arthur Ponting is a former computer and hair curler repairer (read more here), whom, over the past seven years or so, has gained infamy as a prolific internet troll, persistent and frequently outrageous on-line harasser, and near permanent spectre within police stations and court administration offices where warranted officers and staff deal with his multitude of civil and criminal skirmishes.

He is presently involved with at least four private prosecutions against individuals against whom he has taken exception on a variety of pretexts. 

Within the space of two days next week, 9th and 10th April, courts in Preston will hear of allegations against three men, including a serving Lancashire Constabulary inspector.

The Crown Prosecution Service has confirmed that a fourth man, a 44 year old male from the Dudley area in the West Midlands, need not appear as they have taken over conduct of the private prosecution from Paul Ponting and discontinued it. The allegation was a Section 5(1) Public Order Act offence and the CPS say there was not sufficient evidence to proceed.

Two previous private prosecutions by Ponting against the same man, alleging malicious communications, were also ended by CPS discontinuances in or around December, 2022 and September, 2023. The accused has now indicated that he will bring a malicious prosecution claim in the civil courts against the Ormskirk man following the collapse of the latest case against him.

The Lancs police officer, whom is also not named for legal reasons, appears again before a judge on 9th April, 2024 after a previous hearing on 25th March, 2024 was adjourned. There is some confusion as to what Paul Ponting is actually alleging in a range that appears, or appeared, to encompass perjury (see below), misfeasance, malfeasance or misconduct in public office. The inspector denies any wrongdoing. 

A mention hearing, listed to be held remotely by telephone from Preston Magistrates’ Court on 10th April, 2024, is likely to be availed of the CPS position as to whether they intend to take over the private prosecutions and, if they do, what action they propose subsequently. The matter is said to have reached as far as the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions as there have been complaints that Ponting is misusing the criminal justice system to pursue personal vendettas.

The two men, one from the Wolverhampton area, aged 38, and the other from the Dunstable area, aged 66, both face malicious communications allegations, which they deny. 

In what is a very busy period for Paul Ponting, on the same day, 10th April, he is due to face an adjourned final hearing of injunction proceedings brought against him by a 41 year old lawyer from the Salford area and, in what are now conjoined cases, as claimant in a data breach action against the same lawyer.

He was the subject of an interim injunction between April, 2023 and the adjourned trial at Manchester Civil Justice Centre in January, 2024. The principal witness in the Ponting data breach trial no longer supports his claim and he is railing against three separate findings by the Information Commissioner’s Office that there was no data breach, as alleged.

Lancashire Constabulary declined to comment on the ongoing private prosecution of one of their inspectors.

However, in March, 2020, the force obtained an until further Order (permanent) injunction against Paul Ponting in a civil action brought against him by way of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act, 2014 (read full judgment here). The Order places considerable restrictions on his contact with Lancs officers, either on-line or in person.

It is understood that lawyers representing the Lancs inspector being privately prosecuted by Ponting are filing an application with the court to have him made the subject of a Vexatious Litigant Order. The officer is supported by his staff association, the Police Federation. 

Vexatious litigants are individuals who persistently take legal action against others in cases without any merit, and are forbidden from starting civil cases in courts without prior permission.

They must apply to the High Court for permission to start a civil case in court where a judge decides on its merits, or otherwise.

Ponting’s dispute with the Lancs police inspector is understood to centre around a signed document requesting a bail extension and submitted to the local magistrates’ court. ‘The Vigilante’ disagrees with its contents and has elevated that into a perjury allegation.

Following an operation involving two police forces, he was arrested in March, 2023 over allegations of stalking, harassing and assault and has been on police bail, in one form or another, ever since (read more here). He denies all the allegations, the latter now being statute barred, in any event.

On his UK Corrupt Police website, Ponting has named the Lancs officer and also named, and criticised, the district judge whom refused his application for a private perjury prosecution in February, 2024. The judge made this finding: The application to institute proceedings for perjury under section 5 of the Perjury Act 1911 is refused. The evidence provided, even if accepted, does not engage any of the provisions in subsections a to c of the section.

The perpetual complainer claims that he is challenging that decision by way of an application to appeal by way of case stated in the High Court and, it seems, separately to the same court, by way of a permission application for judicial review. He has also asked that the district judge recuse himself from any more dealings with him or this case, based on allegations of bias. 

The judge has maintained his position in the face of those Ponting applications: These were simply representations, or submissions, made to the court in support of the application to extend bail.

Bizarrely, within the aforementioned website article, Ponting does not name himself as the ‘member of the public’ on bail or bringing the private prosecution. 

An explanation of a private prosecution (or ‘laying an information’)

A private prosecution in England and Wales refers to a legal process where an individual or organisation initiates criminal proceedings against another individual or entity. This is done through the courts and is different from a prosecution brought by a public prosecuting authority like the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) or the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).

Here are some key points about private prosecutions in England and Wales:

1. Who can initiate a private prosecution: Any individual or organisation, including companies, can initiate a private prosecution, provided they have sufficient evidence to support the criminal charge.

2. Reasons for private prosecution: Private prosecutions may be pursued for various reasons, such as when the CPS or DPP declines to prosecute, when the victim or complainant is dissatisfied with the decision of the public prosecutor, or when the alleged offence is of a personal nature.

3. Process: The process of initiating a private prosecution involves gathering evidence, preparing the case, and filing the necessary documents with the court. A process formally known as ‘laying an information’. The proceedings then follow a similar course to public prosecutions, including pre-trial hearings, trial, and sentencing if a conviction is secured.

4. Costs: The individual or organisation initiating the private prosecution is responsible for the costs involved, including legal fees, court fees, and other expenses. However, in some cases, costs may be recoverable from the defendant if the prosecution is successful.

5. Legal representation: Private prosecutors typically engage legal professionals, such as solicitors and barristers, to handle the case on their behalf. Legal representation is crucial to navigate the complexities of criminal law and court procedures.

6. Outcome: If the court finds the defendant guilty, they may be subject to penalties, including fines, imprisonment, or other sanctions as prescribed by law.

It’s important to note that while private prosecutions offer individuals and organisations the opportunity to seek justice through the legal system, they also come with responsibilities and potential challenges. Legal advice and assistance are essential for anyone considering a private prosecution to ensure compliance with legal requirements and procedural fairness.

Paul Ponting has, so far, been unrepresented in the private prosecutions referred to in this article. 

 

Page last updated: Thursday 4th April, 2024 at 0555 hours

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.

Picture credit: Lancashire Constabulary

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.

© Neil Wilby 2015-2024. 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.