Doubt is cast on Bexley Council’s allegations against Councillor Maxine Fothergill.
11 February (Part 1) - Curiouser and curiouser
The
blog below is one of several relating to Bexley Councillor Maxine Fothergill and
Bexley Council’s Code of Conduct Committee. This
note aims to make it clear that the events reported between December 2015 and
the Summer of 2016 whilst accurate reflections of various events, disciplinary hearings and sanctions
brought against Councillor Fothergill they are individually insufficient to explain the whole story.
Two members of the Bexley-is-Bonkers team met with Councillor Fothergill at a
secret location on 16th September 2016 where she explained to us what had really happened. She was able to
convince us that she was the victim of a miscarriage of justice.
There were compelling reasons why Councillor Fothergill should be believed. It seemed likely that
the Tory High Command in Bexley had taken revenge on her because Councillor
Fothergill had reported one of their associates to the police for theft.
Councillor Fothergill requested that the explanatory note prefixed to relevant blogs (which first went on line a few days earlier) be further
strengthened so that readers are fully aware that reported events, whilst
accurate at the time, did not reflect her innocence and that Bexley Council’s charge
of misconduct and “gaining a financial advantage for herself” was malicious.
This is a modified version of the note Councillor Fothergill asked to be placed here.
There has been another response to a Maxine Fothergill related Freedom of Information request by Bexley
Council and it takes things forward only a little. Like everything else
discovered so far it provides no evidence that Councillor Fothergill is guilty
of anything except that she may have stumbled upon a seller and buyer for a small bungalow
while performing councillor duties. What was she supposed to do, ignore the opportunity?
Bexley Council’s Code of Conduct Committee pronounced a verdict of Misconduct and embellished it
with an announcement that Councillor Fothergill had “conferred a financial advantage on herself”.
Two days ago Bexley Council confirmed Mr. Barnbrook’s guess that some of Maxine
Fothergill’s business transactions may have been conducted on Bexley Council notepaper
and from Council email addresses but refused to release the content on the
grounds that it “would be likely to prejudice the Council’s exercise of its
functions”. Its main function being to suppress the truth of course.
There is no obvious connection between abusing Council notepaper and obtaining
financial advantages but maybe the content made claims or promises
that are beyond the comprehension of honest people.
There may be a missing link somewhere. An early thought was that Councillor
Fothergill had been fitted up by more senior councillors. Despite the years of
experience that should have taught me otherwise, it is too easy to make
decisions based on the supposition that a senior councillor will behave with integrity.
Maybe that thought should not have been so readily dismissed
Although the complainant has been traced there has been no information on what
the complaint was about. What if it did not amount to much, a storm in a teacup used as an
excuse to attack Councillor Fothergill by those who have taken against her?
We know that the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Committee, Cheryl Bacon, is
capable of the most enormous lies. She said that I and four or five other
members of the public rampaged around the council chamber
on 19th June 2013 when
the truth was that everyone sat quietly mesmerized by the Chairman of the
meeting, Cheryl Bacon, in full on panic mode. Four councillors were
so appalled by those lies that they supplied written statements to the police.
The case is now with counsel at the Crown Prosecution Service.
Bexley’s Legal Team is no better. Lynn Tyler, the Legal Team Manager, (below centre) produced
unsigned and undated statements in support of Cheryl Bacon, except that they didn’t.
As is always the case with lying, those statements fell apart upon critical
analysis, something that kept the police occupied for at least six months last
year. Ms. Tyler’s boss, Akin Alabi, also supported Cheryl Bacon’s lies.
So at least three people present during Councillor Fothergill’s conduct hearing
are known to be content to distort the truth out of all recognition. If a stitch
up had been demanded they are the people who could be relied upon to deliver it.
Perhaps that is why it has been reported that the Independent Person couldn’t
see that Councillor Maxine Fothergill had done anything wrong. Neither can I.
All that has been proved is that Bexley Council’s top priority is secrecy.
Nothing, however trivial, must be allowed to damage what remains of Bexley
Council’s reputation. One day they may realise that honesty is the best policy.
Note: The Code of Conduct Appeals Committee meeting
scheduled for 24th February has been cancelled.