Corrupt Dunlops Police in Hampshirea website exposing corrupt police serving in Hampshire Constabulary
PS Sam Dunlop and PC Matt Dunlop
proven liars, law manipulators, law evaders, paid for by you!

The Dunlop's lie to achieve prosecution.

The Dunlop’s lie to generate a prosecution, they then lie before, during and after the resultant court case!

Overview of false accusations made against my family and I by TI Sam Dunlop, PC Matt Dunlop and others.

On 17th March 2008 a horse owned by Sandra Priestman and Rory Ballard, tenants of Matt and Sam Dunlop, broke through their field fencing, through our garden fencing, went into our stables in our garden then kicked our horse to death.

Their horse was a rig (a rig is a half entire stallion horse, known to be dangerous as they are neither entire nor castrated). The owner, Sandra Priestman knew the horse was a rig and admitted as such to Susan Butler a few days previously to the horse attack incident.

We contacted Matt and Sam Dunlop via the Hampshire Constabulary switchboard, they reached Sam Dunlop, she did nothing. We then contacted the Police. The vet and eventually the carcass removal company as our horse died within half an hour of the attack.

The Dunlop’s as landlords and Sandra Priestman and Rory Ballard as tenants were responsible for keeping this dangerous animal contained within their land. Matt Dunlop denied this in court and it was subsequently explained to him in court that he was wrong (it was not our responsibility to keep the rig out but his responsibility as the landlord to keep the attacking animal in. The Dunlop’s and Sandra Priestman did not have a rental agreement explaining who was responsible for what. They consequently blame each other).

The following day, on 18th March, I was arrested by PC Elly Hurd and five other officers for attacking a horse, attacking a person and criminal damage!

This is amazing as I have been with my family or other officials throughout and can account for my time as can others. We subsequently find out that Matt and Sam Dunlop have concocted a series of lies to attempt to create their own innocence by reneging responsibility for them being also responsible for the death of our horse.

I observed Sam Dunlop meeting with Rory Ballard the partner of Sandra Priestman in the field (the Dunlops field) at the back of our house. They spoke for twenty minutes before multiple Police in marked cars arrive at the field gate. We subsequently discover (in court) that Sam Dunlop has spoken with Rory Ballard, who then accuses me, Stan Evans of the above mentioned crimes to my arresting officer PC Elly Hurd.

Sam Dunlop (at that time herself a Sergeant in Hampshire Constabulary) had actioned a kangaroo court to defend herself and shift the blame on to me by blatant lies. I believe she was also motivated by personal issues which are still unknown to us.   It takes two days in court for one of the attending officers (some of which are friends or known to the Dunlop’s) a PC Anna Wield to reveal to the magistrate that it was Sam Dunlop who named Stan Evans. For clarity, she, TI Sam Dunlop, lies in a prosecution witness statement under a signed statement of truth (which states that the person signing is open to prosecution if there is anything they know to be untrue is stated – its one of the basics of English law and perjury, yet she blatantly or provably lies!).

The arrest, technically! is carried out correctly as Rory Ballard appears (via his prosecution witness statement – where he obviously also lies, but he is a tenant now working with landlords to avoid his own prosecution) to make the accusation.

Again for clarity. This arrest is made with no evidence! This arrest is made based on accusations only. I subsequently spend 15 hours in a cell in Waterlooville police station waiting questioning. We also find this interesting! Maybe the Police can’t find evidence to backup Rory Ballard, Sam Dunlop and Matt Dunlop’s prosecution witness statements – because there isn’t any!

Sam Dunlop (then a sergeant) and Matt Dunlop (a PC) made condemning prosecution witness statements – and weren’t even at the scene of the accusations they made, yet the local Police arrested me, because they knew the Dunlop’s as serving colleagues and took their words as automatically being the truth!

My son and partner obviously objected in the strongest way as I was arrested outside my house by five Police officers with Matt Dunlop (claimed in court to be off duty - but he was in full Police uniform!), my son, Harley, was arrested at the scene (he also spent 15 hours in a police cell) and Susan Butler, my partner was summonsed weeks later (also for protesting my innocence to the Police at the time of my arrest).

Charges against my son were dropped within weeks.

The CPS (obviously influenced by prosecution witness statements made by serving police officers, Sam and Matt Dunlop) decide to proceed to prosecute me, Stan Evans, and my partner, Susan Butler.

I went to court for three pre-court meetings where I was given the opportunity to admit guilt, which I obviously didn’t as I wasn’t, and looked forward to my days in court.

(As an interesting aside – I was advised by my solicitor at the time to plead guilty and take a bindover! He was duly 'fired' and replaced by two barristers. I wonder how many innocent people take a caution to avoid the stress of court and avoid the financial penalty of going to court?)

We (Stan Evans and Susan Butler) went to court on 5th and 6th January 2009, accused of  section 4 and section 5 public order offence charges, in plain English, attacking a person, attacking a horse and criminal damage.

In court Sam Dunlop, Matt Dunlop, Rory Ballard and his father Rory Ballard senior (the Ballard’s attended the field soon after the horse attack incident and repeated lies fed to them by the Dunlop’s) were torn to pieces as their lies were exposed. PC Elly Hurd and PC Anna Wield, officers making the arrest were also cross examined. Our barristers discover on the second day in court that PC Elly Hurd had with-held information (all prosecution information must be exposed to the defence legal team before attending court – it was not). PC Hurd was told by the magistrates to go over the road to Fareham Police station to get the removed information. When this information was returned our barristers discover PC Matt Dunlop had been progressing the case privately in Police time, using Police equipment using his Police email, he even met with another officer, PC Ann Stevens, in Bishops Waltham Police Station car park (he also admits using ebay on the Police computer, this amused us but didn't amuse the barristers who asked if this was allowed). We also discover that his claims on the first day in court (that he did not tell anyone) were lies in court. He was recalled to the witness dock and under questioning by my barrister (with our new evidence at hand) he admits that yes he did indeed inform and discuss the case with several Police colleagues and several neighbours in our village. {this is one of the reasons for this website – this is our say!}

After two days in court, one witness, Clair Enfield, was effectively thrown out of court by the CPS solicitor as her statement was unbelievable and she lost her temper under cross examining. The three magistrates either drop charges before sentencing or at sentencing then declare my partner, Susan Butler, and me, Stan Evans, not guilty of all accusations. Discrepancies in Police evidence were quoted.

I had requested at previous meetings with the Professional Standards Department that the PSD should attend the court meetings due to my claims (at meetings with Police at my request - my claims as set out here) concerning these two serving Police officers. The PSD did not attend court on either day! They failed to effectively police the Police. We consequently spend three days with them, at my request to re-open investigation of the Dunlop’s, after we were cleared. This would not have been necessary had the PSD attended court and seen for themselves what both of the Dunlop’s plus other serving officers had to say!

In summary, two police neighbours who were responsible for a crime tried to cover their guilt by making counter claims of totally untrue crimes against me and my family. They manipulated the Crown Prosecution Service by concocted a story to cover their own guilt and lied extensively under a signed statement of truth in prosecution witness statements.

They manipulated the local Police as they knew at least one of them, or even (as was later revealed) bullied and harassed my arresting officer. (Sam Dunlop, a sergeant at that time, continually contacted PC Elley Hurd who eventually had to go to her superior, Inspector Peglar, to prevent this). Sam Dunlop and Matt Dunlop created totally fabricated prosecution witness statements which were designed to 1)gain an arrest by the local Police, then 2)influence the Crown Prosecution Service to make charges. This they successfully did, but their lies were revealed in court.

In this section of the website I am including a breakdown of each prosecution witness and you’ll also be able to download the original documents. *** To be published here soon

We have met continuously with the Professional Standards Department and the Independent Police Complaints Commission over the last two years – but still the officers mentioned (Training Inspector Sam Dunlop and PC Matt Dunlop) are serving officers!

(we met the PSD previous to the court meeting as we obviously knew the charges against us were untrue, but subsequent investigation of the Dunlop’s and others was held back until after our court case due to sub-justice laws – i.e. two cases cannot run at the same time)


Sam Dunlop, within six weeks of our court case and not guilty verdict, made further accusations that I had an altercation with our postman. The PSD immediately investigated this and Sam Dunlop was given ‘operational advice’ concerning the inaccuracy of her reporting! (Sam Dunlop told lies!) she also received operational advice given for being ‘overzealous’ regarding her communication with my arresting officer, PC Hurd (Sam Dunlop attempted to bully a colleague of lower rank!)

A summary of the Dunlop’s behaviour:

It’s very simple – we are dealing with two neighbours, serving officers within the Hampshire Constabulary, who have lied before, during, and after a court case involving serious accusations which they themselves concocted!

  • The Dunlop’s have committed perjury (they have lied before and in court in order to progress an accusation).
  • The Dunlop’s have wasted substantial Police time via lies to and manipulation of colleagues.
  • The Dunlop’s have wasted substantial tax payer’s funds due to hundreds of pre and post-court time plus two full days in court.
  • The Dunlop’s have brought the good name of the Police into disrepute.
  • The Dunlop’s have disobeyed most of the Police code of conduct.
  • The Dunlop’s are liars, criminals and corrupt Police.

The authorities have shown (by issuing operational advice) that they are aware of the Dunlop’s behaviour and actions, but take no action against them other than advice. They are still in ‘positions of power employed by Hampshire Constabulary’ to potentially do similar things. I warned the PSD, after court, they would not stop and would make further false allegations, they dismissed this as conjecture and presumption. They (the Dunlop’s) subsequently did this by accusing me of having altercations with our postman and also of stealing their CCTV camera (both issues investigated and dismissed – still the authorities do nothing!). The PSD were wrong – I was proven correct.

I therefore now openly publish 1) in the name of justice, 2) because Alex Marshall, chief constable of Hampshire, is strangely unwilling to investigate the facts behind my arrest and remove me from the criminal database, and 3) because PC Matt Dunlop 'made it his business' to quote from court, to inform our neighbours and his colleagues of his version of events. (if his sycophantic friends haven’t worked it out by now – he and his wife wouldn’t even know how to spell the word ‘truth’)

All our court and travel costs were returned to us due to our 'not guilty' verdicts. But this case has cost the Hampshire taxpayer a fortune!