You can thank the Town Clerk Richard White and The then Mayor Sharon Spencer who deliberately delayed my signing of my acceptance papers in turn attempting to interfere with the democratic process.
The Judge of the First-Tier Tribunal has issued a Listing Direction to deal with the remaining 10 complaints.
I am asking if I can claim a travel warrant to attend as Mr Burton has not offered me a lift in his cab.
It is important to note not one complaint has ever been made by a member of the public all complaints have been made by Councillors and ex Councillors many of them have been proved to be no ,more than a group of drunks happy to drop their underwear in the street. Assault me a call me things like your worse than the shit on the pavement and worse than a paedophile, this group I call the local mob have enjoyed years of spending your money and intimidating and bullying people like myself who speak out. Some have now turned political and use the banner of Conservative. There childish bullying nasty and sometimes vile perverted behaviour is costing the tax payer a fortune.
They can threaten and intimidate me as much as they like they won't shut me up. I don't tolerate bullies and they have the cheek to give that label.
I have never sent messages to any of them so upsetting as this one, they are all disgusting people. Especially The Leader of Rutland County Councils Chum, David Burton. Who Tweet similar to this:
- Sounds interesting Mr Brookes, what will they think when they see your CV? Mind you, I doubt your CV tells anything like the truth. I can understand that, how do you put somethings into writing? Take the story of that 'partner' you were supposed to be 'caring for'. Words cannot describe the squalor and degradation you put him through in his final months, it was after all just a meal ticket for you, wasn't it? It was in your interest to get him out of the world as soon as possible and you did everything you could to speed him on his way, once you had got what you wanted out of him. I would't be surprised if you lost your temper that day and smothered him, was that before or after you took photographs of him dying? You must have breathed a sigh of relief when the body was cremated and all evidence of abuse was destroyed...no one will ever know what you did, and only you will know what a dead man's cock tastes like.
Most of those who have raised complaints attended this party that most were pissed by lunchtime and they say they are respectable.
The lady showing her arse was one of many former Mayor Jim Harrison who also complains, video recorded and posted on Youtube to show how these respectable Oakham people celebrated the Royal Wedding like the good lady photographed who was a school governor and former Town Mayor most who attended had or hold public positions in the town and county I can assure readers I have never behaved like this and the Deputy Leader Cllr King (Conservative) has the cheek to write to me and tell me I am a disgrace?
http://martinbrookes.blogspot.com/2011/05/how-rutland-conservatives-celebrated.html
http://martinbrookes.blogspot.com/2011/05/how-rutland-conservatives-celebrated.html
Listing Direction
Ref: no LGS/2011/0537
Subject Matter: Reference in relation to a possible failure to follow the code of conduct.
Applicant: Jennifer Rogers, ESO, Standards for England.
(she has been directed by Rutland County Council and Oakham Town Council and the mob to get me banned from serving, the public might notice not one of my complaints relating to any councillor has ever been dealt with correctly, she won't be attending and the tax payer is footing the bill for her legal representation)
Repsondent: Councillor Martin Brookes of Oakham Town Council
Tribunal:
1 The tribunal to determine the above reference above reference will be convened on 15th August 2011 at the Tribunal Service, Birmingham, Temple Court, 4th Floor, 35 Bull Street, Birmingham, B4 6EQ. The tribunal will commence
1.1 Judge David Laverick
1.2 Member Peter Norris
1.3 Member David Ritchie
2. Attendances
2.1 As yet it is unclear whether the Respondent intends to appear at the hearing, whether in person or by representative. The Respondent is directed to inform the Tribunal (and the Applicant) within 10 days of this Direction as to whether he intends to appear at the Tribunal either in person or by a representative, a failure to comply with this Direction may lead to the Respondent being barred from further participation in the proceedings.
2.2 Mark Jones will be representing the Ethical Standards Officer.
3. The proceedings of the Tribunal are usually open to the public. The use of mobile phones, pagers or cameras will not be allowed during the proceedings, The tribunal may record the hearing. In the event that the hearing is recorded, a copy in CD format can be made available to the parties upon receipt of a written request.
4. The Code of Conduct
4.1 The Tribunal has noted that the following provisions of the Code of Conduct would seem to be relevant:
Paragraph 3(1) You must treat others with respect
Paragraph 3(2)(b) You must not bully anyone
Paragraph 3(2)(c) You must not intimidate a person who is or likely to be a complainant or witness
to proceedings under the code.
Paragraph 5 You must not conduct yourself in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing your office or authority into disrepute.
4.2 The Tribunal will consider the Code as a whole and may also make a finding that there has been a failure to follow the provisions of some other paragraph of the Code. If the Tribunal considers this a possibility, the parties to the hearing will be advised, and may wish to make submissions on the relevance of any part of the Code to the facts of the case, The Tribunal will give a sympathetic consideration for an adjournment to allow such submissions to be prepared.
5. Premlimary Issues
5.1 While the Tribunal will have available to it all the documents which have been received by the Tribunal (which have all been copied to each party with the exception of some irrelevant material from the Respondent), I am enclosing with these Directions a Core Bundle comprising:
5.1.1 The Report of The ESO
5.1.2 A Schedule of Evidence produced by the ESO in response to an earlier Direction from the Tribunal.
5.1.3 Earlier Directions from the Tribunal
5.1.4 The Responses from Councillor Brookes dated 18th June 2011 to my Directions of 16th June 2011
5.1.5 The Response sent on behalf of the ESO on 15th July to my Directions of 16th June. (I had extended the time with which that response needed to be filed.)
5.2 The case is being listed on the basis that no oral evidence is needed to determine either the relevant facts or whether those facts constitute a breach or breaches of the relevant Codes of Conduct. In determining the latter question the Tribunal will consider written material which has been provided and take account of any submissions made orally at the hearing.
5.3 In my directions of 16th June I indicated to strike out part of the Reference unless further submissions were made in support of the proposition that a threat to call the police if the recipient attended a meeting constituted a breach of the Code of Conduct. Further submissions having been made, that is a matter which will now be determined by the Tribunal.
5.4 I also indicated an intention to strike out that part of the reference which related the Respondent's actions on 8th April 2010 in relation to Councillor Charles Haworth. I make no comment on her submissions that persistent low level abuse might be regarded as sufficient to justify a finding that the recipient has not been shown respect, other than to comment the two instances recited in the reference are insufficient to be called persistent. The Tribunal will therefore confine itself to consideration of whether the email of 10th March 2010 evidenced a lack of respect toward Councillor Haworth.
6. As indicated in my earlier Directions there are two key issues for the Tribunal:
6.1 Whether in writing or publishing the various documents identified in the reference, the Respondent was acting in his official capacity.
6.2 The application of the Code of Conduct undoubtedly interferes with the right protected by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights to freedom of expression, There is clear authority from the High Court (Sanders v Kingston) [2005] EWHC 1145 that the interference is prescribed by law. High Court decisions (Sanders as above and Livingstone) are less clear as to whether the particular provisions of the Code go further than is necessary to protect the reputation or rights of others). Essentially that is a decision which needs to be made on the basis of the fact in each instance.
6.3 The Tribunal will determine the first issue before considering the second aspect - unless the Tribunal is satisfied that the Respondent was acting in his official capacity, he cannot be regarded as being in breach of the Code of Conduct no matter what he has said.
6.4 In this context, the Applicant has based several of her submissions on the proposition that the Respondent was acting , in making his various statements, as a representative of the Council. I have reservations about that proposition - there is to mind a distinction between a Councillor being a representative on the Council and a representative of the Council, the latter being dependent on some decisions being made by the Council that the particular Councillor should be its representative on some other body or at some particular event. Subject to consideration of any contrary submission, the Tribunal is likely to concentrate on whether the Respondent was acting in the business of his office as a Councillor.
7 After considering any further submissions, the Tribunal will determine whether or not there has been a failure to follow the provisions of the Code of Conduct. If there has not been such a failure the Tribunal will nevertheless consider and announce whether any recommendations are to be made to the relevant authority concerned.
8 If there has been a failure to follow the Code of Conduct the Tribunal will proceed to consider whether, and if so what further action should be taken.
8.1 The members of the Tribunal and parties have been made aware of guidance as to the action which can be taken by the Tribunal if the Respondent is found to have failed to comply with the provisions of the Code of Conduct. That guidance will be taken into account by the Tribunal.
8.2 The Tribunal will adjourn to take account of any submissions made and determine what action, it (f?) any should be taken
9 A written notice of the decision of the Tribunal will be made available to the parties and then published in accordance with the requirements of Section 78B of the Local Government Act.
10 The written reasons for the decision will be sent to the parties as soon as reasonably practicable, which is likely to be within 14 days and published on the Tribunal's website.
David Laverick Judge
21 July 2011
