Tag Archives: Daniel

Daniel Morgan murder: should the inquiry into police involvement be re-opened?

Daniel Morgan: two years after an independent inquiry that found ‘institutional corruption’ by the Metropolitan Police, that organisation has again been found to have failed investigations into his death.

If you’d prefer to watch a video of this article (featuring me and Crunchie the cat), here it is:

If officers of the Metropolitan Police have found documents relating to the murder of Daniel Morgan, that should have been disclosed to the inquiry into the way the police handled that murder, then the inquiry should be reopened, shouldn’t it?

The whole business is extremely suspicious.

If you’re not aware of the circumstances of the UK’s most-investigated murder: Mr Morgan’s body was found in a south London car park in 1987, an axe buried in his head. He had been investigating police corruption.

To date, no fewer than five investigations have been conducted into the murder. Nobody has been convicted.

In 2013, then-Home Secretary Theresa May launched an independent inquiry to examine “police involvement in Daniel Morgan’s murder, the role played by police corruption in protecting those responsible for the murder from being brought to justice, and the failure to confront that corruption”.

It also looked into “the incidence of connections between private investigators, police officers and journalists at the News of the World and other parts of the media, and alleged corruption involved in the linkages between them”.

When the inquiry panel tried to publish its report in May 2021, then-Home Secretary Priti Patel tried to interfere, saying she needed to see it and may need to censor any part of it that she could claim might affect national security or human rights obligations.

She had no right to do so. The panel objected in the strongest possible terms and Patel had to back down. The report was published in full on June 15 that year.

And now it seems its findings may be false.

In January this year, 60 documents, comprising 166 pages of material, were found in a filing cabinet at New Scotland Yard, that the Met is asking us to believe has been locked for many years. Is that credible?

An assessment into the significance of the documents and any potential impact they may have was started in February and, it seems, concluded this week.

It found that 95 pages of material (37 documents) have been initially identified that would have been disclosed under a protocol agreed with the panel – and a further 71 pages (23 documents) that would have been provided to a subsequent inspection by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS).

The Met’s press release is very specific about the meaning of the discovery: “Our assessment is that there are no evidential documents that relate to criminal investigations into the murder.”

What about documents that relate to “police corruption in protecting those responsible for the murder”? What about any relating to police connections with private investigators and journalists, and corruption between them?

What about documents relating to other wrong-doing, that has not been suggested previously?

The Met’s press release says it will make any material that should have been disclosed to the Panel available to the family of Daniel Morgan and to Baroness Nuala O’Loan, who chaired the independent inquiry.

But shouldn’t it make all the new material available, so the family and Baroness O’Loan can make up their own minds?

You see, that report, published in June 2021, may have been incomplete or based on false information, but it did make several points very clearly:

The Met’s first objective in its approach to the inquiry was to “protect itself” for failing to acknowledge its many failings since Daniel Morgan’s murder in 1987.

Its handling of the investigation into Morgan’s death was “institutionally corrupt” and placed concerns about its reputation above its duty to investigate the murder properly.

The Met deliberately misled the public and Morgan’s grieving family.

It delayed handing over vital documents to the inquiry panel, thereby hindering its own work. An investigation that was not expected to take long ended up being stretched out over eight years.

Then-Assistant Commissioner Cressida Dick – along with her successors after she was promoted – was responsible for refusing to provide access to this information and never provided a reasonable explanation.

So you can see that the Metropolitan Police are not to be trusted in this matter – under any circumstances.

Nor is any politician after Priti Patel’s attempt to interfere.

So let’s have all – and I mean all – the new information handed over to the family and the inquiry which should be reconvened to allow full reconsideration of all the evidence in the light of this discovery.

And one more thing:

Are there any more filing cabinets sitting around Scotland Yard that have been locked since time immemorial? You never know – we may yet find out what happened to Lord Lucan, or learn the identity of Jack the Ripper.</strong


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/

6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical

7) Feel free to comment!

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Kawczynski refugee claim ‘illiterate, immoral and offensive’. Was he drunk again?

Daniel Kawczynski: Is this is excuse this time? It was when he was found guilty of bullying but with reference to refugees, is it a case of “in vino veritas”?

Bullying drinker Daniel Kawczynski, Tory MP for Shrewsbury and Atcham, has been causing trouble again.

