DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20 Posted August 20, 2008 Report Share Posted August 20, 2008 Below are a number of questions that have been asked of the CPS, Northumbria Police, the RSPB, Parkin and Wetton over 13 years. I have never received any answers to my questions even though it was the legal duty of the police to have answered the questions before my trial therefore; I am asking the previously mentioned organisations and people the same questions again both by emails and on the open web. All the evidence will be going on a website called ‘FALCON CRIMES’ as soon as the legal team have checked it all through and everyone who is being called a liar has been given the chance to have their say. JON WETTON 30 July 2008 30 July 2008 Dear JON WETTON Ref: UNRESOLVED QUESTIONS Thank you for your email which I have note with GREAT interest. If I may add I welcome being 'totally open with you and expect you to return the same courtesy'. Before anything goes on the internet I will of course send you a copy for you to check first if that is what you wish. Do you still want a copy of what David Parkin said in relation to the single locus probes having nothing to do with him? In regards to what David Parkin said. He stated that you took all the records in relation to the DNA profiling of the two birds [peregrine falcons] found in my car and the sparrow hawks. I would like to see the result. I would also like to see the results for the feathers, SEE BELOW FOR SECTIONS FROM MY FILES IN RELATION TO THE AFORESAID. Thank you Yours faithfully. Derek Canning LLB[HONS] FROM FILE 5 5] Questions 1] Page 287 of the enclosed court transcript Dr Wetton confirmed that I sent blood to prove that I had bred the two birds found in my car in 1992. I have repeatedly emphasised that I wanted this evidence as it prove that I had bred the two birds found in my car in 1992. This was also supported by the letters that I sent making arrangements to meet the police at Hadrian Vets in 1992. See file 3 page 17 to 8. In light of the evidence above facts I must be supplied with the results of the tests done on the blood that I sent to the genetic experts in 1992 and the procedure that was followed. This is a vital but simple question but the police are fighting me every inch of the way. It must be within your duty of care to help me. See document highlighted ‘DNA Blood sent’ for page 287 6] Questions 2] I want the report done on the feathers mentioned in Brian Litter’s Statement dated 21 December 1993. I have been requesting this report for years from the police and I have been ignored. 7] Feathers as a source of DNA CR0202: The isolation and testing of microsatellite markers from some Birds of Prey A Report to the Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions David T Parkin & Nicola J Peck, Institute of Genetics, University of Nottingham. INTRODUCTION This report begins by detailing the methods and rationale behind an attempt to isolate microsatellites from target species of birds of prey (raptors): Peregrine Falcon, Goshawk, Red Kite, Golden Eagle and Saker Falcon. The laboratory work was initiated by Dr Jon Wetton (salary financed by the Leverhulme Trust), but he left for a career with the Forensic Science Service a few months into the project. The work was continued by Nicola Peck as part of her post-graduate studies (salary funded by the European Commission and latterly by Forest Enterprise). After successfully completing her Ph D, Dr Peck also left for a career with the Forensic Science Service. Further research applying these microsatellites to additional species (Merlin, Peregrine, Saker and Gyr Falcons) has been undertaken by Amy Marsden (Ph D student financed by NERC) and Caroline Metcalf (M Phil student financed by the European Commission). Some of the Goshawk primers have been successfully applied to Sparrowhawks by Arnold van den Burg (Ph D student funded by University of Nottingham). Shortly after the successful identification of two highly variable loci from Peregrine, plus several others that remain unquantified, we learned that a Norwegian researcher (Dr Marit Nesje) was undertaking an exactly similar study with that species (Nesje et al. 2000). We agreed to transfer our attention to the other species. Exchange of methods was agreed, and we would test her micros on Merlin, Gyr Falcon and Saker. The identification of microsatellite loci in Goshawk was successful. Golden Eagle and Red Kite proved much more difficult. Other groups have had similar difficulty with eagles (and indeed Goshawks). It seems possible that there are fewer microsatellite loci in eagles and kites: the success with Peregrine and Goshawk (and House Sparrow, African Grey Parrot and Red Squirrel) indicates that the method works in our hands, and perhaps the material is less tractable. Microsatellites developed for individual species were tested across the rest of the targets. Primer sequences are given in detail, and protocols are provided for the amplification of all primer sequences against all variable loci. The microsatellites that were identified were tested against known families to confirm their inheritance. Selected results are given in more detail to show the potential of these for the recognition of parentage and provenance of individual birds. METHODS The simplest way of identifying microsatellites is by using previously described sequences published in the literature or posted on data bases such as GenBank. This is popular method for species that have been extensively sequenced (eg Drosophila, mice and humans) but is less applicable when sequence data are not available for the species of choice. Although microsatellites can occasionally be used cross-species, it is usually necessary to isolate microsatellites for each species of interest. Until recently, microsatellites have been isolated by probing whole genome DNA libraries. However, this is a long, laborious and inefficient process that often results in only a handful of markers being isolated due to their low frequency in the genome. To improve the efficiency of the technique, libraries are now ‘enriched’ for microsatellites. There are several techniques for enrichment that differ slightly in detail. However, as the frequency of microsatellites was known to be low in avian genomes (Primmer et al. 1997), we attempted a fast, and usually efficient technique enabling microsatellites to be isolated from even the most deficient genomes (Armour et al. 1994; Refseth et al. 1997). The enrichment procedure can be split into four main stages: • Preparation of genomic DNA • Preparation of the oligonucleotide probes • Enrichment of library • Constructing of DNA library from enriched DNA PAGE 1 Applications The aim of this section is to explore the possibilities of microsatellite analysis for population and parentage studies of raptors and to further test the microsatellites developed here. The Studies The first study compares samples of Goshawks from British and Dutch populations. It concerns 26 Goshawks from around Britain, using feathers and blood from North Wales and Derbyshire birds and blood samples from Scottish birds. In order to use only unrelated individuals, birds were chosen from different nest sites and from sub-populations around Britain. The 20 Dutch samples all consisted of feathers from birds known to be unrelated, collected by A. Van den Burg during behavioural studies. Investigation of these two populations allows analysis of their genetic variability, and enables comparisons of the genetic structure of the Dutch and British populations. The results of this analysis were presented at the International Raptor Conference in Elat, Israel, in April 2000. A polymorphic Red Kite microsatellite (mMmi4) was used to re-examine a forensic case that was inconclusive when tested with minisatellites. The same microsatellite locus was also used to investigate claims of captive breeding in the closely related Hen Harrier Circus cyaneus by genotyping two family groups and a further two unrelated birds. Two polymorphic loci (mMmi4, mAge6) were screened for a series of families of Red Kites originating from the re-introduction programme in southern England. These were believed to be genuine families from behavioural and/or wing-tag data. Minisatellite analysis had confirmed these relationships (see Cordero et al. 1997). The two microsatellites further supported these conclusions, demonstrating the utility of these markers for the study of natural populations of Red Kites. A fourth study looked at three Scottish families of Golden Eagle along with a selection of unrelated Norwegian birds. The DNA of the Scottish birds was extracted from feathers, whereas blood or muscle was used as a source in the Norwegian birds. This study examined the genetic profiles of the parent birds and their two chicks using feathers found at the nesting site. The genetic variation of the Norwegian birds was also briefly examined. A further study examined genetic variation in Merlins and Peregrines. The microsatellites isolated by Jon Wetton were used, along with some of the Norwegian markers (Nesje et al. 