HOME-PAGE         SITE-MAP        EMAIL 



See also my page





Not a reference to Putin's actions outside Russia - his vicious attack on Ukraine - but harm inflicted on Russians, but not all of them or most of them.

The abuses of power by South Yorkshire Police couldn't possibly be compared with the abuses of power that take place in Putin's Russia -  or the abuses of power that took place in Stalinist Russia, the millions arrested for the most flimsy of reasons or no reason at all, the millions sent to the camp,s often to die there, the mass torture and mass executions, but the disregard for justice in Putin's Russia can't be compared with the hideous injustices of Stalinist Russia either.


Police action in a liberal democracy should observe much higher standards  than police action in Putin's Russia and generally does.


The 'Community Protection Notice'  issued to me on 15 February 2022 made allegations that amount to defamation of character. I give extracts from the  Notice in the column to the right, with images in the column on the far right which surely show just how grotesque the allegations are.


False accusations of hooliganism are used against dissidents in Putin's Russia.


From the article, 'Navalny Supporter Charged With Hooliganism In Russia's Perm'
(January 3, 2018.)


Russian authorities have charged a supporter of Russian opposition politician and anticorruption campaigner Aleksei Navalny with hooliganism, said an activist.

Sergei Ukhov, a coordinator for Navalny in the city of Perm, said activist Aleksandr Shabarchin was arrested and charged on January 3.

Ukhov said Shabarchin was ordered to remain in the city as police investigated his alleged involvement in erecting an effigy of Russian President Vladimir Putin in central Perm in November.

Shabarchin’s arrest came after police searched his apartment and confiscated his computer, said Ukhov.

If found guilty, Shabarchin faces up to seven years in prison.

Two more activists, whose names have not been disclosed, were also charged in the case.

Putin's effigy was placed in Perm's central Lenin Street on November 11.

The effigy was draped in a black-and-white prison robe and affixed with signs saying “War Criminal” and “Liar.”

In Putin's Russia, the prosecution tends to have distinct advantages over the defence. Defence against an accusation may well be regarded as an optional extra. Defence against an accusation may be regarded as very, very undesirable or forbidden.

Here in South Yorkshire, documents can be issued after a complaint, without the least effort made to find out if the person complained about has a defence against the complaint. This has been my experience. Further information on the page,




My persistent antisocial behaviour (alleged). Extracts from the 'Community Protection Notice - Written Warning' issued to me by South Yorkshire Police.

'Pursuant to Section 43 Part 4 Chapter 1 (Community Protection Notices) Anti-social Behaviour Crime and Policing Act 2014.


This WRITTEN WARNING issued on 15.02.2022.

' ... your conduct is having a detrimental effect of a persistent or continuing nature on the quality of life of those in the locality and the conduct is unreasonable.



'If from this time and date, the conduct is still having a detrimental impact on the quality of life of those in the locality, you will be served a Community Protection Notice. It is a criminal offence not to comply with the Notice ... If found guilty you could be fined up to £2,500.'


Surprising but true - not a single complaint from anyone in the locality, not a single instance of misbehaviour is mentioned in the document!


I've been doing many things in the locality, but fly-tipping, vandalism, urinating in gardens after drunken nights out, vandalism, threatening behaviour  aren't amongst them. No anti-social acts are mentioned in the document  at all, and no complaints from people in the locality.


 What have I been getting up to in the locality?  The images on the right are a record of some of them, most of them images from my two allotments, which are near to this house. The photographs include photographs of rubbish - a very large heap of rubbish in allotments near to mine - but the rubbish wasn't dumped by me.  Over a period of months, I made efforts to have it removed. it wasn't visible from the road but I pointed out to various people that it was a hazard to wildlife and could present a hazard to people. At last, it's gone.


I share Jane Grigson's hope (in Jane Grigson's Vegetable Book): 'In my most optimistic moments, I see every town ringed again with small gardens, nurseries, allotments, greenhouses, orchards, as it was in the past, an assertion of delight and human scale.'