Displaying what we probably guessed was the real Conservative attitude towards Ukrainian refugees, he has tweeted: “British Left wing parties demand Britain takes in more Ukrainian refugees. This is illiterate and immoral.

“When war is over Ukrainians will need to return home to rebuild their country. We should be supporting Ukrainian refugees in frontline states like Poland & Romania.”

But this was too much, even for his fellow Tories. Simon Hoare, Chair of the Commons Northern Ireland committee, responded with a harsh verbal slapping: “What utterly risible, illiterate, immoral and offensive bile. Haven’t you heard what @BorisJohnson has been saying?

“You do not speak for the Tory party. I’m not sure you speak for humanity #whitehotfury.”

Kawczynski has now deleted his tweet, which is why This Site can only quote it, rather than actually show it.

This is far from dirty Dan’s first offence.

I detailed some of them in this previous article:

He drunkenly bullied civil servants … after IT issues made it impossible for him to take part in discussions of a Parliamentary committee. He got drunk, bullied one of the civil servants who had tried to help him, and lied about both of them to his colleagues.

This is the bully who, in 2018, threatened legal action against an editor of the BBC’s Newsnight, Ian Katz, who had suggested that his defence of Saudi Arabia’s war of annihilation in Yemen might be linked to the size of his expenses budget whenever he took trips to that country.

In March 2020, tweeted support for his fellow Tory bully, Home Secretary Priti Patel, who was later found guilty of bullying civil servants by a Cabinet Office inquiry but went unpunished because Boris Johnson refused to accept the decision.

In December of 2020, he refused to make another Newsnight appearance for fear of “bullying” behaviour by presenter Emily Maitlis.

He is the entitled Tory bully who wanted to override the will of the Welsh people – and abolish the Welsh Assembly and its government – so he could visit the beach. Wales has different Covid-19-related restrictions and at the time – May 2020 – these included a ban on people crossing the border from England. The incident marked Kawczynski out as a fool because his nearest beach isn’t in Wales – it’s in the Wirral.

In February 2020, he received a formal warning and reprimand from the Conservative Party – but did not have the whip withdrawn – after he shared a platform with right-wing populist politicians such as Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán and the former deputy prime minister of Italy Matteo Salvini.

He’s a serial offender.

And it seems he hasn’t learned his lesson yet.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Boris Johnson isn’t the only Tory in trouble for breaking the rules

Daniel Kawczynski: this was his justification for bullying his staff.

Here’s Daniel Kawczynski, MP for Shrewsbury and Atcham:

Conservative MP Daniel Kawczynski is facing a one-day suspension from the Commons after being found to have broken the rules over an apology he gave for bullying parliamentary staff.

So, not only was he found guilty of bullying his own staff – he has now been found guilty of breaking the rules for apologising about it!

The recommendation has been made by the Commons Standards Committee and follows comments the MP for Shrewsbury and Atcham made before he said sorry last June.

The committee ruled that interviews he gave on local radio and with a newspaper before the required apology in the Commons chamber meant he had failed to comply, as the apology was not “unequivocal”.

In its report, the committee said: “Although he says he was sincere by the time he made the apology to the House, he had that morning effectively undermined the sincerity of that apology by broadcasting the fact that he was making it because he was required to do so and he disagreed with the way the case had been conducted.

I wonder if he expected the government to change the rules for him, as it tried to do for his former North Shropshire colleague, Owen Paterson?

Read the full story here: Tory MP facing suspension for breaking rules over apology for bullying parliamentary staff

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Tory Kawczynski faces second probe into his behaviour as an MP

Well, he was last time. What will be Daniel Kawczynski’s excuse if he’s found guilty of the latest accusations against him?

Daniel Kawczynski is under investigation – again – by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards over “actions causing significant damage to the reputation of the House as a whole, or of its Members generally”.

This comes after he was found to have drunkenly bullied civil servants over an IT issue.

He was ordered to apologise, which seemed a shockingly lenient punishment for a man who is a serial offender, as This Site described in a previous article.

I wonder how voters in Shrewsbury feel about their disgrace of a Parliamentary representative.

Details of the new accusations are not clear at the moment, but bringing the House of Commons into disrepute is a serious charge against members.

What will he get if found guilty this time – a slap on the wrist?

