Solos Inc aims

AIM: To facilitate social outlets for members and to provide the public with information about relevant services, resources and human rights.

Wednesday, 7 August 2013

"The History of TDC Legal Advice is Worrying"


Anonymous said...

Thank you for featuring my comment about the worrying history of TDC legal advice.

The Law sets duties. For example the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 sets a duty on TDC to talk to other authority about crime. If, for example, they are carrying out a process concerning firearms crime at a gun range they should chat to Kent Police Authority/PCC and Birchington Parish Council. And if the matter of mercenaries throughporting to South Africa using Ramsgate Harbour is involved then TDC should chat to Ramsgate Town Council.

And if the subject matter includes, for example, arrests for paramilitary training activity on land at Broad Oak allegedly co-owned by past leader TDC Cllr Dolding then TDC should chat to Canterbury City Council and Sturry Parish Council.

It is not rocket science.

Of course problems existed when complaint to TDC Standards was made in 2000 against Cllr Hayton who also sat on the Police Authority. But he was the KPA member dealing with the landowner who had made crime complaints about 6th Thanet Gun range.

That tory cllr had already refused or failed to hand in ordnance evidence gathered at the border of the range. But Labour Cllr Coppock did direct TDC Planning Officers to hand in the evidence of unlawful firing to police.

The facts are that TDC:

(1) failed to report that a planning officer had heard and/or witnessed unlawful machine gun fire

(2) failed to document a record for handing in ordnance evidence to police in spite of Cllr Coppocks direction to do so

(3) hid up the evidence file for 6th Thanet Range (which included photos of unlawful firing and un lawful earthworks and survey results and concealed this evidence from Standards Cttee

That Standards cttee sat whilst misled on history and evidence. But also whilst misled in law concerning witness status in High Court and which category Cllr Hayton had given evidence in at the libel case against former tory Cllr Maison.

Because whole council was misled by the process it should be whole council now that determines remedy.

The fact is Kent Police Authority had called for inquiry in August 97 into matters which would require investigation of Derek Dolding's land and George Maison's record of arrest on that land.

That was the defendant and Cllr Hayton's fellow witness Cllr Dolding as far as I know.

So did Cllr Hayton tell the High Court on oath that there was no process of inquiry ??

A simple enough question to answer. But Cllr Hayton has elected silence this 15 years.

And even if Hayton was not a TDC cllr in 98 when he gave evidence the fact remains he was a KPA member with a duty of disclosure and discussion with TDC.

He was re-elected to TDC in 99 so what happened to his KPA disclosure to TDC after he became a District Cllr in 99 ??

No come on TDC. And let's not forget who proposed Sandy Ezekiel for leadership and who mysteriously walked away from unlimited liability as a trustee of East Kent Maritime Trust. If you seek the votes of the people you tacitly promise to provide answers about conduct in public office. Best wishes Richard

Anonymous said...

Thanks for publishing.

In 1998 Mrs Mortlock successfully sued Vice Chair North Thanet tories for libel. She told me that Cllrs Dolding and Hayton were witnesses called by Maison.

She told me that during the hearing the High Court Judge checked original documents concerning North Thanet tory accounts. On the reverse side of one such document was a contemporaneous note that it seems Mr Maison had not spotted. Leading the Judge to advise him "Always check both sides of a document"

The contemporaneous note gave a name. In connection with an anomaly in the funds. This name was male. Other than that the Judge, as I understand it, ordered that the name was not to be reported.

Almost certainly the Judge expected Kent Police inquiry to ensue. It didn't. But Mrs Mortlock did try to make crime complaints after she won the libel action. Including two of perjury.

But that is one to be aware of. Never as much as hint who the male subject of Court Identity Protection Order is.

The other publishing direction is the embargo on Inquest Transcripts in the David O'Leary murder case 2008. HM Coroner provided transcripts for Court, IPCC or Crime Complaint use only. Unless heard and deposed by a someone at inquest no inquest testimony can be reported or used as a basis for published argument.

I can say that there is a Money Laundering Regs Proceeds of Crime Act implication at TDC that they appear to have failed to address.

Problems at TDC tend to build because they fail to establish legal foundation.

For example the Gun Range and Ramsgate Harbour mercenary reports 1994 to 96

In 2009 there was an expose' of a James Shortt as bogus ex SAS (Private Eye and The Sun) and consequently information availed.

For example a group who called themselves "South Africa Scouts" had allegedly made approaches about live fire training to International Bodyguards Assn or International Law Enforcement Training Agency.

Neither of which was registered at Companies House at the material time. With information that these military training groups had no Crown Authority and were not registered for tax... that triggers a Terrorism Act 2000 and Money Laundering reporting duty on TDC.

But TDC were receiving information with NO FILE to reflect it into. Because they failed to obey law from the kick off. The South Africa Commission of Inquiry report should have been circulated in 1995 and in due course cross referred to a 6th Thanet Range file which should have cross referred to Town and Parish councils and the POlice Authority and Dartford Council (For Stone Lodge Range another one with an interesting history of use)

In 2001, just as TDC were hiding up evidence from Standards having failed to document an unlawful ordnance evidence handling chain and after failing to report firearms offences, Scotland Yard published in Telegraph they wanted to interview an ex INternational Bodyguard Assn man in connection with training Al Quedda suspects at English Gun Ranges.

Two witnesses had seen a squad of unidentified middle easterners being trained in mid 90s at 6th Thanet Range.

