Complaint to the Police Complaints Authority
Complaint about the way in which police officers on 23rd and 24th March
handled a case of assault
on Mr G. Madden of 11 Blatchington Mill Drive, Stone Cross, Pevensey, BN24 5QA
by his neighbour, Mr C. Mabry of 15 Blatchington Mill Drive.
After receiving prompt and helpful advice about my dissatisfaction with the police from Richard M Offer of the PCA, I decided to try to deal with the matter locally, as one of Mr Offer's suggestions was that I "could contact the Superintendent heading your police area".
This I tried to do by telephone, but got no further than Sergeant Hansen, who said that she would look into the matter. The following morning she telephoned me, and identified the incident as being No. 959 at 2.04 p.m. Early in the conversation, in reviewing the matter, Sergeant Hansen said that I had been involved in an altercation with Mr Mabry, which is utterly untrue, and the main reason that I am now making a formal complaint through the PCA. When I questioned what she meant by the word altercation, Sergeant Hansen seemed to become angry. I was also dissatisfied with the end of the conversation, when Sergeant Hansen spoke of the nature of the police record of my part in the incident.
What happened, when it happened, what was done, and what was said
After lunch on Saturday 23rd March, I mowed the lawn in front of my property. I then took a light broom, and started to sweep blades of grass from the drive of No. 15. As I was doing so, a car came speeding up the cul de sac using high revs, and screeched to a halt on the Mabrys' drive. Mr Mabry immediately got out and rushed towards me shouting something about "my fence". I retreated across my lawn, and was only able to say "Get off my property" before the first punch landed. I tried to defend myself with the broom as I was punched repeatedly. I backed away across my lawn for five metres, and then down a slope for a further eight metres before I was knocked to the ground on my drive, just in front of my garage.
In a state of some agitation, I dialled 999, and declined the offer of an ambulance: at that stage I was only aware of damage to my left thumb. When two police cars arrived, the occupants of both went into No. 15. Later a third car arrived, and some time after that two policemen (a constable and a sergeant I think) called to see me. They took my name and date of birth, and I was told that the constable would call to take a statement from me on Monday, after telephoning to arrange a convenient time. I suggested that I could write down a statement in the meantime, but was told not to do that. The third police car left the scene some time after the departure of the others, as the driver was still visiting the Mabrys.
The constable did not telephone, but arrived on Sunday morning with a small notebook and - apparently - instructions about what my statement should say. When I declined to say that there had been an argument which led to a fight, the constable returned to base to consult the sergeant. I was then telephoned, and arranged for the sergeant to come for the statement at 1 p.m.
This time the approach was slightly more subtle. The sergeant dictated a statement, for the constable to write down. I was allowed to correct a few words. Then came a sentence which said that I did not want to pursue the matter further. Apparently I had to say that in view of the police's preoccupation with the next set of crime statistics. I refused to do so, at which the sergeant became angry and tried to tell me that I was obstreperous, though what he actually said was "obstroperous".
It was more than an hour after my 999 call before I could take proper stock of my injuries – a split left thumb nail which has made using the hand awkward, superficial damage to my right index finger, now apparently cured, and pain in my right arm and in my chest which continues to make movement painful and causes much sleeplessness in the early morning hours.
I was told that the police had to take the incident on 23rd March in isolation, without reference to my state of health or a history of threats and harassment which has required the attendance of the police on at least four previous occasions.
Health
I am sixty-eight years old, a little under 5' 4'' in height, and weigh some ten stone. In 1995, after two days in intensive care, I survived an operation for cancer, which has been followed by further operations and a permanent medical condition. On 16th February this year I developed problems with leg muscles which in the succeeding week two local doctors were unable to diagnose correctly, and by 23rd February I was completely immobilised and had to be carried to the ambulance which took me to hospital. That problem has not gone away completely. I also have arthritis in both hands. The idea that I would let myself become engaged in an argument which could lead to a fight is ridiculous.
