The Dunlop's actively evade the law.

Dunlop’s evade the law – The PSD fail to take action.

The PSD fail to take action even though they are concerned about public perception of the Dunlop’s.

As explained elsewhere the Dunlop’s carried out an illegal slaughter of sheep on their premises. Their specific crime is they used their premises as an illegal slaughterhouse.

We complained about this to the IPCC.  That complaint and response will be published on this website.

We subsequently complained that the Dunlop’s evaded prosecution and perverted the course of justice by not providing an interview when requested to by another government body.

Please see the PSD response to that complaint. (download the documents at the bottom of this page)

Essentially the PSD state it’s the Dunlop’s right to remain silent and not convict themselves.

I have since pointed out to DI Nick Plummer of the PSD, after he informed me the investigation was dropped, that of course it was, because if they had preceded then Matt Dunlop or Matt and Sam Dunlop would have had to be arrested – because they did break the law.

It seems that those who supposedly enforce the law (PC Matt Dunlop and TI Sam Dunlop) do not obey the law, and the PSD defend that position by lack of action.

The PSD is there to maintain ‘professional standards’ within our constabulary, yet they do nothing except allow the Dunlop’s to hide behind technicalities! What if we all maintained our right to silence? Would the police then be forced to close down and shorten investigations of you or us as the CPS go en-mass to the courts with no evidence? I wonder.

The Dunlop’s by their action :-

• Avoided prosecution.
• Attempted and did pervert the cause of law and justice.
• Were obstructive to an investigation by the Environmental Agency, PSD and Police
• Failed to assist another government agency.
• Abused their position as serving Police officers.
• Did not meet the minimum requirements of honesty and integrity as expected of a Police officer.
• Did not meet the minimum professional conduct as expected of serving Police officers.
• Attempted to delay the investigation and case to their advantage (they believed a 6 month timescale was in place for prosecutions to take place).
• PS Sam Dunlop and PC Matt Dunlop have brought the Police reputation into disrepute.
• Threatened the safety of the general public by preventing tracking of brain and spine tissue within the system.
• Assisted and abetted an illegal activity, namely the carrying out of a slaughter on an unlicensed premises, their own property.
• Further attempted to pervert the course of justice by providing the name of their own solicitor to Colin Jeal the owner of the sheep.
• Attempted to and have prevented the elimination of further related environmental crimes and illegal slaughters.
• Wasted Police and Environmental Agency time and costs.
• Totally disrespected, ignored and acted against the Police code of conduct and abused their position as emanations of the state.

 The PSD fail to take action.

And the attached is their lame response whilst the Dunlop’s continue to make a mockery of the law, their boss’s and the public.

Note that the PSD have met with PS Sam Dunlop and PC Matt Dunlop and let them know how the public can perceive their actions! Why don’t the PSD actually do their jobs and take some action to save us from doing it here?

There is an appeal currently lodged with the IPCC regarding this, details of that appeal and the response from the PSD of that appeal will be posted at the appropriate time. SEE BELOW : >>>

UPDATE - As you may have seen in the news section of this website. The IPCC upheld our complaint that the Professional Standards Department decided not to record this incident. The IPCC have instructed the PSD to record the incident and to deal with it appropriately!

In the IPCC’s own words ‘it is a matter of undisputed fact that that a criminal offence took place on land belonging to the Dunlop’s’.

In my own words ‘it is a matter of undisputed fact that the PSD knew the facts behind this case and decided not to act, in my opinion they did this in order to avoid charging police officers who have broken the law’