Ingeus (UK) Ltd Employment Adviser Kate Dyer Lies to Northamptonshire Police

Kate “Hate Liar” Dyer is a deceitful, sadistic, malevolent, conniving bitch who takes extreme pleasure from persecuting and harming innocent people. Even though Dyer’s insane behaviour has gone on now for over four years, there is no sign of it stopping. In fact, it is getting even worse. In 2013, Dyer told lies and fairy stories about me behind my back, in order to incite the sick thugs in the Ingeus (UK) Ltd management to maltreat me and deny me access to services.

On 7th August 2013, Dyer committed these lies to paper, and published a set of libels to the thug managers with two objectives. The first objective was to cause alarm and distress to the victim. The second was to pervert the third party investigation into Dyer’s employer which had been necessitated by the management’s refusal to provide me with the Work Programme. These libels have been published on this website, here.

On 19th February 2016, Dyer took this malice and treachery a massive step further. Dyer made a completely false statement to a corrupt police officer of Northamptonshire Police, with the intent of inflicting a totally unjustified criminal penalty on the same innocent victim. This false witness statement has now been aired at a public court hearing, and so can be published below. I will then go on to analyse each of the lies in turn, and explain exactly why they are lies.

ingeus-uk-ltd-kate-dyer-lies-to-police

If anything can be said in Miss Dyer’s defence, it is that she is being coerced into continuing to tell lies and cause harm to an innocent victim, by the vicious and sadistic thugs in the Ingeus (UK) Ltd chief executive’s office. These are Chief Executive Officer Jack “Bent Lawyer” Sawyer and his bent lawyer Matthew “Far-Fetched Fairytale” Flood. Flood also made a blatantly and obviously false statement to Northamptonshire Police, which has been published here. Dyer’s own false statement is written in Flood’s words, not Dyer’s, and Flood has deliberately manipulated Dyer’s deceit to attempt to create a false violent threat where none exists.

However, even allowing for the fact that Dyer should have the guts to stand up for what is right and not be bullied into committing criminal acts, there is another factor which means that Dyer is unquestionably involved in the gross moral turpitude and criminality which underpin these acts. That is the fact that the corrupt police officer who took these false statements and acted on them, namely PC 1248 Anstead, had an existing relationship with Dyer at the time. The exact nature of this relationship remains unknown, but it is obvious that Dyer introduced the bent copper to Sawyer and Flood, and so facilitated the bribery and the deceit.

The first three paragraphs of the false statement are routine bullshit, although it must be pointed out that the Ignoramus managers make no effort whatsoever to accommodate any kind of special circumstance, whether it be physical, homelessness or mental illness. They just subject everyone to the same routine bullying, because it is cheaper. It is only when someone submits a complaint, as I was forced to do, that the managers take that as a sign of rebellion and make sure that they subject that complainant to as much humiliation and abuse as possible.

The lies which Dyer told to the police don’t even come close to matching the lies which Dyer told to management three years earlier. It is beyond belief that a cold, calculating, sadistic liar such as Dyer couldn’t even be bothered to read a statement full of lies authored three years earlier, to make sure that the two sets of lies matched, but that is the situation we are faced with here.

On 7th August 2013, Dyer told a half-truth that I “instigated conversations” in March. In reality, I simply asked for an adviser appointment to be rescheduled, and it was. Now, Dyer tells a completely different fairy story to the police.

She says she “first became aware of me” when asked to raise travel expenses. This is wholly untrue. The only time Dyer ever raised travel expenses for me was on 10th May 2013, just over two months after we first met when I asked for my appointment to be rescheduled. If she “was not aware” of me until May, how did she provoke Rimmer into verbally abusing me on 11th March 2013?

The lie that I would sit next to Dyer while she would input data into the computer so I could “see what she was inputting” is an extraordinary one. Firstly, travel expenses are raised by an adviser signing a bus ticket which the attendee then takes to the receptionist. If there is any electronic record taken, it must happen after the attendee has obtained the signature and already left for the reception desk. Secondly, anyone who worked with me during that time would confirm that I have extreme difficulty seeing the screen if I am right next to it. I would have no chance whatsoever of seeing what was on someone else’s computer screen if I was sitting next to them.

Regarding travel expenses, the truth is this – on 3rd May 2013, I approached Dyer and Mrs Sturgess (who was sitting on the next desk) to see if either of them would sign my bus ticket so I could get the refund. Mrs Sturgess took the ticket and signed it. A week later, on 10th May 2013, I asked the same two advisers, and this time Dyer took the ticket and signed it. This was during the time when Dyer was behaving normally towards me in May 2013.

(Anyone reading the above paragraph may wonder whether I am alleging that Mrs Sturgess caused me harm at any stage, given that I have stated that I am only naming people on this site who have deliberately set out to cause me harm. No, I am not. The only reason Mrs Sturgess has been named is that she is mentioned in Dyer’s document full of lies, therefore, she has been named already. The only way I could have avoided this was to have redacted Dyer’s libels, and that would have been severely contrary to my own interests.

I only ever met Mrs Sturgess on that one occasion, on 3rd May 2013, and, while she was aggressive and inquisitive in the way Ignoramus advisers are ordered to be, there was no targeted malice towards myself. Of course, any adviser who was aware of Dyer’s lies at the time I was being humiliated by Marshall and Gilbert has caused me harm to some extent, but the advisers are salaried employees who have to cover their own backs and save their own jobs before sticking up for a victim of bullying and abuse. I don’t attach any blame to them.)

