The Christian Police Association is non-denominational. In other words, we have members who are Baptist, Church of England, Methodist, Episcopalians and Presbyterians and from many of the other mainstream traditions. We are also a member of the Evangelical Alliance. What unites us is our belief in the following principles found in the Bible:

• We Believe

   

  That the Bible, as originally given, is the inspired Word of God without error and is the only complete authority in all matters of faith and doctrine.
  That sin entered the world when man chose to disobey God and please himself. Since then sin has affected the core of humanity, touching every part of our nature and being.
  That it is only by God’s grace and mercy that the sinful person is made right with Him through faith in Jesus Christ alone.

   

• We Believe

   

  That the soul of a person is eternal and that there will be a physical resurrection of the body for everyone who will then be judged by the Lord Jesus Christ. Those who have died having believed and received forgiveness will be raised, and together with those believers who are still alive, will be taken to live with Christ forever. Those who have refused to believe will be condemned from God’s presence forever.

  
  That all Christians have an obligation to demonstrate their true allegiance to Christ by obeying His commands and living lives that please Him.

   

  Highly recommended, a reading of this article on the courage and sacrifices of Birmingham police officers killed during the Blitz.

   

  https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/local-news/from-the-archives-police-heroes-gave-their-lives-164128

   

   I don't know how many of them were Christians - not nominal Christians but people who had 'accepted Christ as personal Lord and Saviour' - but the doctrine that the police offficers who have 'refused' to believe or never got round to considering the issue were 'condemned from God's presence forever.' This doctrine of eternal separation, eternal punishment, Hell, however it's to be described, is truly hideous. The Christian Police Association should be ashamed.

   

  As for the belief that 'the Bible, as originally given, is the inspired Word of God without error and is the only complete authority in all matters of faith and doctrine' I quote some verses which they may believe is 'the inspired Word of God and without error' but which less credulous people will refuse to accept. These are verses I've already quoted quite often in my other pages on Christian belief. I could give many other examples, embarrassing to evangelical Christians and many other Christians but simply a sign that this belief is hopelessly misguided, but far more than simply misguided.

   

   

  Do I think that Sergeant Kirkham showed Christian bias when he made the decision (if it was Sergeant Kirkham who made the decision) to send out police officers to my house to present the Community Protection Notice in response to a complaint by a Christian, Lu Skerratt-Love? I couldn't possibly present conclusive evidence that he was biased. I'll simply make the point that when a Christian police officer is considering a case which involves a fellow Christian, the police officer has to take every case to show neutrality. I'll state this opinion. I think it's unlikely that a non-Christian or anti-Christian police officer would come to the same decision in this case.

  Apart from the issue of Christianity, I take the view that the decision made in this case wasn't a victory for common sense but a ridiculous use of police time and resources. There are large numbers of Councillors and MP's, past and present, exposed to grossly abusive language and false claims over long periods of time. The extent of the assistance given to Lu Skerratt-Love in these matters has been surprising. Lu Skerratt-Love seems to have assumed that she was entitled to action from South Yorkshire Police whenever she made a complaint against me. She seems to have assumed that she was entitled to action, in the knowledge that there are so many other demands on police time and police resources - I hope she has this knowledge, that she recognizes the problem of scare resources and massive demands. Is she willing now to provide the evidence which should have been provided to the police at the time of the complaints, so that the police could have made an informed decision as to whether or not to proceed with action, or would that be too much to ask? The police officers who have dealt with her multiple complaints should have asked for evidence, but seem not to have done that. Their multiple failures have had consequences. If they want to defend their action (and their seeming inaction) then I'll be glad if I could be informed.

   

  Alan Billings, the South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner,  has identified 'Treating eople Fairly' as one of the three 'Policing and Crime Priorities' in his glossy publication 'Keeping Safe: The Police and Crime Plan for South Yorkshire 2017 - 2021, Renewed 2019.'

   

  Only a few categories of unfairness are discussed on the page 'Treating People Fairly,' for example these:

   

  'Ethnic minorities point to the fact that they are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system and may feel that they have undue police attention.'

   

  Other minorities - such as LGBT ... - may say they are not recognized or understood as well as they should be. If hate crimes are to be properly recorded and investigated we need the police to understand what the issues are and what is at stake.'