 I've constructed a large pond used by frogs in spring for mating, contributing to the welfare of these humble animals, visited by dragonflies in summer - all this next to a busy road, I've planted a wealth of wildflowers - meadowsweet, hemp agrimony, musk mallow, bluebells in the shade of the hazelnut trees, I've planted an orchard, and a grove of hazel nut trees. I've planted native trees of many different kinds - rowan, beech, yew, holly and more, I've devised new techniques in composting and other areas of gardening, I've constructed a large greenhouse and other structures, with an attempt at aesthetic values - even beauty - as well as usefulness.


I could have assured Sergeant Simon Kirkham, if he'd bothered to contact me before issuing The Warning that I've never been a noisy person. I listen to symphonies, concertos, chamber music, sonatas, operas, but nothing that would disturb the neighbourhood. I was originally a cellist but I transferred to the violin and viola and  studied with the Hungarian violinist Rudolf Botta. When the world premiere of a violin concerto was performed at a Proms concert at the Royal Albert Hall - the concerto included words as well as music - I contributed words, on aspects of violin technique.


Below, my viola (left) and violin (right).



I don't think anyone in the neighbourhood who knows me would recognize the picture conveyed in that toxic document, which amounts to defamation of character.


I could claim that in this case, South Yorkshire Police has committed approximations of offences which members of the public are charged with -  not just defamation of character but harassment and wasting police time. In the past six months, South Yorkshire Police have contacted me three times after Lu Skerratt-Love has seen fit to make a complaint against me for imaginary actions of mine - supposedly sending emails to her and to other people in the Church Army when no emails had been sent, or, in one case, having published material on my own Website in reaction to her groundless complaints.


South Yorkshire Police has wasted the time of its own police officers by sending them out on matters which I won't say are far too minor to justify the time spent - they aren't matters to do with minor offences but matters to do with non-existent offences - and I have the evidence, the documentation.


This was an instance of lazy policing, if ever there was one, negligent policing, incompetent policing, atrociously bad policing, policing that won't enhance the reputation of South Yorkshire Police in the least.


 I've simply made a start. For the time being, coverage is necessarily restricted. There are extracts from emails here, which have their uses. I only give extracts from my own emails and from emails sent to me when the sender has given me permission to use them. Other emails are private, like the phone conversations I've had with members of South Yorkshire Police. I want anyone who contacts me by phone or email to have a guarantee of confidentiality, with a few understandable exceptions, such as people threatening me with injury or death, but I don't expect there will be any of those people. Any Christians who may contact me to warn me that I'm heading for Hellfire are covered by this guarantee of confidentiality, though.


The material here isn't self-sufficient. My page



gives most of the necessary background information to the case, but some of it will emerge here.


Email from Sergeant Kirkham of South Yorkshire Police (SYP), 15 February 2022, 18.19

I am the Team Sergeant for the area. If you require any further clarity about the notice you have been served please feel free to contact me. If you continue with any behaviour likely to cause harassment, alarm and distress I will consider further action. Please take the notice seriously and understand the negative impact that some of your actions may have had upon others. It’s completely in your power for this matter to stop now and no further action be necessary.

Kind Regards



NW NPT (Walkley & Hillsborough)


Email from me to Sergeant Kirkham of SYP, 15 February, 2022, 22.14

You seem not to have read the email I sent to you today at 16.04, or have not read it with nearly enough care. I asked for specific information. One of the police officers who called today wrote your name on the 'Community Police Protection Notice' but there's no indication on the document that you were the person who authorized the issuing of the notice. I made it clear that I needed certainty on this point before making a complaint (to the Professional Standards Department of South Yorkshire Police.) 

