Imagine if you will a game a rock, paper, scissors. A game where everyone has power over someone else, but equally has another who has power over them. This simple game epitomises perfect balance and works on a series of checks and balances holding the system in check, a system that is replicated in the public sector.
The local Councillors that make up the Police Crime Panel, the Office of Police Fire and Crime Commissioner who are held accountable by the former, and the local Police force who enforce the law should the Council or its employees break it and are equally accountable to the PFCC.
Each has some power over the other, with no one party holding ultimate power and control over the other two, a system that in theory, keeps a series of checks and balances in place to ensure all parties act within their remit and the law overall.
In reality though what appears to be happening in Northamptonshire is the polar opposite, with everyone having quite a cosy relationship with one another and instead of holding the others to account, they are all abusing their powers to suitably cover up for misfeasance, corruption and in my own direct experience, crimes that have been committed.
Prime examples of this are with the Police Crime Panel failing to hold PFCC Stephen Mold to account for his library of failings and wastage of public money for years because they all belong to the same political party. PFCC Stephen Mold displaying extreme cronyism by appointing unsuitable candidates without proper vetting into appointments and then failing to carry out his duties and dismiss the Chief Constable Nick Adderley when clear evidence of fraud and corruption is presented, and finally Northants Police department having a responsibility to investigate crimes, but instead actively working to cover them up and sharing a platform with the very convicted criminals they are meant to bring to justice, just because the person convicted happens to be a Councillor and thus is integral to ensuring the Police remain protected and are not held to account.
A spotlight has been shone on some of the darkness and abuse that hides in dark corners, thanks to the ‘Rotten Boroughs’ article from the April issue of Private Eye, the magazine itself being a worthwhile purchase for less than the cost of a cup of overpriced train station coffee.
The Private Eye piece shines a light on how the man on the far left of the picture below, Councillor Jonanthan Nunn was convicted of ABH of his then wife Janice in 2004, yet despite this conviction for domestic violence, can be seen leading the event “it only takes ones” in 2022.
They say you can tell a lot about a man by the company he keeps. With the most infamous and well known person being the man at the centre of the back row of the picture in Stephen Mold, due to his collection of newspaper headlines, most recently and famously his swansong comments of “I’ll Dump The Bitch.”
After a string of disastrous appointments, misogynistic comments and generally dominating the headlines of the tabloids its easy to allow Mold to overshadow the other person at the back of the picture with an equally impressive CV of gaffes, and one who plays a crucial role in protecting people like Nunn.
For context, like most domestic abusers, this was not Nunn’s fault and in fact he would have you believe he is the victim of harassment. This is explained by him claiming this incident of battering his then wife was just a one off. However with partners both before and after victim of violence Janice, coming forward to bookend his criminal conviction with similar stories, it becomes far harder to dismiss this as a one off.
The children Nunn fathered in 2006, AFTER his 2004 conviction are now subject to a court order of supervised contact, due to their mother also reporting him for separate domestic abuse.
With an existing conviction for domestic violence, followed up by more complaints from different women and court orders preventing unsupervised contact with his children, you’d be forgiven for thinking that Nunn’s presence at such an event designed to tackle exactly this kind of behaviour and encourage women to speak up was as part of some court appointed community service order, intended to be as some for of restorative justice to victims, with Nunn speaking an ex offender.
Sadly for victims, Nunn was at the event proudly flying the flag on behalf of West Northants Council to act as some sort of spokesperson for how he believes victims of domestic violence need not live in fear and should speak out against people like him. The local Conservatives somehow figured he was the best person to front a campaign of this type on behalf of West Northants Council. Perhaps in hindsight putting Nunn in control of the £800,000 of central government money awarded to ensure “a ground-breaking programme to train venue staff to recognise and tackle predatory behaviour” & “challenge the attitudes and inappropriate behaviours of some men.” was not the PR win they thought it would be.
For anyone curious on the statement Nunn has made in that how he has been the subject of sustained harassment, I’ve dug out the article in question from 2004 so we can access what lengths this poor man has been through in this perceived campaign of harassment against him.
