Rutland man posing as a woman, cautioned by Leicestershire Police after telling MP Caroline Nokes she ‘deserved to be violently raped’ on Facebook
Tim Price wrote to MP Caroline Nokes and then popped into a police station
Hi letter begins: “My name is Tim Price. I am the person who sent you that terrible and disgusting message on Facebook. I have no excuse for my actions. You must have been understandably upset and shaken to have received such a message and words cannot express my apology nor how disgusted I feel for putting you and your family through such a dreadful ordeal.”
He says he had been following the Fathers4Justice Facebook page, adding: “I got myself wound up by the utter hatred that came from this page.”
But he insists: “I would like to reassure you that you and your family are in absolutely no danger of physical violence from this incident.”
Tim Price's own FaceBook Page
https://www.facebook.com/tim.price.54922
The Facebook post:
“How fucking dare you and your henchman bully and intimidate Matt Nadine and their 8 year old son. Caroline you deserve to be violently RAPED, and I mean that. I hope you are and left for dead somewhere after being raped…. there are a lot of people who wish you serious harm, torture and death. Watch your back.
A very unpleasant comment.
Last October the press reported the Facebook comment was left by a woman.
I find it odd that some Male Trolls chose to become woman, Ex Cllr and Deputy Mayor Councillor Charles Haworth pretends to be a woman when he trolls on Facebook.
Police cautions replaced with punitive sanctions for three English forces were the headlines in October 2014 it seems one of those forces Leicestershire Police has decided to backtrack.
Fathers4Justice have recently deleted all posts from its site relating to the MP.
Like this one below
October 12th, 2014
12/10/14 – THE DAILY MAIL, CAROLINE NOKES MP & THE TRUTH
MAIL COMP
Picture: in clockwise order: Conservative MP Caroline Nokes with the O’Connor’s, agreeing to support Shared Parenting at the 2010 election. Adrian Yalland, the man the MP brought to the O’Connor’s home on 20/1/14, pictured during his attack. Bite mark inflicted by Adrian Yalland during attack on the O’Connor’s home on 20/2/14. O’Connor’s car window smashed in 15/9/14.
Read Matt O’Connor’s Latest Blog Post – The MP Who Betrayed Britain’s Fathers
http://www.fathers-4-justice.org/thempwhobetrayedbritainsfathers/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2789596/divorced-mp-forced-change-locks-install-panic-alarm-tells-hell-hands-trolls-fathers-4-justice.html
Today’s Daily Mail article by Paul Cahalan is another attempt to smear and villify Fathers4Justice using baseless claims as the press have consistently done, most notably with the ‘Leo Blair Kidnap’ story in 2006. To read the press, one would think that the O’Connor’s and Fathers4Justice were the defendants in the case of harassment and intimidation, not Caroline Nokes MP and her colleague.
The article is devoid of balance and factual content and does not report the facts of the civil case against the MP. Neither the O’Connor’s nor anyone from Fathers4Justice has been to the MPs house, targeted her children or her businesses, or behaved in any inappropriate way, or been arrested in relation to this matter, interviewed or even received a PIN notice from Hants Police. Unlike the MP and her colleague Adrian Yalland.
The O’Connor family have suffered a well documented, 7-month long campaign of violent intimidation which Caroline Nokes has now admitted to being involved in. The O’Connor family have now been forced to move from their home after a threat to call Social Services about their children was carried out last week.
The only person facing charges is Caroline Nokes MP in a civil action brought by the O’Connor’s in the High Court. At the point when she has been forced to admit her involvement, Nokes has launched a series of entirely unfounded, unproven allegations against F4J and the O’Connor’s as she plays the ‘female MP victim of trolling’ card.
If there was any truth to her allegations of harassment then Hampshire Police would have dealt with them a year ago and arrested and charged those responsible. The truth though is they have not, and in fact Hampshire Police have written to us saying there are no concerns about us regarding Ms Nokes for them to investigate.
Below is a point by point rebuttal of the Daily Mail article from the original emails.
Barely a single one of our rebuttals has been included in the article.
From: Paul Cahalan Date: Friday, 10 October 2014 21:45
Subject: Caroline Nokes
Hi Nadine and Matt,
As discussed, I’m going to write an article on Sunday and you might want to comment on a few things.
Our reply – Paul, before we address these points, see below out statements. Matt
STATEMENT BY THE O’CONNORS
1. Firstly, can we state that we are the claimants in a private, civil action against the MP and her friend Mr Yalland, not the defendants, which is the impression created from these questions.
2. This relates to a traumatic, 7-month long campaign of intimidation which has targeted our family, our children and our home in Stockbridge, Hampshire.
3. As a result of this intimidation, we are being forced to move our family out of the area this week.
4. We believe this is a politically motivated campaign of intimidation linked to a dispute with the MP regarding her broken election promises made to Fathers4Justice to support Shared Parenting see link: http://romsey.conservativesintouch.com/news/216/ and the Stanbridge Earls child sex abuse scandal. We said her calls for the school to remain open placed children at risk and the school subsequently closed. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2301327/Stanbridge-Earls-boarding-school-girl-raped-15-head-accused-cover-up.html
5. We believe she and her local supporters turned on us as a result of this and that the MP orchestrated this campaign of intimidation.
6. We are making an application for disclosure under Section 35 Data Protection Act 1995 for witness statements from defendants, legal papers, and all witness statements and notebook entries from Police officers about the incident on 20/2/14 so there can be a trial of fact in the civil court.
7. The MP is a hypocrite for portraying herself as the victim and has never apologised for what happened on 20/2, nor condemned the attack, nor offered any sympathy to our family or even our children.
8. The MP used Yalland to remove any references in the Daily Mail and other national newspaper so her involvement was concealed from the media. Nokes later relied on Police assurances to say she was ‘not present’. Turning the car around on Stockbridge High Street while the attack took place is not a defence under the Joint Enterprise law.
9. The MP has taken 7-months to disclose her role and has repeatedly lied to her constituents and changed her story about the attack 3 times. Her disclosure had only come about as a result of our civil proceedings. The MP has now admitted that she was directly involved with the incident on 20/2/14, has a relationship with Yalland, whose conduct is detailed below, that she is linked to this campaign of intimidation, and it is likely that further admissions will be made by the MP during the course of civil proceedings.
