Mr Eddie Cairns
72 Hillhouse Street
GLASGOW G21 4HP
15 June 2018
Mr Ilya Zharov
Head of Reviews & Policy
The Police Investigations and Review Commissioner
Hamilton Business Park
Hamilton ML3 0QA
Dear Mr Zharov,
I refer to your letter and attachment dated 13 June 2018.
As revealed by new evidence disclosed to me by Scottish Enterprise on 7 July 2016 and by the COPFS on 6 April 2017, since August 1993 police officers, Enterprise Ayrshire employees, Scottish Enterprise employees and COPFS employees have acted dishonestly in concert in this case, with several individuals conspiring to pervert the course of justice:
(a) by failing to carry out an adequate, effective, independent and impartial investigation into my allegations of serious financial irregularities,
(b) by failing to interview witnesses, in particular named individuals, including Mr Andrew Downie, Mr Gary Tracey and Ms Janie Maxwell, seen in documentary evidence to have been involved in manipulating and falsifying accounts in Enterprise Ayrshire and taking control of £187,919 of public money, thereby effectively stealing it, including Mr Andrew Downie, Mr Gary Tracey, Ms Janie Maxwell,
(c) by failing to elicit a plausible explanation for £187,000 of public money being transferred out of Enterprise Ayrshire’s bank account and into the personal bank account of the person who had instructed the fraudulent acts and omissions in Enterprise Ayrshire, Mr Gary Tracey,
(d) by failing to elicit a plausible explanation for a further £919 of interest on the stolen cash being deposited into that same employee’s personal bank account instead of to an Enterprise Ayrshire bank account,
(e) by failing to elicit a plausible explanation for omitting to enter into the financial accounts of Enterprise Ayrshire the receipt of £187,069 on 25 June 1993,
(f) by failing to question Mr Gary Tracey and Ms Janie Maxwell about my allegations of more junior employees in Enterprise Ayrshire having been incited by them to enter into a conspiracy to commit crimes, namely financial fraud and theft
(g) by failing to question Mr Gary Tracey about the evidence noted in the Scottish Enterprise report dated 20 August 1993 recording his instruction to staff in the cash section of Enterprise Ayrshire not to enter into the financial ledger £187,069 that had been received from the European Regional Development Fund on 25 June 1993, which corroborated my allegation of more junior workers, including myself, having been incited to enter into the conspiracy
(h) by falsely pretending that I was the only witness to the financial irregularities and that there was no corroboration of any of my allegations,
(i) by concealing material evidence,
(j) by repeatedly communicating false information, knowingly, amounting to further instances of fraud.
I have copies of the new evidence that I obtained from Scottish Enterprise on 7 July 2016 and from the COPFS on 6 April 2017, proving the concerted actions listed above.
As well as being responsible for his or her own acts and omissions each participant in a conspiracy is responsible for the acts and omissions of all the other participants.
COPFS employees have consistently acted in concert with police officers, Enterprise Ayrshire employees and Scottish Enterprise employees to pervert the course of justice by concealing material evidence and repeatedly communicating false information about this case, knowingly, amounting to additional instances of fraud.
In particular, COPFS employees, police officers, Enterprise Ayrshire employees and Scottish Enterprise employees have repeatedly stated falsely that a thorough investigation into my allegations of financial irregularities was carried out in 1993 and thereafter in several reviews, that I was the only witness to the fraud, and that there was no corroboration of any of my allegations.
The falsehoods communicated by COPFS employees, police officers, Enterprise Ayrshire employees and Scottish Enterprise employees that were exposed by the new evidence arising on 7 July 2016 and 6 April 2017 are amply detailed in my previous correspondence and supporting documentary evidence.
The SPA and the PIRC have done absolutely nothing to ensure effective police performance in this case.
Your reference to my complaint against ACC Nicolson as ‘trivial’ indicates an appearance of bias against me
That complaint arose from ACC Nicolson’s neglect of duty and subsequent communication of a pack of lies to cover that up that neglect of duty in respect of the investigation of the alleged falsification of accounts and the theft of £187,919 of UK taxpayers’ cash from Enterprise Ayrshire in 1993.
The evidence that you casually brush aside includes a bank statement in the name of one of my supervisors in Enterprise Ayrshire personally showing the deposits of the exact amounts missing from the company’s financial accounts and bank accounts. Do you have a plausible explanation?
Is the fraud and theft of £187,919 of UK taxpayers’ cash really too trivial for you to spend public money investigating?
The police officers who abjectly failed to investigate these significant financial irregularities were indeed corrupt. Your view that such investigatory failures were not corrupt is easily shown to be nonsense in the light of the evidence I submitted.
Would you pocket a substantial amount of PIRC cash in a bank account in your own name while instructing more junior employees to falsify the PIRC’s financial accounts accordingly and expect the police to brush that aside because there is nothing wrong in your view?
I believe that the general public will recognise your view as fundamentally crooked.
Your reference to my complaint about such misconduct by ACC Nicolson as ‘trivial’ is in reality dishonest and disgraceful. Your misconduct can reasonably be suspected as designed to cover up the PIRC’s own former dishonesty in falsely communicating, knowingly, that I had submitted 82 police complaints, and in recommending unjustifiably that the police ignore me.
I have published this letter on my blog which has attracted about 50,000 views to date. Your misconduct and failures will be known to the public in more detail in due course.
In the first instance I want to raise a formal complaint against you for outrageous dishonesty and unprofessional conduct.