Not content with laying pinned down on a bed and harassing Nunn by hitting his fists with her face his then wife ran out of the house and harassed Nunn by luring him outside to chase her against his will. She cunningly enticed him out into the open where she viciously lay down in the street and harassed him by attaching herself to his arms forcing him to try to pull away as she made him drag her along the street, kicking her in self defence to stop this hideous campaign of harassment she was engaging in against him.
“Nunn ran after her into the street outside and was seen by neighbours kicking her as she lay on the floor and dragging her along before they came to her aid.”
https://web.archive.org/web/20161028131108/http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/political-career-goes-on-after-wife-attack-1-903254
This is written with obvious satire and I mean no disrespect to Janice for what she endured, but I have written it like this for how absurd Nunn’s claims read as. Not content with just battering his wife in their home, Nunn then following her into the street to put the boot in, quite literally, for the man to then say he is a different person now, but paradoxically also complain that he is somehow the victim in all of this is just offensive and shows he has no remorse for what he has done, trying to frame himself as being a victim!
With his behaviour fresh in your mind, this odd juxtaposition of putting the fox in charge of the henhouse leads us nicely into the main subject of this who’s who article. The man at the back right of the photo. The third and least convincing effort in what looks like a poundshop Professor X cosplay contest line up.
Detective Superintendent Joseph Banfield.
The 2022 “it only takes one” event was a simple PR exercise to promote the scheme, with various stakeholder organisations coming together in partnership to help blow the £800,000 of central government money they had been awarded. In keeping with the theme of being simple, Northants Police wheeled out the man best suited to such a role, Joseph Banfield as head of the “protection vulnerable persons” (PVP) unit as their representative.
The Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme (DVDS), also known as “Clare’s Law” enables the police to disclose information to a victim or potential victim of domestic abuse about their partner’s or ex-partner’s previous abusive or violent offending.
As the head of the PVP unit, Joe Banfield has responsibility to manage this information and work in the best interests of victims. In the old skool days of Gene Hunt, you can conjure up images of a thick manilla folder on an old mahogany desk, stuffed full of sheets of carbon copy paper about cases, or perhaps a wall within a CID with mugshots of repeat offenders and “prom noms.” However your mind displays this information stored for the purpose of Clare’s law, know that as a Superintendent running an entire PVP department, Banfield would be fully aware of Nunn’s background of convictions, court orders and multiple crime reports, needing to provide this information to any person making such an application under Clare’s law.
Banfield, ever keen to mimic his boss and mentor Nick AddALie and grift his way to some column inches for positive PR, was quick to jump on the bandwagon against Stephen Mold last month when he saw others calling him out, deciding the time was right to appear to feign disgust and look to be doing the right thing.
While no significant stories had yet made the headlines about Stephen Mold in 2022, with his headlines of “I’ll Dump The Bitch” to firefighters being merely an aspiration at this point, Banfield could be excused for standing alongside him.
What he cannot be excused about is how he thought it suitable to share a platform with a convicted domestic abuser at an event designed to tackle domestic violence. Never once thinking to raise this issue or question in the same way he did with Stephen Mold, either because he did not see it as an issue, or that he is just grossly inept in his approach to his Police work.
The issue with sharing a platform could have just been a simple oversight with Banfield simply getting confused over where he was and not realising the event was purely for victims of the event rather than a cross party event of all services users, irrespective of what side of the dock they stood in to take part in domestic violence court cases. While I fully subscribe to the theory that DSu Banfield is utterly useless aspiring to be like Frank Drebin, believing that The Naked Gun was a documentary series, when you start to add up all of Banfield’s his actions, you see very dark and sinister motivations at work and realise how dangerous it is to have someone like this within the Police at such a senior rank with so much control.
Regardless of the reasons why he did what he did, this action of sticking 2 fingers up at victims of domestic abuse also has a more sinister meaning. In the same way as during the Jimmy Savile scandal, many victims of his were scared to come forward thanks to his self-promoted cosy relationship with the Police and people in power. Were I a victim of Mr Nunn, and I saw him promoting an agenda of tackling domestic abuse with man that heads up the domestic violence unit at Northants Police apparently legitimising him, then my faith in Joe Banfield to do the right thing if I reported Nunn, would extend to about as far as I could push him with my piss!