Other issues: the Community Protection Notice was issued with only the testimony of Lu Skerratt-Love, You - or the person who issued the notice if it was not you - made no attempt to contact me to obtain my testimony. If I had been contacted, I could easily show, with evidence and documentation, that Lu Skerratt-Love has received no emails from me. Other evidence is provided on the Web page I cite in my earlier email to you. The notice takes for granted, without giving any evidence, that my conduct is allegedly 'having a detrimental effect, of a persistent and continuing nature on the quality of life of those in the locality.' This is a preposterous, in fact malicious accusation - I'm having no such effect. Lu Skerratt-Love, so far as I know, does not live in the  neighbourhood. It is Lu Skerratt-Love who is harassing me. This is the third time she has contacted the police about me in connection with emails or my Website, when throughout, she must have known that due to the action of Tim Ling of the Church Army, all emails from me to her and other members of the Church Army were blocked. I don't know how much more conclusive could the evidence be that the accusations of Lu Skerratt-Love are without any basis.

One further matter. I have a policy, stated on the Home Page of the site, of not quoting emails in whole or in part without the permission of the sender. I think it would be very useful to quote your email to me. Unless I hear from you to the contrary, making it clear that you do not give permission, I'll use the content of your email f for subsidiary purposes in my submission to the Professional Standards Department. [He didn't contact me to refuse permission to quote his emails, so here they are, some of them at least.]

I make it completely clear to you that it's out of the question for me to delete material from my Website as a result of police pressure. The police have no power to censor material of the kind found on my Website. Lu Skerratt-Love has no power to force me to delete material.  We live, of course, in a liberal democracy, not a totalitarian state, or a state with very limited freedoms. 

Please email me the information I require at your earliest convenience and then I can begin the work of writing my complaint to the Professional Standards Department.

Best Wishes,

Paul Hurt


Next, a short extract from a matter-of-fact email I sent to a senior officer (unnamed) with South Yorkshire Police. There was an exchange of emails but I haven' asked for his permission to quote any of the emails he sent to me, so I don't. I  informed him that I intended to make a complaint, but to the Independent Office for Police Conduct, not to the 'Professional Standards Department.'



28 February, 2022


I don't state anywhere in any of my emails that I've already contacted the Independent Office for Police Conduct. I fully intend to make a complaint to the Independent Office for Police Conduct but I haven't submitted a complaint yet ... I've been very busy carrying out some necessary research, obtaining further evidence and doing everything I can to ensure that the submission to the Independent Office will convey the complaint, quite a wide-ranging one, as effectively as possible.


Extract from email to Sergeant Simon Kirkham, 18 February, 2022:


You may deny that you acted in a biased fashion, that your Christian beliefs were involved in any way, but I think it's unlikely that a non-Christian or anti-Christian police officer could write 'In some of these correspondences you make mention of her [Lu Skerratt-Love's] faith.' What evidence can South Yorkshire Police produce that I did mention her personal faith and if so, in what context? What evidence can be produced? It isn't a hate crime to mention Christian faith - or perhaps you think it is ... Freedom of expression - with obvious restrictions, such as in cases of terrorism and promotion of terrorism - should be regarded as a fundamental value of society.


See also the section

Christianity and policing
The Christian Police Association: Sergeant Simon Kirkham of South Yorkshire Police and the Sheffield Police and Crime Commissioner, Dr Alan Billings


in the 4th column of my page





Extract from email to a recipient in South Yorkshire Police I don't identify, 16 February, 2022:


To use against me the fact that I mention her 'personal faith' is very disturbing. Public bodies, including the police, MP's, Councillors and many others recognize that they have to face scrutiny, reasonable criticism when justified. Without scrutiny, it's more likely that there will be stagnation, irregularities, a whole range of problems. Christians evangelize actively. For example, every household in Sheffield (or almost every household) received  pro-Christian, pro-mission literature fairly recently, published and distributed by the Christian organization 'Arise!' South Yorkshire Police has absolutely no right to censor views which make adverse comment on aspects of Christianity. My approach is to provide very extensive documentation and evidence. I take the view that Sergeant Kirkham is fully entitled to his Christian views and to promote his Christian views but in this case, there's the need for someone at a higher level of seniority to consider some possible conflicts of interest in this case, when a Christian police officer considered courses of action when a Christian made complaints against a non-Christian, myself.