10. The MP has repeatedly been untruthful about her role in the incident on 20/2/14 to constituents (see redacted email previously sent).
11. Neither the O’Connor’s nor anyone from Fathers4Justice has been to the MPs house, targeted her children or her businesses, or behaved in any inappropriate way, or been arrested in relation to this matter, interviewed or even received a PIN notice from Hants Police.
12. In light of the revelations concerning Ms Nokes involvement in the incident of 20/2/14, we have written to the Chief Constable of Hampshire, Andy Marsh, calling for the investigation to be reopened and asked that Police consider arresting and interviewing the MP about her role on 20/2/14 under the Joint Enterprise Law.
13. We have made a complaint to the Independent Police Complaints Commission about the role of Hants Police in failing to reveal the MPs indentity in this event and disclosing material evidence in this case which has been concealed from the victims, thereby impending our ability to bring the perpetrators to justice through the criminal or civil courts.
14. On 25/6/14 we were informed by Laura Nicholson, the Assistant Chief Constable of Hants Police that a Police file had been marked restricted ‘to protect the confidentiality of those involved’. The only person whose name had not been reported at that time was Ms Nokes. It is now clear that this was to protect the identity of the MP.
15. We have made a formal complaint to the Independent Police Complaints Commission about the role of Hants Police in concealing the involvement of an incumbent MP in a violent attack which we believe was done to protect her from press coverage of the incident on 20/2/14 with resulting reputational damage that would have ensued before the next election.
16. The PSD report by Hants Police, is being appealed at the IPCC.
17. Finally, this situation is entirely of the MPs own making because she compounded the situation by lying to her constituents about her involvement. She and her supporters, including her father Roy Perry, Leader of Hampshire County Council, refused all efforts by us to diffuse this situation. We can supply copies of these letters.
18. We believe that the MP orchestrated a campaign of violent politically motivated intimidation, using right-wing extremists in the local Tory party to target our family, and especially our 8-yr-old son.
MATT O’CONNOR STATEMENT 11/10/14
Irrespective of my role as the founder and leader of Fathers4Justice, my children and landlord have no political involvement with our campaign and have a right to family life, free of fear, threats and violence.
After 7 months of denials and lying to constituents, Caroline Nokes MP has now admitted bringing a man she knew had mental health issues to our home, a man who had recently received a 2-year bind over after assaulting a nurse, where she knew children would be present as it was half-term, without any lawful reason to do so. We believe this was a deliberate, orchestrated act of political intimidation by the MP. Hants Police must reopen the case, arrest the MP under the Joint Enterprise Law and conduct a full and transparent inquiry into the role of MP and why they covered up her role in a violent incident.
It is blatantly clear that Hants Police conspired to conceal the involvement of an incumbent MP, in a violent, criminal act to protect her reputation and this is now subject to a complaint with the IPCC. It is self evident that her influence affected the integrity of the investigation.
MPs are their to represent their constituents, not attack them and it is down to the constituents of Romsey & Southampton North to judge the MP on her affair, her broken promises, her disgraced trip to the African Dictatorship of Equatorial Guinea, her failure to protect children at Standbridge Earls School and her involvement in this political intimidation, at the next election.
MPs should at all times conduct themselves in a manner which will maintain and strengthen the public’s trust and confidence in the integrity of Parliament and never undertake any action which would bring the House of Commons, or its Members generally, into disrepute. MPs have a duty to uphold the law and a special duty to their constituents.
My sole concern is the protection and welfare of my family. No matter how long it takes, we will bring those responsible to justice.
No MP is above the law.
Matt O’Connor
DAILY MAIL QUESTIONS
1) Ms Nokes claims she has been the victim of a hate campaign for 18 months which has caused her and her daughter distress and led to her increasing house security – alarms, cctv – around the house following a security report. She says her harassment comes from two places,
a) tweets and posts by you/f4j
RESPONSE: Firstly, as you say these are simply ‘claims’, not supported by any evidence. Ms Nokes continues to make a series of baseless, malicious claims in the media about us and Fathers4Justice, in an attempt to demonise and villify us as we bring civil proceedings against her. We must restate that she is the defendant in these actions. We believe this is an attempt to prejudice and politicise the court process and deflect attention from her role in these matters which she has only now begun admitting.
It is important to deal with the facts, not baseless claims. Neither the O’Connor’s or anyone from Fathers4Justice has been to her house, targeted her children or her businesses, or behaved in any inappropriate way, or been arrested, interviewed or even received a PIN notice from Hants Police.
Further, Ms Nokes has brought no legal proceedings against anyone relating to these claims. By contrast, our civil action us based on 7-months worth of evidence, Police reports and her now admitted role in the events of 20/2/14. Equally, no one has attended her surgeries for fear of her making false allegations.
Examples:
A tweet from Matt on 8/6/13 which says
oops, Mrs O @nadineOC nearly runs over Jim Davidson in #stockbridge right constituency, wrong person. RESPONSE: Can you supply a reference for this? Why is the MP monitoring our Twitter accounts? What has this tweet got to do with the MP? We suspect this quip would relate to anyone of a number of local issues and people in Stockbridge at this time from Solar Farms, to planning developments to shale gas exploration which threatens the area. We have been involved in campaigning to protect the area from development by local vested interests and Conservatives for some time.
On 14/6/13 Fathers 4 Justice official tweet says
F4J protesters working around Romsey and Wellow tonight looking for @carolinenokes MP to ask her why she broke her election promises RESPONSE: Can you supply a reference for this including the time of the tweet? On the 14/6/13 the MP had left Romsey because F4J had a stand for Father’s Day in Romsey market place organised with a local businessman to which the MP had been invited. We were told by Conservative Party members, many of whom are friends and supporters, that she had visited a school outside of her constituency because she didn’t want to discuss the dispute regarding her broken election promises about shared parenting. It was clear the MP had no intention of engaging with her constituents in any debate on this matter and was in effect ‘running away’ from democratic debate. As far as I am aware, holding a democratically elected MP to their election promises is not a criminal offence.
By contrast to our peaceful event, it was Mr Yalland who stalked, then took pictures of Nadine O’Connor at this event. Photos of my wife were produced at an executive Conservative meeting that evening, a point I am sure Ms Nokes will confirm. The incident was reported to Hants Police.