This incident of Banfield showing contempt for victims, much like Nunn is far from just a one off, but in fact part of a pattern of behaviour that makes him wholly unsuitable for work within the Police service and a credible danger to residents of Northants.
If you’ve read any of my other blogs, you’ll know of my issue of reporting a rape in 2015 and giving a statement, and this then being covered up for 8 years, due in no small part to the soon to be facing criminal charges disgraced Chief Constable Nick Adderley, but also due to the PVP unit at Northants Police, actively working to block this for so many years, only finally logging this in June 2023. It’s a horrific crime to have to endure and at my lowest I came very close to taking an overdose, due in no small part to the treatment of Northants Police and their staff.
Having two forces involved allowed for a great excuse for both to blame the other, with Thames Valley Police finally admitting in January 2024 they should have logged the case and referred it to DSu Banfield’s team, firmly providing me the evidence that admits their wrongdoing.
You’ll notice the utter apathy in the letter, with a single line of apology for distress caused by not logging the crime for 8 years, said with all the enthusiasm and sincerity of a small child opening his Christmas present of a knitted jumper from his Granny. They couldn’t even be bothered to spell check it, showing how serious this issue ranked with them.
The crime that was FINALLY logged in June 2023 has also been stalled by Joe Banfield’s team, with him taking a personal hand in matters. I would hope that none of you ever need to become as knowledgeable as I am on charging, crimes and the CPS when it comes to rape. The Police will only refer a crime to the CPS if there is sufficient evidence, this is known as the threshold test.
Banfield’s argument as to why this got binned off is that there is insufficient evidence so his team never even bothered to refer it to the CPS, binning it off. The statement there is insufficient evidence is something which both he and I know is utterly untrue.
I do not wish to go into explicit detail (suffice to say the event was not one of my memories I enjoy documenting) but having photos of the suspect in my property on the night in question disproving their notion they were ever in my property, and how these have been provided to Northants Police, you start to question why Banfield states he needs something to be provided to him and his team that they already have.
He goes further by stating he wants access to my devices in order to search them for the evidence he needs as you can see from his letter here. Specifically he wants access to my PC and my mobile phone. This on the face of it all seems quite reasonable, however I just want to walk you through a few details that show how sinister this request is.
1 – Whatsapp messages after the event.
This event occurred in 2010 and at the time I did not have a smartphone, thus I did not have Whatsapp. This was an old Sony Ericson with basic text messages. My oldest phone was purchased in 2018 as you can see from the receipt.
This is 8 years after the event happened and thus this phone has no information from 2010 as the phone did not exist then.
Yet despite this phone have no evidential value regarding the rape, Banfield still wants to get his grubby little hands on it to have unrestricted access to it.
The only information is text messages NOT Whatsapp, I’ve included a selection of them below from the day in question:
2 – Information I placed on social media.
This is an interesting one, despite the whole nature of social media being quite public and the ability to view anything from anywhere with a decent WiFi or 4G connection, Banfield wants access to my PC to see what I posted online.
I am pretty sure everyone else much like me, does not have a PC from 13 years ago as these have a slightly longer life expectancy than smartphones but still only last a few years before they become obsolete and you replace them. Similar to the phone, my most recent PC was purchased in 2017 as the receipt shows, so this will hold no evidence of what was actually posted from it, years before it was ever made.
3 – Images of the person passed out at my house after the event.
Northants Police already have these photos but appear to have NOT included these in the file, instead claiming to not have them and wanting access to my PC to search for them instead.
4 – Vlogs made making reference to the suspect as “Pissy McRapist.”
This is a total fabrication on the part of Banfield’s team, I never once stated I made ANY vlogs about this, so by inventing evidence I am unable to provide (due to it not existing) this helps sufficiently muddy the waters and prevent the case from proceeding by sending it on an endless feedback loop to confuse matters with officers wasting time, and overall making it look weaker through evidence they cannot find, while also demanding access to more devices to search through.