2000), to compare linkage of the loci with a series of minisatellite single locus probes. These results are being analysed by Amy Marsden as part of her PhD thesis. Suffice it to say that there is no evidence of linkage between the minisatellite and microsatellite loci. This combination of microsatellites will be quite adequate for forensic investigations of parentage: Amy Marsden is collaborating with Dr Nesje in the comparison of British populations with those from elsewhere across the species’ range to assess the possibility of determining provenance of individual birds. The microsatellite loci are being used in a study of the population structure of Merlins from eastern Scotland. Again, these will be incorporated in Ms Marsden’s thesis, but they were also presented at the Raptor Conference in Elat. Individual Merlins can be recognised from cast feathers. DNA extracted from down plumes of nestlings can be compared with attendant adults to confirm parentage. Movement between subpopulations can be recognised. Unrecorded adults can be identified via the genetic profiles of their progeny. The genetic structure of populations can be compared and their affiliations analysed. An extensive database of nestling down and cast feathers from adults has been accumulated from ‘at risk’ nests of Merlin, Peregrine, Goshawk and other species from across Northern England. These will form a forensic resource should birds be stolen from these sites, and will also be used to determine the genetic structure of these populations. We have been invited to present these results in December 2000 at a conference in Edinburgh, organised by the British Ornithologists’ Union and Scottish Natural Heritage. The success of this study has also led to a collaboration with an Icelandic researcher into the population biology of Gyr Falcons. A final study, undertaken by Caroline Metcalf as part of her M Phil research, has used some of these microsatellite loci to examine the genetic structure of populations of Saker Falcon from Mongolia and Kazakhstan. These are sufficiently differentiated genetically that individuals can be correctly assigned to the source population from their genetic profile. These results were also presented in Elat. Again, the Peregrine microsatellites isolated here (mFpe1, mFpe2) were integral to this analysis and reveal the potential for these to be used, alongside those of Dr Nesje, for individuality and parentage studies in this species. Our Peregrine markers were used by a research group from London University as part of an investigation of the conservation genetics of Mauritius Kestrel. Despite a request that this study should not be disclosed without clearance from ourselves and DETR, the results were published in Nature (Groombridge et al. 2000) where no acknowledgement was made of the isolation of the key microsatellite markers at Nottingham with DETR support. A written protest was made at this discourtesy, and a formal apology was received. Some of these studies are now reported in more detail. PAGE 15 Parkin’s statement hard copy see below at the end of the document Below is Brian Little’s statement. see below at the end of the document 8] A simple question, what occurred to the DNA on the feathers? And why was it withheld? 9] Question 3] 10] I want the report done the Sparrowhawks that I gave to Pc White only after he agreed to DNA the birds and give me the report. See the letter dated 29 December 2005 for the information on the Sparrowhawks. Please note I have repeatedly informed the police not to destroy the evidence above in writing as I would not stop until the vital evidence was released. I said that the evidence must not be destroyed in the civil court case in which I sued the Chief Constable and he paid me compensation but did not release the evidence that I really wanted. Given this fact I want the IPCC to resolve this issue as I believe the police have been shown to have a great desire to stop me secure the evidence that I needed to advance my case. Every inch of the way the police have tried to stop me exposing the truth therefore I would ask the IPCC to inform me of what avenues I can explore to expose the truth? I have already taken legally advice and I am attacking upon that advice as founds will allow 11] Dr Parkin and Dr Wetton did the DNA profiling in the above matter. The latter person still works for the police. FILE 4 ON THE DNA INDEX FOR PART 4 1] PART 4 OF THE DNA EVIDENCE. 2] DNA PROFILING OF SPARROWHAWKS AND TWO BIRDS FOUND IN MY CAR . 3] Part 4 Withheld Sparrowhawks Evidence. April 1995. [see the file marked Sparrowhawks evidence 2] 4] The Sparrowhawks and statements. Mr. Canning wishes the following main statement Ref B1/VA/8794 Dated 5th December 1994 between Mr. Canning, PC 3957 Henery and PC 922 5] Statement A] Police statement Ref B1/VA/8794 Dated 5th December 1994 between Mr. Canning, PC 3957 Henery and PC 922 White Page 1 PC 3957 Henery accepts that Mr. Canning gave him two Sparrowhawks. Mr. Canning states that he wanted the birds genetically finger printed as he believed that at least one of the birds that he gave to the Police was a parent of the birds that were seized from his home on the 6th July 1993. Page 2 Mr. Canning states that one of the Sparrowhawks that he gave to the Police was a parent of the birds that PC White and Shorrock seized on 16th July 1993. Page 9 Mr. Canning in his statement asks for the Sparrowhawks to be genetically finger printed as it was a vital aspect of his defence. Page 10 Mr. Canning asks again in his statement for genetic proof via the Sparrowhawks. Page 12 the Police in Mr. Canning’s statement confirm that if the genetics match up it will put Mr. Canning ‘in the clear’. This shows how important the Sparrowhawks evidence was to Mr Canning. Page Mr. Canning claims in his statement that the Sparrowhawks will prove his point of innocence. Page 18. Mr. Canning claims in his statement to have bred the birds and that he wants them genetically finger printed to support his defence. 6] Statement B] RSPB statement dated 24th July 1996. 7] Statement C] 15th June 1996 Henery told the RSPB to release the remaining Sparrowhawks owned by Mr. Canning 14th August 1996 Paul Stilgoe of the RSPB states that he found Mr. Canning’s Sparrowhawks agitated. The male had wounds that got more severe as time went on. This is in spite of the fact he has just arrived. Mr. Canning would ask why were imprinted birds in a wild state if they were kept correctly? How does he know that the birds will easily survive in the wild? If the birds were suffering both mentally and physically why was the person [Mrs Bolton] looking after the birds not charged with cruelty. There are clear statements that affirm cruelty has occurred therefore if Mrs Bolton is not charged with cruelty we have a two tier criminal system; the Police and normal people. 8] Statement D] Ian Smith State 26th July 1996 confirms that he let the two Sparrowhawks go due to Henery’s instruction on the 15th June 1996 9] Statement E] 14th February 1995 Henery went to The Veterinary Investigation Centre at Longbenton to allow Devoy to remove tissue for genetic finger printing form the Sparrowhawks. At 2.54 pm Henery arrived at Queens medical Centre in Nottingham with PC White and Guy Shorrock to give the Sparrowhawks tissue to Dr Wetton. This was quite an afford to go to all the way to Nottingham therefore it is inconceivable that the tissue would not be tested. The blood from the two parent Peregrines was also handed over on this occasion. The blood from the Peregrine Falcons was found to support Mr. Canning claim that he bred the Peregrine Falcons seized from his him on 6th July 1993. [Reference Dr Wettin’s statement dated 24th April 1995]. 10] Statement F] 15th January 1998 Pc White’s statement confirms that at 4.40 Monday 5th December 1994 Mr. Canning gave PC White and PC Henery the two Sparrowhawks and that they were put on the property register B1/POFP/846/94 11] Statement G] 15th December 1994 Brian Little confirms one of the Sparrowhawks is a mature adult. 12] Statement H] 8th December 1993 Guy Shorrock state that Sparrowhawks will not breed communally so if the genetics had of supported Mr. Canning’s that he bred the Sparrowhawks then it would have been strong supportive evidence that Mr. Canning’s must have also bred the Peregrines at his home in the summer of 1993. 1]The two birds found in Mr. Canning’s car. 2] A] Page below. This shows that Mr. Canning bail was cancelled in relation to the charges of criminal damage and stealing Peregrine Falcon chicks from Kielder. 3] B] Pages below. These pages show that the charge of stealing Peregrine falcons from Kielder were dropt after Mr. Canning sent the parent blood for the two birds in question to the Police’s genetic experts. 4] The above two copies from Mr. Canning’s statement [[A4/1126/93 SEE FILE 1] shows that Mr. Canning wanted to have the two chicks found in his car, by PC Glenton on the 4th June 1992, GENETICALLY FINGER PRINTED, BUT HE WAS NOT ALLOWED. See A4/1126/93 file 1 for See copies of the letters that Mr. Canning sent to the Police in 1992 to make arrangements to have his birds genetically finger printed at Hadrian Vets in 1992 see documents numbered 8 to 17 in file 3. 