Police withdraw stalking protection order application against Caroline Farrow

Needmoresleep

So are you 100% certain that it is one in the same person who has made this recent report to the police about Caroline - or are you just assuming?

Why is Hayden's behaviour tolerated? I keep thinking about poor Kate Scottow, who ended up with a criminal conviction because Hayden reported her to the police for malicious communications. Just think about the distress poor Kate suffered because this person decided to report her to the police - and just think how the police, the CPS and the judge all sided with this person who has a conviction for sexual relations with a minor. It makes me shudder.

Each time Felix suggested we knew nothing about the claimant, we suggested he had a look at archive material on the Farms. Thinking about it again though all he would need to do is google "Caroline Farrow" which throws up all sorts of mentions of the conflict between the two in national media (which their careful lawyers checking) and elsewhere, going back years.

I have been on this board for six or seven years. Threads about the claimant have been a constant, even though they work hard to get things removed. (I can't see Baggmo's post staying.) I will confess at times things got so weird that I wondered whether to believe Caro, or not, but the claims against her and others keep coming. If the police actually listened to women they would have been able to give them a pretty complete history of what the claimant has been up to. If the police don't then at least consider that Caroline might be the victim of harassment rather than the perpetrator, they have problems with more than grammar and spelling.

Thank you baggmo. The poor victim, just 14 years old when he was abused by Anthony Halliday.

Dr Louise, always good to read your posts, please pass on best wishes to Caroline.

Insert here my hollow laugh re the Claimant's delusional thinking that they have a good reputation

Thanks @baggmo. My Uncle Tony's bingo card is now complete.

Not going to have any days left for Christmas.

Wow, thanks @baggmo I didn’t know that history.

And gosh, 7 weeks’ annual leave? I’m an academic, and according to most people, we’re always on hols. But not for 7 weeks straight! Clearly I’m in the wrong job.

But Felix, we just don't know about the annual leave. You shouldn't speculate because you just don't know.

Oh. The taxpayer funds that Surrey have misused on the failed stalking order are a little over £7000, and have now increased because it's been listed for a costs hearing after Surrey ignored all costs correspondence.

Basically Caroline and her counsel had to prepare a defence for an order which if Wiggum had read the already submitted evidence, would never have been brought. No wonder the officer has escaped on a seven week holiday.

Well I'll just sit on my hands on that one, because my eyes went so crossed reading all that legalese that I'm not even sure if they're still in the correct sockets. Interesting though. Very interesting. It's great that this thread stays busy, because we don't want to lose sight of this important case. All post are therefore very useful and good work everyone who has been bumping the thread.

As we all know who the complainant is, they publicly identified themselves on Twitter and this is now recorded in a court case https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/KB/2023/950.html - as far as I know the outstanding costs have still not been paid, we all know that the police will be coming under a lot of pressure from this person to prosecute.

They will send it to the CPS to make themselves sue-proof.

This will benefit from having an experienced, qualified, regulated and insured legal professional, likely a senior barrister given the profile of the case, review the file and evidence.

In order to bring a prosecution the CPS must be satisfied of two things.

a) it's in the public interest
b) there is a reasonable prospect of conviction

The CPS will also know that given the nature of the litigant, if they decide not to prosecute, the complainant will exercise every avenue for appeal until it's exhausted because that's what they do.

The complainant is desperate for a victory as the police have recently declined to take action against the 4th woman they've had interviewed under caution. https://twitter.com/missdemenor/status/1674097028698087424?s=20

A police complaint against me was also binned.

A look at Laurence Fox's feed is interesting. Laurence "misgenders" the complainant but, to date, hasn't been sued or reported to the police. I wonder why, on the face of it, it's vulnerable women who are subject to what I consider harassment via the judicial and criminal systems.

*Avoided "misgendering" to comply with Talk Guidelines but everyone knows what I think.

I used to think a decent percentage of the British population were educated. I now feel otherwise

I have a mate who reckons that intelligence is actually decreasing in the population as a whole, and I really think she might be on to something. Certainly it's obvious that critical thinking no longer appears to be taught as a skill.

Tell me more about this paint....

This is something I would really like investigated. How much the 'Stonewalling' of public services has actually cost the public purse. Because it's not just the direct cost of their ridiculous rainbow index, it's the cost of inclusivity materials... policies and procedures... spurious police and legal action... paying for the fallout from this nationwide cult.

I used to think a decent percentage of the British population were educated. I now feel otherwise.

Tsk.... @DrLouiseJMoody - he'll be entertaining himself as he's waiting for the diagnostics to come through on whatever car he's doing up at the moment - thats his usual MO anyhoo!

Yes, @BezMills, I think if you manage to appear to counter posts from people who actually have knowledge of the investigation within minutes of their posts, then you probably aren't a legit officer. That or you're possibly on your usual two months leave.

DrLouiseJMoody

We are back to the fact that we don't know what the original reporting person has stated, what the specific offence is or what the evidence is for and against. So at this stage we can't really judge.

Disclaimer - I am using 'we' to mean me and most others on here. I acknowledge that some on here will know or have been told the details of the complaint and I am aware that Caroline may have access to this thread or indeed people close to her. I also acknowledge that the reporting person, OIC and direct witnesses may also read the thread and hence will not be included in the term 'we'.

Perhaps they need the 7 week holibob. You know, maybe he can't afford it on his wages so having to use a freight ship instead of an aeroplane. He might end up just 2 days actually there. Must be exhausting poor thing.

I have come to my own conclusions @DrLouiseJMoody , you wouldn't need to be a DCI to guess what they are, and I'm always interested to read your contributions

LOLZ.

The only person that needs protecting is Caroline.

And stop addressing me, please. I know the details. You're a pedantic, illiterate, irrelevance who does not.

I'll leave other forum users to decide which one of us has credibility concerning the investigation.

Not very pleasant for this forum.
Is that aimed at me or everyone?

DrLouiseJMoody

The SPO is separate matter from the investigation.

As we still don't know what the investigation is about - we can't make any assumptions as to where the investigation is heading. The SPO is a safeguarding matter to protect the complainant whilst the primary investigation is ongoing.

Its similar to a DVPN/DVPO. We have had loads of DVPN's not granted - but the suspect is eventually charged with the primary offence.