15 October (Part 1) - The Information Commissioner disagrees
On 20th July Bexley council was asked if it was “aware of any councillor being the subject of a criminal
investigation by the Metropolitan Police in the last 18 months. If so, how many?” and they replied as follows…
As
usual they preferred to say nothing; however the information Commissioner
sees no reason why the number should not be forthcoming and has given Bexley
council ten days to divulge it. As usual it will be interesting to see what excuse Bexley will manufacture next.
If the News Shopper’s information is correct,
tomorrow is the day when councillor Peter Craske has to report to the police again.
What we don’t know for sure is whether or not councillor Craske is Bexley’s
obscene blogger. The police have told Elwyn and me almost nothing. We only know
that someone (no age, no name, no sex, no address) was arrested on 21st June in
connection with the council’s blog but beyond that everything is coincidence and
conjecture. Without Jim Palmer’s report in the newspaper we would know almost precisely nothing.
When Elwyn and I met the police last February in connection with Bexley council’s crime
they promised to update us monthly, and in approximate terms they have made contact as
promised. However to say only “I do not intend to reveal any details of what enquiries we
are conducting” does not seem to me to get anywhere near satisfying either the
Met’s or the CPS’s stated aims on the sympathetic treatment of hate crime victims.
Bexley’s police have got extremely close to saying nothing at all. If that
continues much longer I can see another formal complaint being formulated.