Source: Tory MP faces second probe into his behaviour after apology for “bullying” staff – Mirror Online

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Daniel Morgan report prompts fresh demand for Leveson Two – inquiry into corrupt connections between police and media

Daniel Morgan: remember that Priti Patel wanted to interfere with the independent inquiry’s report. Won’t it be interesting to see what she does with this latest demand?

The pressure group Hacked Off is saying the report of the Daniel Morgan inquiry shows corrupt collusion between the police and the press.

This has prompted the group to renew its demand for the government to act on the second recommendation of the Leveson Report (remember Leveson?) and start a public inquiry into unlawful and improper conduct between the police and the media.

The Tory government under David Cameron shelved this part of Leveson, years ago – raising suggestions that Cameron was afraid it would reveal unpleasant information about himself and his cronies.

Will this new initiative nudge Boris Johnson’s Tory government – which, if anything, is considered to be much worse even than Cameron’s – into doing the right thing?

Doubtful.

But nothing will happen if nobody does anything.

You can add your voice to the call by signing Hacked Off’s letter to the Home Secretary. The link is at the bottom of this article.

The Daniel Morgan Independent Panel report confirmed that at the heart of the failed police investigations into Daniel’s death was a network of corrupt police officers, newspaper reporters and private investigators.

The Panel found that:

“The circumstantial evidence suggests very strongly that intrusive activity suffered by DCS Cook, his wife Jacqui Hames and their family was arranged by former DS Fillery and Alex Marunchak with a view to discrediting DCS Cook and/or to intimidate him and thus disrupt the Abelard One/ Morgan Two Investigation”

DS Fillery was, at one stage, a suspect in the case.  Alex Marunchak was a reporter at the News of the World.  The Panel confirmed that another former suspect, Jonathan Rees, was making regular payments to Mr Marunchak at this time.

In other words, the Panel considered that the evidence “strongly” supported the allegation that employees of News UK, one of the largest newspaper publishers in the UK, deliberately sought to interfere with a murder investigation on behalf of an individual who later became a suspect in that case.

There is no evidence that News UK carried out a satisfactory internal investigation into these matters.  Indeed, the journalist Mr Marunchak was subsequently promoted.  The editor of the News of the World at that time, Rebekah Brooks, has also since been promoted within News UK.

There has been no proper independent investigation into these matters or into the nature and extent of corrupt relationships between the police and the press.  No-one has been held to account.

To promote public confidence in the police and to uphold the rule of law, we urge you to immediately re-establish Leveson Part Two: the Public Inquiry into unlawful and improper conduct involving the police and national newspapers, including that alleged in the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel Report.

Source: The Daniel Morgan Report | Hacked Off

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Why is police officer part responsible for corruption in Daniel Morgan inquiry being trusted to clean it up?

Cressida Dick: This Writer is cursing the fact that this image isn’t a post-arrest mugshot.

We should be furious about this. It is an invitation to allow the corruption to continue until all the UK’s police forces are poisoned.

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Cressida Dick has insulted the nation with her response to the findings of the Daniel Morgan inquiry.

She said it was a “matter of great regret that no one has been brought to justice” – but failed to say anything about the fact that she shares responsibility for that failure.

Dick started her statement by saying she wanted to acknowledge the “resilience” and “determination” of the Morgan family, but that’s not what they wanted; they wanted her to acknowledge the failings the inquiry discovered – including those in her own behaviour.

Then how about this for cheek:

“I have been personally determined that the Met provided the Panel with the fullest level of co-operation in an open and transparent manner, with complete integrity at all times.”

As far as I can tell, that is a direct lie – Dick herself was singled out for criticism in the inquiry report for obstructing the investigation by denying the inquiry panel access to vital information.

So: no co-operation; no openness; no transparency – and absolutely no integrity at all.

Referring to the report, she stated: “We will take the necessary time to consider it and the associated recommendations in their entirety.”

I can only conclude that she will take as much time as it takes to find a way of dismissing the report’s accusations of “institutional corruption”, to avoid bringing in any of the changes the inquiry panel demanded, and to deflect the criticisms that related directly to her.

In other words, This Writer is willing to bet that, having been found to have betrayed her duty to the public in order to protect the Met’s reputation, Dick will again betray her duty to the public in order to protect the Met’s – and her own – reputation.

It should also be noted that Assistant Commissioner Nick Ephgrave’s comment that he does not accept that the Met is “institutionally corrupt” – as the inquiry found – is cause for deep concern.

