Nigel Farage With His Aid George Cottrell When He Was Arrested In Chicago on 21 criminal charges by the FBI!
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
.
Hi,
when reading this article there will be those who are sufficiently well informed of the antics of UKips leader (owner) in the past. Those who will be aware tjhat Nigel Farage was far from trustworth in the distant past when his Father, Guy Farage, a stock broker (professional gambler) and all too often hopeless drunk, sponsored his son and when Nigel Farage was fired by the French bank for whom he worked for unreliaqble behaviour and habitually returning late and the worse for drink after self indulgent lunches.
Nigel and his brother also worked for a period for American owned Refco in London, that period was curtly curtailed when the directors of Refco were prosecuted for sharp practice and went to prison.
I am unaware as to whether Nigel Farage has as yet settled his large debts accrued whilst working in the City! Though we did note that he set out to avoid British tax by opening a bank account in the Isle of Mann tax haven in the name ‘Farage Educational Trust’ and on one occasion deposited £1/4 Million into the account! Though he suibsequently lied to the media about the account!
‘Strange’ how Nigel Farage is so frequently alongside and deeply involved with criminals yet always manages to avoid arrest! Even on such matters as the debt incurred on his behalf of some £13,500 owed to me when Mark Croucher lost the Court case he brought CLICK HERE & HERE to try to bankrupt me and shut down the steady flow of facts about UKip and the low lifes and scoundrels in their ranks, which I publish on the internet.
Nigel Farage has not even been charged for his vicarious involvement in criminal breeches of the Computer Act and burglary as admitted by John Ison in open Court etc. etc. etc.
When one’s bag carrier is a criminal and your due dilligence has been incompetent you may well find your bags are at risk – one wonders just how embroilled Farage himself is in Cottrell’s criminality and what indiscresions Cottrell may have placed on the record on Farage’s, now confiscated, computer!
It is interesting to note that having flown to America to attend the Republican Congress Nigel Farage failed to meet with Donald Trump which must be rather demeaning for him when you consider the meetings Nikki Sinclaire has had with both Hillary & Bill Clinton when on similar visits. Though to be fair Nikki Sinclaire does have both the experience and the skills to have been an asset and worked on various US election campaigns!
Here again is Nigel Farage alongside a member of his own staff when they were arrested:
Farage aide held in US over money laundering claims: Son of glamour model who once dated Prince Charles facing years in jail after ‘offering his services on the dark web’
George Cottrell was arrested and led away at Chicago’s O’Hare airport
Cottrell was getting off a flight with former UKIP leader Nigel Farage
In custody awaiting trial on 21 charges including attempted extortion
Published: 22:25, 12 August 2016 | Updated: 00:25, 13 August 2016
One of Nigel Farage’s closest aides faces years in a US jail after allegedly being caught in an FBI sting.
George Cottrell was arrested and led away in handcuffs as he and the former Ukip leader got off a flight in Chicago.
Cottrell, who runs Mr Farage’s private office, is in custody awaiting trial on 21 charges including attempted extortion, money laundering and fraud.
Facing jail: George Cottrell was arrested by the FBI after allegedly offering to launder drugs money
The 22-year-old, whose former glamour model mother once dated Prince Charles, is accused of offering to launder money for drug traffickers after advertising his services on the ‘dark web’ – websites that offer privacy because they cannot be traced and need special software to access, some of which are frequented by paedophiles, criminals, hackers and terrorists.
But the ‘drug traffickers’ he is alleged to have dealt with were undercover FBI agents.
Cottrell, grandson of late Yorkshire landowner Lord Manton, was arrested last month as he and Mr Farage were returning from a series of engagements at the Republican Convention in Cleveland, Ohio.
A trusted member of Mr Farage’s inner circle, Cottrell had just agreed to take on a permanent role organising the Ukip MEP’s diary and dealing with media inquiries.
His email accounts, which include details of many of Mr Farage’s day-to-day arrangements, have been frozen.
Court documents filed in the US allege that Cottrell was offering money laundering services on the dark web using the alias ‘Bill’.
When contacted in 2014 by FBI agents pretending to be drug traffickers, he promised to launder their cash for a fee in ‘complete anonymity and security’ through his offshore accounts, the documents claim.
Following a meeting with the undercover agents in Las Vegas, Cottrell arranged for them to send him £15,500, which he planned to pocket, the indictment alleges.
He is alleged to have then attempted to blackmail the ‘drug traffickers’ by demanding £62,000 in the form of bitcoin – a virtual online payment system – saying he would alert the authorities if they refused.
Cottrell was believed by associates to be worth £250million through a family trust fund and had been working for Mr Farage for free.
A trusted member of Nigel Farage’s inner circle, Cottrell had just agreed to take on a permanent role organising the Ukip MEP’s diary and dealing with media inquiries.
But the court documents claim he had a ‘serious, years-long gambling problem, which inherently suggests a strong possibility of irrational risk taking’.
The US District Court in Illinois remanded Cottrell in custody while criminal proceedings continue, ruling that he posed a ‘serious flight risk’.
The detention order filed in the court said that Cottrell had recently changed his name, which he claimed was to distance himself from previous involvement in political activities in the UK, an explanation the court did not find ‘credible’.
Cottrell also claimed he lived with his parents near Evesham, Worcestershire, despite being listed as living at a £2.5million flat in Kensington, West London.
His mother, Fiona Cottrell, was the Penthouse ‘pet of the month’ in October 1973, under the pseudonym Frances Cannon, describing herself as ‘daughter of a landowner’.
The images were reprinted in the magazine in 1977 after she was linked romantically to Prince Charles.
Cottrell’s uncle is Lord Hesketh, a colourful hereditary peer who set up a Formula One team in the 1970s and was a Tory minister under Baroness Thatcher.
A former Conservative Party treasurer, he defected to Ukip in 2011. Cottrell was expelled from the exclusive Malvern College before sitting his A-levels.
He did not complete his education, deciding to go straight into what he has described as ‘private banking’.
His arrest came three weeks after the Brexit victory in the EU referendum, as he accompanied Mr Farage to talk to US media about Brexit.
They flew from London Heathrow to Chicago’s O’Hare airport, from where they had a connecting flight to Cleveland.
Cottrell’s mother once dated Prince Charles
As they arrived in the US, Cottrell was briefly detained by customs officers in Chicago in what appeared to be a routine check before being allowed to continue his journey.
He and Mr Farage spent three days at the Republican Convention, where they had a packed schedule of television appearances and meetings with US senators as well as discussions with aides to presidential candidate Donald Trump.
It now appears that Cottrell was being watched by FBI officers throughout the trip.
To Mr Farage’s shock, five FBI officers were waiting to meet Cottrell as they disembarked from their return flight from Cleveland to Chicago O’Hare on July 22, en route to Heathrow.
The distressed former Ukip leader – who knew nothing of his aide’s alleged illegal activities – was given no information about Cottrell’s arrest, and was forced to return to London without him.
The FBI has frozen all Cottrell’s email accounts, leaving Mr Farage without access to his electronic diary. Four days after he was seized, Cottrell appeared briefly in court in Chicago.
An FBI spokesman in Ohio confirmed that George Swinten Cottrell was arrested on July 22 and was due to be extradited to Phoenix, Arizona.
A Ukip spokesman said: ‘George was an unpaid and enthusiastic volunteer for the party over the period of the referendum.
‘We are unaware of the details of the allegations excepting that they date from a time before he was directly involved in the party.’
NAME-DROPPING ARISTO WHOSE RACY MUM CAUGHT THE EYE OF PRINCE CHARLES
By Richard Kay
Editor at Large
Friends of George Cottrell say he has always wanted to make something of his life – and that he was determined any success would be through his own efforts and not because of who he was.
Not that he was beyond a bit of name-dropping when the occasion demanded.
He claimed, for instance, that his godfather was the secretive billionaire currency trader Joe Lewis, owner of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club, and suggested that he was the beneficiary of a £250million family trust fund.