   

  Dr Billings must understand that people who don't belong to the communities he singles out can be treated unfairly by the police. I hope that Dr Billings understands that an accusation of hate crime can be completely unfair, completely unjust - and that the issuing of a Harassment Warning can be completely unfair, completely unjust.

   

  Violent crime in South Yorkshire doesn't have a section to itself in the short list of Priorities. It's included in Priority 2, with anti-social behaviour and rates only a very brief mention: 'In 2018 we were anxious about the rise in violent crime, particularly stabbings.' This is followed by a few general comments, including this hope: ' ... we want to understand the reasons for the increase and we want to see it brought down.' Gun crime in South Yorkshire doesn't rate a mention at all, unlike the problem of off-road bikes:

   

  'Often it is anti-social behaviour rather than crime that most disturbs people. For example, last year many told me how their lives were blighted by off-road bikes. I was pleased, therefore, when the police established their biker team that has been very successful in pursuing and apprehending those who cause nuisance - and crushing bikes.'

   

  The police haven't been as successful in pursuing and apprehending those who cause much more than a nuisance.

   

  In the same section, Dr Billings makes this claim:

   

  'In South Yorkshire, all crime is investigated.'

   

  It's alarming that someone in his position, with his power can make such a ridiculous claim. f he looks into the matter more closely, he'll find that the claim is completely false.

   

  I'm a non-believer. Dr Billings isn't a non-believer. He describes himself as a retired Church of England priest. In 'Keeping Safe,' very unwisely, he includes, on Page 2, in very large, very prominent letters, this quotation from the Old Testament prophet Jeremiah:

   

  'Seek the well-being of this place ... for in its well-being you will find your own.' Jeremiah 29:7.

   

  His Foreword ends with this:

   

  The overriding message for the coming year (2019-20) is that we must get better at working together for the common good. The prophet put it this way: 'Seek the well-being of the place where you are set ... for in its well-being you will find your own'. (Jeremiah 29:7.)

   

  Jeremiah's words had a specific reference. Dr Billings ignores this and ignores the context. The complete text of Jeremiah 29.7, in the translation of the King James Bible:

   

  'And seek the peace of the city whither I have caused you to be carried away captives, and pray unto the LORD for it: for in the peace thereof shall ye have peace.'

   

  The New International Version translation:

   

  'Also, seek the peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you into exile. Pray to the LORD for it, because if it prospers, you too will prosper.'

   

  'If it prospers, so will you.' Is this necessarily the case? Not in the least. Does the second statement necessarily follow from the first? Not at all.

   

  There was, of course, absolutely no need for Dr Billings to include this quotation from an Old Testament prophet. He should have realized that he was writing for a community made up of many different groups - not just Church of England believers and other Christian believers but non-believers, people with no belief in God or the Bible, either the Bible as the inspired word of God or the Bible as a good guide to contemporary problems, a community which includes people with a wide range of religious and a wide-range of non-Christian views.

   

  My page
  
  www.linkagenet.com/themes/fefe.htm

   

  has material on  the Sheffield Church organisation 'Arise' which includes a very large number of Churches and Church organisations, including ones without a Safeguarding Officer or Safeguarding Police, Fire and Brimstone Churches, many, many Churches promoting a belief in Hellfire for All - except for the tiny minority who accept Christ as their personal Lord and Saviour - in a more restrained way.

   

  Members of 'Arise!' 'prayer-walked' every street in Sheffield, believing that this was the way to transform Sheffield, not the way which recognizes the difficulty and intractability of so many problems, physical, social, personal, often calling for sustained hard work, with no guarantee of success.

   

  From the 'Arise!' Website. It refers to the same text from Jeremiah used by Dr Billings:
  

  “The prophet Jeremiah summoned the exiled people of God to seek the welfare of their city and to pray to the LORD on its behalf.  To be in exile is to be living in a situation we would not choose.  How better then, to respond to the present pandemic than by taking up that ancient challenge, praying to the LORD for our city of Sheffield and by seeking its welfare in the coming months. Arise Sheffield provides us with that opportunity and I commend it to you — with confidence in the Gospel and joy in the Spirit.”

