Banner
underlay

plinth

m a1 a2 a3 a4 a5 a6 any day today rss facebook twitter clear clear
Sainsbury's sell melted ice-cream

Bonkers Blog January 2016

Index: 2011201220132014201520162017

To return from any entry to the top of this page, click any date on the left
To place a bookmark/anchor in the URL bar (for links), click the blog title
To read blogs from other years and months use the menu above
To change the text size click ‘AAA’ or Mobile icon on the menu above
To permanently change the text size click ‘Configure’ on the menu above

Sidcup Place

29 January (Part 3) - We’re saying nothing and we don’t like residents nosing into Council business

The following blog relates to unspecified allegations against Councillor Maxine Fothergill for which Bexley Council found her guilty of obtaining a perceived financial advantage for herself (not an actual one you will note) and bringing Bexley Council into disrepute.
Over time it became apparent, well beyond any reasonable doubt, that the case against Maxine Fothergill was in every respect a dishonest attempt to pervert the course of justice. A wholly fabricated allegation without any foundation whatsoever which circumstantial evidence suggests was instituted by Council Leader Teresa O’Neill in connivance with Councillor Cheryl Bacon, already on record with supporting documentation of being a serial liar. Bacon is Chairman of Bexley’s Code of Conduct Committee and currently being considered by the Crown Prosecution Service for a charge of Misconduct in Public Office.
The motive was almost certainly revenge for Councillor Fothergill’s refusal to overlook criminal activity within the Conservative Party which the Leader had decided to cover up.
No one made a written complaint against Councillor Fothergill, it was manufactured by Bexley Council. There have been reports that the complaint was the work of a member of the Code of Conduct Committee which heard and judged the case against Councillor Fothergill.
Bexley Council has refused to reveal any information that would indicate that Maxine Fothergill committed any sort of ‘offence’ beyond conducting her property business in a perfectly normal manner. Those who have questioned the Council’s abuse of the law have been banned from making any further contact. The action of an organisation with dark secrets to hide.
All the circumstantial evidence points to Bexley’s corrupt Council continuing an unjustified vendetta against Councillor Fothergill.
The following blog has been retained because it contains none of the allegations against Councillor Fothergill which later proved to be entirely false. Other blogs which suggest otherwise have been withdrawn.

If I counted correctly Michael Barnbrook submitted twelve Freedom of Information requests relating to Councillor Fothergill’s ‘Misconduct’ and a question from Mr. Bryant was converted to a Freedom of Information request so that the Council can say the question is not an appropriate one for an FOI. Bexley Council knows all the best FOI avoidance tricks.

It was always likely that the FOIs would produce nothing of any use but that was not the object of the exercise, that was to see by how much Bexley Council was prepared to exploit or bend the rules to suppress the truth.

At least eight of Michael’s FOIs have been rejected out of hand over the past 48 hours. There was another response which was said to be an answer but wasn’t (the Independent Person’s appointment) and another admitted there was no evidence that the complainant had asked for anonymity but the Council is taking the precaution of acting as though he or she did. They don’t want us to trace him/her. That would be disastrous.

The only real fact that came from the FOIs is that the lady I didn’t recognise in the 2nd January photograph is Lynn Tyler, the Legal Team Manager, the Team Manager Greenwich Police investigated for Misconduct in Public Office following the Cheryl Bacon affair. The case is still with the CPS.

My summary of the FOI responses is not as detailed as I would like because there is no time to be spent analysing every reason for rejection but the overall situation does not require it. It is enough to simply report that Bexley Council is not going to say anything that might lead to details of a crime getting into the public domain. At present the only indication that there has been criminal activity is that Bexley Council is in total lockdown mode because the facts known to me are inconclusive.

I asked a Councillor while attending a recent meeting if Councillors are allowed to know the detail of complaints against their colleagues and the reply was “yes normally, but in this case all requests are being refused”. Read into that what you like.

As I see it, to make real progress towards the truth, the old lady’s name and address and the identity of the complainant must be found and on that score there has been a significant breakthrough this morning which should make Part 4 interesting reading and induce consternation in Watling Street. At least I hope it does.

 

Home page Site mapMenu mapContact us
Join Bonkers on TwitterCookie policyReturn to the top of this page