my concerns about the reluctance of a Conservative councillor to be
interviewed to the police officer investigating Bexley council’s refusal to seek
independent witnesses to Cheryl Bacon’s fanciful description of
events of 19th June 2013. viz. that members of the the public present at
that meeting were totally out of control, necessitating putting the meeting into
“closed session” when there is a total of ten people prepared to put hand on heart and say that
Bacon’s statement is wholly inaccurate.
The police officer is far too polite to say so but I would summarise his response as saying that my evidence would be shredded by a competent defence lawyer. He also played his trump card. He had made enquiries and discovered beyond doubt that my concerns were ill founded. His source I regard as totally trustworthy so there is no doubt I put two and two together and made five.
There are two ways out of this predicament. I can say the police officer is work shy and doesn’t want to be involved in any more investigations or that his source is a liar or the evidence I was given was an unprincipled stitch up by someone intent on mischief, but a Cheryl Bacon style solution is not one I favour. My only excuse is a single misinterpreted email but there is no escaping the fact I got this one badly wrong and apologies are definitely due. Must be more cautious!