Extract from an email to an unidentified recipient in South Yorkshire Police, 25 February, 2022:


'm saddened by the fact that these avoidable mistakes have been made, as I see it, since I have an enormously high regard for South Yorkshire Police, and the other police forces, admiration for the courage of you people, admiration for the work you do. In various places on my Website, I make completely clear the reasons for the high regard, the admiration. I point out that in very large and complex organizations such as the Police, it's absolutely impossible to ensure that all members at all times work at a high level of efficiency and probity.


From time to time, some people will fall short. The well-publicized cases involving major transgressions are no reason at all to subject the police force to unfair criticism, which ignores the evidence that they serve the public very well indeed. I detest the grossly unfair fault finding of some sections of the media. I don't in the least regard my criticisms as general ones. They are very specific criticisms.


Although I criticize Sergeant Kirkham, the criticisms aren't general ones but confined to a single aspect of his work. But I'm convinced that this case, or the multiple cases here, are cause for concern and raise issues which fully justify submission of a complaint to the Independent Office for Police Conduct, which in general considers issues of a certain seriousness.


A further reason for submission to the Independent Office is that unlike other bodies which consider complaints against the police,  the Independent  Office will consider matters which relate to dates older than a year, if a submission gives good reasons why the matter was not raised earlier.  As I've pointed out, one of the matters relates to 2015.



South Yorkshire Police relentlessly mocked


after urging people to report one another for 'offensive or insulting words'


The words, 'South Yorkshire Police relentlessly mocked' aren't my words but the words that appear in the source I've used. The criticism here seems to me justified, but it's likely that only a small minority of South Yorkshire Police would endorse the view of policing criticized here.


An article quotes this tweet from South Yorkshire Police:


'In addition to reporting hate crime, please report non-crime hate incidents, which can include things like offensive or insulting comments, online, in person or in writing. Hate will not be tolerated in South Yorkshire. Report it and put a stop to it.'


'It was relentlessly mocked, with more than 5,000 responses to the Sunday night post. Many people likened the force to George Orwell's "Thought Police” from his novel Nineteen Eighty-Four.'


'Scottish political analysis account Wings Over Scotland tweeted: “So just to be clear: you want me to phone the police when there hasn't been a crime but someone's feelings have been hurt?” '


Alan Billings, the South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner, has defended the force's view of its role - as having the right and the duty to investigate a whole range of incidents which aren't crimes. This, to me, is Alan Billings acting the part of South Yorkshire Thought Police and Hate Crime Commissioner.


Nick Ferrari interviewed Alan Billings on lbc radio. This gives a link to the interview, with other material.






'After South Yorkshire Police asked the public to report incidents in which they were offended, Nick Ferrari had this fiery clash with their Police and Crime Commissioner.



'In a time when the police are stretched due to budget cuts, Nick was furious that they are wasting resources on incidents that aren't even crimes.


'Speaking to Dr Alan Billings, South Yorkshire's Police and Crime Commissioner, Nick told him:

"If a motorist cuts another motorist up in Rotherham and one says the other a few choice words, we now have to get the police involved, do we?


' "You've got enough police men and women, do you, to come and talk to me about it?"


'And as Nick pressed Dr Billings on the plan, it fell apart more and more.


'The conversation even ended with Nick having to warn the Police and Crime Commissioner not to make comments about an incident as it was still a live court case.'







The 'Community Protection Notice - Written Warning' which was issued for alleged anti-social behaviour in the locality has nothing at all on anti-social behaviour in the locality. What it does have is this section, 'Details of the conduct.' That should be 'Details of the alleged conduct.'


The Police have become aware of you contacting Lu Skerratt-Love via email and hand delivered letters. You have also been contacting her work colleagues via email and letter regarding her. In some of these correspondences you make mention of her personal faith. When you write these emails and letters it causes great upset to Lu and her colleagues at work. This is not fair and certainly not right to do so. It is important that you realise how much you are upsetting / distressing Lu with this conduct. You would not wish for such conduct for your loved ones. We are willing to help in any way.'


Fact: Lu Skerratt-Love has never received a single email from me. Lu Skerratt-Love is an employee of the Church Army and her Head of Department, Tim Ling blocked emails to Lu Skerratt-Love and other members of the Church Army.


