Friday 25 Oct 2025
I was coming back from doing some grocery shopping and had just gotten off the bus and started to walk through the small housing estate nearby to where my flat is and as usual i turned my phone camera on in case something happened i needed to have on record - and i notice white van very near to where i live and as i got closer i notice that its ro64 so continuing recording and he moved the van - [he was literally in the same place with van the week before going into flat c, when i was coming through the flats from shopping - a co-incidence? hmm or something else. ]and got out just as i was trying to get into the house where i live and he said something and came closer to me [approached me, i didnt approach him] and started filming me. next ph comes out and she shouting wrongly claiming im approaching her - when i wasn't [all the while im still filming] flat c still shouting ..approaching me, and im saying im not you are approaching me, even ro64 tried to get her to move back from me.
shes giving it the mouth, so the neighbours can hear and as usual 'she who shouts loud enough for others to hear' is so telling the truth? nope as usually shes sprouting off bs to make me look bad etc etc.
she threatened to call police again. i phoned them and was told they wouldnt be coming down but a cad number was sent.
not long after 2 male met police turns up at my door and im being arrested again - for breaching a anti harassment order from the courts - to not approach a r064, anyone attached to flat c and that his name was XX - that name sounds familiar i thought. i tell the coppers no its not called what you said, it doesn't say what you said, it doesnt even mention that name. copper says he had just seen a recording of me appraoching her.
no i didnt i says she approached me and i said i filmed it and tried to show them the footage but they didnt want to know. they where there to arrest me and cart me off it seems and nothing i could say etc was going to change that] turns out they had to hang around in my flat for longer that usual as their wasn't a police van available as yet.... anyway
after hours of being traumatised again, my anxiety level going sky high, thinking they where going to kill me etc etc etc and a number of lies from various custody police, one of them that they had to keep me in police custody until i was brought to court sat morning - so from about 5 or so pm friday eve i had to against my will again, stay in police custody. the custody sargeant/s [2 of them i was told when asked] the female was lovely [considering the situation] and was doing the 'booking me in' on the computer whilst the 2 'foot soldier's who brought me in stood either side of me at the counter, one moving about very impatiently. anyway they eventally went and blah blah ..... the usual ....... and hrs later me asking to speak to whoever is in charge at the station as i wanted to try and make sense of why i was there .... evently i was allowed out to go speak to male custody sarg who was sitting behind the counter at computer.
and im thinking his hair is quite striking. next thing someone came to cell whilst im in it opened the hatch thing produces a handheld dictation machine and says 'im arresting you, blah blah 2009 ... blah blah. huh i thought what the fuck is going on. it was the custody sargent who had let his hair down [literally]
seems that the arresting copper [or someone else] lifted the name from 2009 and applied it to ro64...
earlier when speaking at the custody desk with male sarg hes saying its all on the computer - that he was looking at but i didnt see.how can it be.... they are stitching me up and so blatantly.
turns out after that shift had finished and the new shift came on, i was released without charge but on bail [on bail? wft this needs sortin out]
it was a mistake. a mistake? though i don't know his name etc i think he was sargent, he apoliged for what had happened and couldnt have been nice enough .... mental health person and appropriate adult person was there and we chatted a while - they couldnt have been nicer either.
looked like what had happened was [i will find out for sure later] that flat c or ro64 or both had phoned up
the police, and 2 males where dispatched to go get me. i think someone else was contacted as well but i don't know for sure yet.
what they had done was take something that was on the police data base from years ago and attached it to flat c and ro64 including a restraining order.
a 'mistake' they claim. and im wondering who came up with that one?
so thats false arrest, false detention and again traumating me, etc etc. well done.
------------------------
what i know from having [non-aggrivatve] arguments with a few police officers is that they do not know the law as well as they may think they do. i know a little, and i knew enough to know that they are not immune from being prosecuted/sued for their bad actions, as one officer claimed to be .... not true i says, and he back tracked on that one.
i think in most cases they know they are acting illegally etc [exceeding their lawful/legal] authority but they do it anyway - maybe thinking they will get away with it or maybe they really don't care if they do get pulled up and lose their job, sent to prison etc or are delusional.
they have way too much legal authority to arrest, detain etc etc people than many coppers can professional handle, they mis-use/ abuse these powers and to the detriment of others, many who imo do not deserve to be treated the way they have been by the police.
There is also the processes that say from arrest, they 'have to' follow which could be changed, they are not written in stone, they are not the ten commands sort of thing. its the same with the courts and some of the actual laws, common or legislation some that do not imo make sense, and are unfair. and bad law making or implementation has victims and victors and some really do not deserve it. imo. i very much believe in deserving and underserving.
end note
another procedural issue to do with the courts is that of the serving of court summons or requisitions and how in the case of ones that are send out by post, which as far as i am aware are deemed to have been served if a few steps are taken] even if the person who the summons was sent to, doesnt receive the document.
and no checks or anything are necessary for when if an arrest warrant is issued, for the police or whoever to actual check before arresting someone.... and when they do to actually follow what the order says and not make up the law [ to suit themselves or others] and exceed their powers [again]. this is something i have experienced.
so many procedural things i think need tiding up within how the police operate to do with processes
they 'have to go through' and some when 'mistakes' happen right from the start, they can be sorted and do not need to go through the whole distressing etc thing of detention etc etc until court hearing.
this is done at unnecessarily at times to frustrate/distress and punish the person.
lastly, the police and implementing Reasonable Adjustments under the Equality Act 2010 [s20 duty to make adjustments here ] and other Human Rights are not taken seriously - i have had to keep repeating myself and say 'where are my human rights' where are the 'reaonable adjustments' i am legally entitled to as a disabled, vulnerable person - where are they, i want them, [does that sound demanding? considering the situation and unjust processes etc and being traumatised and feeling like im being tortured, i think me 'demanding' my rights occasional and i don't usually make demands' is justified.
