strawman

XXXXXXXXXXXX,
Red Lodge,
Bury St Edmunds,
Suffolk
IP28 XXX
21st February 2011
PC Sinden,
Thetford Police Station,
Norwich Road,
Thetford,
Norfolk
IP24 2HU
Your ref: 10022011-198
Dear PC Sinden,
Two people who did not show me any ID visited my home, unannounced, after dark last night and left with me
what appears to be an undated letter from yourself. As verbal communications are always open to possible
misunderstandings, I therefore request that you clarify the following queries in writing:
1. Your letter states that I sent two letters to Steven Oxborough and that those letters relate to his work. I most
strongly refute that allegation. Neither of those letters relate to his work, and so they are sent directly to him.
As you are aware, I have twice made written request to Suffolk Constabulary that charges be pressed against
Steven Oxborough for his continuing harassment of me. Details of this are shown in the attached document.
Some months ago, an officer of Suffolk Constabulary informed me in connection with another matter, that the
police are not able to charge a business or organisation with harassment of an individual since any such
allegation of harassment has to be made against a named individual. My first letter to Steven was therefore to
inform him that my complaint to the police was against him personally, and requesting him to stop his
continuing harassment of me. It is difficult to see how a letter asking him to stop harassing me could be seen
as harassment of him, so perhaps you could clarify why exactly you deem that to be the case.
2. My second letter to Steven is in connection with a debt which I believe he owes me. I am entitled to take any
such matter through the courts for resolution. However, as you will undoubtedly be aware, the court will not
accept any such application unless it is accompanied by a copy of a letter sent to the defendant making him
aware of the claim of outstanding debt and allowing him 28 days in which to deal with the matter. This
requirement left me with no option but to write the second letter to Steven. Considering the requirement of the
court, there does not appear to be any way in which that letter could be considered to be harassment of the
debtor, so would you please clarify why you consider it to be harassment.
3. Since neither of my letters to Steven can be seen as harassment, why then have you issued me with a warning,
alleging harassment on my part?
4. When I attempted to discuss the details of this matter with my visitors in a calm and reasonable way, I was
shouted down and not permitted to comment. That was a most astonishing act, one which I have never before
encountered at any point in my entire lifetime. Is that behaviour the normal method of dealing with the public
which Norfolk Constabulary uses?
5. As I fall into the category which the government considers to be “elderly and potentially vulnerable”, do you
consider it reasonable to make an unannounced visit in the dark and then shout at somebody in that category
of individuals?
6. Sgt. Keith Grant of the Suffolk Constabulary states that actions are not considered to be harassment if they are
performed in the belief that there is full entitlement to undertake those actions. For that reason, he is reluctant
to press charges against Steven Oxborough in spite of repeated instances of what appears to me to be clear
131