A concise summary of events and dates


8 September, 2021. Email sent to Lu Skerratt-Love pointing out difficulties (mainly security, safety) to do with the proposed garden church at some allotments near to my allotments. Email not received by Lu Skerratt-Love. Tim Ling of the Church Army had decided to block emails from me to Lu Skerratt-Love. By 12 September he had blocked emails from to himself and all members of the Research Unit. Since that time, no members of the Church Army have received emails from me.


In the section at the end of this column, Some Documents, a screenshot of the email sent to Lu Skerratt-Love and the response.The screenshot is too wide to be included here. The response included this: 'Delivery has failed ... Your message wasn't delivered. Despite repeated attempts to deliver your message, the recipient's email system refused to accept a connection from your email system.'


All Lu Skerratt-Love's complaints to South Yorkshire Police about alleged emails from me were made when she must have known that she had never received emails from me, are based upon falsification.


8 October, 2021. Letter from me to Lu Skerratt-Love and Tim Ling, quoted in its entirety after this summary. After this one letter, no further letters sent.


22 November, 2021. Card received from South Yorkshire Police asking me to contact them. When I contacted them, told that Lu Skerratt-Love had complained about receiving unwanted emails from me. Told to stop this. I pointed out that Lu Skerratt-Love hadn't received any emails from me. They were blocked. Considered making a complaint but decided not to - I didn't want to cause any difficulties for the Police Constable who communicated the information.


25 November, 2021. Email sent to Dr Andy Wier ('Research Team Leader' of the Church Army) in connection with his book, 'Creative Tension in Urban Mission: Missional Practice and Theory.' The email I sent never received him - 'Message blocked.'


15 February, 1922. Yet another complaint from Lu Skerratt-Love, about alleged emails and letters, to other members of the Church Army as well as herself. Again, a complete fabrication. After the email and letter mentioned above, no further emails and letters have been received by these people. I decided that a complaint to the Professional Standards Department of South Yorkshire Police is fully justifiable. I informed Simon Kirkham and the members of police who visited on 15 February.


 I decided to make a complaint to the Independent Office for Police Conduct instead.


Email sent to Lu Skerratt-Love on 8 September but not received by her - evidence that the email never reached her, as the result of blocking of all emails to Lu Skerratt-Love and other members of the Church Army   No other emails have reached her. Her claim that she's received emails from me is false.



Email sent to Dr Andy Wier of the Church Army on 26 November, 2021 




Copy of letter sent to Lu Skerratt-Love and Tim Ling of the Church Army:


The 'Details of conduct' mentions 'letters.' There was just one letter, and this is it. I delivered it to the Church Army building in Sheffield, one copy for Dr Tim Ling, one copy for Lu Skerratt-Love and one copy for Dr Andy Wier.


8 October, 2021

Dear Dr Ling,

There are matters which I need to bring to your attention, and the attention of Lu Skerratt-Love. I can't use the most convenient method, for me, email, since you've blocked my emails. This is simply a short preliminary note. I don't discuss in any detail these matters

Instead of using paper and envelope, buying a stamp and using the post, I've chosen instead to call at the Church Army building and deliver this
note in person and I intend to use this method whenever I can justify a further communication to you or to Lu Skerratt-Love. [I've never made any further communication with Tim Ling, Lu Skerratt-Love or anyone else at Church Army Sheffield. This was the only letter they've received.] I've decided further
to make use of 'open' communication, without enclosure in an envelope. The matters I need to bring to your attention aren't confidential.

Banning, blocking and attempts at blatant censorship should be avoided by people in any organization which values its reputation. Your decision to block emails from me was completely unjustifiable. All I had done was to send emails to a few people and organizations to inform them of my concerns about the proposal to set up a garden church at the Morley Street Allotment site. The reasons I gave and the evidence I gave were to do with matters of allotment law, security and safety. I've documented the issues in detail and published them on my Website. The documentation will be extended to take note of future developments. The people and organizations who received my emails - few in number - could be expected to find the issue of a garden church relevant, for example, St Marks Church.


