It looks like I will not be hearing from any elected Members about my letter (previous post). Chief Executive, Mark James has effectively prevented any response by taking it upon himself to yet again represent the views of the entire Council.
This is his email sent yesterday to all the Councillors;
Dear Councillor,
You may have received a letter from Mrs Jacqui Thompson, furthering her continued campaign against the Council. Members have asked that a response be sent to Mrs Thompson. Please find attached a copy of a response which was sent to a blog site supporting Mrs Thompson. This sets out the Council’s position succinctly.
Mark James
The 'blog site' he refers to is of course Madaxeman (aka @mjmilan). As I mentioned last week, a series of questions were put to Mr James about the #daftarrest and issues of filming council meetings. Mr James responded yesterday and made it clear to the blog author that he wished it to be published in full, in the comments section on his blog. Please note, Madaxeman has now also responded to Mr James.
Mr James continues to claim speak for the 'council', ie elected Members. Throughout all this I have seen no evidence, nor heard from any elected Members, nor seen any minutes, that they have discussed, debated or voted on any issues he claims to represent. In fact, I am astonished that the majority of elected Councillors appear so 'controlled' that they just roll over and allow him to make such incorrect and false statements on their behalf.
I will not dignify his comments with a full response but there are one or two points I wish to make.
As a campaigner for free speech I respect Mr James' right to express his opinion but I am troubled that he has decided to smear my entire family. I can take criticism, I would not write a blog if I couldn't and I can understand that Mr James is a little peeved at recent criticism directed against his council from other quarters. But this time he has gone a step too far, he has not only made a series of false allegations about me, but has also decided to include my family his defamatory statement.
I am also concerned about Mr James allegations over my complaint of assault. For someone with a degree in law, he actually appears to have a very poor grasp of such matters, and I would have thought he would know that the police investigate complaints and the CPS are the decision makers. The police did investigate, took statements from all sides, sent it all to the CPS and they then decided that there were insufficient witnesses to secure a conviction. If Mr James is so sure that everyone could see nothing happened, then where are their statements to that effect? His allegation that I made false statements is undoubtably defamatory.
I have already covered, with honesty, this and other allegations elsewhere on this blog.
Lastly, I believe Mr James, in this latest tirade, is on the road to self-destuction. It beggars belief that a very well paid Chief Executive, with a law degree to boot, should resort to such a statement. Has he ever wondered whether other esteemed Chief Executives behave in this manner? Is this how they all deal with public scrutiny? It may go to prove why I and many others are so worried about how this council is run; this is not just highly unprofessional, it's childishly unpleasant.
I can also assure you that he has looked at my blog despite his suggestion to the contrary and if he's really interested in what many members of the public in Carmarthenshire actually think, than perhaps he should read it with a bit more care.
UPDATE 31st JULY;
Y Cneifiwr blog; Towards Better Local Government - which is, of course, what the filming etc was all about in the first place
This is his email sent yesterday to all the Councillors;
Dear Councillor,
You may have received a letter from Mrs Jacqui Thompson, furthering her continued campaign against the Council. Members have asked that a response be sent to Mrs Thompson. Please find attached a copy of a response which was sent to a blog site supporting Mrs Thompson. This sets out the Council’s position succinctly.
Mark James
The 'blog site' he refers to is of course Madaxeman (aka @mjmilan). As I mentioned last week, a series of questions were put to Mr James about the #daftarrest and issues of filming council meetings. Mr James responded yesterday and made it clear to the blog author that he wished it to be published in full, in the comments section on his blog. Please note, Madaxeman has now also responded to Mr James.
Mr James continues to claim speak for the 'council', ie elected Members. Throughout all this I have seen no evidence, nor heard from any elected Members, nor seen any minutes, that they have discussed, debated or voted on any issues he claims to represent. In fact, I am astonished that the majority of elected Councillors appear so 'controlled' that they just roll over and allow him to make such incorrect and false statements on their behalf.