4] The above shows how Mr. Canning’s wanted to prove to the Police that he had bred the two birds found in his car and the Police prevented him from proving personally by genetic that he had bred the birds found in his car. 5] The above copies [A4/1126/93 SEE FILE 1] show how the Police prevented Mr. Canning from genetically finger printing the two chicks found in his car by PC Glenton. 6] The genetic evidence that was withheld from my court case. Note the two pages from the court transcript and the very remote possibility that I could have managed to by chance find a nest of peregrine falcons with more than 4 eggs 7] Court transcript from 285 to 286. 8] BTO EMAIL. 9] Court transcript from 287 10] page 217 of Radcliffe’s book on five eggs. 11] Court transcript page 288. When supplied with blood Parkin and Wetton changed their minds 12] Myatt cuttings 13] The Watchdog programme 14] Terry Burden’s letter dated 27 August 1999. 15] Above is Terry Burden’s letter dated 27 August 1999. 8] See below for the newspaper cuttings about Terry Burden and David Myatt. 1] PART 4 OF THE DNA EVIDENCE. DNA PROFILING OF SPARROWHAWKS AND TWO BIRDS FOUND IN MY CAR . Part 4 Withheld Sparrowhawks Evidence. Mr. Canning supplied vital evidence to PC White: [Reference Police Statement B1/VA/8794 DATED 5th December 1994. This was conducted by PC 3957 Henery and PC J. White 922, to Dr Parkin. The above statement affirms that a ringed female Sparrowhawks and an offspring of this female, that was bred in Mr. Canning aviary at Stamfordham in the summer of 1993, was given to the Police. Moreover, Mr. Canning informed the Police that they could only have the Sparrowhawks on the condition that they were genetically finger printed against the birds that were seized from his home on the 6 July 1993 and that he most be given the results along with the results of the two parent Peregrine Falcons that Mr. Canning also gave to the Police. This was due to the fact that the whole tenor of the prosecution against Mr Canning was that he had never had any parent birds and that he had bred no Peregrine Falcons, Merlins or Sparrowhawks. Mr Canning stated clearly in his statement B1/VA/8794 DATED 5th December 1994 that he wanted the Sparrowhawks genetically finger printed to show that his legal ringed female had produced the young Sparrowhawks that he had given the Police plus and most significantly the ones that the Police had been seized from his home in the summer 1993. If the Police had not agreed to this then he would have had the birds genetically finger printed himself. Mr Canning was trying to be helpful and the Police took advantage of this fact to conceal evidence. This is on top of the results from the blood that Mr. Canning sent to Dr Wetton in the summer of 1993 to prove that the birds found in his car, going missing or being withheld. This cogently violates Article 6 of Mr. Canning’s rights. As a government body the Police have got to follow the Human Rights Convention, therefore all the evidence in relation to Mr. Canning must be released to Mr. Canning or the Police will be taken to court. Shorrock told Mr. Canning that the two Sparrowhawks in question had been destroyed therefore the birds could not be genetically finger printed to affirm that Mr. Canning bred the Sparrowhawks in question and therefore supporting Mr. Canning claim that he had also bred the Peregrine Falcons seized from his home in 1993. Mr Canning has now learned that Shorrock’s statement along with a number of other facts [see the file marked Shorrock 1] is not true [see also the file marked Sparrowhawks evidence 2]. This latter file contains statements from PC White and PC Henery that affirm that they took samples from the two Sparrowhawks to be genetically finger print as requested by Mr Canning and agreed by the Police. They also handed over to Dr Parkin and Dr Wetton samples from the two Peregrines that Mr. Canning had supplied. These Peregrine Falcons match up as parents to the Peregrine Falcons seized from Mr. Canning’s home in the summer of 1993, however at court the prosecution claimed that Mr. Canning trapped these birds and this is why it is believed that the prosecution withheld the genetic report of the Sparrowhawks as one of the parents had a cable tie that had been checked by Shorrock to affirm that it was a legal identity cable tie with a unique number that was registered to Mr. Canning and it had not been tapered with [see the file Sparrowhawks evidence 1 and 2 and the documents there in that affirm the Sparrowhawks tissues were taken to be genetically finger printed]. Guy Shorrock had been given the cable tie found on the parent Sparrowhawks to check if the cable tie had been interfered with [reference statement made by PC Henery dated 14th February 1995 and the statement that affirm that the Peregrine Falcons that Mr. Canning gave the Police were parents of Mr. Canning’s birds that were seized by Shorrock, Reference Dr Wettons’ statement dated 24 April 1995. [see the file marked Sparrowhawks evidence Below is part of Parkin’s statement. see below at the end of the document Mr. Canning would aver that the Sparrowhawks evidence has been criminally withheld from his defence in violation of Article 6 of Mr. Canning’s Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, therefore Mr. Canning would beseech that there should be an independent inquiry into his complaint. Withholding evidence that violates Article 6 of Mr. Canning Rights in this instance means that Northumbria Police Force is liable to be sued. The results of the requested inquiry should be supplying to Mr. Canning with the answer to the question; did the genetic profile of the female Sparrowhawks correspond with the youngster that he furnaced to the Police and the ones seized from his home by Shorrock on 6th July 1993. The ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION CAN BE FOUND AT NOTTINGHAM UNIVERSITY. Mr Canning WOULD CONTEND THAT THIS VITAL EVIDENCE HAS BEEN WITHHELD FROM HIS DEFENCE AS IT WAS STRONG SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE IN RELATION TO HIS BREEDING OF BIRDS OF PREY, AS SPARROWHAWKS ARE MORE DIFFICULT TO BREED THAN PEREGRINE FALCONS [reference MRS BOLTON statement that affirm she COULD NOT KEEP TWO IMPRINTED SPARROWHAWKS belonging to Mr Canning WITHOUT THE birds SUFFERING BOTH Physically AND MENTALLY. See the file labled Sparrowhawks evidence 2. Furthermore, Mr. Canning would ask what has occurred to the other Sparrowhawks that were seized on the 6th July 1993. Mr. Canning was shocked to note how very keen PC Henery was in releasing Mr. Canning’s imprinted Sparrowhawks. This seems strange as the bird would have died quite quickly in the wild unless they had been trained how to hunt. Given the injuries and wild state of the birds this seems unlikely. The Sparrowhawks and statements. Mr. Canning wishes the following main statement Ref B1/VA/8794 Dated 5th December 1994 between Mr. Canning, PC 3957 Henery and PC 922 White to be evidenced in support of his claim that a fundamental aspect of Mr. Canning defence was withheld from him by the prosecution. Moreover, statements from A] to H] are also relevant. Statement A] Police statement Ref B1/VA/8794 Dated 5th December 1994 between Mr. Canning, PC 3957 Henery and PC 922 White Page 1 PC 3957 Henery accepts that Mr. Canning gave him two Sparrowhawks. Mr. Canning states that he wanted the birds genetically finger printed as he believed that at least one of the birds that he gave to the Police was a parent of the birds that were seized from his home on the 6th July 1993. Page 2 Mr. Canning states that one of the Sparrowhawks that he gave to the Police was a parent of the birds that PC White and Shorrock seized on 16th July 1993. Page 9 Mr. Canning in his statement asks for the Sparrowhawks to be genetically finger printed as it was a vital aspect of his defence. Page 10 Mr. Canning asks again in his statement for genetic proof via the Sparrowhawks. Page 12 the Police in Mr. Canning’s statement confirm that if the genetics match up it will put Mr. Canning ‘in the clear’. This shows how important the Sparrowhawks evidence was to Mr Canning. Page Mr. Canning claims in his statement that the Sparrowhawks will prove his point of innocence. Page 18. Mr. Canning claims in his statement to have bred the birds and that he wants them genetically finger printed to support his defence. Cogently Mr. Canning is trying to be helpful to the Police; however the Police have used this fact to violate Mr. Canning’s Human Rights Statement B] RSPB statement dated 24th July 1996. Statement C] 15th June 1996 Henery told the RSPB to release the remaining Sparrowhawks owned by Mr. Canning 14th August 1996 Paul Stilgoe of the RSPB states that he found Mr. Canning’s Sparrowhawks agitated. The male had wounds that got more severe as time went on. This is in spite of the fact he has just arrived. Mr. Canning would ask why were imprinted birds in a wild state if they were kept correctly? How does he know that the birds will