Guy Shorrock hidden agenda from the police.

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

THIS IS A NOTICE TO ALL THE POLICE STATIONS IN THE UK AND ALL OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES: GUY SHORROCK [RSPB] CANNOT BE USED TO HELP INVESTIGATE PEOPLE IN RELATION TO BIRDS AS HE HAS A ‘HIDDEN AGENDA’, HE DOES NOT ‘LIKE PEOPLE WHO BREED BIRDS’ AND WANT TO ‘CLOSE THEM DOWN’. NOT MY WORDS BUT THE WORDS OF THE POLICE. WE NEED A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION INTO THE MATTER. DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS]

 

Dear Sir/Madam

Reference: Guy Shorrock hidden agenda of persecution.

It has recently come to my attention via Animal Health accidently releasing a copy of an email dated 28 January 2008 [see below] between North Yorkshire Police [PC Lee Flickling] and Animal Health [Roy Pitt] to me, that states that Yorkshire Police were aware that Shorrock was living out a secret agenda of his own because he did not like people who breed birds and therefore wanted to close Mark Robb down for no other reason than he breed birds. Given the police knew this fact why did police officers allow themselves to be used at the will of Shorrock to victimise me and others. Even Defra has stopped supplying information to Shorrock.

Below is a sequence of emails from Animal Health, the police and Guy Shorrock that I wish to comment on and make an official complaint about in support of the numerous complaints of Guy Shorrock from various people and my past complaints. It must now be cogent that Shorrock is out of control and using the police and the CPS to further his hidden agenda against Mark Robb, me and anyone else who keeps birds and or has anything to do with birds. You will note that both Mark Robb and I were raided because ‘someone’ said [we believe the information was made up to get search warrants on our homes and kick my door in for no reason that I can see as the door was not locked] that I had taken 2 peregrine falcon eggs from a nest site in Alston at a date that peregrine falcons do not have eggs in the wild [July] and driven them down to Mark Robb yet no one has ever interviewed or even asked me about such a crime and no one has asked Mark Robb either. For further proof that the whole situation was a fabrication I would evidence the following summary:

1] When I offered a peregrine falcon chick for DNA profiling to PC Henery on the day of the raid he refused to accept.

2] When I was interviewed no one asked me about illegal peregrine falcons from Alston going to Mark Robb.

3] On Mark Robb’s raid the police showed little interest in DNA profiling the two peregrine falcons that he bred in 2006. These were the only two potentially relevant immature peregrine falcons as the large numbers of birds that Mark Robb bred that year were hybrids that do not occur in the wild.

4] No one mentioned that I had supplied illegal peregrine falcons in Mark Robb’s interview.

It was all based on a secret agenda, Guy Shorrock’s agenda.

The whole scenery was manufactured to obtain search warrants and oppress both Mark Robb and me as has occurred in the past. Shorrock has already been caught out lying in my first court case in October 2008 [the Court transcript and police statements have already been supplied to prove Shorrock’s perjury] and the further evidence below of Shorrock’s hidden agenda must now make it vital that Shorrock should be suspended from anymore activities involving investigating people and he must be himself investigated straight away and all the charges against me must be discontinued until Shorrock has been investigated to prevent further crimes.

Thank you for your help.

John Dodsworth

 

 

HIDDEN AGENDAS AND GUY SHORROCK

The emails below from Defra, the police and Shorrock show how Shorrock has used a secret agenda to persecute people who breed birds and to close them down.

June 2006

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

email 2

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

email 3

Where is the evidence that Mark Robb said he does not know what birds he has? Month pass and no emails?

November 2006

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

email 3

Where is the evidence that Mark Robb said he does not know what birds he has? Month pass and no emails?

November 2006

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

email 4

 

Why black out information if you have nothing to hide? Who has a full list and is it ‘Guy’ if so why does he have the list and not the police?

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

email 5

 

 

 

January 2007

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

No, the DNA evidence has not come back negative, it has come back positive by 24 January 2007 as it proves Mark Robb bred his birds in question. At this point Mark Robb should not have been persecuted further moreover given the fact the whole matter has been a ‘waste of everyone times’ where did the original bogus information come from to get the two search warrants? It is my contention that the search warrants were secured by perjury and I want the evidence used to secure the search warrant supplied to me before my court case in September 2009. I have Mark Robb’s full permission to have any information supplied to me in relation to Sea Hare and he has the same permission from me.

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

next email

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

As the DNA evidence has shown by the 24 January 2007 that Mark Robb has bred all of his birds why is Guy Shorrock still requesting information from Animal Health on the 24 January 2007 and how is he allowed to come to Animal Health and take away personal files on Mark Robb unsupervised when the police had only asked for the Article 10s?

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

Above is a document used by Mark Britton to sign out Mark Robb’s personal documents to Guy Shorrock on the 10 January 2007. The questions is when was the DNA evidence available in relation to proving Mark Robb bred his birds and why was Shorrock, who is just a member of the public, allowed to sign out personal data unsupervised when there was a hidden agenda to target bird breeder by Shorrock as he does not like people who breed birds and wants to close them down?

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

By the 24 January 2007 the DNA evidence showed Mark Robb had bred his birds. The above email to PC Lee Flickling from Roy Pitt is dated 25 January 2007 which is after the DNA evidence was known so why is Guy Shorrock still harassing Mark Robb and allowed to continue his hidden agenda? The reasons why Roy Pitt is questioning the role of Shorrock needs to be investigated by the police. Mark Robb was told by the DoE that he would be given time to sort out the technical paper work offences therefore there was no need to ‘raid’ Mark Robb’s home or John Dodsworth’s. The police had the power to take blood sample from any birds with or without a search warrant and only the peregrine falcons born in 2006 were relevant therefore there was no need to lie to get a search warrant. To put it in the words of Roy Pitt [Animal Health] ‘THERE APPEARS TO BE NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE ALLEGATIONS THAT ROBB WAS IN COLLUSION WITH DODSWORTH IN THE TAKING AND LAUNDERING OF WILD TAKEN BIRDS- WHICH WAS THE PRIMARY REASON FOR MOUNTING THE OPERATION IN THE FIRST PLACE. I AM ASSUMING THAT NO FURTHER ACTION IS BEING TAKEN BY NORTHUMBRIA POLICE IN RESPECT OF DODSWORTH?’

Given there is no evidence to support laundering of birds what evidence was used to get two search warrants and why is Shorrock being allowed to further victimise Mark Robbb?

 

Shorrock is being allows to try and save face and cover up the lies used to get the 2 search warrants even after he lied in my first court case in October 2008 Shorrock is still used by the police to investigate people without any checks on Shorrock’s hidden agenda?

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

It should be noted that Mark Robb had not seen me [John Dodsworth] for over 10 years before BOTH raids. Contact was only made with me [John Dodsworth] by Derek Canning going to Newcastle Crown Court in October 2008 therefore how does the officer believe that he can prove a connection between Mark Robb and me in relation to supplying illegal birds? This would have been legally needed to secure the search warrants. It is my contention that the officer has been lied to. It seems strange that PC Lee Flickling in his email dated 28 January 2007 is concerned that the police cannot proven if the birds held by Mark Robb were from the wild as the DNA evidence has already proved non of Mark Robb’s birds were wild. Why is there even a need for a third visit when it has all been a waste of everyone’s time given the DNA results? Shorrock seems to be still leading the show.

 

The officer confirms the police have only asked for the Article 10S and it seems that the police have not asked Shorrock to get any information from Animal Health, he has just gone on a personal hidden agenda of a ‘fishing trip’ to further his hidden agenda to close Mark Robb down and in doing so using the cover of the police to secure the information. Given this fact what did Shorrock say to secure personal information from Animal Health if the police did not ask him to secure any information? Shorrock is not allowed to go about his hidden agenda to obtain personal information by pretending he is acting for the police.

The DNA evidence proved that Mark Robb bred all of his birds therefore the evidence to get the search was all part of a secret agenda to wrongly convict Mark Robb and close him down. Not my words, the words of the police [i ALSO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT GUY SHORROCK IN THIS CASE. I SEE A HIIDEN AGENDA E.G. ‘WE DON’T LIKE PEOPLE WHO BREED BIRDS’ ‘A NEED TO CLOSE HIM DOWN’. Note the words used by the police are in quotation marks therefore it is assumed the police are quoting Guy Shorrock. Given what the police have said it is cogent that Shorrock is deceiving people and on a personal agenda to close bird breeders down. Such a hidden agenda needs to be investigated as it amount to perverting the course of justice.

Simply put WHY ARE PEOPLE STILL DEALING WITH GUY SHORROCK WHEN THE POLICE HAVE CONCERNS THAT HE HAS A HIDDEN AGENDA AND THAT HE DOES NOT LIKE PEOPLE WHO BREEDS BIRDS AND HE WANTS TO CLOSE PEOPLE DOWN? IF THE POLICE DID NOT ASK FOR INFORMATION FROM ANIMAL HEALTH WHY DID ANIMAL HEALTH ALLOW SHORROCK TO TAKE AWAY PERSONAL FILES?

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

Roy Pitt given that PC Lee Flinckling told you the police only requested information on Mark Robb’s Article 10s would you like rethink your answer in the above letter as Shorrock was allowed to go on a ‘fishing trip’ through Mark Robb’s personal papers on his hidden agenda to close Mark Robb down because he breeds birds?

February 2007

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

What situation has occurred in North Yorkshire Police in relation to the case in question that Roy Pitt on the 2 February 2007 should say that information should only be released to Shorrock if the police requested it? Have Animal Health been deceived by Shorrock into releasing information to further his hidden agenda without the police knowing? It would have been more prudent not to have allowed Shorrock to have stamped his hidden agenda on the investigation in the first place and it is unacceptable to allow Shorrock to continue in my case or any one elses.

 

From Shorrock’s email dated 1 February 2007 you will note how Shorrock reacts when he does not get his way to fulfil his hidden agenda. Shorrock is out of control and determined to destroy Mark Robb no matter what the facts were or what he was told. Shorrock even says he has no reason to suspect any criminal activity, yet he still want to persecute Mark Robb in relation to the foreign birds. Now that Mark Robb is out of Shorrock’s reach he has turned his attention to save face and justify the massive waste of tax’s payers money to further Shorrock’s hidden agenda by persecuting me and lying in my case [see the court transcript and police statements]

[DEREK CANNING LLB[HONS] 20]

Why is Shorrock allowed to be in control when it is known that he has a hidden agenda and why on the 7 February 2007 after what Roy Pitt said on the 2 February 2007; Shorrock NOT be allowed to receive any more information does Shorrock secure more information? Why does Roy Pitt pass on more information to Shorrock, especially after the DNA evidence had proved Mark Robb bred his birds?