I will not dignify his comments with a full response but there are one or two points I wish to make.
As a campaigner for free speech I respect Mr James' right to express his opinion but I am troubled that he has decided to smear my entire family. I can take criticism, I would not write a blog if I couldn't and I can understand that Mr James is a little peeved at recent criticism directed against his council from other quarters. But this time he has gone a step too far, he has not only made a series of false allegations about me, but has also decided to include my family his defamatory statement.
I am also concerned about Mr James allegations over my complaint of assault. For someone with a degree in law, he actually appears to have a very poor grasp of such matters, and I would have thought he would know that the police investigate complaints and the CPS are the decision makers. The police did investigate, took statements from all sides, sent it all to the CPS and they then decided that there were insufficient witnesses to secure a conviction. If Mr James is so sure that everyone could see nothing happened, then where are their statements to that effect? His allegation that I made false statements is undoubtably defamatory.
I have already covered, with honesty, this and other allegations elsewhere on this blog.
Lastly, I believe Mr James, in this latest tirade, is on the road to self-destuction. It beggars belief that a very well paid Chief Executive, with a law degree to boot, should resort to such a statement. Has he ever wondered whether other esteemed Chief Executives behave in this manner? Is this how they all deal with public scrutiny? It may go to prove why I and many others are so worried about how this council is run; this is not just highly unprofessional, it's childishly unpleasant.
I can also assure you that he has looked at my blog despite his suggestion to the contrary and if he's really interested in what many members of the public in Carmarthenshire actually think, than perhaps he should read it with a bit more care.
UPDATE 31st JULY;
Y Cneifiwr blog; Towards Better Local Government - which is, of course, what the filming etc was all about in the first place
13 comments:
I think that the only scurrilous piece of writing on this issue has been penned by Mark James. I do hope that he consulted a lawyer before putting that email out.
Dick Bain
I, like Mark James would like to put things into context. He should take a deep breath before putting pen to such an hysterical outpouring. His thoroughly distasteful letter has more of a ‘personal vendetta’ ring about it than a professional response from a Chief Executive of a council replying to a letter on the subject of ‘filming a public meeting’. I believe most people reading his tirade against Mrs. Thompson and her family would also find his choice of words, ill judged, most objectionable, unprofessional and shameful. He seems to have grasped this opportunity in order to go into as much vitriolic, personal detail as possible to smear Jackie Thompson and her family’s good reputation. What ever did her children do to him to deserve such a public admonishment?? He has, most unwisely, chosen to use a combative manner, rather than take this opportunity to dispel the majority of the public’s view that C.C.C run under his leadership is not a council to be trusted, and that he himself is a bully. All he has achieved is to further reinforce the publics conception that he does indeed run his council in a tyrannical fashion, where officers and members alike are afraid to question his rule. Having digested his aggressive and hostile letter, I wouldn’t wish to oppose him! Mr. James’s most inappropriate language has served only to reinforce many peoples opinion of him, that he believes, absolutely, he is accountable to no-one. He has over reached himself, and is sounding rather ‘ out of control.’ It really is time for him to go.
Jacqui, as the post I left on madaxeman's blog says: isn't it time, if this stuff is all untrue, you called a libel lawyer?
@Photon
Yes it is definitely time I called a libel lawyer and I intend to make some enquiries but I understand that unless you have a spare £50,000 then 'don't even think about it'. As I haven't got a spare £5 I'm probably stuffed. I could represent myself of course but very difficult in this area of law and still huge cost risk if I lost. CFA may be possible with ATE insurance. I will find out. Pro bono help would be best.
@Photon
I do wonder if this is the sort of thing Mark Jones actually intended with his reply - to make us all wonder about Jacqui and if there isn't some other backstory to all this. Clearly we've only really had one side of the story so far...
The thing is, it really doesn't matter if she is guilty of all he has accused her and her family of - it is totally beside the point.