In the evening of 14/6 we met with people in the area to discuss the Stanbridge Earls Child Sex Abuse scandal http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2351515/Stanbridge-Earls-School-Pupils-abseiled-naked-teachers-watched-latest-saga-hit-boarding-school-Lord-Flies-abuse-claims.html F4J had been critical of the MP as she had called for the school to remain open despite the fact that Oftsed had said that children were unsafe.
Later that night, 22.23, another tweet says @carolinenokes MP can run, but she can’t hide. @f4j official in Romsey and Wellow & #stanbridgeearlschool tonight. RESPONSE: you supply a reference for this? See above comment.
b) harassment by other internet trolls, inspired by F4J. RESPONSE: Paul, how are these ‘inspired’ by F4J, a campaign group who peacefully campaigns in fancy dress which enjoys the support of 104 MPs from all political parties and UKIP?
Examples include Ms Nokes being trolled by others after the Feb 20 event.
One troll said: “How fucking dare you and your henchman bully and intimidate Matt Nadine and their 8 year old son. Caroline you deserve to be violently RAPED, and I mean that. I hope you are and left for dead somewhere after being raped…. there are a lot of people who wish you serious harm, torture and death. Watch your back. RESPONSE: This clearly has no relation to us or Fathers4Justice or our social media accounts and is yet another attempt to smear us by linking us to some wholly unconnected comment found on the darker corners of the internet.
2) Ms Nokes claims you shouldn’t have used her daughter as a “pawn” in the childcare debate.
Matt, you raise the issue of custody in a posting on 20/4/13 and then name her daughter in a posting on 24/4/13. She will say that her ex-husband and her share custody. RESPONSE: With regard to using children in her political career or a political ‘pawn’, Ms Nokes appeared with us, our children and her daughter in the announcement ref her support for shared parenting in 2010 http://romsey.conservativesintouch.com/news/216/ (SEE ALSO ATTACHED PIC).
Given the MP had changed her position on shared parenting, it was a legitimate question to ask whether this change in position was as a direct result of her divorce from her husband following her well publicised affair in the Daily Mail: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1286264/Cameron-Cutie-MP-Caroline-Nokess-4-year-affair-toyboy.html No doubt Mr Nokes can confirm whether there were issues surrounding contact during the dispute, however such disputes are common place even amongst MPs (Remember David Blunkett MP and Kimberly Quinn) and it was reasonable to ask whether her husband had full, unrestricted access to their daughter and a shared parenting arrangement giving him equal access. This was particularly relevant given she had stopped supporting shared parenting.
If the MP does support shared parenting, there would have been no dispute with her. However, she endorsed the discredited Children & Families Bill, sat on that committee, refused to sign EDM 210 supporting Shared Parenting http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2013-14/210 which 104 of her colleagues signed this year or attend a Shared Parenting debate in Parliament in June 2014 attended by 10 of her constituents.
It is our job to hold MPs to their election promises and we will not apologise for doing so.
With regard to the welfare of children in general, the MP has shown no concern for the welfare and wellbeing of our young children (who appeared in the photograph with her daughter), during the last 7 months despite being fully aware as to what has happened to our family. Further, in June 2013 she wrote to us to tell us she would never represent our children stating, I will not represent ‘you, your wife, your children, her parents, either now or at any time in the future.’
3) Events of Feb 20.
Ms Nokes has admitted driving Mr Yalland to Stockbridge. She claims she stopped “a distance away” but didn’t witness the attack. She then says she returned to give police a copy of the legal letter Yalland was intending to serve. She says Yalland and her are just friends, but she admits she knew he was going to deliver a letter – adding Yalland had taken legal advice that it was legally ok to do so.
RESPONSE: Firstly, Nokes has never condemned Yalland’s actions on the day, nor apologised for what happened, nor expressed any sympathy to our family. Secondly, Stockbridge is a small village, not a town, as she has previously claimed. Thirdly, the MPs story has repeatedly changed. Over the last 7-months she has told constituents that she was not present and had no involvement in the events of the 20th February (see redacted emails below). She then told The Independent newspaper that she ‘dropped him (Yalland) off on the edge of town’. She is now claiming that she chauffered Yalland to Stockbridge and delivered a copy of the legal letter Yalland was intending to serve to Stockbridge Police station, which supports our claim that NO legal papers were served. In fact Yallands story has changed from ‘serving legal papers’ to ‘serving a letter before action’ to ‘popping letters through their letter box’.
The violent incident that followed was witnessed by our 8-yr-old son who was spoken to by Yalland and had pictures taken of him. Yalland had forced entry to our land via electric gates, scaled an internal fence and attempted to entre the rear of the property. He was only prevented from doing so because Mrs O’Connor was holding onto the other end of the door. He then forced the electric gates to leave the property and left. He then returned to our home to take pictures of Nadine O’Connor who was in an upstairs window on the phone to the police. As I attempted to prevent him from taking further pictures of my wife, Yalland punched me in the head knocking me to the ground outside my house, and then savagely bit my landlord, drawing blood (see pic sent) who was trying to restrain him from attacking me on the ground.
As soon as Hants Police became aware of the presence of the MP, they conspired to conceal her involvement. We have made applications for disclosure of all police notes from officers who attended on the day. Her involvement was not only concealed from us, but the public and the Daily Mail who reported the story on 21/2/14 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2567688/Former-Tory-arrested-biting-Fathers4Justice-founder-tried-serve-legal-papers.html. Her involvement in a violent incident, her misleading and untruthful claims to constituents are a legitimate matter of public interest.
Hants Police upheld a complaint by us in their PSD report of 1/9/14 that concerned ‘the failure of officers to identify any role or involvement of Ms Nokes’. This is a masterclass in legally worded obfuscation which is why this has been appealed tot he IPCC.
We are also raising other concerns about the personal relationship between Andy Marsh, the Chief Constable of Hants Police and the MP in light of an investigation into the leaking of information relating to Stanbridge Earls school from him to her earlier this year.
She also claims she has never lied to her constituents about the issue and that she has claimed her expenses fairly as she was on parliamentary business. RESPONSE: Firstly, Parliament was in recess that week. Secondly, she brought Yalland to our house where a violent incident took place, using fuel paid for by taxpayers. Secondly, she has repeatedly been been untruthful (at best, obfuscated) to constituents about the incident see letter below and her response.
Nokes repeatedly states she had not given a statement ‘as a witness to the incident’, yet Inspector Paul Pressley from Hants Police wrote to inform us on 2/5/14 that “She was treated as a witness by the police to the incident on 20th Feb.”
LETTER TO CONSTITUENT
———- Forwarded message ———-
From: NOKES, Caroline
Dear Mr Redacted
Thank you for your email of 20th August received via the ‘They Work for You’ website.
Although you do not specifically say so, I assume you are referring to an incident in Stockbridge in February, involving Mr and Mrs O’Connor, and Mr Adrian Yalland, who I understand is suing Mrs O’Connor for libel in the High Court.
As I have not seen the letter you refer to, I cannot comment at length. However, Mr Yalland has not been a member of the Romsey and Southampton North Conservative Association since October last year, five months before this incident.
As you yourself pointed out, no charges were made against Mr Yalland, who from the article you refer to claims he acted in self-defence. I cannot comment on those claims as I was not there, but I was told the incident was witnessed by an unrelated third party who apparently confirmed she saw Mr Yalland being attacked.
Contrary to the claims of Mr & Mrs O’Connor I have not given a statement ‘as a witness to the incident’. However, the following week, I was one of a number of people who confirmed to the police that Mr. Yalland had stated it was his intention to deliver legal documents to Mrs O’Connor on the day in question.
I cannot comment on whether Mr Yalland has been given a ‘harassment warning’, or on the ‘file’ being marked ‘restricted’. I would refer you Hampshire Police on those points.
Finally, I have never had any commercial relationship with Mr Yalland (which is verifiable via my entry in the register of members’ interests), and he is not my ‘partner’.
Yours sincerely
Caroline Nokes
Caroline Nokes MP
Romsey and Southampton North
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA
Tel: 0207 219 1468
www.carolinenokes.com
Sent from my iPad
Wednesday 20 August 2014
Dear Mrs Nokes,
I was concerned to receive a letter from a local resident on the 1st August 2014 that set out details of an attack at their home back in February and subsequent allegations of harassment. I have lived in Stockbridge for 8 years now and this attack has greatly shocked and alarmed many in the town.
What concerned me most is the allegation that you were directly involved in this incident. The letter states that Hampshire Police have confirmed that you were treated as a witness to the attack.
As a resident, parent and constituent of yours, can you address some of the allegations made in this letter?
1. What is your relationship with the alleged attacker and former Vice Chair of Romsey Conservative Branch?
2. Is it true that you drove this man to the O’Connor’s house in Stockbridge on that day?
3. Is the allegation that Police treated you as a witness to the attack also true?
4. If you did not drive this man to their house as the letter alleges, were you present in Stockbridge during the attack?
5. Having seen the graphic pictures of the assault on the Daily Mail website, which happened in broad daylight on Stockbridge High Street, it seems remarkable nobody was charged. The implication in the letter is that you used your political influence to ensure charges were never brought against the assailant. Is this true?
6. If you are not involved, why would the Police state you were a witness and mark the file ‘restricted’ as the O’Connor’s allege and why have you not condemned this attack by your former Vice Chair?
7. Finally, we are all very concerned to hear that the same man has received a Police harassment warning after targeting the 8-year-old son of the O’Connor’s. This is the same age as my eldest son, who is a friend, and as you can imagine any associations of that kind give us great cause for concern.
On behalf of many concerned parents in Stockbridge, I think these questions need to be answered. Stockbridge is a small close knit community and these unpleasant developments need to be resolved. Whatever the truth in the matter, I sincerely hope you will answer my questions openly and honestly, as soon as possible.
Yours sincerely
4) She claims F4J “dropped the ball” when the children and family bill came around. She says there was no written submission from F4J and that the organisation did not engage on what amendmentsshould have been made. RESPONSE: The MP supported a bill that did not contain a single one of the promises she and the Conservative Party made to Fathers4Justice in 2010. In particular, it did not include their specific promise to introduce a presumption of shared parenting. It was impossible for Fathers4Justice to make a submission on a bill that was a sham and the dispute with the MP flowed from these broken promises.
MR YALLAND’S ROLE
We believe that civil proceedings will reveal that Yalland has been acting as a proxy for Ms Nokes. His savage actions on 20/2/14 speak for themselves. Bear in mind this was a former Tory Spin Doctor, former Vice Chair Romsey Tories and the MPs personal friend who took a chunk out of a complete strangers arm.
He has relentlessly targeted every aspect of our lives and is subject to an ongoing Police investigation. His course of conduct to date has included the following as his Twitter account will also confirm.
1. He sent 22 emails in 3 days to us prior to 20th February
2. After the attack on 20/2, he rang the Daily Mail and removed any mention of Caroline Nokes from media reports
3. On 19/6/14 he posted our personal address and business details on Twitter and began targeting our son and his school on Twitter
4. On 4/7/14 Yalland was served with a PIN notice by Hampshire Police about you conduct that stated: “That you have retweeted photographs of Archie O’Connor and are to refrain from further re-tweeting/ publishing any photographs of Archie O’Connor.” “You have also tweeted personal details of the O’Connor’s and are to desist from this and including tweeting documents that contain personal information about the O’Connor’s.”
5. On 10/7/14, he targeted a new business start up by the O’Connors on Twitter and made defamatory claims to a major UK retailer about them with the intention of harming their business
6. 23/8/14 he posted defamatory tweets about the Fathers4Justice campaign with the intention of harming their campaign
7. 14/9/14 he tweeted the Breeders Show in London where Nadine O’Connor was speaking the following day with the intention of trying to discredit Nadine O’Connor and her position in the debate
DISCLOSURE
As part of our disclosure application we have also asked for the following information about Nokes & Yalland:
1. Disclosure of all emails, letters, note, telephone between Nokes & Yalland regarding the claimants
2. Documents relating to Yalland’s arrest, change and bind over in Croydon Magistrates Court on 20th November 2013
3. Details of any mental health disorder which may have affected Yalland’s actions on 20/2/14, as disclosed by Martin Hatley, Vice Chair Romsey Tories to the Romsey Advertiser, and referred to in a Press Complaints adjudication here http://www.holdthefrontpage.co.uk/2014/news/privacy-complaint-against-weekly-rejected/
ENDS
Posted in Adrian Yalland, Caroline Nokes, Chief Constable Andy Marsh, Conservative Party, General Election 2015, Hampshire Constabulary, Latest News, Police, Romsey & Southampton North
Tim Price wrote to MP Caroline Nokes and then popped into a police station
Hi letter begins: “My name is Tim Price. I am the person who sent you that terrible and disgusting message on Facebook. I have no excuse for my actions. You must have been understandably upset and shaken to have received such a message and words cannot express my apology nor how disgusted I feel for putting you and your family through such a dreadful ordeal.”