   

  – Rt Revd Dr Pete Wilcox, Bishop of Sheffield

   

  So the Bishop of Sheffield thinks that the best way to respond to the Covid pandemic is prayer? Over the centuries, Christians generally believed that the best way to respond to outbreaks of cholera, smallpox, the plague, other infectious diseases, natural disasters such as earthquakes was by prayer. A proportion thought that killing Jews would help.

   

  Will 'prayer-walking' solve such problems as gun crime or attacks on the police, fire crews and other members of the emergency services or fly-tipping?

   

   Can 'Arise!, provide any evidence showing   an upsurge in the numbers attending church services after the Miracle of the Distribution of the Leaflets, the delivery of 240,000 Sheffield-themed Easter cards, one to every home in Sheffield, it's claimed. Did many people take up 'the opportunity to connect with someone from a church near them?' Or did most people consign them to the blue waste paper bin along with the rest of the unsolicited mail?

   

  Supplementary material:

   

  On 28 January 2019, a letter of mine was published in the Sheffield newspaper 'The Star,' with the heading 'Can public C of E services be defended?'

   

  An extract:
  

  'According to the British Social Attitudes Survey, affiliation with the Church of England (C of E) has never been lower in all age groups: it amounts to only 2 per cent of young adults.

   

  'What can justify the C of E’s dominant role in Remembrance Sunday commemorations, then? I attend the event in the city centre or at Weston Park. Like ones throughout the country, it takes the form of a C of E service.

   

  'There are many, many prayers and after each one, this is the expected response (as given in the Order of Service booklet):

   

  'All Hear our prayer

   

  'What is a non-believer or a believer in another religion to do? Mumble insincerely? Stay silent? Should non-believers pretend to believe in the power of prayer, or in the Trinity – the doctrine that there’s God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit (also in the booklet)? We attend to remember the fallen, to show gratitude for their sacrifice, to show gratitude and appreciation for present members of the armed forces, not to witness a C of E service. '

   

  Dr Billings made a comment on the Website of the newspaper but declined to address the problem. His view seems to entail a view of the Church of England as having a privileged position in the civic life and wider activities of this country. In addition to receiving his view of South Yorkshire Police's conduct in my case, whether he chooses to defend the force or to criticize it, I'd be interested in receiving his view of the Church's role in Remembrance Sunday events - does he support the continuance of the status quo or not? Perhaps he thinks that the views of non-believers like myself can safely be disregarded.

   

  Police and Crime Commissioners have very great powers, including the power to remove a Chief Constable.

   

  'Hillsborough police chief who was fired last year after being accused of blaming the disaster on fans was "unlawfully" removed from his job,' a court has found. 

   

  The High Court ruled that David Crompton, the former chief constable in South Yorkshire, should not have been forced to resign by Dr Alan Billings, the region’s police and crime commissioner. 

   

  Mr Crompton was removed because of a press release issued last April which alluded to "other contributory factors" outside of police conduct, which the jury found caused or contributed to the disaster. (Daily Telegraph, 19 June, 2017.)

   

  The relationship between Stephen Watson, the last Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, and Alan Billings seemed very amicable. The 'Chief Constable's Message,' part of the document 'Keeping Safe,' goes much too far in promoting Dr Billing's Plan, which isn't in the least free from faults.

   

  The relationship between Chief Constable and Police and Crime Commissioner shouldn't be a symbiotic relationship in the least. The two have very different roles. in a system of checks and balances, responsibilities for oversight and operational decisions and so much else. As it is, the Chief Constable has gone in for a form of grovelling - or, rather, has made not nearly enough effort to preserve a healthy distance. He writes,

   

  ''The Police and Crime Plan sets out clear priorities for the force and I have an unshakeable intention to ensure that the plan is implemented and we achieve our objectives of keeping South Yorkshire a safe place to live, learn and work.'

   

  The Plan sets out the views of one particular Church of England 'Priest.' The Chief Constable has, or should have, a far greater knowledge of operational police matters than Dr Billings. His 'unshakeable intention to ensure that the plan is implemented' isn't desirable in the least. As for the objective of keeping South Yorkshire a safe place to live, learn and work, can this be achieved, as he claims, South Yorkshire can never become a completely safe place, unless the Chief Constable believes that he can completely end gun crime, knife crime and the other crimes that endanger the community. He's surely more realistic, less utopian, in his expectations?

   

  The Chief Constable attended the relaunch of the Christian Police Association, the 'Hellfire and Heaven  Association.'

