Another in the series of articles about the incompetence of Dorset Police, Crown Prosecution Service, and Bournemouth Crown Court that led to the ruin of the local company ‘Phones Rescue.’ Also, read other articles in this series.

Series Of Articles On The Incompetence Of Dorset Police, Crown Prosecution Service, And Bournemouth Crown Court (

Why do Officer Rose Pratt and other officers of Dorset Police not adhere to the Victims’ Code?

Victims’ Code are government guidelines instructing, among other things, the police on how to deal with crime victims. This government website clearly defines who is a victim of crime:

Who is a ‘victim’ under this Code?

This Code acknowledges that the terms ‘complainant’ and ‘survivor’ are often used in the criminal justice system to describe a person who has made a criminal allegation to the police. However, for the purpose of this Code, the definition of a ‘victim’ is:

  • a person who has suffered harm, including physical, mental or emotional harm or economic loss which was directly caused by a criminal offence

As I proved in my previous article, I am a victim of both physical and psychological domestic violence. Therefore, I would like to know which legal act allows Dorset Police and OIC Rose Pratt to disregard the Victims’ Code?

According to the government website, all the organizations listed below must adhere to the Victims’ Code:

  • Police and Crime Commissioners
  • All police forces in England and Wales, the British Transport Police and the Ministry of Defence Police
  • Police Witness Care Units
  • The Crown Prosecution Service
  • Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service
  • Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service
  • The National Probation Service
  • The Parole Board for England and Wales
  • The Criminal Cases Review Commission
  • The Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority
  • The UK Supreme Court
  • Youth Offending Teams

Officer Rose Pratt and other officers of Dorset Police have violated many points of the Victims’ Code.

Right to information when reporting a crime

I reported being assaulted by my then-partner to Dorset Police three times.

  1. On June 25, 2024, to Officer Rose Pratt.
  2. On July 9, 2023, by phone.
  3. In July 2023, online. Officer Emma Chubb contacted me twice at that time, but since then completely ignored my emails and attempts to contact me.

I never received written confirmation of reporting the crime.

According to the law, I should have received written confirmation of my allegations. This confirmation should contain basic information about the crime committed, the crime reference number, and the contact details of the police officer handling my case. All information under this law must be provided within 5 working days from the moment of reporting the crime.

According to the law, I should also receive information about the rights of crime victims and how to obtain necessary support.

Referral to services providing support to victims of crime and offering services and support tailored to the needs of the victim

According to the law, when reporting a crime, I have the right to receive support.

Right to information about the investigation and prosecution

Since reporting to Officer Rose Pratt on June 25, 2023, I have practically been unable to obtain any information about the investigation. Many of my questions and emails directed to Dorset Police officers are ignored by them.

Failure to comply with guidelines on ethical and professional conduct in the police

In addition to not adhering to the Victims’ Code, OIC Rose Pratt and other officers of Dorset Police also do not comply with guidelines on ethical and professional conduct for police officers.

These guidelines describe how police officers should behave, yet Dorset Police officers, especially Officer Rose Pratt, do not adhere to these guidelines, tarnishing the reputation of other officers.

Officers should act truthfully, trustworthy, and honestly

As I demonstrated in my previous article, Dorset Police officers lie in police reports. When I asked them to provide evidence for the accusations they made against me, I was completely ignored.

Police officers cannot knowingly make false, misleading, or inaccurate oral or written statements

As mentioned above, lying in police reports and making false police reports not only violates guidelines for police work but also is against the law.

Police officers must ensure that their behaviour and language are not discriminatory.

As I demonstrated in my previous article in point 4, Officer Rose Pratt discriminates against a domestic violence victim based on gender.

Regarding the above allegations concerning police work, I filed an official complaint on March 23, 2024, and I am awaiting a response. As soon as I receive it, I will provide information about it in this or subsequent articles.

Update: Does N. REDSTONE claim that the mere fact of conducting an investigation authorizes the police to discriminate against citizens and disregard the Victims’ Code?

On March 26, 2024, I received a response to my complaint from “N REDSTONE, Joint Head of Complaints & Misconduct Unit.”

Dear Mr Majewski
I acknowledge receipt of your correspondence dated 23 March 2022, and can confirm that
these additional allegations have been added to the above complaint.
These matters are closely related to matters which are currently under investigation, so will be
dealt with once any criminal proceedings have finished.
Yours sincerely
Joint Head of Complaints & Misconduct Unit

In this letter, N. Redstone does not address any of the questions or allegations I raised against Dorset Police, explaining that the investigation is still ongoing. The issue is that my allegations concern precisely the methods used in conducting this investigation. Therefore, I request an answer to the question: