LATEST ISSUES 16th March, 2026
- Mark Stock
- 5 hours ago
- 27 min read
This is the complete, revised 'Open Letter' now due for release tomorrow, 17th March.
OPEN LETTER
17th March 2026
I am and always have been just a beleaguered single dad and carer to a mentally ill daughter.
FOR THE URGENT ATTENTION OF
HAMPSHIRE POLICE
HAMPSHIRE & IOW HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION TRUST
The PARLIAMENTARY HEALTH SERVICE OMBUDSMAN
This document is a comprehensive and lengthy autopsy of significant issues that have had profound negative impact on my life for around SEVEN YEARS. If I have invited you to read my words it is because I believe it is necessary. The issues laid out here are all connected and every addressee has a vested interest in these issues. I would urge you all to read this complete document. I will be inviting the national press, the Fifth Estate, social media and legal entities throughout country and around the world to witness my struggle going forward. You might not want to spend time reading the entirety of this document but others with the political resources to hold power to account undoubtedly will.
THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENT IS A STATEMENT OF INTENT TO INITIATE A NEW CAMPAIGN OF PROTEST AGAINST GROSS INJUSTICES AND FAILURES TO ADDRESS HISTORIC GRIEVANCES
My New Campaign will target national news media, alternative news media and multiple social media platforms including Facebook, Instagram, X and Tik Tok. My New Campaign may also include further theatrical protests outside prominent sites in Central London including the Houses of Parliament, Downing Street and Trafalgar Square and new sites including the BBC in Portland Place and Langham Place, London and outside CAMHS, Bramblys Drive, Basingstoke, CMHT The Bridge Centre, Basingstoke and the current site of Hampshire Police in Parklands, Basingstoke.
My New Campaign will persist for as long as Hampshire Police continue to retain FALSE, DISCRIMINATORY and PSYCHOLOGICALLY DAMAGING information under my name on their database which, to my understanding, will be at least until 2032 or possibly until I am DEAD.
My New Campaign will persist for as long as my complaint against Hampshire & IOW Healthcare Foundation Trust remains unresolved and until those responsible for the wholly inappropriate referral of me to PREVENT are properly held to account.
My New Campaign will persist for as long as Hampshire Police continue to withhold and or retain information relating to the wholly inappropriate referral of me the government counter-terrorism initiative, PREVENT which, to my understanding, will be held for up to SIX YEARS.
My New Campaign will persist for as long as the Parliamentary Health Service Ombudsman refuses to properly attend to my complaint originally submitted Wednesday 31st August, 2022.
INTRODUCTION
This document, originally intended to be a follow up to a previous ‘Open Letter’ dated 30th April, 2025, is primarily an appeal to Hampshire Police, Hampshire and IOW Healthcare Foundation Trust and the Parliamentary Health Service Ombudsman following gross injustices and a call for appropriate and timely action to properly attend to historic grievances.
Injustices metered out by Hampshire Police following their intervention on the 25th September 2022 have catastrophically undermined my mental health and seriously exacerbated suicidal ideation. The distress caused to me for more than three and a half years has been chronic, persistent and pervasive. I have been effectively imprisoned in my own homed and socially isolated for more than three and a half years. The false information retained by Hampshire Police is a virtual criminal record that can be used against me in the future by the police and used to discriminate against me following enhanced DBS checks by prospective employers. I am unable to form any new adult relationships out of a genuine fear that any potential future relational grievance can be aligned with the data retained by Hampshire Police and cynically used as evidence of ‘patterns of behaviour’ leading to prosecution and potential incarceration.
My shared plans to peacefully protest those injustices outside the House of Commons, Downing Street and Trafalgar Square on the 24th June 2025 incurred a wholly inappropriate referral of me to the government counter-terrorism initiative, PREVENT. That referral, made by a senior member of the leadership team within Hampshire and IOW Healthcare Foundation Trust and based on spurious and flawed reasoning has compounded my mental health challenges and completely eroded my trust in mental health services. Those responsible for the referral are still refusing accountability for their actions almost NINE MONTHS later. Hampshire Police are complicit in the referral and are also refusing accountability.
My issues with Hampshire Police and Hampshire and IOW Healthcare Foundation Trust are embedded in a wider grievance that involves CAMHS, Bramblys Drive, Basingstoke, overseen at the time by the Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust. I followed all pro-social routes of complaint but was failed by the internal Patient Advisory Liaison Services and am currently being failed by the Parliamentary Health Service Ombudsman.
I made further protests by way of repeated hunger strikes during 2024 and 2025 but was roundly ignored by Hampshire Police. I escalated my protest, peacefully, outside the Houses of Parliament, Downing Street and Trafalgar Square in order to attract widespread public attention. Any future hunger strike would carry more political weight if carried out under the scrutiny of thousands or hundreds of thousands.
Now I am setting out my intentions going forward which includes the initiation of a New Campaign designed to raise widespread national awareness of my story. This ‘Open Letter’ now becomes a comprehensive document for ALL eyes. I believe that ALL recipients of this ‘Open Letter’ have a vested interest in these issues.