He was saying that he will attempt to obstruct plans to root out the corruption that the inquiry found.

I said it in a previous article and I’ll say it again here:

If Priti Patel could be trusted to do her job properly, she would have already demanded the suspension of Dick and every other police officer involved in this 34-years-long corrupt cover-up – all of them.

She would then invite law enforcement officers from a completely different place – possibly even from a different country, because I don’t think anybody here can be trusted to be honest (think Hillsborough) – to investigate their roles and determine whether and what criminal charges should be levelled against them.

But she isn’t doing any of that.

She’s trusting one of the people responsible for the corruption to clean it up. She’s making this worse.

Source: Daniel Morgan report: Cressida Dick apologises for failings in case | Metro News

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Cressida Dick and Met police ‘institutionally corrupt’ in hindering Daniel Morgan murder inquiry

Cressida Dick: next time I publish an image of her I want it to be the mugshot taken after she is arrested.

How will the police be reformed after the damning report on the murder of a private detective – who had been investigating police corruption?

And how can we trust any measures when the current Metropolitan Police Commissioner actively participated in the corrupt cover-up of what happened to Daniel Morgan – and the current Home Secretary wanted to edit the independent report on this fiasco before the public could see it?

Do we all know the story? Morgan’s body was found in a south London car park in 1987, an axe buried in his head. He had been investigating police corruption.

To date, no fewer than five investigations have been conducted into the murder. Nobody has been convicted.

In 2013, then-Home Secretary Theresa May launched an independent inquiry to examine “police involvement in Daniel Morgan’s murder, the role played by police corruption in protecting those responsible for the murder from being brought to justice, and the failure to confront that corruption”.

It also looked into “the incidence of connections between private investigators, police officers and journalists at the News of the World and other parts of the media, and alleged corruption involved in the linkages between them”.

When the inquiry panel tried to publish its report in May, current Home Secretary Priti Patel tried to interfere, saying she needed to see it and may need to censor any part of it that she could claim might affect national security or human rights obligations.

She had no right to do so. The panel objected in the strongest possible terms and Patel had to back down. The report has been published in full today (June 15).

It reveals that the Metropolitan Police is “institutionally corrupt” and singles out Met Commissioner Cressida Dick for personal censure.

Panel chairman Baroness Nuala O’Loan said the Met’s first objective in its approach to the inquiry was to “protect itself” for failing to acknowledge its many failings since Daniel Morgan’s murder in 1987.

Its handling of the investigation into Morgan’s death was “institutionally corrupt” and placed concerns about its reputation above its duty to investigate the murder properly.

The Met deliberately misled the public and Morgan’s grieving family.

It delayed handing over vital documents to the inquiry panel, thereby hindering its own work. An investigation that was not expected to take long ended up being stretched out over eight years.

Then-Assistant Commissioner Cressida Dick – along with her successors after she was promoted – was responsible for refusing to provide access to this information and never provided a reasonable explanation.

The inquiry panel’s report states [boldings mine]:

“The family of Daniel Morgan suffered grievously as a consequence of the failure to bring his [killer] to justice, the unwarranted assurances which they were given, the misinformation which was put into the public domain, and the denial of failings in investigation, including failing to acknowledge professional [in]competence, individuals’ venal* behaviour, and managerial and organisational failures.

“The Metropolitan Police also repeatedly failed to take a fresh, thorough and critical look at past failings.

“Concealing or denying failings, for the sake of the organisation’s public image, is dishonesty on the part of the organisation for reputational benefit and constitutes a form of institutional corruption.”

“The Metropolitan Police were not honest in their dealings with Daniel Morgan’s family, or the public. The family and the public are owed an apology.”

A statement by Morgan’s family condemned “a culture of corruption and cover up in the Metropolitan Police, an institutionalised corruption that has permeated successive regimes in the Metropolitan Police and beyond to this day.

The independent panel made a number of recommendations which include:

  • Law enforcement agencies should be subjected to a newly created “statutory duty of candour”.
  • Metropolitan Police should properly vet employees and have “adequate and effective processes” to establish whether any officers and staff are “currently engaged in crime.”
  • The force should make sure it has the necessary resources to tackle corrupt behaviour among its officers and to ensure police watchdog the Independent Office for Police Conduct is also sufficiently resourced to investigate such matters.
  • An investigation should be carried out by another police watchdog, Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS), looking at police practices and procedures to determine whether “sufficient resources” are available to protect police whistleblowers.