He says he had been following the Fathers4Justice Facebook page, adding: “I got myself wound up by the utter hatred that came from this page.”
But he insists: “I would like to reassure you that you and your family are in absolutely no danger of physical violence from this incident.”
Tim Price's own FaceBook Page
https://www.facebook.com/tim.price.54922
The Facebook post:
“How fucking dare you and your henchman bully and intimidate Matt Nadine and their 8 year old son. Caroline you deserve to be violently RAPED, and I mean that. I hope you are and left for dead somewhere after being raped…. there are a lot of people who wish you serious harm, torture and death. Watch your back.
A very unpleasant comment.
Last October the press reported the Facebook comment was left by a woman.
I find it odd that some Male Trolls chose to become woman, Ex Cllr and Deputy Mayor Councillor Charles Haworth pretends to be a woman when he trolls on Facebook.
Police cautions replaced with punitive sanctions for three English forces were the headlines in October 2014 it seems one of those forces Leicestershire Police has decided to backtrack.
Fathers4Justice have recently deleted all posts from its site relating to the MP.
Like this one below
October 12th, 2014
12/10/14 – THE DAILY MAIL, CAROLINE NOKES MP & THE TRUTH
MAIL COMP
Picture: in clockwise order: Conservative MP Caroline Nokes with the O’Connor’s, agreeing to support Shared Parenting at the 2010 election. Adrian Yalland, the man the MP brought to the O’Connor’s home on 20/1/14, pictured during his attack. Bite mark inflicted by Adrian Yalland during attack on the O’Connor’s home on 20/2/14. O’Connor’s car window smashed in 15/9/14.
Read Matt O’Connor’s Latest Blog Post – The MP Who Betrayed Britain’s Fathers
http://www.fathers-4-justice.org/thempwhobetrayedbritainsfathers/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2789596/divorced-mp-forced-change-locks-install-panic-alarm-tells-hell-hands-trolls-fathers-4-justice.html
Today’s Daily Mail article by Paul Cahalan is another attempt to smear and villify Fathers4Justice using baseless claims as the press have consistently done, most notably with the ‘Leo Blair Kidnap’ story in 2006. To read the press, one would think that the O’Connor’s and Fathers4Justice were the defendants in the case of harassment and intimidation, not Caroline Nokes MP and her colleague.
The article is devoid of balance and factual content and does not report the facts of the civil case against the MP. Neither the O’Connor’s nor anyone from Fathers4Justice has been to the MPs house, targeted her children or her businesses, or behaved in any inappropriate way, or been arrested in relation to this matter, interviewed or even received a PIN notice from Hants Police. Unlike the MP and her colleague Adrian Yalland.
The O’Connor family have suffered a well documented, 7-month long campaign of violent intimidation which Caroline Nokes has now admitted to being involved in. The O’Connor family have now been forced to move from their home after a threat to call Social Services about their children was carried out last week.
The only person facing charges is Caroline Nokes MP in a civil action brought by the O’Connor’s in the High Court. At the point when she has been forced to admit her involvement, Nokes has launched a series of entirely unfounded, unproven allegations against F4J and the O’Connor’s as she plays the ‘female MP victim of trolling’ card.
If there was any truth to her allegations of harassment then Hampshire Police would have dealt with them a year ago and arrested and charged those responsible. The truth though is they have not, and in fact Hampshire Police have written to us saying there are no concerns about us regarding Ms Nokes for them to investigate.
Below is a point by point rebuttal of the Daily Mail article from the original emails.
Barely a single one of our rebuttals has been included in the article.
From: Paul Cahalan
Subject: Caroline Nokes
Hi Nadine and Matt,
As discussed, I’m going to write an article on Sunday and you might want to comment on a few things.
Our reply – Paul, before we address these points, see below out statements. Matt
STATEMENT BY THE O’CONNORS
1. Firstly, can we state that we are the claimants in a private, civil action against the MP and her friend Mr Yalland, not the defendants, which is the impression created from these questions.
2. This relates to a traumatic, 7-month long campaign of intimidation which has targeted our family, our children and our home in Stockbridge, Hampshire.
3. As a result of this intimidation, we are being forced to move our family out of the area this week.
4. We believe this is a politically motivated campaign of intimidation linked to a dispute with the MP regarding her broken election promises made to Fathers4Justice to support Shared Parenting see link: http://romsey.conservativesintouch.com/news/216/ and the Stanbridge Earls child sex abuse scandal. We said her calls for the school to remain open placed children at risk and the school subsequently closed. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2301327/Stanbridge-Earls-boarding-school-girl-raped-15-head-accused-cover-up.html
5. We believe she and her local supporters turned on us as a result of this and that the MP orchestrated this campaign of intimidation.
6. We are making an application for disclosure under Section 35 Data Protection Act 1995 for witness statements from defendants, legal papers, and all witness statements and notebook entries from Police officers about the incident on 20/2/14 so there can be a trial of fact in the civil court.
7. The MP is a hypocrite for portraying herself as the victim and has never apologised for what happened on 20/2, nor condemned the attack, nor offered any sympathy to our family or even our children.
8. The MP used Yalland to remove any references in the Daily Mail and other national newspaper so her involvement was concealed from the media. Nokes later relied on Police assurances to say she was ‘not present’. Turning the car around on Stockbridge High Street while the attack took place is not a defence under the Joint Enterprise law.
9. The MP has taken 7-months to disclose her role and has repeatedly lied to her constituents and changed her story about the attack 3 times. Her disclosure had only come about as a result of our civil proceedings. The MP has now admitted that she was directly involved with the incident on 20/2/14, has a relationship with Yalland, whose conduct is detailed below, that she is linked to this campaign of intimidation, and it is likely that further admissions will be made by the MP during the course of civil proceedings.
10. The MP has repeatedly been untruthful about her role in the incident on 20/2/14 to constituents (see redacted email previously sent).