Now to provide sufficient context on this situation that might offer some insight into Banfield’s motives. I was involved in a raft of court cases in both local County Court and The High Court amongst others, they were predominantly relating to fraud that I and other creditors had brought against several companies. I won’t go into huge detail but if I said it started in 2019, with all the claims made relating to companies involving people born and originally living in Northampton, and related to fraud we allege was carried out by these companies and their directors with evidence relating to several Police forces.
The main element of fraud was how we alleged that officers of the Court who carry out insolvency appointments and civil servants were deliberately obstructing investigations into matters and aiding those carrying out fraud through destroying documents and evidence. You might notice the names of politicians involved in this who ended up in positions of authority over the Police.
Reading all of this might seem somewhat like Deja vu and you might be starting to have a eureka moment, with the benefit of hindsight seeing how this all sounds quite familiar to the current mire we are in with Mold, Nunn, Adderley etc. You can see from these letters and court bundle appendixes from early 2020/2021 just how they long predate Adderley being suspended.
If you were not aware, documents that are either evidence in live court cases and/or that have been subject to professional legal advice are what is known as ‘privileged’ meaning that they have added legal protections. These protections specifically mean that even Police who can usually seize and search anything they like, are not legally allowed to get access to or see privileged information. In the same way if you ever watch a TV drama of someone being arrested, they get private meetings with their solicitor. This level of privacy extends to evidence and is the cornerstone of a fair process within the law. The main reason being to stop corrupt Police officers whose sole purpose is to investigate a crime, having too much power and attempting to pervert the course of justice by being judge and jury and determining the outcome.
I kept raising this not insignificant issue of legal privilege to Banfield, explaining how he was NOT having me authorise him getting unrestricted and unsupervised access to devices that had not been invented at the time of the rape so would hold no evidential value to him, but did hold evidence of fraud, a lot of which related to several of his Police officer colleagues.
Banfield huffs and puffs and makes out he has no interest in the legal privileged information, yet fails to actually articulate why he wants access to devices that he knows were not invented at the time and thus will not hold any evidence. When a direct question was put to him challenging him on this, he clammed up refusing to answer me as apparently I shared his last letter “out of context” on social media.
Hurrah for transparency in Police!
The only element of transparency here is the motivation behind Banfield wanting access to devices that hold ZERO evidence in relation to the rape, but would be career ending for several of his colleagues, so by getting access he can either tip off his mates or engineer to “lose” the evidence.
Putting his reasons for this aside, as much as I am somewhat humorous and cynical in how I deliver my blogs that can make you view my comments in a certain flippant way, please do not ever forget I am a victim of the horrendous crime of rape that was covered up for 8 years by Banfield and his officers. You’d think that after making such a monumental fuck up, he might firstly show a modicum of empathy, or at the very least be a bit proactive when being informed he has cocked things up again, and actually address this and try to rectify matters.
Alas no, the strategy of the head of the protecting vulnerable people unit in carrying out his duties of protecting me is by shutting me down refusing to reply to me and refusing to move the case to the CPS, using the manufactured evidence and my refusal to give him access to devices as the reason, knowing it to be totally Mickey Mouse.
The takeaway here is Banfield as a senior Police officer, will happily lie and misrepresent the evidence in a rape case, refuse to reply to a victim of crime nor seek to correct errors with a case that has been highlighted to him, but will happily see sharing a platform with a convicted domestic abuser at an event designed to tackle it as a positive PR move.
Banfield’s priorities and approach to his work appear somewhat backwards, with offenders ranking higher than victims in his estimation. The sad truth is you have a better chance of getting some positive interactions with Banfield and his team if you are the perpetrator of a crime rather than if you report being a victim of one.
This single issue of covering up wrongdoing by his team is not an isolated incident in the clown show that Banfield runs.
In 2022 I was the victim of a different and unrelated sex crime, unrelated in so far as that it has no connection to the offender of the 2015 case. It might shock you to learn the suspect in this case is actually one of Banfield’s team, who works on the sexual offences team himself. A serving Police officer!