   

  Police activity to make South Yorkshire safer surely won't be helped in the least by devoting time, money and other resources to problems such as the ones experienced by Andrew Conheeney, the 'Blundering Buffoons Problem.' Faced by harsh realities, the Chief Constable and Alan Billings refuse to admit that harsh realities demand that the police can't possibly meet all the demands placed on them. If someone calls someone else a 'blundering moron' on a couple of occasions then the police would be wasting police resources by pursuing the matter.

   

  In his Plan, Dr Billings does write, 'The public need to understand ... how they can become resilient.' He ought to have qualified this statement, making a distinction between very serious setbacks and very minor setbacks. An example of a very serious one, being shot in the head but surviving the injury. An example of a very minor setback - to give the example yet again, being called a 'blundering buffoon.'

   

  The Websites of Churches and Church organizations are vastly different. Their Websites give inflated views, moving the Churches from the periphery to the centre: Christian belief as central to society, churches transforming communities, transforming the life of the nation, prayer regarded as a vital activity.

   

  Capability: Christianity, policing and an abuse of power

   

  This section is followed by the section

   

  Appreciation of the police, including South Yorkshire Police

   

  First of all, an extract from a long email I sent to the Allotment Officer on 6 October, 2021. I provide a copy of the complete email in full in the first column of the page. I pointed out difficulties to do with security and safety, allotment law and practicalities in emails  to the Officer and to Lu Skerratt-Love, who had publicized plans to set up a

  Garden Church in allotments very near to my own. As I make clear, the email never reached her, because Tim Ling had blocked emails from me to members of the Church Army. I gave reasons why I took the view that starting a garden church in Sheffield was undesirable and could have unintended consequences. In the extract below, I point out that when an 'allotment church' was started in Blackburn, Jill Duff, the Bishop of Lancaster attended:

   

   Jill Duff 'is an outspoken opponent of same-sex marriage and supports a view of sexual relations which has now become very uncommon in this country, but not in the Church of England. She has conservative evangelical views according to which the vast mass of people are destined for hell ... '

   

  The extract from my email to the Allotment Officer.

   

  The Garden Church Facebook page mentions at one point the use of the land to promote what is referred to as 'mission.' The word has a special meaning for Christians. This is a commonly cited definition:
  

  'A Christian mission is an organized effort to spread Christianity to new converts.'
  

  The Facebook Page of the Garden Church has a photograph of an existing 'allotment church,' showing Jill Duff, the Bishop of Lancaster, with adults and children. Three of the children and one adult were baptized by the bishop at an event at the 'allotment church.' It's completely clear that one of the main aims of this allotment church is to convert non-Christians.
  
  This is how Sharon Collins, who is associated with the 'allotment church,' describes the 'mission' of the allotment church. She moved to an estate and then
  

  ' We began prayer walking in earnest around the estate, laying hands on and claiming places for Jesus and just crying out, when we got given the use of a disused allotment in the community, which means we could once again meet to worship and we became a very public and visible church. 
  

  "It's a very strategic position that God has thrown the doors out for us. So it is wonderful to be there. There's some fencing that surrounds the allotment and we use that as well for mission. [Bold print supplied by me.] So we often put posters up with Bible verses on them or with words of encouragement on them.'
  

  Jill Duff, the Bishop of Lancaster who attended and baptized at the 'allotment church' has views which should be more widely known. She's an outspoken opponent of same-sex marriage and supports a view of sexual relations which has now become very uncommon in this country, but not in the Church of England. She has conservative evangelical views according to which the vast mass of people are destined for hell - only those who accept Christ as their personal Lord and Saviour are 'saved.
  

  As I've pointed out, Sheffield City Council is under no obligation to make land available for 'missionary' work. Its obligation is very different - to supply allotment land to those wanting to cultivate it for (primarily) fruit and vegetables. People who take on allotments will have a wide range of views on religion and related matters. It's completely unfair to allow a group with one particular set of views to make allotments into a temporary church.

   

  From my Capability page: Extracts from the article published in the 'Evening Standard:'

   

  South Yorkshire Police relentlessly mocked after urging people to report one another for 'offensive or insulting words'

   

  The article quotes this tweet from South Yorkshire Police:

   

  'In addition to reporting hate crime, please report non-crime hate incidents, which can include things like offensive or insulting comments, online, in person or in writing. Hate will not be tolerated in South Yorkshire. Report it and put a stop to it.'