The broad inclusion of all addressees reflects the complexity of this case and the scale of the issues that I have been forced to contend with for more than SEVEN YEARS.
I will simultaneously address this ‘Open Letter’ to the national press, alternative press and across multiple social media platforms and publish on my blog at www.fourandtwentydeadcrows.com
It should be understood by all concerned that the events highlighted by this document began innocently in the late autumn of 2018 when I first brought my severely mentally unwell daughter, Meg, to CAMHS, Bramblys Drive, Basingstoke desperate for help. For more than SEVEN YEARS since I have been faced with clinical neglect and abuse, dishonesty, lies, corruption, contempt, indifference, delay, incompetence, obstruction and obfuscation across two NHS Foundation Trusts, Hampshire Police and the Parliamentary Health Service Ombudsman. While advocating on behalf of my daughter I have been psychologically damaged and criminally accused and while defending myself against spurious accusations and false allegations I have stress-tested formal complaints processes only to find them ineffectual and ‘corrupt by design’. I have since been forced to protest by way of hunger strikes and demonstration only to be vilified following suspicion of terrorism.
I am and always have been just a beleaguered single dad and carer to a mentally ill daughter.
The addressees of this ‘Open Letter’ are
Hampshire Police
Alexis Boon QPM, Chief Constable Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary,
Alex Reading, Chief Inspector Hart & Rushmoor district,
Hayley O'Grady, Chief Inspector Hayley O'Grady Basingstoke district,
Donna Jones, the Police and Crime Commissioner for Hampshire and the Isle of Wight,
James Howard 12913, mental health liaison,
Jason Russell C2093, Senior Manager for Public Access JIMU,
Roy Wilsher, HM Inspectorate of Constabulary.
Hampshire & IOW Healthcare Foundation Trust
Darren Humphrey, Director of Quality and Professions - Hampshire & IOW Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust,
Sadie Bell, Director of Information Governance - Hampshire & IOW Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust,
John Kelly, Services Manager, CMHT The Bridge Centre - Hampshire & IOW Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust,
Dr Chinu Simon, Consultant Psychiatrist, CMHT Bridge Centre, Basingstoke - Hampshire & IOW Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust,
Dr Viv Cowdrill, Consultant Clinical Psychologist, mid-north Hants psychological services - Hampshire & IOW Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust,
Ron Shields, Chief Executive - Hampshire & IOW Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust.
PARLIAMENTARY HEALTH SERVICE OMBUDSMAN
Emily Sills, Head of Ombudsman Assurance Team
PREVENT WATCH
Dr Layla Aitjhdt and Anna Sekular, Directors and Senior Caseworkers.
The HEALTH AND CARE PROFESSIONS COUNCIL
INFORMATION COMMISSIONERS OFFICE
Paula Flanagan, Lead Case Officer.
NHS Hampshire and Isle of Wight Integrated Care Board
Maggie MacIsaac, Chief Executive of NHS
Health and Social Care Select Committee
Office of the Independent Prevent Commissioner
Reference number TK8EP2NS.
SHABANA MAHMOOD, Home Secretary
LUKE MURPHY, MP for Basingstoke
This ‘Open Letter’ is formed of three parts
1) HAMPSHIRE POLICE
2) HAMPSHIRE & IOW HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION TRUST and HAMPSHIRE POLICE
3) THE PARLIAMENTARY HEALTH SERVICE OMBUDSMAN
4) SUMMARY
1) HAMPSHIRE POLICE
Before I go ahead with my New Campaign and exponentially increase the risk to my physical and mental health I am appealing to Hampshire Police to remove information it currently holds on their database under my name on the grounds that the information is FALSE.
Hampshire Police currently hold records on their database under my name in three ‘Occurrence details’ referenced ‘4*********2’, ‘4*********9’ and ‘4*********2’.
‘Occurrence details 4*********2’ appears to be the original record.
‘Occurrence details 4*********9’ appears to be a mistake resulting from ‘some crossed wires’ but apparently remains on the Hampshire Police database with embellishments.
‘Occurrence details 4*********2’ appears to be another mistake being ‘a duplicate of 4*********9’ but apparently remains on the Hampshire Police database.
‘Occurrence details 4*********2’ reports ‘Occurrence Type’ as ‘Stalking/Harassment’, ‘Summary’ as ‘INFT reporting stalking/harassment from an’ and ‘Primary investigation WHAT HAS HAPPENED? This incident is in relation to a continuation of on-going harassment between MARK STOCK ( suspect ). Police have visited MARK STOCK on the 25th September 2022 at 9am to speak to him about making unwanted contact to…’
‘Occurrence details 4*********9’ is particularly egregious as it reports the same as the previous ‘Occurrence details 4*********2’ but makes an embellishment under ‘Reports’, ie ‘Police have already dealt with the same stalking incident…’
I categorically deny ‘making unwanted contact’, ‘harassment’ and or ‘stalking’!
‘Unwanted contact’ I did NOT make ‘unwanted contact’ with anyone. How can anyone reasonably believe that any contact with anyone is ‘unwanted’ unless it is categorically stated, verbally or in writing, that contact is ‘unwanted’? Sally Mungall had NEVER made me aware that contact with her was ‘unwanted’. I sent Sally Mungall two forms of correspondence.
The first was a copy of the 50 page complaint report that I had also sent to the Patient Advisory Liaison Service at the Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust at the end of July 2022. I sent this 50 page document out of professional courtesy because I knew that the Trust was acting dishonestly while investigating my complaints. I believed that the Trust were being disingenuous and didn’t want Sally Mungall ‘blindsided’ by my complaints which were about to be escalated to the Parliamentary Health Service Ombudsman.
The second was a letter written following the advisements laid out by the Health and Care Professions Council in their ‘Ethics and Standards’. The letter asked for Sally Mungall’s accountability, to explain what had gone wrong while I was under her therapeutic care and an explanation for why she had so grossly misrepresented me to her clinical cohorts and leadership within the Trust and with colleagues at CRISIS and CMHT The Bridge Centre. The Parliamentary Health Service Ombudsman had informed me that a caseworker would not be allocated to my complaint for up to 11 months due to a Covid 19 backlog. My only other recourse of accountability was a ‘fitness to practice’ complaint about her with the Health and Care Professions Council. I was reluctant to file a ‘fitness to practice’ complaint against Sally Mungall because I didn’t want to jeopardise her professional reputation or risk her livelihood ( ‘fitness to practice’ investigations can lead to registrants being punitively sanctioned or even ‘struck off’ and barred from practice ). Honest answers to the questions posed in my letter might have persuaded me against a ‘fitness to practice‘ complaint. The last paragraph of my letter explained that if Sally Mungall felt uncomfortable with my contact that she should inform me and would not contact her again.
Sally Mungall had TWO opportunities to inform me that contact with her was ‘unwanted’. Sally Mungall ignored BOTH opportunities and called Hampshire Police instead.
‘Harassment’ I did NOT ‘harass’ anyone. By all reasonable accounts Harassment is recognised as behaviour intended to cause a person alarm or distress. – https://sentencingcouncil.org.uk/resources/common-offences/harassment-and-stalking/ I did NOT intend to harass anyone, nor cause alarm or distress. My contact was polite and reasonable. My contact was absolutely necessary under the circumstances and was made under advisement of Sally Mungall’s regulatory board, the Health and Care Professions Council by way of their ‘Standards of conduct, performance and ethics, Section 8
‘Openness with service users and carers
8.1 You must be open, honest and candid when something has gone wrong with the care, treatment or other services that you provide, by:
- where applicable, alerting your employer of what has gone wrong and following the relevant internal procedures; - informing service users and where appropriate carers, or where you do not have direct access to these individuals the lead clinician, that something has gone wrong;- providing service users and carers with a detailed explanation of the circumstances in which things have gone wrong and the likely impact; and- taking action to correct the mistake if possible and detailing this action to the service user and where appropriate, their carer.’
Sally Mungall was a responsible trained healthcare professional who knew with absolutely certainty that I would never intend to cause her alarm or distress. Indeed, medical records quote Sally Mungall’s insistence that she felt no fear for her safety from me. I believe Sally Mungall opted to use the state power of the police to absolve herself of her professional responsibility and to avoid accountability. Reporting me to the police was dishonest and cowardly.
‘Stalking’ I did NOT ‘stalk’ anyone. There is absolutely NO evidence of ‘stalking’ because it never happened. I have challenged and continue to challenge Hampshire Police to present evidence of ‘stalking’. Evidence suggests that accusations of ‘stalking’ were first engineered by my accuser, Sally Mungall, in conversations with clinicians at CMHT The Bridge Centre, Basingstoke in February 2022. The accusations are likely based on the fact that I knew the home address of Sally Mungall. I actually knew the address of Sally Mungall because she advertised her art therapy services online. Sally Mungall managed a website that detailed her services and even included photographs of her, the terrace of houses where her home where her art therapy practice is based and invitations and directions to her art therapy room in the back garden of her home. There was and still are multiple online references to Sally Mungall’s art therapy practice including her address by postcode and precise location maps. Am I really guilty of ‘stalking’ Sally Mungall because I have access to the internet and can read Sally Mungall’s online solicitations?
Did Sally Mungall actually accuse me of ‘stalking’? If she did then that would amount to a false allegation. This allegation should be investigated by Hampshire Police.
I NEVER ‘stalked’ Sally Mungall. I never went anywhere near her house and I never went anywhere near where she worked at CAMHS Bramblys Drive, Basingstoke after my daughter was discharged from CAMHS services.
The allegation of ‘stalking’ is absolutely FALSE!
Evidence revealed in my medical records and later in my daughter’s medical records detail multiple occurrences of misrepresentation of me by Sally Mungall. Sally Mungall actually lied to me. Sally Mungall’s clinical cohorts also misrepresented me and CAMHS General Manager, Wanda Reynolds, misrepresented me an lied about me and to me. Indeed, I uncovered a covert plan to misrepresent me, lie about me, monitor me, grossly mis-pathologise me and support criminalisation of me. Sally Mungall, Wanda Reynolds and other clinicians crafted a false narrative about me which was shared with colleagues working in CRISIS and CMHT, The Bridge Centre, Basingstoke. I firmly believe this false narrative was engineered to safeguard the professional reputation of Sally Mungall and the institutional reputations of CAMHS, Bramblys Drive, Basingstoke and the wider Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust.
There needs to be a full investigation into all matters relating to Sally Mungall, Wanda Reynolds, CAMHS and the wider Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust.
I have been suffering a pervasive and permanent mental health crisis as a direct result of actions taken by Sally Mungall, Wanda Reynolds, CAMHS and the wider Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust.
I have been rendered powerless, voiceless and impotent.
Hampshire Police have informed me that my only legal recourse is by judicial review. Enquiries back in 2023 confirmed quotes for judicial reviews in the order of £30,000!! I cannot afford justice!
But then, why should I pay £30,000 for justice! Hampshire Police did this to me. It’s absolutely THEIR responsibility. They can, under their own discretion, surely undo what they have done.
I AM FUCKING INNOCENT!
Hampshire Police are also involved in issues related to HAMPSHIRE & IOW HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION TRUST as outlined in Part Two below.
2) HAMPSHIRE & IOW HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION TRUST
Before I go ahead with my New Campaign I am appealing to Hampshire & IOW Healthcare Foundation Trust to hold Gemma Stubbington and the Safeguarding Board of the Trust to account for the wholly inappropriate referral of me to the government counter-terrorism initiative, PREVENT. Also, I am appealing to Hampshire Police to hold themselves to account for their involvement.
On the 18th June, 2025, I was referred to the government counter-terrorism initiative, PREVENT, in response to my stated intent to protest peacefully outside the Houses of Parliament, Downing Street and Trafalgar Square on the 24th June 2025.
I have been trying to hold those responsible to account for the wholly inappropriate referral, namely Gemma Stubbington and the Designated Safeguarding Lead, presumably Susan Corley, who advised Gemma Stubbington and also police mental health liaison, James Howard 12913 who also advised completing a Community Partnership Information form.
I made formal complaints, in writing, about the referral to PREVENT on the 11th September, 2025 to Gemma Stubbington herself and, at the same time, asked her to account for multiple contentious entries by her while completing the National Prevent Referral Form.
It took the Trust more than FIVE MONTHS to properly respond to my formal complaints.
My complaint was entirely ignored for TWO MONTHS before being contemptuously dismissed by newly appointed head of nursing at CMHT, The Bridge Centre, Joe Jackson without investigation. I complained.
I eventually met with Darren Humphrey, Director of Quality and Professions on the 25th February 2026 for the first time to review and explore my complaint. The meeting concluded with a shared understanding that my complaint warrants further exploration and a follow‑up meeting has been scheduled for Tuesday 8th April to provide updates.
My complaint has been complicated by the obstinate refusal by the Trust Director of Information Governance, Sadie Bell to comply with my lawful Subject Access Request for my personal data being held by the Trust.
My complaint has also been further complicated by the obstinate refusal by the Senior Manager of Public Access Hampshire Police, Jason Russell to comply with my lawful Subject Access Request for my personal data being held by the police. I have also requested that police mental health liaison, James Howard 12913 answer questions relating to his advice given to Gemma Stubbington as she considered the referral to PREVENT. James Howard has NEVER even acknowledged my request which was sent to him, in writing, on the 5th February, 2026.
On the 13th March, 2026, I spoke with Paula Flanagan, Lead Case Officer with the Information Commissioners Office regarding recent Subject Access Requests for my personal data, held by the police in connection with the PREVENT referral last year. Paula later confirmed, in writing, I have agreed with
‘Having reviewed the information available, on balance we are satisfied that Hampshire Constabulary has complied with its obligations under data protection law. While your right of access entitles you to confirmation of any personal information held and processed about you, organisations may apply relevant exemptions and redact third‑party data where appropriate. In this case, we consider that the force applied a relevant exemption when responding to your SAR. As discussed, the ICO does not have the power to compel an organisation to disclose information. Only a court can require disclosure… As we discussed, you may wish to seek support from Prevent Watch if you decide to pursue legal action.’
I have agreed with Paula that she should focus her attention on the Trust through Sadie Bell at Information Governance to secure ALL remaining personal data under my name, particularly the communication between Gemma Stubbington and the Safeguarding Board of the Trust.
I will continue to request that police mental health liaison, James Howard 12913 answers my reasonable questions first presented in writing on the 5th February, 2026.
