Complaint essentials, filed 6th June 21: Details of your complaint Start date of incident Sunday, May 2, 2021 - 00:00 Start time of incident 2000 End date of incident Sunday, May 2, 2021 - 00:00 End time of incident 2015 Incident location Connops Way Incident number (if known) 20/597917/21 - Chat Log 3478 [Council Reference WK 202115893] What is your complaint about? Describe your complaint As in the transcript of Chat Log 3478: Connops Way, DY9 8UD 2000-2015 - asked dog-owner if he could quieten his dog that had been barking since my arrival (for about 20 minutes); owner approached with clenched fist and usual terms of abuse - grabbed my coat with left hand - I fended-off the assault with both hands to coat of assailant in the shoulder area - witness in rear drying area of Love Lane flats. Strained third finger to my left-hand. Vicky: Sorry have I understood correctly -you asked the dog owner to quieten his dog, and then the dog owner was aggresive? David William Austin: Yes, but this is classified as an assault isn't it? Vicky: I just wanted to confirm I understood correctly, I will need to make a report, yes. David William Austin: He's appeared, with his annoying, dirty dog within the last 12 months, but this is the first time we have 'met' and 'spoken'. Believe the character lives in 'block' 29-34, Love Lane Flats, DY9 8BS though he walked 'round to Connops Way in order to confront me. Complaint resolution What is your expected resolution? That the culprit is at least apprehended, interviewed, cautioned or prosecuted. Complaint circumstances If your complaint relates to discrimination, please tick if it refers to any of the following: Age 10. Witnesses to the incident Were there any witnesses to the incident? Yes Witness first name Unknown Witness last name Unkown Witness address Claycroft Estate The Lye Stourbridge, West Midlands 11. Additional Information Please use this section to provide any extra information It seems the only available step in this process is to make a complaint! This is very unfortunate as I've been trying to establish 'effective working relations' between myself and WiMP in resolving the challenges that face my community. One of them is The Dog, but WiMP, famously, in 'Sarah's Stitch-Up', acted as the Council's poodle by arresting me after complaints of harassment from a 'doggie' neighbour, when in fact, she had chased me! And here we have another complaint (the fourth) centred on a dog - yes, these hateful hounds are a significant part of Policing, but not all coppers are doggies! Is it possible that WiMP have deliberately delayed a request for CCTV images to miss the 30-day deadline? How can an identification fail when, on his own admission, this character has been about this area for up to twelve months and witnessed by yours truly? There may well have been some unfair discrimination on the grounds of age, or relative wisdom - surely, to solve problems between all sections of society we must focus on the environment that is shared by all and so badly abused, currently, by my neighbours' dogs?