This was initially reported in July 2023 and has been covered up by Banfield and his team ever since, needing no less than 3 separate reports to actually get it logged. This was further frustrated by my statement I gave being edited by the officer taking it, removing the suspect’s name in my statement because and I quote
“I do not feel comfortable putting this in the statement”
as though evidence collection is entirely contingent on the feelings of the officer taking the statement.
I challenged this as you can see from the transcript from the audio of the interview, where despite asking more than once, the officer refused to correctly take down my statement verbatim and would only present me with a statement to sign if I removed his colleague’s name. Naturally I refused to sign such a statement and anyone working within the criminal justice system will know that tampering with evidence in this way to protect a suspect and prevent a crime being investigated amounts to perverting the course of justice.
The matter then escalated to one of JB’s team, a DS wanting to visit me at my house. Consider if you are the victim of a sex crime, with the offender being a member of the Police sexual offences team, and you live alone, would you feel comfortable one of the same team coming into your house? Naturally I explained I was not comfortable with this and instructed them not to attend my property.
This was of course ignored and the DS came round on a Sunday morning hammering on my doors and windows trying to get inside and speak to me. He may claim it was to investigate the crime, but after it took 3 online reports being filed to get this logged, a statement was refused to be taken naming the suspect and he was told not to come to my house, it is hard to view this as anything but an intimidation tactic. The fact that we are now 3 months on and I am STILL not provided with a statement to sign and the DS continues to mess me around with no formal statement taken tends to prove me right.
I do not want to give away too much about matters as this is a live case and Banfield’s team are eager to goad me into revealing information that could help derail any successful prosecution of their colleague and mate, because just like Wayne Couzens, it matters not if they are a sexual predator, ‘blue code’ means covering up for your colleagues if a victim of their crime has the temerity to dare report it and want it to be investigated.
As it stands, the case does not appear to be correctly logged, they refuse to provide me with a statement to sign saying it is missing information (despite an identical statement removing the officer’s name is apparently perfect) and when asked what information the DS needs to progress matters, he either ignores me or tells me he needs for me to cooperate, evading the question of what information he wants me to provide to him.
If they had answered yes there is at least 1 person under investigation, this would confirm to me this was likely logged and expose how pisspoor Banfield’s management of the PVP unit is, having a sexual offences team staffed by Police officers suspected of the same crimes being investigated by their mates.
If this was answered as 0 officers under investigation, it would prove the case has not been logged and is being covered up by Banfield and his team.
As you can see Northants Police refused to answer at all, pretty much solidifying how this case is NOT logged and they do not wish to give information that would expose the cover up.
A cover up being overseen by the man at the top, DSu Joe Banfield.
So accepting how utterly crap Banfield is at his tax payer funded job of protecting the public through having staff who commit sexual offences on his team, covering up crimes and errors of judgement in sharing platforms with the very people who he is paid by the public purse to pursue and bring to justice, just what are the redeeming qualities of Banfield and how did he convince Nick Adderley to promote him all the way to Superintendent from being an Inspector within Thames Valley in 2015?
With many people promoted to their highest level of incompetence and showing very poor abilities in their job, sometimes they just lack experience but are great man managers, having the people skills needed to hold a department together.
Sadly in the case of Banfield, when it comes to managing conflicts and people, he is about as much use as the other half of the Countdown clock. If I told you that officers who report into Banfield who deal with sexual exploitation cases, post pictures online, commenting and laughing about how non consensual sex is funny, you would struggle to defend Banfield’s unique approach to managing a sexual offences team.
I am not making the online content here visible just yet, as this will just highlight the officers in question and give them a chance to cover their tracks and delete what they have posted. I can say that other media outlets have been provided copies and links which are still live and are working on this case in the background. When that story does goes live I will suitably unhide the missing paragraph and images from this blog so that you can see them and judge for yourself.
I would add that exposing this much corruption within the Police and elected officials makes me genuinely fearful for my safety, so should any ‘accidents’ happen to befall me, rest assured mechanisms are in place with several others to release EVERYTHING I have. This might sound like paranoia but when someone tried to run me off the road in July 2023 and the Police refused to log it, lying saying it was the responsibility of a different force and then not a crime but an insurance issue, you feel suitably worried how deep the corruption runs.
