On 16 Jan 2013 at 3:18pm Mark Slade wrote:
Well Katy Bourne has got the £85,000 a year job she is supposed to be working for the people of Sussex not covering up for paedophiles.
We think not why is she not making any comments over Sussex Police corruption and the paedophile ring it seems that C.C. Martin Richards is covering up for. The people of Sussex have the right to know that she is honest and acting to see that we get our legal rights ,human rights,
On 16 Jan 2013 at 5:52pm Deelite wrote:
Nice gravy train if you can get on it. Sussex needs her and the expense of her like a hole in the head. WTF are we creating £85k jobs in these austere times...? oh yes, because us mugs pay for them.
On 16 Jan 2013 at 8:40pm weary wrote:
Austere times:
- 'Austerity means CHOOSING to underuse resources, reducing the exploitation of the economy's true productive potential. It means letting people, land and capital lie idle, to serve the interests of the money markets, corporatists and technocrats - not those of the people of Europe. Those that condemn millions to poverty and unemployment are the rich and not the poor - they are simply expected TO PAY for the crisis of capitalism.'
The political high jacking of language.... it has always been thus.
On 16 Jan 2013 at 9:02pm Ducatipete wrote:
£85k pa What a waste. Join the real world.
On 16 Jan 2013 at 10:37pm the old mayor wrote:
Oh people get real !! There is no austerity with our money because there is absolutely no limit to it. Take Brighton spending £1.5m to fund a 20 mile an hour limit in the town centre, when everyone knows you can't go faster than that anyway. And whats more the buggers want to spend it here to. They lay awake at night planning what to spend it on next !! Trust me !!
On 16 Jan 2013 at 10:46pm Deelite wrote:
weary... nothing like picking and choosing your definitions to suit your ends. Austere can simply mean 'reduced, plain, simple'
On 17 Jan 2013 at 2:09pm Nixon Scraypes wrote:
A mysterious post this; who is Martin Richards and what paedo ring is he covering up and what police corruption? Streeter please note the new punctuation technique, I've undergone purging by semi-colonic irrigation at Dr Clencher's Grammar Spa. Yours, Robert Redford the Punctuation Kid,not Paul Newman.
On 17 Jan 2013 at 2:49pm Ed Can Do wrote:
Martin Richards is (Was?) Sussex Police Chief Constable. A quick Google search throws up a report from the Daily Mail back in July saying he was under investigation for misconduct over claims he meddled in a police inquiry into an alledged sex attack. A report from the BBC in October said the IPCC found he had no case to answer after the person who made the initial allegation failed to come forward.
I'm guessing Mark Slade is someone with an axe to grind. Mark Slade appears to be the name of a suspect in the murder of Katrina Taylor in 96 and a few websites seem to have been set up to suggest that former chief cop Paul Whitehouse was in some way complicit with a coverup involving Mark Slade. One of the comments on the same news story on thisissussex.co.uk says that a prospective PCC candidate, a Matt Taylor, had amassed a wealth of evidence about corruption in Sussex Police and was going to sack Martin Richards as first order of business after getting elected.
It's not a stretch of the imagination to assume that whoever posted this thread in either Matt Taylor or someone who knows him. I'm not sure how effective posting here will be in uncovering institutional corruption in the police force though, I'd have thought contacting Katy Bourne directly might be a better use of time.
On 17 Jan 2013 at 2:59pm Ed Can Do wrote:
Did a bit more Googling. Matt Taylor was going to run as a PCC candidate but refused to post the £5,000 entry fee, plus there were questions as to his elidgability after he received a military conviction at some point in the past. He was the one hoping everyone would write SOS across their ballot papers and this would somehow mean he got to be PCC.
I believed he posted on here a few times in the run up to the PCC election. He comes across as a little bit unhinged and obsessive to be honest. He might be a perfectly normal bloke but he doesn't do himself any favours when he writes things on the internet.
On 17 Jan 2013 at 5:10pm Southover Queen wrote:
Your memory serves you well, Ed. I had quite a long exchange with him here in the run up to the elections, and to be perfectly honest he seemed a bit bonkers and not terribly honest either. I'm amazed that people can get away with posting such defamatory stuff on the internet, even if it's on a local forum.
On 17 Jan 2013 at 7:53pm Sussex Jim wrote:
Before you start knocking the post of Police Commissioner, please also think of the other many "non jobs" on similar salary levels in the public sector. There must be many more existing "posts" that we can do away with, and then refund our Council Tax payments.
Cut out all the politically driven militants and featherbedded wastrels in local government. £30K is plenty of salary for those in administration; especially when most jobs are now being advertised as paying minimum wage (13K) and a degree of responsibility is also expected.
On 17 Jan 2013 at 11:21pm the old mayor wrote:
This reads like a Peter James synopsis !! We likey !!
On 28 Jan 2013 at 6:31pm Ben wrote:
If Katy Bourne thinks she can fail to reinvestigate what the IPCC ordered and cover up her little friend Martin Richard's corrupt acts she is very wrong. She allows Dan Steadman the Chief Executive to pervert the course of justice with his second bodged up plastic investigation into the dishonest Chief Constable we currently have in Sussex. She never should have gained the position. There is something seriously wrong!
On 5 Feb 2013 at 4:23am Ashley Leaney wrote:
Well, Katy Bourne will soon be appointing a deputy to assist her.
That means Sussex Police has gone from being overseen by a mixed group of 17 unpaid individuals, from mixed backgrounds, probably with mixed political allegiances and holding differing view and offering different experience - to being overseen by ONE person, being paid an £85,000 salary, who was 'elected' with less than 5% of the available vote on a 15% turn-out* and assisted by an individual APPOINTED BY HER (probably one of her cronnies) on a £45,000 salary.
Or put simply - from a not very satisfactory situation - albeit one that worked reasonable well at reasonable cost, to one that stinks of self-interest, politics, and potential corruption.
In a bid - allegedly - to have a democratic and accountable steer for our police force, we now have an £85,000 per year Conservative-backed 'loose cannon' assisted by a £45,000 per year side-kick, both of whom I suggest will be steering policing in the direction they and their friends and political cronies want policing to go.
*I seem to remember that when British Airways staff went on strike recently, based on 5,811 voting for a strike and 1,170 against, with a turn-out of 72%, the Government denounced the strike as UNDEMOCRATIC and unrepresentative due to the poor turn-out. On that basis, Katy Bourne should not be in charge of a push-bike, let alone having anything to do with the running of a police force.
Or am I just being cynical?
On 18 Feb 2013 at 10:39pm Kenneth Burgoyne wrote:
True story posted to the Sussex Police Commissioners facebook page.
The Commissioner shows who's in control....pffft.
I complained to the Commissioner that contrary to her and Sussex Police statements on accountability and transparency that Sussex police have ignored a complaint I made to them over one year ago resulting in me taking legal action against them. The Commissioner advised that I should complain to Sussex Police that their Chief Constable has ignored my complaint.
Way to go Katy didn't you get the point "Sussex Police are ignoring complaints".