My long-suffering solicitor received a welcome message from the Metropolitan Police last month.
I reproduce it here:
I would like to speak directly with Ms Hewson about the allegation to Police in January. This is not a police interview and a phone call will suffice. Firstly it would be to inform her that the crime report will soon be closed and the reasoning behind this and secondly to explain under what circumstances the report would be re-opened. I have a landline number for her but it does not have an answering service. Do you have a mobile number that she would be happy for you to pass on to me?
DC Kirsty Crookston.
Well, the Met knew it was going take a hammering when an unredacted version of Chapters 1-3 of the Henriques Report on the Metropolitan Police “Service’s” handling of non-recent sexual offence investigations against prominent persons finally saw the light of day on 4 October this year.
I am ploughing through its 391 pages, now released into the public domain. Thank God for Sir Richard Henriques! A man of integrity who stood up for due process and the rule of law, just when everyone thought they had been killed off in the United Kingdom. This man deserves canonisation.
It is terrifying, incidentally, to reflect that – like the boy with his finger in the dyke – Sir Richard has been a lone voice amongst Britain’s officialdom and judiciary, so “woke” (i.e. cowed) have the latter become on the issue of victimhood.
Even at the micro level, it’s good to see the Met belatedly growing a spine and binning vexatious complaints by wannabe victims: such as a certain Bristol barrister, whose name I shall not publish here, for what are customarily termed “legal reasons”.
Hence the e-mail I have quoted above.
It followed a year’s worth of bogus allegations about me to the Met in 2018 by the crazed conspiracy theorist and Twitter chum of said barrister, namely one Louise Clare Davis aka @craftymuvva on Twitter, who blogs as scepticpeg (see blogs passim).
No further action there either!
Evidently, I am on a winning streak.
The pair of them have been in cahoots for some years now. The Bristol buffoon started reporting me to the police early in 2017, after joining forces with the notorious ex-Exaro accuser, Esther Baker. At the time, Baker was a complainant in a criminal case, that subsequently got canned on 23 May 2017.
Indeed, such was her allegiance to Baker, that the Bristol barrister made several complaints about me to the police, the Bar Standards Board (BSB) and even my chambers on Baker’s behalf (and, presumably, at Baker’s behest). She excelled herself when, on 16 March 2017, she reported me to the BSB on behalf of the infamous “Nick” of Operation Midland, aka Carl Stephen Beech!
She actually described Beech, who by then had been arrested and charged with possession of child pornography, as “a high-profile complainant”!
Gosh, seriously bad timing, eh?
So utterly incompetent and, frankly, divorced from reality is the BSB, that it decided that I should be charged with professional misconduct in relation to Carl Stephen Beech’s “complaint” about me by his proxy, the Bristol barrister!
It was only after strenuous protests by my solicitors that the BSB finally faced facts, and decided not to make a total fool of itself (as opposed to just making of a fool of itself, which seems to be its default position much of the time). I am pleased to report that the BSB has – albeit grudgingly – canned its charge against me in relation to the convicted sex offender and serial perverter of the course of justice, Carl Beech.
The Bristol barrister had previously complained on her blog shortly after Easter 2017 that the Met regarded her as a “bad” victim, because she had given as good as she got on social media. This is what she wrote in a bitter and petulant post entitled “Hewson: We have a problem” (note: she seems to have taken her website off-line, at the time of writing this post, but you can still access it using the Wayback machine!):
the police have been clear I have lost my status as ‘good victim’ by responding on occasion.
That is not the whole story, of course. Indeed, it is deliberately misleading. She omitted to mention that she had repeatedly targeted individuals, including me, whom she set out to goad, provoke and vilify, as well as joining the unhinged Carl Stephen Beech/ Esther Baker’s support network of obsessed conspiracy theorists.
Martin Daubney MEP, a highly experienced journalist, immediately got the measure of her after she tried trolling him, asking her:
Are you just trawling Twitter looking for aggro?
Indeed, I described her to the Met as an “attention-junkie”. Never were truer words spoken!
And as the prominent legal blogger Matthew Scott informed this lady, back in the day:
Words don’t become criminal depending on whether they’re hurtful.
if you can’t take it don’t dish it out. Police have better things to do.