   

  'It was relentlessly mocked, with more than 5,000 responses to the Sunday night post. Many people likened the force to George Orwell's "Thought Police” from his novel Nineteen Eighty-Four.'

   

  'Scottish political analysis account Wings Over Scotland tweeted: “So just to be clear: you want me to phone the police when there hasn't been a crime but someone's feelings have been hurt?” '

   

  Alan Billings, the South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner, has defended the force's view of its role - as having the right and the duty to investigate a whole range of incidents which aren't crimes. This, to me, is Alan Billings acting the part of South Yorkshire Thought Police and Hate Crime Commissioner.

   

  Nick Ferrari interviewed Alan Billings on lbc radio. This gives a link to the interview, with other material.

   

  https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/nick-ferrari-tears-into-crime-commissioner/

   

  Extracts:

   

  'After South Yorkshire Police asked the public to report incidents in which they were offended, Nick Ferrari had this fiery clash with their Police and Crime Commissioner.

   

   

  'In a time when the police are stretched due to budget cuts, Nick was furious that they are wasting resources on incidents that aren't even crimes.

   

  'Speaking to Dr Alan Billings, South Yorkshire's Police and Crime Commissioner, Nick told him:

  
  "If a motorist cuts another motorist up in Rotherham and one says the other a few choice words, we now have to get the police involved, do we?

   

  ' "You've got enough police men and women, do you, to come and talk to me about it?"

   

  'And as Nick pressed Dr Billings on the plan, it fell apart more and more.

   

  'The conversation even ended with Nick having to warn the Police and Crime Commissioner not to make comments about an incident as it was still a live court case.'

   

  Appreciation of the police, including South Yorkshire Police

   

  

   

  

   

  The section in the first column of the page contains criticism, but not in the least criticism of South Yorkshire Police as a whole. The section below is about my appreciation for the work of the police, including South Yorkshire Police. This is an extract from existing material on another page of the site, the page which discusses the work of Street Pastors, with some additional material:

   

  'So much criticism of  police forces in this country seems to me to be unfair, failing to recognize that in organizations which are large and complex, facing a very wide range of problems, in the case of the police, very demanding problems as varied as knife crime and gun crime, sexual abuse and property crime, the difficulties of vulnerable people, and so many others, facing demands from so many members of the public which are impossible to satisfy, it's inevitable that some people - many people - will be left unsatisfied -  the familiar, intractable difficulty of finite resources and infinite - or very great - demands.

   

  The police forces have many, many employees, of course, and, human nature being what it is, it's very likely that from time to time a small percentage will make serious mistakes, which are rightly publicized by the media. Very often, criticism which  should be specific  becomes generalized, amounting to a general indictment of the police. It becomes grossly unfair. Honest criticism is one thing but again and again,  the strengths of the police forces are overlooked. The strengths of the police forces, including South Yorkshire Police, are massive strengths, far outweighing the weaknesses and the outright blunders.

   

  A short extract from the Sky News Website:

   

  Cressida Dick resignation: Metropolitan Police Federation says it has 'no faith' in London Mayor Sadiq Khan.

   

  The body claims comments made by Mr Khan have "undermined the professional, dedicated and incredibly difficult work of tens of thousands of hard-working and brave police officers from across the capital".

   

  Ken Marsh, chairman of the federation, said the atmosphere among officers was at "rock bottom" following the resignation of Commissioner Dame Cressida Dick.

   

  Accusing politicians of using "policing and the career of the country's most senior police leader to deflect from their own failings", Mr Marsh said: "This is not a move we take lightly.'

   

  I agree with the Federation.

   

  In a role which is particularly important, protection of the public from violent crime, the police forces rarely fail, and in all their other roles, the successes surely outweigh the failures. But I'd want to put it much more strongly than that.

  
  Police officers risk injury and sometimes death. Street Pastors are overwhelmingly unlikely to be injured let alone killed on the streets at night, but they are ready to portray themselves as 'on the front line,' doing a vital job, and more than that, doing hazardous work.