I have absolutely no confidence that any of these recommendations will be honoured by those concerned.

Patel has made a statement in Parliament, saying she has demanded a full response to the report from Dick. I have no confidence that anything these two cook up between them will bear any relationship to the facts; they will try to mislead us again.

If Patel could be trusted to do her job properly, she would have already demanded the suspension of Dick and every other police officer involved in this 34-years-long corrupt cover-up – all of them.

She would then invite law enforcement officers from a completely different place – possibly even from a different country, because I don’t think anybody here can be trusted to be honest – to investigate their roles and determine whether and what criminal charges should be levelled against them.

This is a most serious matter; we are seeing corruption at the heart of the police and government – of an ingrained, institutional nature.

And the Tories – themselves proven to be institutionally corrupt over the last two years of Boris Johnson’s government – are entirely unfit to tackle it.

*Showing or motivated by an inclination towards being bribed; corrupt.

Source: Daniel Morgan murder: Met chief censured for hampering corruption inquiry | Daniel Morgan | The Guardian

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Tory Kawczynski apologises for drunken bullying – but this is not his first offence. Shouldn’t he resign?

Why is Daniel Kawczynski being allowed to get off with an apology after he drunkenly bullied civil servants over an IT issue?

He should be facing investigation with a view to demanding his resignation from Parliament. Right?

It’s not even his first bullying offence.

Kawczynski was forced to apologise, according to the BBC, after IT issues made it impossible for him to take part in discussions of a Parliamentary committee.

The independent report into his conduct said Mr Kawczynski had “repeatedly” contacted one of the complainants through the day on his personal mobile, and was “repeatedly aggressive, rude and impatient”.

As the day went on, it became clear he had consumed alcohol, it added.

Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards Kathryn Stone said Mr Kawczynski had also made “critical and untruthful comments” on a WhatsApp group shared with other committee members.

He got drunk, bullied one of the civil servants who had tried to help him, and lied about both of them to his colleagues.

And the only reason he apologised was because a second panel set up to determine what punishment he should accept told him to do so, after he had appealed against the (identical) decision of the first.

This is the bully who, in 2018, threatened legal action against an editor of the BBC’s Newsnight, Ian Katz, who had suggested that his defence of Saudi Arabia’s war of annihilation in Yemen might be linked to the size of his expenses budget whenever he took trips to that country.

In March 2020, tweeted support for his fellow Tory bully, Home Secretary Priti Patel, who was later found guilty of bullying civil servants by a Cabinet Office inquiry but went unpunished because Boris Johnson refused to accept the decision.

Perhaps he thought that, if she could get away with it, he could?

He is the entitled Tory bully who wanted to override the will of the Welsh people – and abolish the Welsh Assembly and its government – so he could visit the beach.

Wales has different Covid-19-related restrictions and at the time – May 2020 – these included a ban on people crossing the border from England.

The incident marked Kawczynski out as a fool because his nearest beach isn’t in Wales – it’s in the Wirral.

Then in December of 2020, he refused to make another Newsnight appearance for fear of “bullying” behaviour by presenter Emily Maitlis.

What a double-standard. He was happy to support the bully Priti Patel but changed his tune sharply when facing the prospect of being bullied himself.

And now this. And I haven’t even mentioned his other offences and alleged indiscretions.

Just to quote one example, in February 2020, he received a formal warning and reprimand from the Conservative Party – but did not have the whip withdrawn – after he shared a platform with right-wing populist politicians such as Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán and the former deputy prime minister of Italy Matteo Salvini.

He’s a serial offender. And his excuse for the latest was that he was drunk?

I should bleedin’ cocoa!

Source: Shrewsbury MP Daniel Kawczynski apologises for bullying over lockdown IT issues – BBC News

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

‘National embarrassment issues’ as Daniel Morgan panel refuses to hand report to Priti Patel

Daniel Morgan: Priti Patel, who is in charge of the police, still wants to interfere with a report into the murder of a man who had been investigating police corruption.

What a principled, positive stand by the panel responsible for the Daniel Morgan murder inquiry.

According to The Guardian,

The independent panel investigating the Daniel Morgan scandal is refusing the home secretary’s demands to hand over its report before it can be published, as senior police sources say nothing in the case affects national security.