I have passed a comprehensive sixty-one page document which, to all intents and purposes, is a legal brief to Prevent Watch. I understand that Prevent Watch has already passed this document to legal teams for assessment. If I am advised to take legal action against Gemma Stubbington and or the Trust and the police then I will do so. I will not be seeking settlement outside the courts unless advised to do so. I would prefer that this case be heard, in full, before a judge.
It has been almost NINE MONTHS to the day since Gemma Stubbington referred me to counter-terrorism following my written statement to PEACEFULLY PROTEST outside the Houses of Parliament on the 24th June last year.
Records confirm that it took Gemma Stubbington just THREE DAYS between raising concerns with the Safeguarding Board of the Trust and actually filing the PREVENT referral with Emily Taylor at Counter Terrorism Policing South East.
I have been trying to hold Gemma Stubbington, the Safeguarding Board of the Trust, the Designated Safeguarding Lead ( presumably Susan Corley ) and Hampshire Police to account ever since. All of my formal efforts to hold everyone to account have been contemptuously dismissed, cynically obstructed or rudely ignored. Sadie Bell, the Director of Information Governance at the Trust has made disingenuous use of Data Protection Law in attempts to deny me rightful access to my personal data in this matter. Sadie Bell’s stance in refusing to disclose my personal data is considered by me to be vexatious and the exemptions cynically deployed by her to be ‘lawfare’.
The exploitation of entrusted authority through the manipulative interpretation of legal provisions for personal benefit is otherwise known as ‘corruption’.
All of this DESPITE the fact that the PREVENT referral was assessed on the 5th July, 2025 and closed under supervision on the 7th July, 2025!!
WHERE IS THE TRANSPARENCY?
WHERE IS THE ACCOUNTABILITY?
This wholly inappropriate referral to PREVENT was done to me. I had no voice in the matter. I was accused of being a terrorist and or being susceptible to radicalization. The whole referral was a farce, an ill-advised, knee-jerk reaction, rush of blood to the head born out of ignorance, a histrionic reaction to mitigate against potential liability under corporate governance and a dishonest attempt to safeguard the reputation of the Trust.
Furthermore, this referral sought to deny my Human Rights including my right to protest.
‘Everyone has the right to protest and to organise protests. This right is protected by the European Convention on Human Rights (the ECHR). Your right to freedom of expression is protected under Article 10 of the ECHR. Your right to freedom of assembly is protected under Article 11.’- Liberty https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/advice_information/right-to-protest/
The referral went far beyond infringing my human rights.
The referral has adversely affected my mental health. The completed PREVENT referral form is a litany of accusations. The Community Partnership Information form that Gemma Stubbington filed under my name raises further suspicions that I committed other crimes or offences.
Community Safety Partnerships
Community Safety Partnerships (CSPs) were introduced by Section 6 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and bring together local partners to formulate and implement strategies to tackle crime, disorder and antisocial behaviour in their communities.
Among the many questions I forwarded to police mental health liaison, James Howard 12913 was this one
‘Are Community Partnership Information forms part of the reporting process within Community Safety Partnerships? If they are then the necessity for completing a Community Partnership Information falls under ‘Section 6 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and bring together local partners to formulate and implement strategies to tackle crime, disorder and antisocial behaviour in their communities.’ - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/community-safety-partnerships/community-safety-partnerships ‘
Howard has never even bothered to acknowledge my enquiry, much less actually address my reasonable questions. This is consistent with the absolute contempt Hampshire Police have for me, demonstrated over many years since taking accusing me of offences back in September, 2022, that I did not commit.
What I have discovered through my own investigations is
Community Partnership Information forms ‘should be used to pass information which may relate to crime’. - https://www.iowsab.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/CPI-Presentation-03-04-25.pdf
‘If you notice suspicious activity then it you can report it to the police using a Community Partnership Information form. Non-urgent but useful community intelligence can be submitted to Hampshire police by partner agencies on Community Partnership Information Forms (CPI forms). - https://www.saferportsmouth.org.uk/community-partnership-information-forms/
‘Submitting things you have seen or heard on Community Partnership Information Forms helps us to build intelligence on perpetrators and locations of interest.’ - https://www.saferportsmouth.org.uk/community-partnership-information-forms/
Community Partnership Information forms ‘should be used to pass information which may relate to crime’. - https://www.iowsab.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/CPI-Presentation-03-04-25.pdf
I AM NOT A FUCKING CRIMINAL!
NOR DID I EVER ENGAGE IN ANY FUCKING DISORDER OR ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR!
My experiences at CAMHS, Bramblys Drive and the dishonest actions taken by CAMHS art therapist, Sally Mungall alongside her clinical and leadership cohorts within the wider Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, made a mental health patient out of me.
The referral of me to PREVENT has exacerbated ALL the mental health issues that CMHT had attempted to treat, including Complex PTSD and suicidal ideation.
I can say, without reservation, that the referral has further TRAUMATISED me.
Serious questions remained unanswered.
Why are all those involved, Gemma Stubbington, the Safeguarding Board of the Trust, Susan Corley, police mental health liaison, James Howard 12913, so obstinately determined to refuse accountability? What is everyone hiding?
Why is senior manager for Public Access at Hampshire Police Jason Russell C2093 so determined to undermine transparency and wreck public confidence in the police? On the 13th March, 2026, I was informed by Paula Flanagan, Lead Case Officer at the Information Commissioner’s Office
‘…Having reviewed the information available, on balance we are satisfied that Hampshire Constabulary has complied with its obligations under data protection law. While your right of access entitles you to confirmation of any personal information held and processed about you, organisations may apply relevant exemptions and redact third‑party data where appropriate. In this case, we consider that the force applied a relevant exemption when responding to your SAR…’
Paula has being doing sterling work while challenging Jason Russell on his refusal to disclose my personal data but has apparently reached the edge of the ICO legal remit. Paula told me in a telephone conversation, also on the 13th March, she does not have the authority, at this final hurdle, to compel Hampshire Police to release my personal data. Only a court now has that power.
But what of the ‘exemption’ cited above. What was the ‘exemption’? Paula didn’t tell me. Let me guess. There will always be some kind of exemption, some kind of catch-all, get out of jail free card that can be used spuriously and casually to deny my lawful right to my own personal data. The ‘exemption’ is just a tool to be wielded by arrogant authoritarians who wish to subvert democracy, rights and freedoms.
Why deny me access to my personal data? Am I still regarded by the police as some kind of criminal? What the fuck did I do wrong?
Why is Sadie Bell at Information Governance so obviously using lawfare to deny me access to my personal data? The evidence proves that she is making indiscriminate use of ‘exemptions’ as obstacles to my Subject Access Requests. Why? Does she really think I am too fucking stupid to see through her deception?
And am I going to be able to request that the police remove ALL records of this absurd referral of me to PREVENT? After all, the referral was assessed and closed within three days over NINE MONTHS ago. Surely that means I am exonerated?
If the police refuse to remove ALL records then it proves that PREVENT is, first and foremost, a programme of surveillance, an exercise in data collection, a governmental overreach of power.
3) THE PARLIAMENTARY HEALTH SERVICE OMBUDSMAN
Before I go ahead with my New Campaign I am appealing to the PHSO to investigate the FULL SCOPE of my complaints against CAMHS, Bramblys Drive, Basingstoke and the wider Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust. I am also appealing to Basingstoke MP, Luke Murphy, to raise the following issues in the House of Commons and to campaign, robustly, for the legislative reform of the PHSO
On Wednesday 11th March, 2026, I received the following email from Lawrence Hall, Senior Ombudsman Assurance Officer – Ombudsman Assurance Team
‘Our original case reference: C-2*****3
I work in the Ombudsman’s casework team, known as the Ombudsman Assurance Team. Among our responsibilities is reviewing challenges to our casework decisions.
Unfortunately, it appears we failed to act on Mr Stock’s feedback letter, which was first shared with us on 20 May 2025. Please accept my sincere apologies for this oversight. On this occasion, our service appears to have fallen below the high standards we aspire to.
To address this, we will now carefully consider and respond to Mr Stock’s feedback letter…’
Lawrence Hall continued by informing me that his response, alongside a response from Ian Higgins, another manager, would be forwarded within four weeks. I have zero confidence of a satisfactory outcome.
My pessimism is founded in an appalling reality, shared with countless other underserved complainants, the national press and the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee.
“As we have done annually for many years now to no avail, we are once again calling on the Government to bring forward what is now very long-overdue legislative reform of the PHSO, so that it can provide the level of service the public requires from it.’’ - Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee Chair, William Wragg MP
A previous trigger for debate on the reform of the complaints system was made as long ago as 2013, after the release of the Francis Report following the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry!
I own a copy of Della Reynolds book, ‘What’s the point of the Ombudsman?’ Della’s book runs to 579 pages of copious volumes of damning evidence and anecdotal accounts of systemic failures by the PHSO. Chapter Three of the book titled ‘Is the PHSO corrupt by design’ adequately sums up the perception shared by so many frustrated NHS service users.
Getting back to Lawrence Hall and his written words,
‘On this occasion, our service appears to have fallen below the high standards we aspire to.’
Let me educate Lawrence Hall on the grim reality of the ‘high standards’ he seems to champion.
THE TIMELINE OF MY COMPLAINT WITH THE PARLIAMENTARY HEALTH SERVICE OMBUDSMAN
My formal complaint about CAMHS, Bramblys Drive, Basingstoke and the wider Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust was first acknowledged by the PHSO on Wednesday 31st August, 2022.
That complaint, initially designated by the PHSO as FS-Case-4*******6, was allocated to and further acknowledged in writing by Intake Caseworker, Katie Bailey and given a reference numbers C-2*****9 Stock0****2KB on the 9th September, 2022.
Katie Bailey wrote again on the 16th September, 2022 to inform me that, due to a Covid-19 backlog, ‘you are likely to wait between 9 to 11 months before we can allocate your case to a caseworker.’
Almost a year had passed without any communication from Katie Bailey or anyone else at the PHSO so I contacted Maria Miller who was the MP for Basingstoke at the time. Maria wrote to me on the 1st September, 2023 to tell me that she would be writing to the Chief Executive of the PHSO ‘to request a review of your case’.
I then received a template letter from the PHSO on the 25th September, 2023, asking me to complete new complaint forms and designating a new reference number c-2116212.
PHSO case worker, Mark Pierce, contacted by phone 17th October 2023 and then by letter dated 20th October, 2023
Mark Pierce advised that I first seek resolution by way of independent lawyers and to return to the PHSO if I was unsuccessful in securing private legal representation.
Over the following five months I contacted over 170 lawyers. Ultimately, I failed to secure private legal representation, not due to lack of merit, but due to the unavailability of lawyers with relevant expertise and resources who offer Legal Aid.
I wrote to Mark Pierce for the 1st time on the 16TH March 2024 but was ignored.
I wrote to Mark Pierce for the 2nd time on the 16th April 2024 but was ignored for a further month.
Mark Peirce eventually telephoned on the 17th May 2024 to confirm my case was to be reassessed following submission of evidence confirming approach to lawyers while an email follow up confirmed that my case had been allocated a caseworker and ‘prioritised due to the delay in me picking up your emails…I agreed that I would put a note in my diary for the end of August to check if your case has been allocated to a caseworker.’
I received another email on the 15th August 2024 from Caseworker, David Jagiello-Brown to conform a caseworker had been assigned to me and would contact me.
On the 22nd August, 2024 I received an email from David Jagiello-Brown who informs me that he is the caseworker looking into my complaint. He designates yet another reference number C-*******3 and then attempts to summarise my complaint, referring to me as ‘Mr Hann’. The summary is incomplete and does not cover the full scope of my complaint. He goes on to further account for ‘how this has affected you’, still referring to me as Mr Hann. David Jagiello-Brown finally adopts my real name when listing questions he believed I wanted answered by the Trust. He asks me to confirm what specific questions I wanted the Trust to answer.
I received another email from David Jagiello-Brown on the same day asking for my daughter to make her own complaint about the way she was treated by CAMHS, Bramblys Drive, Basingstoke. I replied by email soon after.
I received an email from David Jagiello-Brown on the 25th September, 2024 explaining that my case had been discussed with a team manager and deemed ‘more complex than we had first thought. As this is the case it will move to a senior casework team.’
On the 6th January, 2025 I received an email from Kirsty Fitzsimons, Senior Caseworker, informing me that ‘I will be looking into your concerns about Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust.’
And then on the 14th January, 2025 I received the following information by email from Kirsty Fitzsimons ‘I wanted to let you know that I have been reading the case material you sent over to us and I’ve identified a possible conflict of interests for me with your concern. Before coming to work for PHSO, I worked in a similar service to the one you are complaining about, and I am concerned that my professional background may lead to a degree of unconscious bias in the way I consider your complaint. I want to ensure that your case is given the full attention and impartiality it deserves and so my manager has agreed to reallocate your case to a different Senior Caseworker today (to avoid any further delay).’
On the 17th January, 2025 I was informed by Thomas Body that he had been appointed my replacement caseworker. Thomas Body asked me to provide him with a shorthand version of my list of my complaints against CAMHS Bramblys Drive, Basingstoke and the wider Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust.
I spoke to Thomas Body on the 24th January, 2025. He advised me that the PHSO would unlikely investigate the full scope of my complaints against CAMHS Bramblys Drive, Basingstoke and the wider Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust because my complaints were deemed ‘disproportionate’. I argued, robustly, for the full scope of my complaints to investigated and Thomas Body said that he would take my case to a higher authority for consideration.
Between the 24th January and the 23rd April I made multiple submissions of evidence. Some information was specifically requested by Thomas Body, including ‘'Can you confirm what specific questions you wanted the Trust to answer as part of your desired outcome?' I submitted 73. Thomas Body declined to forward even 1!
The following email, sent to Thomas Body on the 1st April, 2025 expresses my growing frustration with the PHSO
‘WHY THE HELL ASK ME 'Can you confirm what specific questions you wanted the Trust to answer as part of your desired outcome?' AND WASTE MY DAMNED TIME IN COLLATING THOSE QUESTIONS?!!!
AND HOW THE ACTUAL HELL CAN YOU MAKE THE FOLLOWING COMPLAINT ON MY BEHALF ie 'The notes about him were not accurate and inappropriate.' IF THE TRUST ARE NOT REQUIRED TO ANSWER MY QUESTIONS. THE MAJORITY OF MY QUESTIONS RELATE TO THAT SPECIFIC COMPLAINT!?!!!’
I received the following email from Thomas Body on the 25th April, 2025
‘Dear Mr Stock,
I am emailing to let you know, I have issued a letter explaining we will not be taking your case forward any further as we are unable to agree a complaint scope. The letter also explains that we will be setting up a separate case for Meg and will be in contact once this has been done.
I am sorry this will be extremely disappointing for you, but we feel we have tried on several occasions to manage your expectations on what we can and cannot do as part of any investigation.
Kind regards
Thomas’
Thomas Body’s letter had actually arrived in the post the day before. This was my response on the same day
‘THOMAS BODY
I am informing you that I have now opened and read your letter dated 23rd April, 2025.
I DO NOT accept your decision not to consider my complaint further and will be taking robust and determined action against you and the wider PHSO.
I am notifying you that I WILL be forwarding 'feedback' to you within one month of the 23rd April, 2025. This will be above and beyond the 'customer survey' that I filled out yesterday. I will outline my assertion that you have treated my complaint against the Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust unfairly, unprofessionally and with contempt and dishonesty.
I will be forwarding a report to the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee and to the Health and Social Care Committee. I will NOT be attempting to enlist the PACAC as I am already aware that the PACAC cannot review the PHSO's adjudications on individual cases, including the PHSO's decisions on whether or not to accept a case. I WILL be making both the PACAC and the HSCC aware of the wider issues and outlining my serious intentions going forward.
I have already engaged my local MP and will be mounting high-profile and very public protests against the Trust AND the PHSO commencing in June this year.
I CANNOT allow the serious clinical negligence and reputational abuse of me by clinicians and leadership at CAMHS Basingstoke and the wider Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust to go unaccounted. Nor can I allow the PHSO to avoid its responsibilities to hold those same individuals and institutions to account.
I WILL do whatever it takes to raise national and international awareness of my cause and grievances. There WILL be a reckoning.
Sincerely,
MARK STOCK’
On the 20th May, 2025 I sent a ‘Feedback Document’ to the PHSO FOR THE ATTENTION OF THOMAS BODY with a covering email that included
‘With reference to the email I sent to you on Friday, May 16, 2025, please find attached 'PHSO FEEDBACK DOCUMENT' which I also intend as a formal complaint and which should be accepted by the PHSO as such. This document is specifically addressed to acting CO of the PHSO, Rebecca Hilsenrath. I would kindly ask you to forward the document to her and inform me that you have done this.’
Thomas Body did not reply or even acknowledge my ‘Feedback Document’.
Thomas Body’s email to me on the 8th October, 2025 acknowledged further delays in considering my daughter’s complaint separate from my own. Meg’s case was now allocated reference number C-******5
‘Dear Mr Stock,
I am emailing to let you know that Megan’s case has been allocated back to me to consider. I am sorry there was previously an oversight in the case not being allocated straight back to me after your original complaint was split into two (your care and Megan’s care) and Megan’s case was opened…’
Meg’s own complaint about CAMHS Bramblys Drive, Basingstoke remains unresolved by the PHSO to this day.
Is THIS what Lawrence Hall means by 'the high standards we aspire to' ?
‘a state captured regulator is worse than no regulator at all. The flawed PHSO process gives an illusion of accountability for public bodies where none exists. It validates poor performance, condoning the harm caused to citizens. It allows politicians to absolve their responsibility to the public as they knowingly refer cases into oblivion. With unforgiveable cruelty it sets up false hope, resulting in victims of injustice wasting many hours, months and years repeatedly putting the facts before an organisation which is institutionally deaf and blind to them.’ – ‘What’s the point of the Ombudsman?’ PHSOtheFACTS edited by Della Reynolds.
This ‘illusion of accountability’ is embedded in the conscious awareness of NHS managers and Patient Advisory Liaison Services and baked into the complaints procedure. I put it to Lawrence Hall that many complaints are forwarded by Local Resolution managers in the full knowledge that the PHSO is where complaints invariably go to die.
I have just been made aware of the following.
‘The Ethics and Integrity Commission issued the following press notice:
PRESS NOTICE 3 March 2026
CAN OMBUDSMEN HELP DETECT SYSTEM FAILURE? – NEW REVIEW BY THE
INDEPENDENT ETHICS AND INTEGRITY COMMISSION
The newly established independent Ethics and Integrity Commission (EIC) has today launched its first Review, exploring the role of public service ombudsman schemes in identifying wider systemic failures.
The Commission has issued a call for evidence, inviting stakeholders, experts, and the public to contribute their views.
The closing date for submissions is 30 April 2026.’
I will be taking FULL advantage of this invitation
4) SUMMARY
To reiterate, this ‘Open Letter’ is a statement of intent to initiate a new campaign of protest against gross injustices and systemic failures to address historic grievances.
The new campaign starts on the 25th March, 2026, exactly three calendar months until the anniversary of the visit by PC Newstead to my home on the 25th September, 2022.
I am appealing to everyone identified in the list of addressees above to take note and, where appropriate, take action.
I will not allow my appeal to go unheard beyond 25th September, 2026.
I will have already endured four years of injustice, under the shadow of a virtual criminal, socially isolated and virtually incarcerated.
I will take back my life or die in the process.
I AM NOT A CRIMINAL
Mark Stock
17th March, 2026
Comments