   

  The site

   

  https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/
  police-workforce-england-and-wales-31-march-2021/annex-statistics-on-the-number-of-police-officers-assaulted-in-the-year-ending-march-2021-england-and-wales

   

  gives the information that in the year ending March 2021, there were about 37, 000 assaults on police officers in England and Wales. There were 11, 235 cases of 'assaults with injury on a constable.'

   

  An extract which conveys  the intense difficulties so often faced by police officers but not faced by Street Pastors, or not nearly as often. Although Street Pastors may be in close proximity to incidents of aggression, almost always, the aggression isn't aimed at them.

   

  From the Website of the National Police Chiefs' Council

   

  https://www.npcc.police.uk/2017%20FOI/CO/078%2017%20CCC%20April%202017%2006%202%20Spit%20Guards.pdf

   

  'The spit guard is a lightweight mesh garment that is placed over a person’s head to help minimise the risks of communicable diseases (blood borne viruses (BBV)) and injuries associated with a suspect spitting and biting. A Spit Guard will not prevent every injury through spitting or biting, it will not prevent the first instance of spitting. However there are circumstances where a suspect is deliberately spitting saliva and possibly blood, where officers need to be in close proximity to them in order to achieve a lawful objective e.g. searching, preventing self-harm etc where the use of Spit Guard can effectively minimise the risks to officers. Spit Guards cannot prevent the blunt trauma injury from biting, however they can reduce the transfer of bodily fluids in these cases.'

   

  The work of the police calls for a very wide range of skills and personal strengths. Some of the situations they have to deal with call for immense courage, others for tact and sensitivity. I remember  well one instance where I found the response of a member of South Yorkshire Police very, very impressive. I was at the house of some grandparents and their grandchild was there. They'd helped to bring  her up in the child's early years but this was much later. There have been psychiatric issues of some severity, and the police officer had been called to help with one of these episodes. The police officer responded with immense skill. His words were ones which seemed to me to be very helpful, ones which would be very likely to lower the emotional tension and in the event achieved this.

   

  I don't find all of the Bible impossible to take seriously. This, from Ecclesiastes 3, is one of the exceptions:

   

  3 There is a time for everything,
      and a season for every activity under the heavens:

  2     a time to be born and a time to die,
      a time to plant and a time to uproot,
  3     a time to kill and a time to heal,
      a time to tear down and a time to build,
  4     a time to weep and a time to laugh,
      a time to mourn and a time to dance,
  5     a time to scatter stones and a time to gather them,
      a time to embrace and a time to refrain from embracing,
  6     a time to search and a time to give up,
      a time to keep and a time to throw away,
  7     a time to tear and a time to mend,
      a time to be silent and a time to speak,
  8     a time to love and a time to hate,
      a time for war and a time for peace.

   

   

  The immense variety of police work calls for very different responses: for example, a time for empathy and sympathy and a time for force.

   

  This is from my page on Israel - a defence of Israel, although appreciation and admiration are more appropriate than 'defence.' This is a country, after all, which has shown such ability to defend itself. It concerns the use of force by the armed forces of democracies but some of it is applicable to the police, such as defence of the public against terrorists and other fanatics, the need to put excesses, mistakes, blunders on one side, in the context of overall success, successes which far outweigh any excesses, mistakes and blunders.

   

  It's a gross misconception to believe that totalitarian states, such as the Nazi state, may kill many civilians and destroy many civilian homes, but that democratic states, such as Britain, the United States and Israel, can be expected always to fight wars without sometimes killing civilians and destroying civilian homes. [This is obviously not applicable to police work.]
  
  It's a gross misconception to equate Israelis with Nazis, just as it's a gross misconception to equate the British and the Americans with the Nazis, or to claim that the British and Americans were no better than the Japanese at the time of the Second World War.

   

   

  When a democracy is fighting for survival, in the midst of extreme danger, then the measured response which is approved by armchair critics is an ideal not always attained - impossible of attainment.
  
  To overcome fanatical opposition, the armed forces of a democratic state often have no alternative but to use extreme force. To use slight force would be to guarantee defeat or make it far more likely.

   

  All the same, the armed forces of democracies have often used force which was excessive and cannot claim to have never broken the rules of war.    
       

  Excesses, mistakes, blunders are often pounced on and taken as evidence that the forces of a democracy responsible for excesses, mistakes and blunders - generally committed under conditions of acute danger and danger which is not short-lived but which has tested the courage and stamina of the democratic forces in extreme ways - are just the same or almost as bad as their opponents. I find it essential to use the concept of 'outweighing,' which I explain on the page Ethics: theory and practice. The excesses, mistakes and blunders are considered as part of an overall ((survey)). 