Patel cited the need to consider national security and human rights obligations before making the report public.

But one source with close knowledge of the five Metropolitan police inquiries into the case and the documents involved, said: “There are no national security issues involved. There are national embarrassment issues.”

The grounds on which Patel is justifying her demand to review the report are very shaky indeed:

The Home Office pointed to one part of the panel’s terms of reference which, it said, allows it to see the report before agreeing to its publication, and make changes as it sees fit.

The relevant section says: “The independent panel will present its final Report to the home secretary, who will make arrangements for its publication to parliament.”

A government source said: “Before the home secretary lays it before parliament she has to satisfy herself as to her statutory duties.

“Those relate to national security considerations and that it complies with human rights obligations such as the right to life (article 2) and the right to privacy (article 8).”

This is an attempt to shoe-horn new requirements into rules that were written six years before Patel got anywhere near the Home Office. And it shouldn’t work.

There is nothing in that section of the terms of reference that says the Home Secretary may do anything other than arrange for the report to be published.

In fact, it could be argued that the omission specifically prohibits her from trying; if she was to be allowed such leeway, it would have been written into the terms.

I reckon this will go to the High Court.

Source: Daniel Morgan murder: panel refuses to hand over report | Police | The Guardian

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Fury as Patel interferes with independence of report into private detective’s murder

Daniel Morgan: Priti Patel wants to interfere with a report into the murder of a man who had been investigating police corruption. Now, why would she want to do that?

Nothing screams “cover up” quite so loudly as a Home Secretary interfering in the publication of an independent report – especially when it is on the murder of a detective investigating police corruption.

This Writer has been reporting on the murder of Daniel Morgan, practically since I started working on newspapers, and the lack of progress in his case indicates either a monumental failure – or monumental obstruction.

His body was found in a south London car park with an axe embedded in its head in 1987.

The motive for the murder has not been established. Some believe it resulted from a business dispute but following a fresh investigation the Met announced in 2007 that the motive for the murder was probably that Morgan “was about to expose a south London drugs network possibly involving corrupt police officers”.

There are claims that corruption in Rupert Murdoch’s News International media empire is also linked to the case.

The independent Morgan panel was set up in 2013 to investigate “the incidence of connections between private investigators, police officers and journalists at the former News of the World and other parts of the media, and alleged corruption involved in the linkages between them.”

Its terms of reference included “police involvement in the murder; the role played by police corruption in protecting those responsible for the murder … and the failure to confront that corruption”.

And now Priti Patel, the government minister responsible for the police, is refusing to allow the report of an independent inquiry into his murder to be published until she has vetted it, despite not having the right to do so.

It seems she wants to black out any part of the report she says might affect national security or human rights obligations.

The Morgan panel, responsible for the report, has issued a statement attacking the intervention in the strongest possible terms.

It said it had been told the report would not be made public until it agreed to the pre-publication review by government, which breaches the understanding it has about its independence.

The panel claimed the Home Office wanted the right to black out any part of the report it considered may breach “national security” or human rights obligations.

“The Panel was informed yesterday (Monday 17 May) that a publication date will not be agreed until the home secretary and Home Office officials and lawyers have reviewed the contents of the Panel’s Report,” its statement said.

“A review of this nature has not been raised previously in the eight years since the panel was established in 2013.”

It added: “The panel believes that this last-minute requirement is unnecessary and is not consistent with the panel’s independence.”

It said: “The panel is disappointed with this position and hopes the matter can be resolved in adequate time for its report to still be published in May while parliament is sitting.”

And it said a senior team from the Metropolitan police had already checked to ensure there was nothing in the final report that jeopardised security.

The Home Office statement on the matter is contradictory.

It states: “The home secretary … has an obligation to make sure the report complies with human rights and national security considerations. This has nothing to do with the independence of the report and the Home Office is not seeking to make edits to it.”

But if Patel is planning to alter the report – in any way – before the public can see it, then she is seeking to edit it.

Daniel Morgan’s brother Alistair has said the panel should take a case to the High Court, to protect its independence.

Let’s hope it does. This case has been going on for long enough that another slight delay won’t make much difference – and resisting Patel’s interference could make the difference between finally having a conclusion and suffering another grubby cover-up.

Source: Anger as Patel delays publication of report into private detective’s murder | Police | The Guardian

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook