28 August (Part 1) - Tower Hamlets council given more to think about
It can become a little depressing that various authorities will always accept
the word of the liars at Bexley council over people like Mick Barnbrook and
myself who are always meticulous in our reporting of events such as
councillor Cheryl Bacon’s closed session meeting and the appointment of Will
Tuckley as Chief Executive to Tower Hamlets council.
There is absolutely no need to make things up or exaggerate when reporting
Bexley council, one would get found out sooner or later or be sued for libel.
The Commissioners at Tower Hamlets were sufficiently concerned about
Mick’s
email to make enquiries in Bexley and received all the assurances they needed to
dismiss his home truths out of hand. A vexatious fascist blogger.
I decided I would throw my own hat into the ring and send an email to the Commissioners.
An edited version appears below. It is edited only to protect honest
Conservative councillors in Bexley - there are some - from retribution from
above. Retribution that has been meted out before when the ruling clique believed too many
truths had leaked out. They hadn’t but that is another story.
Taking out whole paragraphs weakens the email considerably but it has to be done
to protect certain individuals from the wrath of Teresa O’Neill OBE (Outmanoeuvring Barnbrook’s Email).
Dear Sirs,
I am amazed at the reports following your meeting to appoint Mr. Tuckley as
Chief Executive, both from those present and in the press.
Mr. Barnbrook is neither vexatious nor a blogger and every word he wrote to you
is true and I have copies of all the documentation to prove it.
I am copying this email to my MP and to my Bexley ward councillor as both keep a
close eye on local events and I invite either of them to contact you if any part
of what I am about to say is inaccurate.
The main incident to which Mr. Barnbrook referred took place on 19th June 2013
when a Bexley council public meeting was illegally put into “Closed Session” by
the chairman. Those words are hers.
The next day a council memo referred to the incident in a measured and accurate
way but when it became more obvious later that the closure was contrary to the
Local Government Act a reason for its closure had to be invented and a press
release issued. The invention was (I summarise) that every member of the public
was running riot in the chamber, shouting, waving papers etc. Hence the closed session.
None of that was true. Only one person moved, most said nothing at all. The
initial council report made no mention of a widespread disturbance, only that
one member of the public had a small audio recorder in his hand and the police
who were called to the meeting confirmed it had been entirely law abiding.
[20 words removed] there was no disturbance in the chamber and
later two Labour councillors joined [one word removed]. A report from a council employee made
no reference to a disturbance either.
Five Conservative councillors refused to confirm there was a disturbance when asked to do so.
When I discovered that Bexley council was making derogatory comments about me (I
too was at the meeting) in response to FOI requests in connection with the
incident I made a formal complaint to Mr. Tuckley suggesting that he interviewed
the councillors who had expressed a wish to tell the truth about what took place
at the meeting. He refused to interview any of them. [Eleven words removed].
Mr. Tuckley continued to refuse to carry out any investigation over several
months, preferring to stick with the council’s fabricated line that there had
been a major disturbance in which every member of the public present had
participated. The police report did not support him but they were prevailed upon
to alter it. This is a separate issue now being investigated by an Assistant
Commissioner at Scotland Yard.
As Mr. Tuckley would not agree to conduct any enquiries into the events of June
2013 and the falsehoods disseminated about it by Bexley council, Mr. Barnbrook
and three members of the public, one of whom is myself, made an allegation of crime to the police.
There has been a long history of “political interference” in Bexley police
matters by Bexley council (the police’s words not mine) and because of that the
case was sent to Greenwich police for investigation.
The four members of the public were interviewed at considerable length (several
hours each) and three Labour councillor witnesses too. A great deal of
supporting evidence was submitted including an audio/video DVD.
[58 word paragraph removed].
The police told me of that message and the same councillor [17 words removed].
The investigating police officer unfortunately became seriously unwell and with
my agreement (he tended to correspond with me rather than Mr. Barnbrook) he did
not hand the case over to another officer. This caused a delay of several months.
However he did tell me he intended to present the case to the CPS personally
because it was both complex and powerful. Off the record he told me that if he
could get it to court he would expect the sentence to be “life changing”.
According to a message to Mr. Barnbrook the case is now with the CPS. The police
considered the evidence of Misconduct by Mr. Tuckley to be compelling. The
information you received from Bexley council is misleading to say the least.
The leader of Bexley council is not beyond reproach either. She personally (I
have the police’s report on the matter) asked Bexley police to arrest me for,
and I quote, “criticising councillors”. The police in Bexley are so obedient to
her that I was rescued only by the intervention of the IPCC.
Neither is it right to suggest that Mr. Barnbrook is a racist. He was appointed
sports mentor to Stephen Lawrence while serving in the Metropolitan Police. He
joined the BNP because it was the only prominent anti-EU party at the time. He
left when he came to the conclusion that its leader Nick Griffin was corrupt and
that the party’s banking practices were suspect.
I hope that this is sufficient information to demonstrate that there is an
active police investigation into Mr. Tuckley’s conduct although I expect it will
at any moment be subject to the “political interference” for which Bexley council is renowned.
As I said at the outset, if any part of what is written here is inaccurate in
any way, I am sure you will get an email from my MP and my ward councillor
within the next hour or two. However every statement is supported by
documentation that I hold.
Yours faithfully,
The email was copied to the Leader of Tower Hamlets council, the leader of their Independent
group and the local newspaper plus Teresa Pearce MP and councillor Danny Hackett
in accordance with paragraph three of the email.
In my view it is unlikely to affect Mr. Tuckley’s appointment - and who would
not want him to go? - and that is not the intention.
It is however important that the truth be known about Will Tuckley and more
particularly the dishonesty that runs through Bexley council from top to bottom
should be broadcast as widely as possible.
Welcome to BiB’s new readers in Tower Hamlets who join those in the Isle of Man
where the last discredited Bexley executive ended up.
He didn’t last long, and the government there has had to make up
excuses about his departure. Tower Hamlets next?
Michael Barnbrook’s email was dismissed by Tower Hamlets council as the work of
a fascist and vexatious blogger and that information could only have come from Bexley council. It is yet
another outrageous lie and absolutely typical of council leader Teresa O’Neill.
Maybe another Freedom of Information request is called for.