   

   

  My complaint to the Professional Standards Department of South Yorkshire Police

   

  My complaint got me nowhere. Some extracts from the voluminous material I accumulated at the time. I refer to the person who handled the complaint as 'the Investigator.'

   

   

  Sergeant Kirkham was believed, a member of the Christian Police Association, a fundamentalist evangelical outfit which believes in Hellfire for All for All Eternity - except for the small minority who accept the Lord Jesus as Redeemer. The complainant was also a Christian, but Sergeant Kirkham assured the Investigator that there was no bias involved. He didn't even know that the complainant was a Christian. The evidence that he did know that the complainant was a Christian is not just overwhelming but complete. He knew that she worked for the Church Army and in the COMMUNITY PROTECTION NOTICE - WRITTEN WARNING issued to me (capitals as in the original) there's this: 'In some of these correspondences you make mention of her personal faith.'

   

  The Investigator shows absolutely no recognition of the fact that it isn't the job of the police to act against someone for 'mention' of someone's faith, in this case Christian faith. As I show in various places in these pages, police action against me for 'correspondences' was grossly unfair and very disturbing. Again, the Investigator wasn't interested in the evidence I had available and depended on the testimony of Sergeant Kirkham, the one I was complaining against. The 'correspondences' received by Lu Skerratt-Love, the complainant, amount to just one item, a courteous letter. The other 'correspondences' amount to an email I sent which was never received by Lu Skerratt-Love.

   

  The Investigator refers to Lu Skerratt-Love as a 'victim' and to Lu Skerratt-Love as a vulnerable person. The pitfalls of self-identification have been exposed in the furore concerning some transgender cases. Allowing people who are biologicall male to claim that they are women can have consequences, severe consequences. Vulnerable people include genuinely vulnerable people and people who claim to be vulnerable. Victims include people who are genuinely victims and people who claim to be victims.

   

  The Investigator works for the Complaints and Discipline Section of the Professional Standards Department of South Yorkshire Police and  has a background in investigating 'Hate Crime' but I've been informed that the Investigator no longer investigates Hate Crime and has not done that for a few years.

   

  The Investigator had received detailed information from me, giving argument and evidence but chose to present the outcome of my case in a form which does not take into account very substantial issues: a schematic, systematic presentation which gives a neat and tidy appearance on the page but which is more a matter of formatting than of substance. The document has major omissions and other very substantial faults. It completely fails to do justice to the issues, which include fundamental issues to do with free expression. I don't regard free expression as a right which is subject to no restriction whatsoever but I have the documentary evidence to refute all the charges which were used against me and which the Investigator allows to stand in this document,  using the phrase, 'I have determined that the level of service provided was acceptable.'

   

  The Investigator writes, 'whilst I have carried out my reasonable and proportionate enquiries.' This is simply a phrase which makes a claim. Who could criticize enquiries which are 'reasonable and proportionate?' Can the claim be justified, throughout or in part? Is it an empty claim, no more than copying and pasting words thought to be impressive and beyond scrutiny, or do the enquiries fall far short? Is this claim to do with an ideal world or the real world. We'll see.

   

  Here, I don't follow the order of presentation in the document. I begin with some of the more disturbing aspects of the document - very disturbing, I hope to demonstrate.

   

  These comments of the Investigator were completely unnecessary:

   

  He is unhappy that a Community Protection Notice has been issued against him.
  PS 160 Kirkham
  PC 160 Kirkham confirms that a warning was issued to you ...
  • The complainant states that he was never given a written warning before the delivery of the Community Protection Notice and would like to know why this essential step was omitted.
  
  Mr Hurt, I can confirm that a Community Protection Notice was not issued to you.
  I can confirm that it was a Community Protection Notice – Written Warning that was issued to you ...

   

  The impression was given that I believed that a Community Protection Notice had been issued to me and that I was confused about what had occurred - that I was mistaken about the facts until I received this document on 3 February, 2023.