easily survive in the wild? If the birds were suffering both mentally and physically why was the person [Mrs Bolton] looking after the birds not charged with cruelty. There are clear statements that affirm cruelty has occurred therefore if Mrs Bolton is not charged with cruelty we have a two tier criminal system; the Police and normal people. Statement D] Ian Smith State 26th July 1996 confirms that he let the two Sparrowhawks go due to Henery’s instruction on the 15th June 1996 Statement E] 14th February 1995 Henery went to The Veterinary Investigation Centre at Longbenton to allow Devoy to remove tissue for genetic finger printing form the Sparrowhawks. At 2.54 pm Henery arrived at Queens medical Centre in Nottingham with PC White and Guy Shorrock to give the Sparrowhawks tissue to Dr Wetton. This was quite an afford to go to all the way to Nottingham therefore it is inconceivable that the tissue would not be tested. The blood from the two parent Peregrines was also handed over on this occasion. The blood from the Peregrine Falcons was found to support Mr. Canning claim that he bred the Peregrine Falcons seized from his him on 6th July 1993. [Reference Dr Wettin’s statement dated 24th April 1995]. Statement F] 15th January 1998 Pc White’s statement confirms that at 4.40 Monday 5th December 1994 Mr. Canning gave PC White and PC Henery the two Sparrowhawks and that they were put on the property register B1/POFP/846/94 Statement G] 15th December 1994 Brian Little confirms one of the Sparrowhawks is a mature adult. Statement H] 8th December 1993 Guy Shorrock state that Sparrowhawks will not breed communally so if the genetics had of supported Mr. Canning’s that he bred the Sparrowhawks then it would have been strong supportive evidence that Mr. Canning’s must have also bred the Peregrines at his home in the summer of 1993. 1] What occurred to the DNA profiling of the Sparrowhawks done by Dr Parkin and Dr Wetton? Below is Dr Scott’s statement. 2] What is the quality schemes that was run by Parkin and Wetting? INDEX 1]The two birds found in Mr. Canning’s car. 2] A] Page below. This shows that Mr. Canning bail was cancelled in relation to the charges of criminal damage and stealing Peregrine Falcon chicks from Kielder. 3] B] Pages below. These pages show that the charge of stealing Peregrine falcons from Kielder were dropt after Mr. Canning sent the parent blood for the two birds in question to the Police’s genetic experts. 4] The above two copies from Mr. Canning’s statement [[A4/1126/93 SEE FILE 1] shows that Mr. Canning wanted to have the two chicks found in his car, by PC Glenton on the 4th June 1992, GENETICALLY FINGER PRINTED, BUT HE WAS NOT ALLOWED. See A4/1126/93 file 1 for See copies of the letters that Mr. Canning sent to the Police in 1992 to make arrangements to have his birds genetically finger printed at Hadrian Vets in 1992 see documents numbered 8 to 17 in file 3. 4] The above shows how Mr. Canning’s wanted to prove to the Police that he had bred the two birds found in his car and the Police prevented him from proving personally by genetic that he had bred the birds found in his car. 5] The above copies [A4/1126/93 SEE FILE 1] show how the Police prevented Mr. Canning from genetically finger printing the two chicks found in his car by PC Glenton. 6] The genetic evidence that was withheld from my court case. Note the two pages from the court transcript and the very remote possibility that I could have managed to by chance find a nest of peregrine falcons with more than 4 eggs 7] Court transcript from 285 to 286. 8] BTO EMAIL. 9] Court transcript from 287 10] page 217 of Radcliffe’s book on five eggs. 11] Court transcript page 288. When supplied with blood Parkin and Wetton changed their minds 12] Myatt cuttings 13] The Watchdog programme 14] Terry Burden’s letter dated 27 August 1999. 15] Above is Terry Burden’s letter dated 27 August 1999. 8] See below for the newspaper cuttings about Terry Burden and David Myatt. The two birds found in Mr. Canning’s car. Mr. Canning would ask you to read the following pages; A] Page below. This shows that Mr. Canning bail was cancelled in relation to the charges of criminal damage and stealing Peregrine Falcon chicks from Kielder. B] Pages below. These pages show that the charge of stealing Peregrine falcons from Kielder were dropt after Mr. Canning sent the parent blood for the two birds in question to the Police’s genetic experts. To confirm this fact Geoffrey Rudd gave Mr. Canning back both of his Peregrines Falcons on the 5th January 1992. On the 5th December 1993 and after Mr. Canning had been told that he would not be charged by the Police in 1992 in relation to the birds found in his car the Police charged Mr. Canning in 1993 in relation to the birds found in his car. If the birds were illegal then the chief constable has committed a criminal offence as has assisted Mr. Canning to commit a criminal offence according to the Police solicitor [see the statement dated 22 July 1997 see page below]. Not to mention any offences in relation to CITES [Regulation 3626]. Moreover, Mr. Canning must have established to the civil burden that he bred the birds or PC Rudd would not have given the birds back on the 5th January 1993, if the police force solicitor were to be believed [see page below] Given the aforesaid can it be true that the two Peregrine Falcons we are dealing with are illegal and the Chief Constable in his own solicitor’s words by giving Mr. Canning back the birds has broken the law, ‘The Chief Constable would be Guilty of assisting the plaintiff to commit a criminal offence i.e. possession of a wild bird’ If the birds in question are legal then Mr. Canning could have rightly excluded Pc Glenton’s evidence. [see page below] Below is a page from my police statement. Quote Link to post
DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20 Posted August 20, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 20, 2008 Below is a page from my police statement. Quote Link to post
DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20 Posted August 20, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 20, 2008 THOSE WHO ARE WONDERING WHAT THE POINT OF ALL THIS IS I WILL TELL YOU: TO SHOW HOW THE POLICE IN SPITE OF OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE WILL NOT EVEN ANSWER MY LETTERS OF COMPLAINT, NOT TO MENTION START AN INQUIRY INTO MY COMPLAINTS. THE POLICE ARE FRIGHTENED TO START INVESTIGATING MY COMPLAINTS AS THEY KNOW THAT IT WILL OPEN A PANDORA’S BOX OF CRIMES AND A NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT THE POLICE WANT TO PROTECT WILL BE EXPOSED. THE POLICE HAVE A LEGAL DUTY TO INVESTIGATE MY COMPLAINT HOWEVER THIS DOES NOT SEEM TO BOTHER THEM. I HAVE ASKED THE POLICE IF I AM WRONG THEN POINT OUT WHERE I AM WRONG AND THIS HAS BEEN MET WITH SILENCE OR A STATEMENT THAT I DID NOT COMPLAIN WITHIN 12 MONTH. THE CRIMES THAT I AM COMPLAINING ABOUT ARE INDICTABLE CRIMES THAT DO NOT HAVE A TIME LIMIT. Quote Link to post
DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20 Posted August 31, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 31, 2008 I would invite the Police, Animal Health and the RSPB to justify and to try contradict me. I would ask they aforesaid to note, as the police, RSPB and Animal Health will not answer my questions I will start asking my questions in open letters. Quote Link to post
DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20 Posted January 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 I would invite the Police, Animal Health and the RSPB to justify and to try contradict me. I would ask they aforesaid to note, as the police, RSPB and Animal Health will not answer my questions I will start asking my questions in open letters. STILL WAITING FOR ANSWERS Quote Link to post
DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20 Posted January 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 The RSPB and Dr Parkin were told not to use their single locus probes in my court case by the Department of the Environment this fact was withheld both of the aforesaid and the single locus probes were used to wrongly convict me. This clear corruption and in need od a police inquiry in relation to perverting the course of justice. Quote Link to post