Also, of course, I presume everyone else who attended the next meeting, where they had to sign pledges or be refused access to the public gallery (which I suspect was illegal) and were then locked in the public gallery (which I also suspect was illegal), actually had done nothing wrong at all.
I'm going to wait and see if he answers the points at the bottom of my response...
Martin (MadAxeMan)
I'm surprised that nobody seems to have gotten to the bottom of whether such simple aspects, like insisting on undertakings, is actually unlawful or not.
I'm afraid tha this situation really has reached a point where endlessly banging on about it on a blog is increasingly looking futile and silly.
As to libel, well, go through it line by line, and ask to each statement: is anything put forward as a statment of fact? If so, can those facts be shown to be true? If they are put forward as facts and can't be shown to be true, then your worry about legal costs become much reduced.
@Photon
Re; undertakings
I have not been able to ascertain the legalities - I suspect this is a unique situation with no legal precedent. Therefore merely a matter of divided opinions. as it refer's to a policy whaich doesn't exist I suspect it's flawed. I agree though, it would be more useful to have a definite legal view. Otherwise there is only one way to test it.
re; libel
I am in the process of doing exactly as you suggest, line by line, and applying myself to establishing a firm case in preparation for tomorrow morning when solicitors' offices open. I will then know where I stand.
Whoah, guys, nobody should be encouraging anyone to sue for libel - that's a mug's game and the only winners are the lawyers. Whilst the reply was in my view quite extraordinary, there's surely nothing in it that's worse than any number of phrases taken from just this one page here - 'slush fund', 'illegal libel action' etc.
Rather than blow a huge amount of money and acrimony on making lawyers wealthier, would be better to focus on simply maintaining the pressure on issues of transparency and accountability - councillors who know and understand the public are watching carefully and recording their decisions are councillors who are less likely to try to get away with things. The council's position over the arrest is already beginning to crumble - what was claimed to be a regulation now appears to be a practice, what was claimed to be an interruption by a disruptive member of the public is now admitted to be a moment of pique by the chair when he didn't get his own way. The police may have been misled over the circumstances.
At the minute, it's looking kind of like Rosa Parks in 1955 in Montgomery, Alabama, staying in her seat when the bus driver's telling her to move to the back to make way for a white man. Getting entangled in ill-advised defamation litigation would surely detract from that?
Jacqui,
I've posted on an analysis at:
http://photonicanglesey.blogspot.com/2011/07/some-help-for-jacqui-thompson.html
Of particular note is the fact that all members of your family have been dragged into his comments, which almost inevitably leads to a claim of libel.
See what you think - it's your call, of course!
@Photon
many thanks; I have been applying myself to similar but you have analysed it as the 'reasonable person' reading the statement and the meaning inferred - invaluable.
@bob
I fully understand where you are coming from and what you are saying. I am familiar with the pitfalls and risks of becoming embroiled in libel litigation, and it remains to be seen how this will pan out, if at all.
Neither do I want to detract from the current issues of transparency.
I do feel though that I have to make a stand somehow, even in a small way, and challenge Mr James' comments, which, incidentally, he also sent to 74 County Councillors.
I'm with Bob here... It's for you to take your own decisions Jacqui, but one has to wonder whether legal action will make the situation better or worse...
I think the way forward is dialogue, and failing that, the Local Government Ombudsman...
And I think that reaches a natural 'Amen' moment: we out here have done all we can and this episode is rapidly passing into obscurity.
I agree the Ombudsman may well find the nature of the letters issues unacceptable, although in the end, they can't actually force an apology, only 'recommend' one be made.
It's difficult to disagree with all comments and advice. Photon's appraisal of Mark James's letter is rational and reasoned. There is no doubt this C.E. has intentionally used defamatory language and is guilty of, at best, unprofessional conduct. With the evidence the Welsh Government has at it's disposal, regarding inappropriate conduct of certain officers and members, including that of Mark James, it really is time for them to intervene in the running of this council. To continue to ignore what is taking place in Carmarthenshire is seriously failing in their governmental duties.
Post a Comment