A little of the history
In November of last year, I applied to Eastbourne County Court (Madden v. Mabry, Claim No:
EA 101669) for an injunction order against Mr Mabry in an attempt to stop the harassment and threats to which I have been subjected, as visits by the police seemed ineffectual. Only the day before the attack I had sent the Court a comment on a complaint made by Mr Mabry that I was unwilling to discuss a boundary problem with him. The reasons I gave for being unwilling to discuss anything with Mr Mabry included the following:
• In a letter of 20/9/99 the claimant wrote to Mayo & Perkins [Mr Mabry's solicitors]:
"Since Mr Mabry has twice threatened me with physical violence, I am no longer willing to
discuss the problem of the boundary with him."
• Mr Mabry's behaviour has not improved in the meantime. Last year the worst "discussion" I heard Mr Mabry engaged in kept me awake for some time. An altercation with another man outside Mr Mabry's property after midnight was very loud, foul-mouthed, threatening, and prolonged, and resulted in the attendance of at least three police vehicles at the scene.
A letter from me to Mr Mabry's solicitors, 10th July 1999, includes the paragraph
Recently my neighbour has taken to mowing the strip of my lawn adjacent to his drive. After he had done so once more last Monday, I began to remove a few bricks from the wall on my front lawn. Your client appeared, advanced towards me in a threatening manner, pushed me in the chest - perhaps to provoke some retaliation - and said he would put me in need of "intensive care". His wife alleged that she had seen me raise a hammer to threaten your client. They are both shameless liars. I reported the threats to the police.
The assault on 23rd March was evidently a partial carrying-out of that threat to beat me up to the extent that I would be in need of intensive care in hospital.
A further letter from me to Mr Mabry's solicitors, 16'h August 1999, says
You wrote on 8fh July asking me to ensure that any wall built adjacent to your client Mr Mabry's property is constructed by a reputable contractor. This may not be possible.
As I indicated in my email of 23rd July, I asked three builders to quote for the relocation and extension of the wall. Two of them are members of the Guild of Master Craftsmen. They all visited me between 19th and 23rd July to inspect the site and discuss the job. I felt it only fair to inform them all of Mr Mabry's attitude, and as I indicated in my email, the last of the builders, a local craftsman and his son, were actually present when Mr Mabry threatened violence against me or anyone I employed to build the wall.
The police were of course called on the occasion of those threats, and the name, address and
telephone number of the builders were given to them.
In 1999 the police also investigated without success stuff I have been receiving by courier or through the mail over the last three years, including boxes of books, parcels, catalogues and hundreds of letters. Though I returned some of it to the senders, and threw most of it away when the police gave up on the case, I still have about nine kilogrammes of letters in my garage.
On 5th November 2001, Mr Mabry removed a panel from the fence to his back garden, giving him access to my back garden. He had told a neighbour in advance that he was going to do this. He told the Court that he did this so that he could talk to me. The Court, at my request, ordered him to reinstate it. Mr Mabry's purpose was of course intimidation.
My main complaint is that the sergeant who visited me prejudged the matter in the light of what my assailant and his wife had said, and did not allow me to make a signed statement of what had happened. I have a first class honours degree in English, and am more than capable of producing a simple narrative of events, but was not allowed to do so.
Mr Mabry is a continuing threat to me, and I consider the refusal to consider the events of 23rd March in the context of the state of my health and the nature of Mr Mabry's previous behaviour unreasonable.
Some of the things the sergeant said to me were objectionable, but not worth complaint in themselves: for instance he said that instead of spending so much time with me they could have been doing something important like attending a rape case, and yet he wasted time by making several references to "the cells" and why he could arrest me if he wanted to – for example for assault, or for breach of the peace.
Some time ago, a neighbour told me that Mr Mabry used to belong to the police force. I find this hard to believe, but would like the matter to be investigated, as if I can be sure that it is not true, my present low opinion of the local police could be slightly higher than it currently is, and if I am ever called for jury service again, I could be a little less sceptical of the claims of the police.