11. Neither the O’Connor’s nor anyone from Fathers4Justice has been to the MPs house, targeted her children or her businesses, or behaved in any inappropriate way, or been arrested in relation to this matter, interviewed or even received a PIN notice from Hants Police.
12. In light of the revelations concerning Ms Nokes involvement in the incident of 20/2/14, we have written to the Chief Constable of Hampshire, Andy Marsh, calling for the investigation to be reopened and asked that Police consider arresting and interviewing the MP about her role on 20/2/14 under the Joint Enterprise Law.
13. We have made a complaint to the Independent Police Complaints Commission about the role of Hants Police in failing to reveal the MPs indentity in this event and disclosing material evidence in this case which has been concealed from the victims, thereby impending our ability to bring the perpetrators to justice through the criminal or civil courts.
14. On 25/6/14 we were informed by Laura Nicholson, the Assistant Chief Constable of Hants Police that a Police file had been marked restricted ‘to protect the confidentiality of those involved’. The only person whose name had not been reported at that time was Ms Nokes. It is now clear that this was to protect the identity of the MP.
15. We have made a formal complaint to the Independent Police Complaints Commission about the role of Hants Police in concealing the involvement of an incumbent MP in a violent attack which we believe was done to protect her from press coverage of the incident on 20/2/14 with resulting reputational damage that would have ensued before the next election.
16. The PSD report by Hants Police, is being appealed at the IPCC.
17. Finally, this situation is entirely of the MPs own making because she compounded the situation by lying to her constituents about her involvement. She and her supporters, including her father Roy Perry, Leader of Hampshire County Council, refused all efforts by us to diffuse this situation. We can supply copies of these letters.
18. We believe that the MP orchestrated a campaign of violent politically motivated intimidation, using right-wing extremists in the local Tory party to target our family, and especially our 8-yr-old son.
MATT O’CONNOR STATEMENT 11/10/14
Irrespective of my role as the founder and leader of Fathers4Justice, my children and landlord have no political involvement with our campaign and have a right to family life, free of fear, threats and violence.
After 7 months of denials and lying to constituents, Caroline Nokes MP has now admitted bringing a man she knew had mental health issues to our home, a man who had recently received a 2-year bind over after assaulting a nurse, where she knew children would be present as it was half-term, without any lawful reason to do so. We believe this was a deliberate, orchestrated act of political intimidation by the MP. Hants Police must reopen the case, arrest the MP under the Joint Enterprise Law and conduct a full and transparent inquiry into the role of MP and why they covered up her role in a violent incident.
It is blatantly clear that Hants Police conspired to conceal the involvement of an incumbent MP, in a violent, criminal act to protect her reputation and this is now subject to a complaint with the IPCC. It is self evident that her influence affected the integrity of the investigation.
MPs are their to represent their constituents, not attack them and it is down to the constituents of Romsey & Southampton North to judge the MP on her affair, her broken promises, her disgraced trip to the African Dictatorship of Equatorial Guinea, her failure to protect children at Standbridge Earls School and her involvement in this political intimidation, at the next election.
MPs should at all times conduct themselves in a manner which will maintain and strengthen the public’s trust and confidence in the integrity of Parliament and never undertake any action which would bring the House of Commons, or its Members generally, into disrepute. MPs have a duty to uphold the law and a special duty to their constituents.
My sole concern is the protection and welfare of my family. No matter how long it takes, we will bring those responsible to justice.
No MP is above the law.
Matt O’Connor
DAILY MAIL QUESTIONS
1) Ms Nokes claims she has been the victim of a hate campaign for 18 months which has caused her and her daughter distress and led to her increasing house security – alarms, cctv – around the house following a security report. She says her harassment comes from two places,
a) tweets and posts by you/f4j
RESPONSE: Firstly, as you say these are simply ‘claims’, not supported by any evidence. Ms Nokes continues to make a series of baseless, malicious claims in the media about us and Fathers4Justice, in an attempt to demonise and villify us as we bring civil proceedings against her. We must restate that she is the defendant in these actions. We believe this is an attempt to prejudice and politicise the court process and deflect attention from her role in these matters which she has only now begun admitting.
It is important to deal with the facts, not baseless claims. Neither the O’Connor’s or anyone from Fathers4Justice has been to her house, targeted her children or her businesses, or behaved in any inappropriate way, or been arrested, interviewed or even received a PIN notice from Hants Police.
Further, Ms Nokes has brought no legal proceedings against anyone relating to these claims. By contrast, our civil action us based on 7-months worth of evidence, Police reports and her now admitted role in the events of 20/2/14. Equally, no one has attended her surgeries for fear of her making false allegations.
Examples:
A tweet from Matt on 8/6/13 which says
oops, Mrs O @nadineOC nearly runs over Jim Davidson in #stockbridge right constituency, wrong person. RESPONSE: Can you supply a reference for this? Why is the MP monitoring our Twitter accounts? What has this tweet got to do with the MP? We suspect this quip would relate to anyone of a number of local issues and people in Stockbridge at this time from Solar Farms, to planning developments to shale gas exploration which threatens the area. We have been involved in campaigning to protect the area from development by local vested interests and Conservatives for some time.
On 14/6/13 Fathers 4 Justice official tweet says
F4J protesters working around Romsey and Wellow tonight looking for @carolinenokes MP to ask her why she broke her election promises RESPONSE: Can you supply a reference for this including the time of the tweet? On the 14/6/13 the MP had left Romsey because F4J had a stand for Father’s Day in Romsey market place organised with a local businessman to which the MP had been invited. We were told by Conservative Party members, many of whom are friends and supporters, that she had visited a school outside of her constituency because she didn’t want to discuss the dispute regarding her broken election promises about shared parenting. It was clear the MP had no intention of engaging with her constituents in any debate on this matter and was in effect ‘running away’ from democratic debate. As far as I am aware, holding a democratically elected MP to their election promises is not a criminal offence.
By contrast to our peaceful event, it was Mr Yalland who stalked, then took pictures of Nadine O’Connor at this event. Photos of my wife were produced at an executive Conservative meeting that evening, a point I am sure Ms Nokes will confirm. The incident was reported to Hants Police.