   

  In fact, in an email sent to the Investigator on 14 December, 2022, I wrote,

   

  In my online record of events - the extensive page   https://www.linkagenet.com/themes/fefe-christianity-south-yorkshire-police.htm  is the main record so far - I don't make the mistake I made recently. I refer to the 'Community Protection Notice - Written Warning' as simply  'the Written Warning' but in my recent emails I inadvertently wrote that the the paper document was itself a 'Community Protection Notice' rather than a written warning preceding the possible issue of a Community Protection Notice. 

   

  I had made a mistake, of the kind that can easily occur in very long sessions of research and writing, and I corrected the mistake long ago. There was absolutely no need to include the material. I won't claim that it was done to demonstrate superior knowledge of the facts, but I had been aware of the facts concerning the 'Community Protection Notice-Written Warning' for a long time. The title 'Community Notice-Written Warning' may easily lead to this kind of mistake.

   

   

  In an email I sent to Sergeant Kirkham  as long ago as 16 February, 2022, I included this:

   

  I sent one letter to Lu Skerratt-Love many months ago ... although I sent one email to Lu Skerratt-Love many months ago she never received it.

   

  Lu Skerratt-Love knew that she had never received any emails from me: her superior at the Church Army had blocked all emails from me. Her complaints that I had been harassing her over a long period of time were based upon falsification, but Sergeant Kirkham chose to believe the testimony of the 'victim' and thought it completely unnecessary to contact me for my testimony.

   

  He [Sergeant Kirkham] confirms that the evidence exists and therefore, the warning was served.

   

  What evidence? The evidence of a courteous letter and a courteous email - which was never even received by Lu Skerratt-Love - is all the evidence Sergeant Kirkham needed to issue a Community Protection Notice - Written Warning. The Warning contained this:

   

  ' ... your conduct is having a detrimental effect, of a persistent or continuing nature on the quality of life of those in the locality and the conduct is unreasonable now issue you with a WRITTEN WARNING ... By this Written Warning you are required to cease this conduct immediately.

   

  If from this time and date, the conduct is still having a detrimental impact on the quality of life of those in the locality, you will be served a Community Protection Notice. It is a criminal offence not to comply with this Notice ...

   

  The claim that my conduct is having a detrimental effect ... on the quality of life of those in the locality' is grossly offensive and amounts to defamation of evidence. The evidence that I have been having a detrimental effect on the quality of life in the locality is non-existent. The evidence that I have worked hard to enhance the quality of life in the locality is very substantial. The gardening images on the Home Page of the site will make this completely clear.

   

  If constructing a wildlife pond which attracts dragonflies and which attracts mating frogs, increasing the population in the area very much, amounts to a 'detrimental effect,' then Sergeant Kirkham has a great deal to learn. His behaviour has been not just unprofessional with regard to these events. I take the view that the failures are worse than that.

   

  The Investigator fails to mention these all-important facts. The Investigator comes to a conclusion:
  
   From the above, I have determined that the level of service provided was acceptable.

   

  This is a grossly biased and completely insupportable conclusion to reach.

   

  Later in the document, we find this astonishing claim:

   

  PS 160 Kirkham confirms that he does not know the victim [the victim!] or her religious beliefs. This is surely false testimony. In the Community Protection Notice - Written Warning which he perhaps wrote and certainly authorized - he has confirmed that he authorized the issuing of the document, there is this: 'In some of these correspondences you make mention of her [Lu Skerratt-Love's] faith. Sergeant Kirkham obviously knew that Lu Skerratt-Love worked at the Church Army - this and other evidence makes the claim not to be aware of Lu Skerratt-Love's Christian beliefs a claim which cannot possibly be true. if he contests this, then I think he has some explaining to do. If he doesn't contest it, he has some explaining to do, but explaining may not be amongst his strengths.

   

  This Investigator's Document was the first time that I learned that material concerning Durham University was included in the dossier and used as evidence against me, leading to the issuing of the Written Warning! It was never so much as mentioned in the Written Warning or anywhere else - and now, the person who was investigating my complaint gives me this completely new claim!

   

  I contacted some academics at Durham University and informed them that I intended to include profiles in my page on Universities. Durham University has a massive number of academics teaching and doing research in various branches of theology - so many, that I think of Durham as a 'Faith University,' with some similarities with faith schools. I decided not to include any profiles. There has never been any mention of Durham University in my page on Universities. This issue should never have been included in the Investigator's document.