Just in case Flood should invent another fairy story that I was “obsessed” with Dyer because I still have a bus ticket with her signature on it, I will explain the simple truth. When you are on a Work Programme, you get given a lot of irrelevant, nuisance paperwork. On that date, 10th May 2013, I had a carrier bag full of useless paperwork, and just threw the signed bus ticket into the bag when I left the office. When I got home, I filed the papers onto the heap and forgot about them. It wasn’t until two years later that I discovered I still had the ticket. By then, litigation was imminent so I retained it in case it would one day come in useful as evidence. Hopefully, it will do just that.

The next part of the false statement is just generalised lies which no trained police officer would take seriously. If someone has committed a criminal offence, it must happen on a date, at a time, and at a place. If we assume by default that the place is the Ingeus (UK) Ltd Northampton office, where are the dates and times? Any trained police officer would know this was someone making a false statement to harm an innocent victim. The police officer who took the bribe, PC Anstead, obviously did know this, as internal paperwork shows PC Anstead referring to the civil court case between myself and Dyer’s employer. The motive for the deceit is obvious.

The “positioning” and “staring” lies are repeated, albeit in generalised terms which mean absolutely nothing. There is a new lie added that I “followed her around.” There is no explication of where I followed her to or for what purpose, when it happened, or even how many times it happened. If it has any truth, it is probably a reference to the time when Dyer rescheduled my adviser appointment, and I probably walked behind her towards the receptionist’s desk. That is the type of thing Flood would pick up on and twist into something nasty, as he has done on his false witness statement to the High Court, which will be analysed in a forthcoming post.

Dyer has lied by stating that “official complaints” were made “about myself.” In truth, I explicitly stated that the complaint raised after 5th July 2013 was not a complaint against Dyer. It was a dual-faceted complaint regarding the fact that I was receiving no support whatsoever while purportedly being on a Work Programme, and the fact that I was being subjected to threatening and abusive behaviour from staff in the office.

The emails referenced in this false statement were cries for help submitted to multiple staff members. The were obviously not targeted at Dyer, and Flood is once again looking for any excuse to cause trouble. He has ordered Dyer to misrepresent the emails, and also, for shock effect, to include a quote “they had just raped my grandmother” without providing any context for the quote. Dyer’s entire false statement is written in “Flood-speak.”

It is true that in February 2016 I published Dyer’s libels onto this website. I believe I was fully justified in exposing the lies which have destroyed my Work Programme and since destroyed my life. If you invent fairy stories about people, you must expect that those people are going to expose you in public as a liar.

Dyer’s drug addiction is referenced briefly in passing. If Dyer believes that she is not addicted to a drug, she is welcome to bring a claim for defamation in the High Court. Given that her employer is already subsidising her legal representation and her existing deceit to the High Court, I’m sure she would have a willing backer if that backer thought the action had any prospect of success.

My statement that Dyer needs psychiatric help and should not be working with members of the public is a statement of honest opinion. Lying to the police to further harm a victim and the submission of a false witness statement to the High Court (which will be published in a future post) have done nothing to alter that opinion.

The most outrageous of Dyer’s false statements are those which follow. “I am genuinely concerned for my safety, as I do not know (sic) what he is capable. I live locally and worry he knows where I live or could easily find out. I am worried (illegible) that he is watching me, just recently he bumped into me on the street.”

These are Flood lies, not Dyer lies. They are designed to invoke an entirely false threat of violence so that a far more serious criminal charge can be brought by the police officers to whom Flood had paid bribes. Of course, no police officer with half a brain cell would take this drivel seriously unless there was something substantiated by a description of an actual incident, and a date, time and place of the incident.

The truth is that I had no contact with Dyer following the Donlevy incident of 5th July 2013. I deliberately avoided the office altogether except for mandatory appointments from that moment on.

On 9th September 2015, I was walking down St Giles Street in Northampton Town Centre, when someone who I believed may have been Dyer (I am visually impaired so I cannot be sure) came out of Dreams Coffee Shop and walked across the road in front of me. That was it. Absolutely nothing happened, and Dyer on this occasion hasn’t even bothered to invent a fairy story that anything did happen.

The timing is also significant. So, two people who are routinely in the town centre every working day happen to be on the same street at the same time once in a three year period, and one walks across the other’s path without anything occurring. That makes Dyer so “concerned for her safety” that she goes home and forgets about it for five months before suddenly lying to the police only two months before an interlocutory hearing in a case between the person being lied about and her employer. How convenient!

Anyone who is being “walked home from work by colleagues” and “constantly looking over their shoulder” because someone they have victimised was on the same street as them once in a three year period would be admitting that they genuinely do need psychiatric help. Of course, it is all Flood’s lies, put on to the paper in Dyer’s virtually illegible scrawl handwriting.

For the avoidance of doubt, I should state that I don’t believe the police officer who took this false statement, PC 1097 Tredwell, was involved in the malice and the turpitude. It was PC 1248 Anstead, who took Flood’s false statement, who then proceeded to lie to other police officers, make false inputs onto the police computer system, and then to assault and falsely imprison the victim being lied about on these false statements, and who accepted the financial inducement to commit these acts, and it was Anstead who had the prior relationship with Dyer the liar.

There will be more to come on both Anstead and Dyer. Research is continuing into the relationship between the two, and Dyer has since authored a blatantly obvious false witness statement and submitted it to the High Court. This will be published on this website very shortly, as it has now been aired at a public court hearing.

There are other documents which I would very much like to publish, but which I am unable to reveal at this stage as they have not been publicly aired. This is an ongoing case, and any relevant material will be published as soon as it can legally be published.