Shame of Cambridge Police: How Investigator Susan Marsh Failed Me as a Victim of Sex Crime

Your author is a proven victim of sex crime. Proven in the High Court, not the court of Tumblr, when I was the subject of revenge pornography / falsified pornography by neo-Nazis. Readers might expect the most supportive and appropriate institution to be police. Far from it. In this article I am naming and criticising Investigator Susan Marsh 3253, whose behaviour, in my view brings shame on Cambridgeshire Police and Chief Constable Nick Dean. The failure to support me as a victim of sex crime is consistent with a recent report critical of the force (archive), which criticised how the constabulary deals with calls from members of the public and management of sex offenders.

Chief Constable of Cambridgeshire Police Nick Dean was planning to retire but then decided to stay. Cambridge deserves better.

Chief Constable of Cambridgeshire Police Nick Dean was planning to retire but then decided to stay. Cambridge deserves better.

On 10 April 2024 I was the victim of a serious, real world crime (not internet crime). I consider this connected to the earlier sex crime referred to. Hertfordshire Police attended. Officers listened, with bodycam active, as I explained my concerns. They asked me to upload documents, which I did, that pointed towards a suspect based on their online publications.

Whereupon nothing happened. When I called to enquire, I was told the crime had been allocated to a police employee. When I updated the crime online because the suspected perpetrator had posted online as being in the area, the police officer who saw my update had no idea of the prior information I had given and closed the investigation. In the meantime, another police force dealing with a similar, likely related, offence in another part of the country, had been hard at work obtaining forensic evidence and CCTV footage. They identified the suspects’ vehicle, a 5 door model.

Continue reading

Share Button

Hemming Wins Preliminary Trial in Hemming v Poulton

John Hemming and Sonia Poulton faced each other in court again in Hemming v Poulton at a preliminary trial of meaning on 11th July 2024. The hearing did not go well for Sonia, who has always denied defaming Hemming.

Artists impression – John Hemming and Sonia Poulton clash at the High Court in London on 11th July 2024, backed by supporters. Poulton extends a skeletal hand across the battlefield, urging her undead minions forward.

For the past four years, Sonia Poulton has been denying she defamed John Hemming. As to some of her posts she even denies they mentioned him. That position began to crumble, badly, earlier this year when Deputy Master Irena Sabic (a High Court procedural judge) struck out Poulton’s denials as inconsistent with a witness statement and ordered a preliminary trial of meaning.

The preliminary trial of meaning occurred on 11th July 2024 and the judgment is here, for those who prefer to read the court’s words for themselves. Under consideration were two of the five publications for which Poulton is being sued. The judge, Deputy High Court Judge Susie Alegre, found both publications contained defamatory meanings. The weakest was an opinion meaning – but still defamatory, for a video Poulton made with Shaun Attwood and published in 2019. Even so, Poulton faces a critical difficulty. Opinion meanings are usually easier to defend – except for damning documents that have now passed into the public domain. Correspondence with police shows that Sonia Poulton finds Esther Baker so untrustworthy she would not give evidence for her in their failed criminal trial (charges dropped) against Darren Laverty.

Continue reading

Share Button