Police throw out Douglas Denny's data protection complaint

In conversation with GLW the other day I was quite amused when he read to me the details of an email sent by Dippy Denny.

You may recall that Denny complained to the Police after GLW published a rather embarrassing email exchange between Denny and Jonathan ‘nice but dim’ Arnott.

In Denny’s email he bitterly complained about Michael Zuckerman incompetence. He ended his rant by describing Zuckerman as a soggy sheep. See: LINK.

Denny has now spoke with PC Bishop of Chichester Police who has made it absolutely clear that, regardless of Denny’s fantasies, no crime has been committed and the Police will be taking no further action against GLW.

In high dudgeon the delusional Denny has sent a ranting email to Nuttall, Zuckerman and Arnott in which he compares himself to the Tory MP who had his office searched by the Police!

Ironically, Denny has now sent a pleading email to the very man who but a few short weeks ago was accused by Denny of legal incompetence. In this email he asks Zuckerman for legal advice!

Denny, your priceless!

The above post was originally posted on the British Democracy Forum earlier today.

In no time at all Dippy Denny responded with this rebuttal:

This is nonsense.I assure you the investigation is still ongoing by West Sussex police.There is prima facie evidence of criminal activity under the Misuse of Computers Act. I also assure you there will be great wailing and gnashing of teeth in the GLW/Junius axis.

DED.

Unfortunately for Denny the existence of an email SENT BY HIM to UKIP’s NEC proves that he is almost as big a liar as Mark Croucher.

Here it is:

FYI.

Colleagues,I have just had a conversation with a PC. Bishop and Sergeant Millburn of Chichester police regarding the one-to-one e-mail exchange between Jonathan Arnott and myself which was intercepted and published by GLW.

They refuse to investigate any further on the grounds that they have no evidence of a criminal act or unlawful interception of the e-mails. It appears they contacted GLW and asked him about the publishing of the e-mails. He does not deny possession of them, but states he "received them from a third party who had them sent to them, by myself or Jonathan Arnott". He refuses to disclose his source.

The police say it is incumbent upon myself (or Jonathan) to ask the internet provider for details of isp's who have accessed the accounts at the relevant time, to find out if there is any unlawful accessing to prove unlawful hacking. I would have thought that was their job - but it is clear they don't want the paperwork or hassle involved. They can arrest an MP and go through his computers, paperwork and mobile phones in Westminster Palace, at the behest of a government minister (and against the law doing so) - but won't look into a case of obvious hacking and interception by a member of the public.

They say there is no evidence of criminal acts occurring in this case. Is this correct Michael? Surely the interception is self-evident, the question is - is it a criminal act?

And are they obliged ort not to investigate further?I shall ask for the case details to be sent to me Michael so you can scrutinise the case and see if there is anything further needs to be done.

It is clear to me that the UKIP.org server is compromised. It also implies with the statement by GLW, that some person is deliberately accessing e-mails on the UKIP.og server and sending them to GLW. This needs investigating.

Douglas.

So once again Denny is proved to be a sad little liar.

For more on this see GLW’s blog: LINK

And just for the record I am not Piers Merchant!