Halfinch 51 Posted January 23, 2009 Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 Below are a number of questions that have been asked of the CPS, Northumbria Police, the RSPB, Parkin and Wetton over 13 years. I have never received any answers to my questions even though it was the legal duty of the police to have answered the questions before my trial therefore; I am asking the previously mentioned organisations and people the same questions again both by emails and on the open web. All the evidence will be going on a website called ‘FALCON CRIMES’ as soon as the legal team have checked it all through and everyone who is being called a liar has been given the chance to have their say. JON WETTON 30 July 2008 30 July 2008 Dear JON WETTON Ref: UNRESOLVED QUESTIONS Thank you for your email which I have note with GREAT interest. If I may add I welcome being 'totally open with you and expect you to return the same courtesy'. Before anything goes on the internet I will of course send you a copy for you to check first if that is what you wish. Do you still want a copy of what David Parkin said in relation to the single locus probes having nothing to do with him? In regards to what David Parkin said. He stated that you took all the records in relation to the DNA profiling of the two birds [peregrine falcons] found in my car and the sparrow hawks. I would like to see the result. I would also like to see the results for the feathers, SEE BELOW FOR SECTIONS FROM MY FILES IN RELATION TO THE AFORESAID. Thank you Yours faithfully. Derek Canning LLB[HONS] FROM FILE 5 5] Questions 1] Page 287 of the enclosed court transcript Dr Wetton confirmed that I sent blood to prove that I had bred the two birds found in my car in 1992. I have repeatedly emphasised that I wanted this evidence as it prove that I had bred the two birds found in my car in 1992. This was also supported by the letters that I sent making arrangements to meet the police at Hadrian Vets in 1992. See file 3 page 17 to 8. In light of the evidence above facts I must be supplied with the results of the tests done on the blood that I sent to the genetic experts in 1992 and the procedure that was followed. This is a vital but simple question but the police are fighting me every inch of the way. It must be within your duty of care to help me. See document highlighted ‘DNA Blood sent’ for page 287 6] Questions 2] I want the report done on the feathers mentioned in Brian Litter’s Statement dated 21 December 1993. I have been requesting this report for years from the police and I have been ignored. 7] Feathers as a source of DNA CR0202: The isolation and testing of microsatellite markers from some Birds of Prey A Report to the Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions David T Parkin & Nicola J Peck, Institute of Genetics, University of Nottingham. INTRODUCTION This report begins by detailing the methods and rationale behind an attempt to isolate microsatellites from target species of birds of prey (raptors): Peregrine Falcon, Goshawk, Red Kite, Golden Eagle and Saker Falcon. The laboratory work was initiated by Dr Jon Wetton (salary financed by the Leverhulme Trust), but he left for a career with the Forensic Science Service a few months into the project. The work was continued by Nicola Peck as part of her post-graduate studies (salary funded by the European Commission and latterly by Forest Enterprise). After successfully completing her Ph D, Dr Peck also left for a career with the Forensic Science Service. Further research applying these microsatellites to additional species (Merlin, Peregrine, Saker and Gyr Falcons) has been undertaken by Amy Marsden (Ph D student financed by NERC) and Caroline Metcalf (M Phil student financed by the European Commission). Some of the Goshawk primers have been successfully applied to Sparrowhawks by Arnold van den Burg (Ph D student funded by University of Nottingham). Shortly after the successful identification of two highly variable loci from Peregrine, plus several others that remain unquantified, we learned that a Norwegian researcher (Dr Marit Nesje) was undertaking an exactly similar study with that species (Nesje et al. 2000). We agreed to transfer our attention to the other species. Exchange of methods was agreed, and we would test her micros on Merlin, Gyr Falcon and Saker. The identification of microsatellite loci in Goshawk was successful. Golden Eagle and Red Kite proved much more difficult. Other groups have had similar difficulty with eagles (and indeed Goshawks). It seems possible that there are fewer microsatellite loci in eagles and kites: the success with Peregrine and Goshawk (and House Sparrow, African Grey Parrot and Red Squirrel) indicates that the method works in our hands, and perhaps the material is less tractable. Microsatellites developed for individual species were tested across the rest of the targets. Primer sequences are given in detail, and protocols are provided for the amplification of all primer sequences against all variable loci. The microsatellites that were identified were tested against known families to confirm their inheritance. Selected results are given in more detail to show the potential of these for the recognition of parentage and provenance of individual birds. METHODS The simplest way of identifying microsatellites is by using previously described sequences published in the literature or posted on data bases such as GenBank. This is popular method for species that have been extensively sequenced (eg Drosophila, mice and humans) but is less applicable when sequence data are not available for the species of choice. Although microsatellites can occasionally be used cross-species, it is usually necessary to isolate microsatellites for each species of interest. Until recently, microsatellites have been isolated by probing whole genome DNA libraries. However, this is a long, laborious and inefficient process that often results in only a handful of markers being isolated due to their low frequency in the genome. To improve the efficiency of the technique, libraries are now ‘enriched’ for microsatellites. There are several techniques for enrichment that differ slightly in detail. However, as the frequency of microsatellites was known to be low in avian genomes (Primmer et al. 1997), we attempted a fast, and usually efficient technique enabling microsatellites to be isolated from even the most deficient genomes (Armour et al. 1994; Refseth et al. 1997). The enrichment procedure can be split into four main stages: • Preparation of genomic DNA • Preparation of the oligonucleotide probes • Enrichment of library • Constructing of DNA library from enriched DNA PAGE 1 Applications The aim of this section is to explore the possibilities of microsatellite analysis for population and parentage studies of raptors and to further test the microsatellites developed here. The Studies The first study compares samples of Goshawks from British and Dutch populations. It concerns 26 Goshawks from around Britain, using feathers and blood from North Wales and Derbyshire birds and blood samples from Scottish birds. In order to use only unrelated individuals, birds were chosen from different nest sites and from sub-populations around Britain. The 20 Dutch samples all consisted of feathers from birds known to be unrelated, collected by A. Van den Burg during behavioural studies. Investigation of these two populations allows analysis of their genetic variability, and enables comparisons of the genetic structure of the Dutch and British populations. The results of this analysis were presented at the International Raptor Conference in Elat, Israel, in April 2000. A polymorphic Red Kite microsatellite (mMmi4) was used to re-examine a forensic case that was inconclusive when tested with minisatellites. The same microsatellite locus was also used to investigate claims of captive breeding in the closely related Hen Harrier Circus cyaneus by genotyping two family groups and a further two unrelated birds. Two polymorphic loci (mMmi4, mAge6) were screened for a series of families of Red Kites originating from the re-introduction programme in southern England. These were believed to be genuine families from behavioural and/or wing-tag data. Minisatellite analysis had confirmed these relationships (see Cordero et al. 1997). The two microsatellites further supported these conclusions, demonstrating the utility of these markers for the study of natural populations of Red Kites. A fourth study looked at three Scottish families of Golden Eagle along with a selection of unrelated Norwegian birds. The DNA of the Scottish birds was extracted from feathers, whereas blood or muscle was used as a source in the Norwegian birds. This study examined the genetic profiles of the parent birds and their two chicks using feathers found at the nesting site. The genetic variation of the Norwegian birds was also briefly examined. A further study examined genetic variation in Merlins and Peregrines. The microsatellites isolated by Jon Wetton were used, along with some of the Norwegian markers (Nesje et al. 2000), to compare linkage of the loci with a series of minisatellite single locus probes. These results are being analysed by Amy Marsden as part of her PhD thesis. Suffice it to say that there is no evidence of linkage between the minisatellite and microsatellite loci. This combination of microsatellites will be quite adequate for forensic investigations of parentage: Amy Marsden is collaborating with Dr Nesje in the comparison of British populations with those from elsewhere across the species’ range to assess the possibility of determining provenance of individual birds. The microsatellite loci are being used in a study of the population structure of Merlins from eastern Scotland. Again, these will be incorporated in Ms Marsden’s thesis, but they were also presented at the Raptor Conference in Elat. Individual Merlins can be recognised from cast feathers. DNA extracted