In the evening of 14/6 we met with people in the area to discuss the Stanbridge Earls Child Sex Abuse scandal http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2351515/Stanbridge-Earls-School-Pupils-abseiled-naked-teachers-watched-latest-saga-hit-boarding-school-Lord-Flies-abuse-claims.html F4J had been critical of the MP as she had called for the school to remain open despite the fact that Oftsed had said that children were unsafe.
Later that night, 22.23, another tweet says @carolinenokes MP can run, but she can’t hide. @f4j official in Romsey and Wellow & #stanbridgeearlschool tonight. RESPONSE: you supply a reference for this? See above comment.
b) harassment by other internet trolls, inspired by F4J. RESPONSE: Paul, how are these ‘inspired’ by F4J, a campaign group who peacefully campaigns in fancy dress which enjoys the support of 104 MPs from all political parties and UKIP?
Examples include Ms Nokes being trolled by others after the Feb 20 event.
One troll said: “How fucking dare you and your henchman bully and intimidate Matt Nadine and their 8 year old son. Caroline you deserve to be violently RAPED, and I mean that. I hope you are and left for dead somewhere after being raped…. there are a lot of people who wish you serious harm, torture and death. Watch your back. RESPONSE: This clearly has no relation to us or Fathers4Justice or our social media accounts and is yet another attempt to smear us by linking us to some wholly unconnected comment found on the darker corners of the internet.
2) Ms Nokes claims you shouldn’t have used her daughter as a “pawn” in the childcare debate.
Matt, you raise the issue of custody in a posting on 20/4/13 and then name her daughter in a posting on 24/4/13. She will say that her ex-husband and her share custody. RESPONSE: With regard to using children in her political career or a political ‘pawn’, Ms Nokes appeared with us, our children and her daughter in the announcement ref her support for shared parenting in 2010 http://romsey.conservativesintouch.com/news/216/ (SEE ALSO ATTACHED PIC).
Given the MP had changed her position on shared parenting, it was a legitimate question to ask whether this change in position was as a direct result of her divorce from her husband following her well publicised affair in the Daily Mail: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1286264/Cameron-Cutie-MP-Caroline-Nokess-4-year-affair-toyboy.html No doubt Mr Nokes can confirm whether there were issues surrounding contact during the dispute, however such disputes are common place even amongst MPs (Remember David Blunkett MP and Kimberly Quinn) and it was reasonable to ask whether her husband had full, unrestricted access to their daughter and a shared parenting arrangement giving him equal access. This was particularly relevant given she had stopped supporting shared parenting.
If the MP does support shared parenting, there would have been no dispute with her. However, she endorsed the discredited Children & Families Bill, sat on that committee, refused to sign EDM 210 supporting Shared Parenting http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2013-14/210 which 104 of her colleagues signed this year or attend a Shared Parenting debate in Parliament in June 2014 attended by 10 of her constituents.
It is our job to hold MPs to their election promises and we will not apologise for doing so.
With regard to the welfare of children in general, the MP has shown no concern for the welfare and wellbeing of our young children (who appeared in the photograph with her daughter), during the last 7 months despite being fully aware as to what has happened to our family. Further, in June 2013 she wrote to us to tell us she would never represent our children stating, I will not represent ‘you, your wife, your children, her parents, either now or at any time in the future.’
3) Events of Feb 20.
Ms Nokes has admitted driving Mr Yalland to Stockbridge. She claims she stopped “a distance away” but didn’t witness the attack. She then says she returned to give police a copy of the legal letter Yalland was intending to serve. She says Yalland and her are just friends, but she admits she knew he was going to deliver a letter – adding Yalland had taken legal advice that it was legally ok to do so.
RESPONSE: Firstly, Nokes has never condemned Yalland’s actions on the day, nor apologised for what happened, nor expressed any sympathy to our family. Secondly, Stockbridge is a small village, not a town, as she has previously claimed. Thirdly, the MPs story has repeatedly changed. Over the last 7-months she has told constituents that she was not present and had no involvement in the events of the 20th February (see redacted emails below). She then told The Independent newspaper that she ‘dropped him (Yalland) off on the edge of town’. She is now claiming that she chauffered Yalland to Stockbridge and delivered a copy of the legal letter Yalland was intending to serve to Stockbridge Police station, which supports our claim that NO legal papers were served. In fact Yallands story has changed from ‘serving legal papers’ to ‘serving a letter before action’ to ‘popping letters through their letter box’.
The violent incident that followed was witnessed by our 8-yr-old son who was spoken to by Yalland and had pictures taken of him. Yalland had forced entry to our land via electric gates, scaled an internal fence and attempted to entre the rear of the property. He was only prevented from doing so because Mrs O’Connor was holding onto the other end of the door. He then forced the electric gates to leave the property and left. He then returned to our home to take pictures of Nadine O’Connor who was in an upstairs window on the phone to the police. As I attempted to prevent him from taking further pictures of my wife, Yalland punched me in the head knocking me to the ground outside my house, and then savagely bit my landlord, drawing blood (see pic sent) who was trying to restrain him from attacking me on the ground.
As soon as Hants Police became aware of the presence of the MP, they conspired to conceal her involvement. We have made applications for disclosure of all police notes from officers who attended on the day. Her involvement was not only concealed from us, but the public and the Daily Mail who reported the story on 21/2/14 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2567688/Former-Tory-arrested-biting-Fathers4Justice-founder-tried-serve-legal-papers.html. Her involvement in a violent incident, her misleading and untruthful claims to constituents are a legitimate matter of public interest.
Hants Police upheld a complaint by us in their PSD report of 1/9/14 that concerned ‘the failure of officers to identify any role or involvement of Ms Nokes’. This is a masterclass in legally worded obfuscation which is why this has been appealed tot he IPCC.
We are also raising other concerns about the personal relationship between Andy Marsh, the Chief Constable of Hants Police and the MP in light of an investigation into the leaking of information relating to Stanbridge Earls school from him to her earlier this year.
She also claims she has never lied to her constituents about the issue and that she has claimed her expenses fairly as she was on parliamentary business. RESPONSE: Firstly, Parliament was in recess that week. Secondly, she brought Yalland to our house where a violent incident took place, using fuel paid for by taxpayers. Secondly, she has repeatedly been been untruthful (at best, obfuscated) to constituents about the incident see letter below and her response.
Nokes repeatedly states she had not given a statement ‘as a witness to the incident’, yet Inspector Paul Pressley from Hants Police wrote to inform us on 2/5/14 that “She was treated as a witness by the police to the incident on 20th Feb.”