But still TDC persisted in silence and cover up. All on the basis of legal advice that I consider was flawed and misdirecting members of TDC time and time again.

Solo Gays said...

It seems that individuals have gone to an awful lot of trouble to hold certain Thanet Councillors to account for their actions and inactions?

How do these past events impact on the way TDC is run today I wonder?

Solo Gays said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Solo Gays said...

Anonymous said...
There is also some degree of interest from a member of House of Lords. Who has asked to be copied into reports to Home Secretary that are in preparation by me.

Harvey Patterson has been given the TDC reference number, by me, of their Planning Dept reference number for their 1995 dealings with the 6th Thanet Gun Range.

The letter of 1995 is signed by an officer called Mr Dennis. It claims that the issues raised by the neighbouring land owner, about activity at the range, are not within the jurisdiction of TDC.

I would say this is self evidently wrong in law. The neighbouring landowner Mr True went over Kent Police and TDC Heads to Home Office range licensing and got the range licence withdrawn 1995.

In 1999 May/June Cllr Coppock, rightly, instructed an officer "Director of Community Services" to administer the handling of evidence, from the range, to be handed to police.

TDC now say they have no record (Heard that a few times). But I have a record because I still have Cllr Coppock's 1999 letter and I thank him for doing his duty in law. But his efforts seem to have been undermined by TDC.

In 1999 Margate Charter Trustees took a decision to end public funding of a private cadet group Kent Adventure Training Corps.

At the time the group was under some review by KCC Youth Group Affiliation officer. And he, for some 18 months, had been seeking co-operation from Thanet Police. But it was me who was the first to tell him that a KATC adult leader was a Reliance Security Guard at Deal Barracks 1989 (the terrorist bombing year). And that the first check on his claimed Army Service had just been raised by me and, as a result, REME Corps Secretariat had called in MOD Police. From which I infer the private cadet group leader had a questionable history of claiming to have served in the Army. And hence how had he cleared vetting to work at the barracks. And why hadn't Kent Police checked his record as part of the security warning inquiry 1988/89 and as part of the 22.9.89 terrorist bombing inquiry.

For the "Usual suspects" who love to accuse me of conspiracy theory. The decision to call MOD Police was taken by the Army upon examination of their records.

5 September 2013 08:52

Solo Gays said...

Anonymous said...
Margate Charter Trustees were told that Kent Police Special Branch were making inquiries. But this was a time when Kent Chief constable was telling Home Secretary that no inquiries were being conducted because they were not meritted.

I don't know how many years Margate Charter Trustees were paying out public money to the cadet group. But on the subject of TDC legal advice it seems that they had never even checked if the cadet group was legal (Unlawful Drilling Act 1819)

After the Terrorism Act 2000 came in I made a complaint to TDC Standards against the 6th Thanet Range Planning Officer and against Cllr Bill Hayton who had "Contacted" potential police witnesses about range activity and after his "Contact" they had elected not to give evidence.

Three Terrorism Act 2000 reporting compliance related strands of evidence were concealed from the Standards process. Cllr Coppock's and TDC evidence handling involvement, a file of photos and records about the range and the Kent Police disclosure to Margate Charter Trustees.

You see what happened here ? Mr Dennis in 1995 had written it was beyond TDC jurisdiction. Wrong. A TDC cllr involves in the matter 1999 et seq. Then TDC decide that we won't check whether Mr Dennis initial position is right. If it is outside the jurisdiction of TDC then we can hide evidence in our process and exempt Hayton from Standards examination.

So Standards were misled. They decided TDC had no jurisdiction to subject Cllr Hayton to their Standards scrutiny. And in so doing they appear to have blatantly broke the obligatory reporting parts of the Terrorism Act 2000

Full council endorsed the Standards decision whilst apparently so misled. Except that every cllr who was also a Margate Charter Trustee appears to have had knowledge that would cause them to suspect or to know that Standards could not be right. But they nodded the Standards decision through anyway.

Kent Adventure Training Corps adult leader tory Cllr Maison was found guilty of libel 1998 in an action brought by the late Mrs Mortlock. I have been in touch with the barrister who represented her.

I think that Maison called two Thanet tory cllrs Hayton and Dolding.

And the question for Cllr Hayton is what did he say in evidence. Did he tell the High Court there was no process of inquiry concerning Maison of KATC ?

As a member of the Police Authority Cllr Hayton must surely have known that in August 1997 they called for inquiry. Deal Barracks bombing, arrests for paramilitary activity in TA 1987 and an unpursued line of inquiry in the 1987 arrests which was KATC adult leader related.

The arrests of TA paramilitaries in 1987 appear to have occurred on land at Broad Oak co-owned by tory Cllr Dolding.

So on the face of it the Kent Police Authority call for inquiry of 1997 was inherently a call for police inquiry touching on Cllr Dolding and Cllr Maison of TDC.

That is the defendant and the co-witness of Cllr Hayton of the Police Authority and from 99 of TDC too.

he seems to have a gaggle of mitigators, smoke screeners and apologists bullying away on Thanet blogs ?

But surely it is a simple matter. Mr Hayton sought the votes of the electorate and hence honour contracted with the people to answer public interest questions put to him. So how about ending skulking in 15 years of silence and clarify the facts to the people who vote for you Cllr Hayton ? For all I know you may have a commendable explanation and enhance your share of the vote when judged on the propriety of your record.

Meanwhile I am preparing a report for the Lord whose duty it is to review the Terrorism Act 2000.

Best wishes Richard Card
5 September 2013 08:53