from down plumes of nestlings can be compared with attendant adults to confirm parentage. Movement between subpopulations can be recognised. Unrecorded adults can be identified via the genetic profiles of their progeny. The genetic structure of populations can be compared and their affiliations analysed. An extensive database of nestling down and cast feathers from adults has been accumulated from ‘at risk’ nests of Merlin, Peregrine, Goshawk and other species from across Northern England. These will form a forensic resource should birds be stolen from these sites, and will also be used to determine the genetic structure of these populations. We have been invited to present these results in December 2000 at a conference in Edinburgh, organised by the British Ornithologists’ Union and Scottish Natural Heritage. The success of this study has also led to a collaboration with an Icelandic researcher into the population biology of Gyr Falcons. A final study, undertaken by Caroline Metcalf as part of her M Phil research, has used some of these microsatellite loci to examine the genetic structure of populations of Saker Falcon from Mongolia and Kazakhstan. These are sufficiently differentiated genetically that individuals can be correctly assigned to the source population from their genetic profile. These results were also presented in Elat. Again, the Peregrine microsatellites isolated here (mFpe1, mFpe2) were integral to this analysis and reveal the potential for these to be used, alongside those of Dr Nesje, for individuality and parentage studies in this species. Our Peregrine markers were used by a research group from London University as part of an investigation of the conservation genetics of Mauritius Kestrel. Despite a request that this study should not be disclosed without clearance from ourselves and DETR, the results were published in Nature (Groombridge et al. 2000) where no acknowledgement was made of the isolation of the key microsatellite markers at Nottingham with DETR support. A written protest was made at this discourtesy, and a formal apology was received. Some of these studies are now reported in more detail. PAGE 15 Parkin’s statement hard copy see below at the end of the document Below is Brian Little’s statement. see below at the end of the document 8] A simple question, what occurred to the DNA on the feathers? And why was it withheld? 9] Question 3] 10] I want the report done the Sparrowhawks that I gave to Pc White only after he agreed to DNA the birds and give me the report. See the letter dated 29 December 2005 for the information on the Sparrowhawks. Please note I have repeatedly informed the police not to destroy the evidence above in writing as I would not stop until the vital evidence was released. I said that the evidence must not be destroyed in the civil court case in which I sued the Chief Constable and he paid me compensation but did not release the evidence that I really wanted. Given this fact I want the IPCC to resolve this issue as I believe the police have been shown to have a great desire to stop me secure the evidence that I needed to advance my case. Every inch of the way the police have tried to stop me exposing the truth therefore I would ask the IPCC to inform me of what avenues I can explore to expose the truth? I have already taken legally advice and I am attacking upon that advice as founds will allow 11] Dr Parkin and Dr Wetton did the DNA profiling in the above matter. The latter person still works for the police. FILE 4 ON THE DNA INDEX FOR PART 4 1] PART 4 OF THE DNA EVIDENCE. 2] DNA PROFILING OF SPARROWHAWKS AND TWO BIRDS FOUND IN MY CAR . 3] Part 4 Withheld Sparrowhawks Evidence. April 1995. [see the file marked Sparrowhawks evidence 2] 4] The Sparrowhawks and statements. Mr. Canning wishes the following main statement Ref B1/VA/8794 Dated 5th December 1994 between Mr. Canning, PC 3957 Henery and PC 922 5] Statement A] Police statement Ref B1/VA/8794 Dated 5th December 1994 between Mr. Canning, PC 3957 Henery and PC 922 White Page 1 PC 3957 Henery accepts that Mr. Canning gave him two Sparrowhawks. Mr. Canning states that he wanted the birds genetically finger printed as he believed that at least one of the birds that he gave to the Police was a parent of the birds that were seized from his home on the 6th July 1993. Page 2 Mr. Canning states that one of the Sparrowhawks that he gave to the Police was a parent of the birds that PC White and Shorrock seized on 16th July 1993. Page 9 Mr. Canning in his statement asks for the Sparrowhawks to be genetically finger printed as it was a vital aspect of his defence. Page 10 Mr. Canning asks again in his statement for genetic proof via the Sparrowhawks. Page 12 the Police in Mr. Canning’s statement confirm that if the genetics match up it will put Mr. Canning ‘in the clear’. This shows how important the Sparrowhawks evidence was to Mr Canning. Page Mr. Canning claims in his statement that the Sparrowhawks will prove his point of innocence. Page 18. Mr. Canning claims in his statement to have bred the birds and that he wants them genetically finger printed to support his defence. 6] Statement B] RSPB statement dated 24th July 1996. 7] Statement C] 15th June 1996 Henery told the RSPB to release the remaining Sparrowhawks owned by Mr. Canning 14th August 1996 Paul Stilgoe of the RSPB states that he found Mr. Canning’s Sparrowhawks agitated. The male had wounds that got more severe as time went on. This is in spite of the fact he has just arrived. Mr. Canning would ask why were imprinted birds in a wild state if they were kept correctly? How does he know that the birds will easily survive in the wild? If the birds were suffering both mentally and physically why was the person [Mrs Bolton] looking after the birds not charged with cruelty. There are clear statements that affirm cruelty has occurred therefore if Mrs Bolton is not charged with cruelty we have a two tier criminal system; the Police and normal people. 8] Statement D] Ian Smith State 26th July 1996 confirms that he let the two Sparrowhawks go due to Henery’s instruction on the 15th June 1996 9] Statement E] 14th February 1995 Henery went to The Veterinary Investigation Centre at Longbenton to allow Devoy to remove tissue for genetic finger printing form the Sparrowhawks. At 2.54 pm Henery arrived at Queens medical Centre in Nottingham with PC White and Guy Shorrock to give the Sparrowhawks tissue to Dr Wetton. This was quite an afford to go to all the way to Nottingham therefore it is inconceivable that the tissue would not be tested. The blood from the two parent Peregrines was also handed over on this occasion. The blood from the Peregrine Falcons was found to support Mr. Canning claim that he bred the Peregrine Falcons seized from his him on 6th July 1993. [Reference Dr Wettin’s statement dated 24th April 1995]. 10] Statement F] 15th January 1998 Pc White’s statement confirms that at 4.40 Monday 5th December 1994 Mr. Canning gave PC White and PC Henery the two Sparrowhawks and that they were put on the property register B1/POFP/846/94 11] Statement G] 15th December 1994 Brian Little confirms one of the Sparrowhawks is a mature adult. 12] Statement H] 8th December 1993 Guy Shorrock state that Sparrowhawks will not breed communally so if the genetics had of supported Mr. Canning’s that he bred the Sparrowhawks then it would have been strong supportive evidence that Mr. Canning’s must have also bred the Peregrines at his home in the summer of 1993. 1]The two birds found in Mr. Canning’s car. 2] A] Page below. This shows that Mr. Canning bail was cancelled in relation to the charges of criminal damage and stealing Peregrine Falcon chicks from Kielder. 3] B] Pages below. These pages show that the charge of stealing Peregrine falcons from Kielder were dropt after Mr. Canning sent the parent blood for the two birds in question to the Police’s genetic experts. 4] The above two copies from Mr. Canning’s statement [[A4/1126/93 SEE FILE 1] shows that Mr. Canning wanted to have the two chicks found in his car, by PC Glenton on the 4th June 1992, GENETICALLY FINGER PRINTED, BUT HE WAS NOT ALLOWED. See A4/1126/93 file 1 for See copies of the letters that Mr. Canning sent to the Police in 1992 to make arrangements to have his birds genetically finger printed at Hadrian Vets in 1992 see documents numbered 8 to 17 in file 3. 4] The above shows how Mr. Canning’s wanted to prove to the Police that he had bred the two birds found in his car and the Police prevented him from proving personally by genetic that he had bred the birds found in his car. 5] The above copies [A4/1126/93 SEE FILE 1] show how the Police prevented Mr. Canning from genetically finger printing the two chicks found in his car by PC Glenton. 6] The genetic evidence that was withheld from my court case. Note the two pages from the court transcript and the very remote possibility that I could have managed to by chance find a nest of peregrine falcons with more than 4 eggs 7] Court transcript from 285 to 286. 8] BTO EMAIL. 9] Court transcript from 287 10] page 217 of Radcliffe’s book on five eggs. 11] Court transcript page 288. When supplied with blood Parkin and Wetton changed their minds 12] Myatt cuttings 13] The Watchdog programme 14] Terry Burden’s letter dated 27 August 1999. 15] Above is Terry Burden’s letter dated 27 August 1999. 8] See below for the newspaper cuttings about Terry Burden and David Myatt. 1] PART 4 OF THE DNA EVIDENCE. DNA PROFILING OF SPARROWHAWKS AND TWO BIRDS FOUND IN MY CAR . Part 4 Withheld Sparrowhawks Evidence. Mr. Canning supplied vital evidence to PC White: [Reference Police Statement B1/VA/8794 DATED 5th December 1994. This was conducted by PC 3957 Henery and PC J. White 922, to Dr Parkin. The above statement affirms that a ringed female Sparrowhawks and an offspring of this female, that was bred in Mr. Canning aviary at Stamfordham in the summer of 1993, was given to the Police. Moreover, Mr. Canning informed the Police that they could only have the Sparrowhawks on the condition that they were genetically finger printed against the birds that were seized from his home on the 6 July 1993 and that he most be given the results along with the results of the two parent Peregrine Falcons that Mr. Canning also gave to the Police. This was due to the fact that the whole tenor of the prosecution against Mr Canning was that he had never had any parent birds and that he had bred no Peregrine Falcons, Merlins or Sparrowhawks. Mr Canning stated clearly in his statement B1/VA/8794 DATED 5th December 1994 that he wanted the Sparrowhawks genetically finger printed to show that his legal ringed female had produced the young Sparrowhawks that he had given the Police plus and most significantly the ones that the Police had been seized from his home in the summer 1993. If the Police had not agreed to this then he would have had the birds genetically finger printed himself. Mr Canning was trying to be helpful and the Police took advantage of this fact to conceal evidence. This is on top of the results from the blood that Mr. Canning sent to Dr Wetton in the summer of 1993 to prove that the birds found in his car, going missing or being withheld. This cogently violates Article 6 of Mr. Canning’s rights. As a government body the Police have got to follow the Human Rights Convention, therefore all the evidence in relation to Mr. Canning must be released to Mr. Canning or the Police will be taken to court. Shorrock told Mr. Canning that the two Sparrowhawks in question had been destroyed therefore the birds could not be genetically finger printed to affirm that Mr. Canning bred the Sparrowhawks in question and therefore supporting Mr. Canning claim that he had also bred the Peregrine Falcons seized from his home in 1993. Mr Canning has now learned that Shorrock’s statement along with a number of other facts [see the file marked Shorrock 1] is not true [see also the file marked Sparrowhawks evidence 2]. This latter file contains statements from PC White and PC Henery that affirm that they took samples from the two Sparrowhawks to be genetically finger print as requested by Mr Canning and agreed by the Police. They also handed over to Dr Parkin and Dr Wetton samples from the two Peregrines that Mr. Canning had supplied. These Peregrine Falcons match up as parents to the Peregrine Falcons seized from Mr. Canning’s home in the summer of 1993, however at court the prosecution claimed that Mr. Canning trapped these birds and this is why it is believed that the prosecution withheld the genetic report of the Sparrowhawks as one of the parents had a cable tie that had been checked by Shorrock to affirm that it was a legal identity cable tie with a unique number that was registered to Mr. Canning and it had not been tapered with [see the file Sparrowhawks evidence 1 and 2 and the documents there in that affirm the Sparrowhawks tissues were taken to be genetically finger printed]. Guy Shorrock had been given the cable tie found on the parent Sparrowhawks to check if the cable tie had been interfered with [reference statement made by PC Henery dated 14th February 1995 and the statement that affirm that the Peregrine Falcons that Mr. Canning gave the Police were parents of Mr. Canning’s birds that were seized by Shorrock, Reference Dr Wettons’ statement dated 24 April 1995. [see the file marked Sparrowhawks evidence Below is part of Parkin’s statement. see below at the end of the document Mr. Canning would aver that the Sparrowhawks evidence has been criminally withheld from his defence in violation of Article 6 of Mr. Canning’s Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, therefore Mr. Canning would beseech that there should be an independent inquiry into his complaint. Withholding evidence that violates Article 6 of Mr. Canning Rights in this instance means that Northumbria Police Force is liable to be sued. The results of the requested inquiry should be supplying to Mr. Canning with the answer to the question; did the genetic profile of the female Sparrowhawks correspond with the youngster that he furnaced to the Police and the ones seized from his home by Shorrock on 6th July 1993. The ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION CAN BE FOUND AT NOTTINGHAM UNIVERSITY. Mr Canning WOULD CONTEND THAT THIS VITAL EVIDENCE HAS BEEN WITHHELD FROM HIS DEFENCE AS IT WAS STRONG SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE IN RELATION TO HIS BREEDING OF BIRDS OF PREY, AS SPARROWHAWKS ARE MORE DIFFICULT TO BREED THAN PEREGRINE FALCONS [reference MRS BOLTON statement that affirm she COULD NOT KEEP TWO IMPRINTED SPARROWHAWKS belonging to Mr Canning WITHOUT THE birds SUFFERING BOTH Physically AND MENTALLY. See the file labled Sparrowhawks evidence 2. Furthermore, Mr. Canning would ask what has occurred to the other Sparrowhawks that were seized on the 6th July 1993. Mr. Canning was shocked to note how very keen PC Henery was in releasing Mr. Canning’s imprinted Sparrowhawks. This seems strange as the bird would have died quite quickly in the wild unless they had been trained how to hunt. Given the injuries and wild state of the birds this seems unlikely. The Sparrowhawks and statements. Mr. Canning wishes the following main statement Ref B1/VA/8794 Dated 5th December 1994 between Mr. Canning, PC 3957 Henery and PC 922 White to be evidenced in support of his claim that a fundamental aspect of Mr. Canning defence was withheld from him by the prosecution. Moreover, statements from A] to H] are also relevant. Statement A] Police statement Ref B1/VA/8794 Dated 5th December 1994 between Mr. Canning, PC 3957 Henery and PC 922 White Page 1 PC 3957 Henery accepts that Mr. Canning gave him two Sparrowhawks. Mr. Canning states that he wanted the birds genetically finger printed as he believed that at least one of the birds that he gave to the Police was a parent of the birds that were seized from his home on the 6th July 1993. Page 2 Mr. Canning states that one of the Sparrowhawks that he gave to the Police was a parent of the birds that PC White and Shorrock seized on 16th July 1993. Page 9 Mr. Canning in his statement asks for the Sparrowhawks to be genetically finger printed as it was a vital aspect of his defence. Page 10 Mr. Canning asks again in his statement for genetic proof via the Sparrowhawks. Page 12 the Police in Mr. Canning’s statement confirm that if the genetics match up it will put Mr. Canning ‘in the clear’. This shows how important the Sparrowhawks evidence was to Mr Canning. Page Mr. Canning claims in his statement that the Sparrowhawks will prove his point of innocence. Page 18. Mr. Canning claims in his statement to have bred the birds and that he wants them genetically finger printed to support his defence. Cogently Mr. Canning is trying to be helpful to the Police; however the Police have used this fact to violate Mr. Canning’s Human Rights Statement B] RSPB statement dated 24th July 1996. Statement C] 15th June 1996 Henery told the RSPB to release the remaining Sparrowhawks owned by Mr. Canning 14th August 1996 Paul Stilgoe of the RSPB states that he found Mr. Canning’s Sparrowhawks agitated. The male had wounds that got more severe as time went on. This is in spite of the fact he has just arrived. Mr. Canning would ask why were imprinted birds in a wild state if they were kept correctly? How does he know that the birds will easily survive in the wild? If the birds were suffering both mentally and physically why was the person [Mrs Bolton] looking after the birds not charged with cruelty. There are clear statements that affirm cruelty has occurred therefore if Mrs Bolton is not charged with cruelty we have a two tier criminal system; the Police and normal people. Statement D] Ian Smith State 26th July 1996 confirms that he let the two Sparrowhawks go due to Henery’s instruction on the 15th June 1996 Statement E] 14th February 1995 Henery went to The Veterinary Investigation Centre at Longbenton to allow Devoy to remove tissue for genetic finger printing form the Sparrowhawks. At 2.54 pm Henery arrived at Queens medical Centre in Nottingham with PC White and Guy Shorrock to give the Sparrowhawks tissue to Dr Wetton. This was quite an afford to go to all the way to Nottingham therefore it is inconceivable that the tissue would not be tested. The blood from the two parent Peregrines was also handed over on this occasion. The blood from the Peregrine Falcons was found to support Mr. Canning claim that he bred the Peregrine Falcons seized from his him on 6th July 1993. [Reference Dr Wettin’s statement dated 24th April 1995]. Statement F] 15th January 1998 Pc White’s statement confirms that at 4.40 Monday 5th December 1994 Mr. Canning gave PC White and PC Henery the two Sparrowhawks and that they were put on the property register B1/POFP/846/94 Statement G] 15th December 1994 Brian Little confirms one of the Sparrowhawks is a mature adult. Statement H] 8th December 1993 Guy Shorrock state that Sparrowhawks will not breed communally so if the genetics had of supported Mr. Canning’s that he bred the Sparrowhawks then it would have been strong supportive evidence that Mr. Canning’s must have also bred the Peregrines at his home in the summer of 1993. 1] What occurred to the DNA profiling of the Sparrowhawks done by Dr Parkin and Dr Wetton? Below is Dr Scott’s statement. 2] What is the quality schemes that was run by Parkin and Wetting? INDEX 1]The two birds found in Mr. Canning’s car. 2] A] Page below. This shows that Mr. Canning bail was cancelled in relation to the charges of criminal damage and stealing Peregrine Falcon chicks from Kielder. 3] B] Pages below. These pages show that the charge of stealing Peregrine falcons from Kielder were dropt after Mr. Canning sent the parent blood for the two birds in question to the Police’s genetic experts. 4] The above two copies from Mr. Canning’s statement [[A4/1126/93 SEE FILE 1] shows that Mr. Canning wanted to have the two chicks found in his car, by PC Glenton on the 4th June 1992, GENETICALLY FINGER PRINTED, BUT HE WAS NOT ALLOWED. See A4/1126/93 file 1 for See copies of the letters that Mr. Canning sent to the Police in 1992 to make arrangements to have his birds genetically finger printed at Hadrian Vets in 1992 see documents numbered 8 to 17 in file 3. 4] The above shows how Mr. Canning’s wanted to prove to the Police that he had bred the two birds found in his car and the Police prevented him from proving personally by genetic that he had bred the birds found in his car. 5] The above copies [A4/1126/93 SEE FILE 1] show how the Police prevented Mr. Canning from genetically finger printing the two chicks found in his car by PC Glenton. 6] The genetic evidence that was withheld from my court case. Note the two pages from the court transcript and the very remote possibility that I could have managed to by chance find a nest of peregrine falcons with more than 4 eggs 7] Court transcript from 285 to 286. 8] BTO EMAIL. 9] Court transcript from 287 10] page 217 of Radcliffe’s book on five eggs. 11] Court transcript page 288. When supplied with blood Parkin and Wetton changed their minds 12] Myatt cuttings 13] The Watchdog programme 14] Terry Burden’s letter dated 27 August 1999. 15] Above is Terry Burden’s letter dated 27 August 1999. 8] See below for the newspaper cuttings about Terry Burden and David Myatt. The two birds found in Mr. Canning’s car. Mr. Canning would ask you to read the following pages; A] Page below. This shows that Mr. Canning bail was cancelled in relation to the charges of criminal damage and stealing Peregrine Falcon chicks from Kielder. B] Pages below. These pages show that the charge of stealing Peregrine falcons from Kielder were dropt after Mr. Canning sent the parent blood for the two birds in question to the Police’s genetic experts. To confirm this fact Geoffrey Rudd gave Mr. Canning back both of his Peregrines Falcons on the 5th January 1992. On the 5th December 1993 and after Mr. Canning had been told that he would not be charged by the Police in 1992 in relation to the birds found in his car the Police charged Mr. Canning in 1993 in relation to the birds found in his car. If the birds were illegal then the chief constable has committed a criminal offence as has assisted Mr. Canning to commit a criminal offence according to the Police solicitor [see the statement dated 22 July 1997 see page below]. Not to mention any offences in relation to CITES [Regulation 3626]. Moreover, Mr. Canning must have established to the civil burden that he bred the birds or PC Rudd would not have given the birds back on the 5th January 1993, if the police force solicitor were to be believed [see page below] Given the aforesaid can it be true that the two Peregrine Falcons we are dealing with are illegal and the Chief Constable in his own solicitor’s words by giving Mr. Canning back the birds has broken the law, ‘The Chief Constable would be Guilty of assisting the plaintiff to commit a criminal offence i.e. possession of a wild bird’ If the birds in question are legal then Mr. Canning could have rightly excluded Pc Glenton’s evidence. [see page below] Below is a page from my police statement. Bloody hell Derek (with honours), I aint got time to read that lot. What is the basic gist of it? Quote Link to post
DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20 Posted January 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 (edited) The RSPB and Dr Parkin were told not to use their single locus probes in my court case by the Department of the Environment this fact was withheld by both of the aforesaid and the single locus probes were used to wrongly convict me. This is clear corruption and in need of a police inquiry in relation to perverting the course of justice. Edited January 23, 2009 by DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] Quote Link to post
DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20 Posted January 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 (edited) The RSPB and Dr Parkin were told not to use their single locus probes in my court case by the Department of the Environment this fact was withheld by both of the aforesaid and the single locus probes were used to wrongly convict me. This clear is corruption and in need od a police inquiry in relation to perverting the course of justice. Edited January 23, 2009 by DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] Quote Link to post
DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20 Posted January 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 THERE IS MUCH MUCH MORE THAT SHOWS THAT PEOPLE COMMITTED PERJURY AT MY COURT CASE AND I WOULD NOT BE SAYING THIS IF I COULD NOT PROVE IT. IT IS TIME FOR A POLICE INQUIRY INTO MY COMPLAINTS AND OTHERES. Quote Link to post
DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20 Posted January 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 (edited) http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=awAYdZFAG8g http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=b4cBknhngbk ABOVE IS THE PROGRAMMES OF THE RSPB BRAGGING ABOUT THEIR BOGUS DNA. NOTE THAT I HAVE THE REPORTS FROM THE MYATT COURT CASE THAT DISCREDITED THE DNA EVIDENCE OF DR PARKIN Edited January 23, 2009 by DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] Quote Link to post
DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20 Posted January 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=awAYdZFAG8ghttp://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=b4cBknhngbk ABOVE IS THE PROGRAMMES OF THE RSPB BRAGGING ABOUT THEIR BOGUS DNA. NOTE THAT I HAVE THE REPORTS FROM THE MYATT COURT CASE THAT DISCREDITED THE DNA EVIDENCE OF DR PARKIN http://www.thehuntinglife.com/forums/index...mp;#entry872463 SEE THE LINK ABOVE Quote Link to post
akton 15 Posted January 23, 2009 Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 FFS man derek with honours I am sure you have a strong case ,with all that evidence do something with it TRY ROGER COOK OR ROUGH JUSTICE SEE HOW THEY THE RSPB and all the others like it when joe public can provide evidence of wrong doings amongst the professionals.. go for it Quote Link to post
DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20 Posted January 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2009 FFS man derek with honours I am sure you have a strong case ,with all that evidence do something with it TRY ROGER COOK OR ROUGH JUSTICE SEE HOW THEY THE RSPB and all the others like it when joe public can provide evidence of wrong doings amongst the professionals.. go for it MY APPEAL IS ALL IN HAND HOWEVER WHAT I AM TRYING TO ACHIEVE IS A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION INTO THE PEOPLE WHO LIED IN MY CASE AND OTHERS. Quote Link to post
![DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS]](data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg%20xmlns%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2000%2Fsvg%22%20viewBox%3D%220%200%201024%201024%22%20style%3D%22background%3A%23c46362%22%3E%3Cg%3E%3Ctext%20text-anchor%3D%22middle%22%20dy%3D%22.35em%22%20x%3D%22512%22%20y%3D%22512%22%20fill%3D%22%23ffffff%22%20font-size%3D%22700%22%20font-family%3D%22-apple-system%2C%20BlinkMacSystemFont%2C%20Roboto%2C%20Helvetica%2C%20Arial%2C%20sans-serif%22%3ED%3C%2Ftext%3E%3C%2Fg%3E%3C%2Fsvg%3E)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.