LETTER TO CONSTITUENT
———- Forwarded message ———-
From: NOKES, Caroline
Dear Mr Redacted
Thank you for your email of 20th August received via the ‘They Work for You’ website.
Although you do not specifically say so, I assume you are referring to an incident in Stockbridge in February, involving Mr and Mrs O’Connor, and Mr Adrian Yalland, who I understand is suing Mrs O’Connor for libel in the High Court.
As I have not seen the letter you refer to, I cannot comment at length. However, Mr Yalland has not been a member of the Romsey and Southampton North Conservative Association since October last year, five months before this incident.
As you yourself pointed out, no charges were made against Mr Yalland, who from the article you refer to claims he acted in self-defence. I cannot comment on those claims as I was not there, but I was told the incident was witnessed by an unrelated third party who apparently confirmed she saw Mr Yalland being attacked.
Contrary to the claims of Mr & Mrs O’Connor I have not given a statement ‘as a witness to the incident’. However, the following week, I was one of a number of people who confirmed to the police that Mr. Yalland had stated it was his intention to deliver legal documents to Mrs O’Connor on the day in question.
I cannot comment on whether Mr Yalland has been given a ‘harassment warning’, or on the ‘file’ being marked ‘restricted’. I would refer you Hampshire Police on those points.
Finally, I have never had any commercial relationship with Mr Yalland (which is verifiable via my entry in the register of members’ interests), and he is not my ‘partner’.
Yours sincerely
Caroline Nokes
Caroline Nokes MP
Romsey and Southampton North
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA
Tel: 0207 219 1468
www.carolinenokes.com
Sent from my iPad
Wednesday 20 August 2014
Dear Mrs Nokes,
I was concerned to receive a letter from a local resident on the 1st August 2014 that set out details of an attack at their home back in February and subsequent allegations of harassment. I have lived in Stockbridge for 8 years now and this attack has greatly shocked and alarmed many in the town.
What concerned me most is the allegation that you were directly involved in this incident. The letter states that Hampshire Police have confirmed that you were treated as a witness to the attack.
As a resident, parent and constituent of yours, can you address some of the allegations made in this letter?
1. What is your relationship with the alleged attacker and former Vice Chair of Romsey Conservative Branch?
2. Is it true that you drove this man to the O’Connor’s house in Stockbridge on that day?
3. Is the allegation that Police treated you as a witness to the attack also true?
4. If you did not drive this man to their house as the letter alleges, were you present in Stockbridge during the attack?
5. Having seen the graphic pictures of the assault on the Daily Mail website, which happened in broad daylight on Stockbridge High Street, it seems remarkable nobody was charged. The implication in the letter is that you used your political influence to ensure charges were never brought against the assailant. Is this true?
6. If you are not involved, why would the Police state you were a witness and mark the file ‘restricted’ as the O’Connor’s allege and why have you not condemned this attack by your former Vice Chair?
7. Finally, we are all very concerned to hear that the same man has received a Police harassment warning after targeting the 8-year-old son of the O’Connor’s. This is the same age as my eldest son, who is a friend, and as you can imagine any associations of that kind give us great cause for concern.
On behalf of many concerned parents in Stockbridge, I think these questions need to be answered. Stockbridge is a small close knit community and these unpleasant developments need to be resolved. Whatever the truth in the matter, I sincerely hope you will answer my questions openly and honestly, as soon as possible.
Yours sincerely
4) She claims F4J “dropped the ball” when the children and family bill came around. She says there was no written submission from F4J and that the organisation did not engage on what amendmentsshould have been made. RESPONSE: The MP supported a bill that did not contain a single one of the promises she and the Conservative Party made to Fathers4Justice in 2010. In particular, it did not include their specific promise to introduce a presumption of shared parenting. It was impossible for Fathers4Justice to make a submission on a bill that was a sham and the dispute with the MP flowed from these broken promises.
MR YALLAND’S ROLE
We believe that civil proceedings will reveal that Yalland has been acting as a proxy for Ms Nokes. His savage actions on 20/2/14 speak for themselves. Bear in mind this was a former Tory Spin Doctor, former Vice Chair Romsey Tories and the MPs personal friend who took a chunk out of a complete strangers arm.
He has relentlessly targeted every aspect of our lives and is subject to an ongoing Police investigation. His course of conduct to date has included the following as his Twitter account will also confirm.
1. He sent 22 emails in 3 days to us prior to 20th February
2. After the attack on 20/2, he rang the Daily Mail and removed any mention of Caroline Nokes from media reports
3. On 19/6/14 he posted our personal address and business details on Twitter and began targeting our son and his school on Twitter
4. On 4/7/14 Yalland was served with a PIN notice by Hampshire Police about you conduct that stated: “That you have retweeted photographs of Archie O’Connor and are to refrain from further re-tweeting/ publishing any photographs of Archie O’Connor.” “You have also tweeted personal details of the O’Connor’s and are to desist from this and including tweeting documents that contain personal information about the O’Connor’s.”
5. On 10/7/14, he targeted a new business start up by the O’Connors on Twitter and made defamatory claims to a major UK retailer about them with the intention of harming their business
6. 23/8/14 he posted defamatory tweets about the Fathers4Justice campaign with the intention of harming their campaign
7. 14/9/14 he tweeted the Breeders Show in London where Nadine O’Connor was speaking the following day with the intention of trying to discredit Nadine O’Connor and her position in the debate
DISCLOSURE
As part of our disclosure application we have also asked for the following information about Nokes & Yalland:
1. Disclosure of all emails, letters, note, telephone between Nokes & Yalland regarding the claimants
2. Documents relating to Yalland’s arrest, change and bind over in Croydon Magistrates Court on 20th November 2013
3. Details of any mental health disorder which may have affected Yalland’s actions on 20/2/14, as disclosed by Martin Hatley, Vice Chair Romsey Tories to the Romsey Advertiser, and referred to in a Press Complaints adjudication here http://www.holdthefrontpage.co.uk/2014/news/privacy-complaint-against-weekly-rejected/
ENDS
Posted in Adrian Yalland, Caroline Nokes, Chief Constable Andy Marsh, Conservative Party, General Election 2015, Hampshire Constabulary, Latest News, Police, Romsey & Southampton North