27 Oct 2025
I said to xx I could see how the fraud/set-up against me by xx was being played and was asked to explain what i mean't [words to that effect] i hope i was able to explain clearly and make sense. i think they are easy to see, but not so easy to get enough evidence to get someone the sack or investigated and charged/prosecuted for, so in some ways they are clever - in the processes used but i think they rely on other people who may not be part of the gang but have been pulled into the fraud - and who know if they don't keep their months shut they will be intimidated or even stitched up themselves.
even the police appear to be in on it. All sorts of bad practices are shown, from not following procedures where the decision to to have arrested and detained you is supposed to be reviewed after 6 hrs and so on and so on. the
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) – Code C here
" 1.0 The powers and procedures in this Code must be used fairly, responsibly, with respect for the people to whom they apply and without unlawful discrimination. Under the Equality Act 2010, section 149 (Public sector Equality Duty), police forces must, in carrying out their functions, have due regard to the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct which is prohibited by that Act"
They don't have in place any Reasonable Adjustments that protect disabled vulnerable people who may be arrested/detained for even minor/summary stuff - from being harmed, traumatised, etc etc when they are forced to go through the usual processes.
Laws that are there to protect some people from abuse/harm by local authorities [such as s15 of the Equality Act 2010 here ] and s20 adjustments for disabled people here need to be brought to the attention of the courts because they are in my view, abuses of processes - not complying with the law they are supposed to be complying with.
They cast serious doubt on the integrity of the Met Police - to carry out their duties in a fair/just way and without fear or favour etc etc.
They also make up their own law - and they don't have the authority to do that, and it is often at the detriment to a person/s who is vulnerable, etc. Some even end out in hospital after contact with the police, some end up dead - all down to bad/criminal practices. they have way too much power and don't know how to use it in a responsible professional way.
They use their powers of arrest in a very disproportionate way - and this isnt always necessary
High Court decision restates the law on necessity for an arrest to be lawful here
additions
threats to destroy or damage property - this crime the police didnt even arrest ph for
Perverting the Course of Justice - this one is blatant lying that police didnt correct which adds serious doubt to much of what she says
18 feb 2026
ive watched the recording i took on my phone of 24 oct 2025 - of michael mansano and petra hind approaching me outside the front door of where we live.
he was parked up to on the corner when i got to where i live so i took a photo as he keeps harassing/intimidating me and i wanted to get evidence of him hanging around where i live a lot, even in the daytime when he is supposed to be working for camden council.
when he saw that i had my phone pointed at the van, he moved van closer to where i live and got out and walked towards me
then he came very close to me and had his phone right in my face
then she came out and walked past me then they both went to walk over to the council van, but she stopped and looked back at me
then they both came back over to where i was and stood there - both looking like they where enjoying intimidating/harassing me 
then they moved closer towards me really close to me and i was feeling very anxious and intimidated by them
she also 2x told me she had been assured i was to be found guilty [words to that effect[ in regards to the trial.
she then lied and said again loud enough for others to hear that i had approached him [i hadn't] and i had approached her [i hadn't]
the police seemingly being easily manipulated and not doing proper investigations and the truth not mattering much [imo] didnt challenge her - police had either lied about seeing a video of me approaching her or she had told them i had, or she had edited video from his phone to only show a picture of me near them - no actual footage of me approaching them,
she had done that before with another photo, she claimed was me chasing her down the stairs, when it didnt show any such thing and the police didnt challenge her.
they take her word for things they really shouldn't but thats how they are - they throw things together as 'evidence' put it to the court, get a district judge they can rely on to pass it through with out much scrutiny
and who holds a below par hearing - and no transcripts of hearing, and all play along with it including the defence lawyers.
flat c petra hind has been doing the slamming of the doors and running down the stairs today causing a nusiance again
ive got video recording of her and michael mansano where you can clearly see they have approached me
she later on phoned police and got me arrested for approaching her - she and he appraoched me - she may sound convincing at times but imo she believe hers own lies
police claimed to have seen a video of me approaching her, which i think is bs or that she edited it to make it look like i was near them and then claimed i had appraoched them - without needing to show that i actually had. the police are easily manipulated ive found.
its the 2x time she has produced a photo and claimed that me doing blah blah [when it clearly doesnt show it] yet police don't question it, and despite it be able to undermine the prosecution, its 'rigged' imo so any old nonsense/lies are taken as fact by them and the courts
the truth doesnt matter - what matters is that they get convicted someone like me - its helps the prosecution to have close connections to the local council and one of them moves in with the witness and harass's and intimidates me and gets away with it -
and having not so great lawyers who my cat could put up a better argument etc doesnt help... and then keeping things from you and procedure rules not being followed etc etc
its so fucking disheartening having to go through that and not really having a fair chance because it was already decided months previously. it sickening, and it shouldnt be allowed, but it is.
the single district judge has a lot to answer for imo
imo she knew about and had been coached about various lax police and court procedures
..
PDF 236 KB
