questions

Since 1985 Dave Fords quest for justice has left him with many unanswered questions. This page highlights only a few of the key items covered by his book, DVD and video. These are some of the key questions Dave is looking to get answered in court very soon.

In 1982, three years before Dave was offered the paintings, there was an alleged aggravated armed robbery at Thorne Manor Lodge. D.I. Leech attended the scene and appears not to have requested forensic evidence to be taken, the attending officers did not take a full inventory of items allegedly taken and no report to Customs was made - a major oversight being as the 'stolen' items would be very difficult to sell in the UK.

Were the investigating officers negligent or was this something other than a robbery?

Officers from Leech's team later offered to return the 'stolen' items for the sum of £10,000, adding that no arrests would be made. Sherbourne paid in cash via his bank manager but the items were not returned. Sherbourne then went to police complaints board and the complaint was upheld. As a result several officers were fired or forced to retire and Leech was transferred from Hounslow to Fulham. Being as the officers offered to return the 'items' then surely they must have had possession or control of them which means legally they ceased to be stolen.

How then was it possible to later bring charges of theft against other parties?

Leech was removed from the case and transferred to Fulham. Why did he take all the case papers from Hounslow with him and not return them for three years?

Why didn't D.I. Leech's replacement, D.I. Free, notice that the paperwork was missing and request their return ?

This case was alleged to be the largest aggravated armed robbery of fine arts in a century. Would D.I. Free not have required the papers to continue investigating this case?

Were they the only papers he removed ?

Was there something in the papers D.I. Leech was trying hide by holding the file for almost three years ?

Were Leech and Free conspiring to pervert the course of justice ?

Dave is the rightful owner of the paintings - there is no proof to suggest otherwise. How could charges be brought against Dave when there has never been proof that the paintings where part of the robbery?

Though the pictures were never proven to be stolen and Dave was in possession of all the relevant paperwork including a bill of sale, why were the paintings never returned to Dave?

As part of the police investigation the police searched Dave's property and removed all the authenticating documents from his safe. These missing items included of a bill of sale, the customs documents and authenticating paperwork from America where the paintings had just returned from after being offered for sale by a major art dealer.

The police refused to give Dave an itemised receipt for the items they seized. Is that correct police procedure?

Why was this crucial evidence never produced in court and why does it not appear on any exhibit list for the prosecution of Dave?

There are affidavits from James Barrymore who was selling the painting on behalf of the owner Colin Bishop and Freddy Brazil the agent that offered the paintings to Dave Ford. These affidavits clearly state that these paintings were not stolen and were being offered for sale by their rightful owner thereby given the paintings a clean bill of health.

When did the paintings become 'stolen'?

Why was Brazil only charged with handling one stolen painting?

Why was Barrymore never charged in connection with the paintings?

Why did the police solicitors offer Dave money to drop his complaint and charges against the them?

Would it not have been better for the police to have their day in court and exonerate themselves?

+++

During the investigation into the bonds a taped statement made by an ex Police Officer clearly states that several bonds were stolen and sold by members of the investigating team.

Why has this tape been suppressed by Ex Commissioner Lord Condon and the current Commissioner Sir John Stevens?

Why were no charges brought against Dave in relation to the bonds?

Why did the police not provide Dave with an itemised receipt for the bonds?

Being as the bonds past all the police checks and were given a clean bill of health why were they never returned?

Many of the answers to these question can be found in Dave’s book, ‘Who's the Thief?’ The rest will be answered in court in the very near future and then published here.