24 May (Part 1) - Another long winded quest for the truth
A big thank you to the various senders of support with the ongoing battle against the
corruption endemic in Bexley Council and the Metropolitan Police. I dearly wish I
could reveal some of the information that trickles down to me from the Daniel
Morgan Panel. If that ever gets into the mainstream media it will blow the
Metropolitan Police apart. Hillsborough is nothing by comparison.
I rather liked the Facebook comment; “Time to get the popcorn out”. It’s true
that for most of the time BiB rumbles on with a succession of B movies and then
just as I despair of finding something more long running, along comes
Bexley Council in some shape or other and produces a Blockbuster. The last
one concerned Councillor Fothergill and her conviction by Bexley’s Code of Conduct Committee of
bringing the Council into disrepute.
(Links to Council website.) The case, rather than
the Councillor, shows every sign of doing just that.
Since Councillor Cheryl Bacon (still with the CPS for alleged Misconduct in a Public Office) chaired that infamous
Code of Conduct Committee meeting on 10th
December and found a Councillor guilty of obtaining a financial
advantage, a number of people have tried to get at the truth. Michael Barnbrook
asked 14, I think it was, questions and learned almost nothing.
Bexley Council never has been happy with the concept of residents knowing the truth about how
it operates so most enquirers have been fobbed off, given up asking and fallen by the wayside -
but not John Watson.
Mr.
Watson’s case revolves largely around his assertion that Mr. Akin
Not A Proper Solicitor Alabi, Bexley’s Head of Legal
has confirmed to him that there was no legitimate complaint against Councillor Fothergill. Nothing was in
writing. If Mr. Watson has sent me the proof of that I cannot find it.
Having perhaps got a little too close to the truth for Bexley Council’s liking, the
Acting Chief Executive Paul Moore said he was closing down the correspondence
and if Mr. Watson wrote to him again
he would be declared vexatious.
Mr. Watson was not deterred and appears to be going for Bexley Council’s
jugular. Someone has to try to bring these criminals to account, obviously you
cannot rely on a subservient police force to do it.
His letter, sent by email and displayed here in a format more suitable for the
web, sums up the present situation and sets out what is likely to happen next.
THE QUEEN V LONDON BOROUGH OF BEXLEY
Unsatisfactory conduct
• With further reference to
your email of last Friday 13th May 2016, I have to say I am very disappointed at its contents.
• Having now carefully considered the contents of that email, I am wondering whether it was in fact
drafted by you because it appears to me to be written in the writing style of Lynn Tyler.
Accountability
• However, at the end of the
day, what you say is in black and white and it has been sent and signed by you.
Thus you are personally accountable for all the untrue, misleading statements
and the serious misrepresentations your email under reply contains.
• I am concerned that your
email is infested with such diversionary, irrelevant statements and subterfuge.
• This is not an acceptable
reply by a public servant who is being paid from public funds and in your case,
very handsomely paid, at the rate of £133,000 odd pounds a year.
• It cannot be right for a
public servant to write to a member of the public, from which public you are
obtaining your salary, and make untrue and misleading statements and serious
misrepresentations in order to avoid properly replying to correspondence.
• It appears to me your email
has all the hallmarks of what is known in the vernacular as ‘a Cover-up’.
• Nevertheless, I need to press on with Judicial
Review matters but I can assure you I will be addressing in detail all the
untrue, misleading statements, the serious misrepresentations and the threats
you make to deprive me of my human rights in your email under reply.
Summary of Bexley Council’s current position.
• You know that the only way
you can obtain power to deal with allegations against Councillors is by
complying with section 28 (9) of The Localism Act 2011.
• You know that section 28 (9)
of The Localism Act 2011 specifically provides that allegations against
Councillors must be made in writing.
• You know that no such written
allegations were made by the alleged elderly lady Complainant.
• You know that without
properly laid allegations under section 28 (9) of The Localism Act 2011 you have
no powers to pursue allegations against Councillors.
• You know that if you act
beyond your statutory powers you are acting illegally and/or unlawfully which
provides a cause of action.
• You know that you have
admitted that the allegations against Councillor Maxine Fothergill were not made
in writing by the alleged elderly lady Complainant.
• You know that you have
admitted that the allegations against Councillor Maxine Fothergill were not made
by the alleged elderly lady Complainant.
Rule 2.1 of The Procedure for Dealing With Complaints Pursuant to The Members’ Code of Conduct
• You know that the only way
the Members' Code of Conduct Complaints Sub-Committee can obtain power to deal
with allegations against Councillors is by there being full compliance with Rule
2.1 of The Procedure for Dealing with Complaints Pursuant to The Members’ Code
of Conduct.
• You know that Rule 2.1 of The Procedure for
Dealing with Complaints Pursuant to The Members’ Code of Conduct specifically
requires that “A complaint should be made in writing, by letter or email, to the Monitoring Officer…”
• You know that no such written complaint was
made by the alleged elderly lady Complainant.
• You know that Rule 2.1 of The Procedure for
Dealing With Complaints Pursuant to The Members’ Code of Conduct specifically
requires that “A complaint should be made in writing, by letter or email, to the
Monitoring Officer within 7 days of the alleged breach(es) of the Members’ Code of Conduct”.
• You know that no complaint was made by the
alleged elderly lady Complainant against Councillor Maxine Fothergill “…within 7
days of the alleged breach of the Members’ Code of Conduct”.
• You know you have admitted that the
allegations against Councillor Maxine Fothergill were not made in writing as
required by Rule 2.1 of The Procedure for Dealing with Complaints Pursuant to
The Members’ Code of Conduct.
• You know you have admitted that the
allegations against Councillor Maxine Fothergill were not made “..within 7 days
of the alleged breach of the Members’ Code of Conduct”.
• You know that if the Members' Code of Conduct
Complaints Sub-Committee acts contrary to Rule 2.1 of The Procedure for Dealing
with Complaints Pursuant to The Members’ Code of Conduct it is acting illegally
and/or unlawfully which provides a cause of action.
• You know I have tried to meet with you at
least four times to seek ways of resolving these issues but you have repeatedly
refused to do so.
• You know you have sought to justify your
unfair, unreasonable, illogical and unlawful conduct by writing to me in Alice
in Wonderland language and refusing to treat my correspondence with respect.
What I state above shows you to be acting in a way that is unfair, unreasonable, illogical
and beyond your powers. I now anticipate that the conduct of Bexley Council that
I refer to above will form the basis of my Judicial Review claim.
As the person with ultimately responsible for
the Members' Code of Conduct Committee and the Members' Code of Conduct
Complaints Sub-Committee, will you please let me know to what extent you were
personally involved in connection with the prosecution of Councillor Maxine
Fothergill. For example, were any matters referred to you in connection with her
prosecution and, if so, what were those matters.
I believe there is still a possibility that
the situation you are in could be resolved by our meeting for this purpose and I
would again ask you to reconsider doing so after you have reflected on your
position as set out above. If I do not hear from you within 7 days with your
proposals in this regard, I will assume you are still refusing to have a meeting.
John Watson