Lu Skerratt-Love had publicized the issue on the St Marks Church Website.The tone of my emails was courteous. I used Lu Skerratt-Love's Church army email address because I had no alternative. This was the only email address I could find.I felt at the time that it was unwise of her not to make available an alternative email address.

Lu Skerratt-Love's decision to complain to the police, her attempt to have me remove material from my own Website, was disastrously misguided, like your decision to block my emails. Lu Skerratt-Love's twitter page is full of complaints against the police but she chose to turn to the police (as an alternative to prayer, perhaps, or to supplement prayer). This, to me, was wasting police time. I don't claim that it
was wasting police time in the strict legal sense but if people demand action from the police for the flimsiest of reasons, or no good reason at all, or for thoroughly bad reasons, then the police have less time available for all the other issues, far more important issues, which they have to deal
with, such as doing something to curb the excesses of Extinction Rebellion, rape, violent crime, and many more. [I don't equate the excesses of Extinction Rebellion with rape or violent crime, of course. This is a short list with examples which are very different in their degree of seriousness.]

I don't make demands myself, although I think that an apology is due from Lu Skerratt-Love and yourself. If you find the arguments and evidence I've put forward on my Website unpersuasive, then by all means let me have - better still, publicize - your counter arguments and evidence.

As I say, this is only a preliminary stage. I've already spent a great deal of time and effort on these matters and I'm willing to do far more. Any necessary communication with you or Lu Skerratt-Love will be by personal delivery of a note. [I didn't deliver any more notes/letters.]

I hope you will be able to bring this note to the attention of Lu Skerratt-Love. [In the event, I provided a copy for Lu Skerratt-Love.] Obviously, you're free to bring it to the attention of other people as well.

Best Wishes,

Paul Hurt


From my page


including quotes from an email to the Allotment Officer:

 I gave reasons why I took the view that starting a garden church in Sheffield was undesirable and could have unintended consequences. In the extract below, I point out that when an 'allotment church' was started in Blackburn, Jill Duff, the Bishop of Lancaster attended:


The extract from my email to the Allotment Officer.


The Garden Church Facebook page mentions at one point the use of the land to promote what is referred to as 'mission.' The word has a special meaning for Christians. This is a commonly cited definition:

'A Christian mission is an organized effort to spread Christianity to new converts.'

The Facebook Page of the Garden Church has a photograph of an existing 'allotment church,' showing Jill Duff, the Bishop of Lancaster, with adults and children. Three of the children and one adult were baptized by the bishop at an event at the 'allotment church.' It's completely clear that one of the main aims of this allotment church is to convert non-Christians.

This is how Sharon Collins, who is associated with the 'allotment church,' describes the 'mission' of the allotment church. She moved to an estate and then

' We began prayer walking in earnest around the estate, laying hands on and claiming places for Jesus and just crying out, when we got given the use of a disused allotment in the community, which means we could once again meet to worship and we became a very public and visible church. 

"It's a very strategic position that God has thrown the doors out for us. So it is wonderful to be there. There's some fencing that surrounds the allotment and we use that as well for mission. [Bold print supplied by me.] So we often put posters up with Bible verses on them or with words of encouragement on them.'

Jill Duff, the Bishop of Lancaster who attended and baptized at the 'allotment church' has views which should be more widely known. She's an outspoken opponent of same-sex marriage and supports a view of sexual relations which has now become very uncommon in this country, but not in the Church of England. She has conservative evangelical views according to which the vast mass of people are destined for hell - only those who accept Christ as their personal Lord and Saviour are 'saved.

As I've pointed out, Sheffield City Council is under no obligation to make land available for 'missionary' work. Its obligation is very different - to supply allotment land to those wanting to cultivate it for (primarily) fruit and vegetables. People who take on allotments will have a wide range of views on religion and related matters. It's completely unfair to allow a group with one particular set of views to make allotments into a temporary church.


  South Yorkshire Police: 'Part Putin Policing?'