C/Supt Simon Willsher

Willsher

Page last updated Wednesday 8th June 2014 at 13.10hrs

West Yorkshire Police has, arguably, the weakest senior management team of any in the country. Its Command Team is notably lightweight with a several having huge question marks against them and already featuring elsewhere on this website. But the management layer that highlights its serious failings as a police force is at Chief Superintendent level. Long serving Simon Willsher becomes the eight at this rank to come under the uPSD spotlight.

Willsher has only recently come to our attention as the investigator appointed to lead complaints made by Huddersfield businessman, Stephen Bradbury, against a number of officers which have flowed from a series of assaults and unlawful arrests – and a Subject Access request that now enters its eighteenth month without an appropriate determination.

This is a quote from an article in the Bradford Telegraph & Argus when Willsher’s Division that he commanded were criticised for criminalising minors: “Our primary duty is to protect victims and communities from harm and continue to inspire confidence and trust in the service we provide.” Which sounds like another big gulp of management sound-bite, of which WYP are so fond. It certainly bears no relation to the treatment of Mr Bradbury by Willsher.

This is the text of a letter sent to C/Supt Willsher after an email received from him with his own name spelt wrongly. Twice.

Dear Mr Willsher

Why would it be apparent to me that an email sent from a police email address, with your name in capital letters at the top and a sign off in your name at the bottom, would be sent without your approval?

There are few things more unedifying that a senior public official blaming subordinates for their own shortcomings and it would be also interesting to know whether the latest Simon Willsher fiasco resulted in you losing your temper, again, and throwing things at the secretarial staff.

Your comments about the complaint against DCC Collins appears to be confused, garbled nonsense designed to cover the fact that you have no idea what you are doing and have no knowledge of the processes you are required to follow. It is also my entrenched belief that you will, ultimately, be proved to have told a pack of lies over the Collins complaint. It required a simple apology and an explanation (however implausible). Now, as a result of your own incompetence and dishonesty, the matter will escalate into the public domain and cause further damage to the public’s confidence in the police.

The February 2013 letter from DCI Osman Khan to which you refer has no relevance at the current time for three reasons. (1) Events that led to that letter were superseded by later interaction with C/Supt Battle and Mike Percival (2) prior to December 30th 2013 I had never sent a single email to WYP (3) Khan is a corrupt police officer whose word has no standing, whatsoever. I have seen the file in my friend Tony Ramsden’s case, particularly the Khan “investigation” that led to the recent front page story in the Yorkshire Post, and he should no longer be allowed to carry a warrant card. How can you possibly put forward something with his name on and attach value to it?

I replied to your “update” dated 17th April 2014 and raised a large number of valid points: Particularly, where you are in breach of the law. You have not had the courtesy to acknowledge that email or provide evidence that you have remedied the defects in your own “investigation”, which has all the makings of another front page story.

I request again that you be removed from any matters involving my issues with your Force.

 

Stephen Bradbury

Apart from not being able to spell his own name correctly, Willsher has blundered his way through two “investigations” demonstrating, at every stage, his lack of knowledge of both the Police Reform Act 2002 and IPCC Statutory Guidance. He has also shown clearly he does not even have the grasp of basic detection techniques.

His investigation reports have still not been shared with the complainant months after the complaints were recorded. uPSD will no doubt be able to drive a coach and horses through both of them when they, eventually, are released by PSD.