Keeping with his pisspoor management though, what I can share is how his DI Liz Basham holds a directorship of a limited company. We’ve touched on this before in previous blogs and I’ll be doing a far deeper dive on her in the coming weeks, but in fairness I need to say how being a director of a business is neither a restriction nor indication of any wrongdoing.
The only issue arises when this could become a conflict of interests, for example if DI Basham has to attend an incident at the business in question, or as a trustee responsible for the finances of the school, her Police duties require her to arrest and prosecute a customer of the business, potentially cutting off funding. This can occur in all walks of life and to manage this, Police have what is known as a register of interests. A location where they need to record such interests and ensure they are not assigned nor come into contact with any event that could compromise them.
Part of Banfield’s job is to manage his team with adequate supervision to ensure issues like this are on his radar and are dealt with promptly.
Imagine my surprise at how Companies House, a quite public and easily accessible resources, has Basham listed as a director of the same business Stephen Mold also used to be director of, and it is NOT listed on the register of interests.
With the litany of disasters listed above, you would think Banfield would be keen to avoid further scandal and address this matter with the degree of urgency it needs, more so when this escaped his notice and was brought to his attention by a member of the public, already armed with a library of errors displaying Banfield’s incompetence. Banfield reverts to type and just lies saying how Companies House has it wrong and Basham is NOT a director and he will not be discussing it further.
Much like the Angela Rayner story, if matters were as innocent as someone just not filling out a form on the register of interests, you’d think that killing it dead by correcting the error would be the simplest option to prove this is a non-story. The public care not about small admin mistakes and missteps, rather it is the cover up that fuels the attention and speculation and what we have here is Banfield lying and covering up not just his staff and their misfeasance, but his own woefully inept management of matters.
The fact that this is the same business interest once held by Stephen Mold, a man who has his own questions over cronyism and failure to manage the staff that he appoints make this all the more salacious.
So while the focus this week thanks to Private Eye is firmly on Councillor Jonathan Nunn, it is safe to say that questions will very soon start to be asked of Northants Police and why DSu Banfield seems to cover up more crimes than he actually refers to the CPS.
Joe Banfield is on a salary just shy of 6 figures and does precious little to prove that he is deserving of it, acting against the interests of victims of crime. If you ever watch him in interviews, he comes across as akin to a gormless oaf who has wandered onto the set of a porn movie by mistake and unsure of what to do, ending up standing in the corner taking everyone’s coats from them nodding and thanking them.
If this picture of him that I paint is in any way accurate, then perhaps it could offer an explanation as to why he employs, covers up for and mixes with so many of the sexual and violent offenders he is tasked to put away, as though to gain some form of insight into his job, as lets face it he doesn’t inspire any confidence that he has any clue what he is doing being asleep at the wheel as he is.
I am being slightly tongue in cheek here, but I genuinely find the man quite a pitiable oddball, whose only real talent he seems to posses that helped him get as far as he did within the Police was snorkelling in Adderley buttocks.
I personally see the salary being paid to Banfield as wholly wasteful. That salary could have been put to better use, like increasing the wages of existing nurses or perhaps helping fund recruiting more of them. Which when reviewing the above sorry saga is likely something that we will need more of with Backwards Banfield at the helm, cheering on abusers in photo opportunities and helping supress investigations from actual victims of domestic and sexual abuse committed by officers on his team.
roguetrader1980 
Clare’s Law… totally useless drivel. I tried to access my ex-girlfriend’s domestic violence history, which Banfield marginalised with the term ‘DV’ as a way of disarming its importance, and I was continually refused the history of her behaviour until, at the last minute, I was charged with ‘stalking/harassment’ for pursuing it after she had tried to kill me.
You hit the nail on the head again Si mate. Happy Friday!
[…] I cover in a lot more detail examples of crimes that DSu Banfield has previously covered up and is c… The point being that if any Police chose to go down the route of using their warrant card to help feather their own nest, some of the first people’s interests they will work to serve will be those of the local elected officials. […]