This WRITTEN
WARNING issued on 15.02.2022.
' ... 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.
...
'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 the Notice ... If found guilty you
could be fined up to £2,500.'
The section, 'Details of the conduct.' That should be 'Details of the alleged conduct.'
The Police have become aware of you contacting Lu Skerratt-Love via email and hand delivered letters. You have also been contacting her work colleagues via email and letter regarding her. In some of these correspondences you make mention of her personal faith. When you write these emails and letters it causes great upset to Lu and her colleagues at work. This is not fair and certainly not right to do so. It is important that you realise how much you are upsetting / distressing Lu with this conduct. You would not wish for such conduct for your loved ones. We are willing to help in any way.'
Fact: Lu Skerratt-Love has never received a single email from me. Lu Skerratt-Love is an employee of the Church Army and her Head of Department, Tim Ling blocked emails to Lu Skerratt-Love and other members of the Church Army.
A concise summary of events and dates
8 September, 2021. Email sent to Lu Skerratt-Love pointing out difficulties (mainly security, safety) to do with the proposed garden church at some allotments near to my allotments. Email not received by Lu Skerratt-Love. Tim Ling of the Church Army had decided to block emails from me to Lu Skerratt-Love. By 12 September he had blocked emails from to himself and all members of the Research Unit. Since that time, no members of the Church Army have received emails from me.
In the section at the end of this column, Some Documents, a screenshot of the email sent to Lu Skerratt-Love and the response.The screenshot is too wide to be included here. The response included this: 'Delivery has failed ... Your message wasn't delivered. Despite repeated attempts to deliver your message, the recipient's email system refused to accept a connection from your email system.'
All Lu Skerratt-Love's complaints to South Yorkshire Police about alleged emails from me were made when she must have known that she had never received emails from me, are based upon falsification.
8 October, 2021. Letter from me to Lu Skerratt-Love and Tim Ling, quoted in its entirety after this summary. After this one letter, no further letters sent.
22 November, 2021. Card received from South Yorkshire Police asking me to contact them. When I contacted them, told that Lu Skerratt-Love had complained about receiving unwanted emails from me. Told to stop this. I pointed out that Lu Skerratt-Love hadn't received any emails from me. They were blocked. Considered making a complaint but decided not to - I didn't want to cause any difficulties for the Police Constable who communicated the information.
25 November, 2021. Email sent to Dr Andy Wier ('Research Team Leader' of the Church Army) in connection with his book, 'Creative Tension in Urban Mission: Missional Practice and Theory.' The email I sent never received him - 'Message blocked.'
15 February, 1922. Yet another complaint from Lu Skerratt-Love, about alleged emails and letters, to other members of the Church Army as well as herself. Again, a complete fabrication. After the email and letter mentioned above, no further emails and letters have been received by these people. I decided that a complaint to the Professional Standards Department of South Yorkshire Police is fully justifiable. I informed Simon Kirkham and the members of police who visited on 15 February.
I decided to make a complaint to the Independent Office for Police Conduct instead.
Email sent to Lu Skerratt-Love on 8 September but not received by her - evidence that the email never reached her, as the result of blocking of all emails to Lu Skerratt-Love and other members of the Church Army No other emails have reached her. Her claim that she's received emails from me is false.
Email sent to Dr Andy Wier of the Church Army on 26 November, 2021
Copy of letter sent to Lu Skerratt-Love and Tim Ling of the Church Army:
The 'Details of conduct' mentions 'letters.' There was just one letter, and this is it. I delivered it to the Church Army building in Sheffield, one copy for Dr Tim Ling, one copy for Lu Skerratt-Love and one copy for Dr Andy Wier.
8 October, 2021
Dear Dr Ling,
There are matters which I need to bring to your attention, and the attention
of Lu Skerratt-Love. I can't use the most convenient method, for me, email,
since you've blocked my emails. This is simply a short preliminary note. I
don't discuss in any detail these matters
Instead of using paper and envelope, buying a stamp and using the post, I've
chosen instead to call at the Church Army building and deliver this
note in person and I intend to use this method whenever I can justify a
further communication to you or to Lu Skerratt-Love. [I've never made any
further communication with Tim Ling, Lu Skerratt-Love or anyone else at
Church Army Sheffield. This was the only letter they've received.] I've
decided further
to make use of 'open' communication, without
enclosure in an envelope. The matters I need to bring to your attention
aren't confidential.
Banning, blocking and attempts at blatant censorship should be avoided by
people in any organization which values its reputation. Your decision to
block emails from me was completely unjustifiable. All I had done was to
send emails to a few people and organizations to inform them of my concerns
about the proposal to set up a garden church at the Morley Street Allotment
site. The reasons I gave and the evidence I gave were to do with matters of
allotment law, security and safety. I've documented the issues in detail and
published them on my Website. The documentation will be extended to take
note of future developments. The people and organizations who received my
emails - few in number - could be expected to find the issue of a garden
church relevant, for example, St Marks Church.
Lu Skerratt-Love had publicized the issue on the
St Marks Church Website.The tone of my emails was courteous. I used Lu
Skerratt-Love's Church army email address because I had no alternative. This
was the only email address I could find.I felt at the time that it was
unwise of her not to make available an alternative email address.
Lu Skerratt-Love's decision to complain to the police, her attempt to have
me remove material from my own Website, was disastrously misguided, like
your decision to block my emails. Lu Skerratt-Love's twitter page is full of
complaints against the police but she chose to turn to the police (as an
alternative to prayer, perhaps, or to supplement prayer). This, to me, was
wasting police time. I don't claim that it
was wasting police time in the strict legal sense but if people demand
action from the police for the flimsiest of reasons, or no good reason at
all, or for thoroughly bad reasons, then the police have less time available
for all the other issues, far more important issues, which they have to deal
with, such as doing something to curb the excesses of Extinction Rebellion,
rape, violent crime, and many more. [I don't equate the excesses of
Extinction Rebellion with rape or violent crime, of course. This is a short
list with examples which are very different in their degree of seriousness.]
I don't make demands myself, although I think that an apology is due from Lu
Skerratt-Love and yourself. If you find the arguments and evidence I've put
forward on my Website unpersuasive, then by all means let me have - better
still, publicize - your counter arguments and evidence.
As I say, this is only a preliminary stage. I've already spent a great deal
of time and effort on these matters and I'm willing to do far more. Any
necessary communication with you or Lu Skerratt-Love will be by personal
delivery of a note. [I didn't deliver any more notes/letters.]
I hope you will be able to bring this note to the attention of Lu Skerratt-Love.
[In the event, I provided a copy for Lu Skerratt-Love.] Obviously, you're
free to bring it to the attention of other people as well.
Best Wishes,
Paul Hurt
From my page
www.linkagenet.com/themes/fefe-free-expression-south-yorkshire-police.htm
including quotes
from an email to
the Allotment
Officer:
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:
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.