Separating fact from fiction, however, is a different matter. For young George likes to construct an air of mystery around his activities and indeed his background. Unlike most young men of his age he has no social media profile. Nor does he upload pictures of his private life or of his friends.
Penthouse pet: Fiona Cottrell in the 70s
He claims that he was used to handling large sums of money because as a 12-year old his ‘Irish’ racing uncles regularly despatched him to the bookies with bundles of notes as they drank in bars on the racetracks.
But who might these Irish kinsmen be? For Cottrell’s mother Fiona, who once bared all for adult magazine Penthouse and was pursued by a youthful Prince Charles, is the daughter of soap tycoon and Yorkshire landowner Lord Manton.
George’s father Mark is a former bobsleigh competitor who dreamed of representing Britain in the Olympic Games and went to Gordonstoun, where he was a contemporary of Prince Andrew.
One of George’s uncles is the colourful former Tory grandee and one-time treasurer Lord Hesketh, who famously defected to Ukip in 2011.
Alexander Hesketh, who set up a Formula One racing team recruiting James Hunt in the 1970s and who is married to Fiona’s older sister Claire, did, however, once own a racecourse – Towcester in Northamptonshire.
But it was sold along with everything else when he was forced to flog off the family’s nearby baroque stately home, Easton Neston in 2005.
Chain-smoking Cottrell, 22, claims he was expelled from Malvern College, where fees for boarders are £36,000 a year, before taking his A-levels and did not go to university. He told one figure that despite this he went straight into ‘private banking.’
Contacted at the family home near Evesham, Worcestershire, yesterday George’s 62-year-old mother said: ‘I never speak to the newspapers,’ and hung up.
She was not always so reticent. In 1974 she was draped naked, apart from a pink necklace, displaying her 38-23-35 figure across 11 pages of Penthouse.
Using the pseudonym Frances Cannon, Fiona described herself as the ‘daughter of a landowner.’
In the accompanying text the former debutante offered some pert observations. ‘My parents let me grow up believing my body is beautiful and sex in the right circumstances is wonderful.’
That might have been the end of the matter had Fiona not, some three years later, attracted the admiring eye of the Prince of Wales after meeting at a weekend house party when he was on a flying course at RAF Cranwell in Lincolnshire.
Alas his ‘cautious and careful’ approach in attempting to woo her was his downfall. Fiona was not the kind to sit waiting for the phone to ring.
When he finally did, she thought it was a prank and told him she already had a date with Mark Cottrell, whom she went on to marry in 1978.
With his uncle’s political connections, it was perhaps no surprise that the stocky George, who has a sister Laura, 28, should find himself offering his services to then Ukip leader Nigel Farage.
At the time of his arrest last month he had just agreed to take on a permanent role organising Mr Farage’s diary and dealing with media inquiries. He had been working for him for free.
Mr Farage, who likes to take troubled types under his wing, felt that working for the party gave the young man a purpose he otherwise lacked.
‘They had done their due diligence on George before agreeing to hire him and found nothing to worry about,’ assured an insider.
Last night that reassurance was looking rather hollow.
Nikki Sinclaire Prosecution Raises Many Questions But Few Answers Including when will criminals like John Ison & those who corrupted the law and perverted the course of justice be prosecuted.
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
.
Hi,
it will be noted by those who followed the case that this is a classic case of ‘Justice delayed being Justice denied’.
One is forced to ask on what grounds did the police persecute Nikki Sinclaire, just how staggeringly incompetent or even arguably corrupt was the police investigation when within a couple of days the Jusge saw through the case and officially cautioned the police witness John Ison as it was clear his evidence was incriminating him!
On what basis did Simon Timothy Orme Specialist Lawyer in the CPS Special Crime Division believe there was a case to answer and justify an expenditure of some £1.5Million on the unsubstantiated allegations of one bitter little man’s claims in breech of his contract of employment and openly made in collusion with Nigel Farage, as both his statement and the recordings showed – a claim amounting to a mere £3,200!
&
&
for
Just what have OLAF, the police and Simon Timothy Orme Specialist Lawyer in the CPS Special Crime Division done towards the prosecution of David Bannermann & Stuart Agnew, both UKip MEPs for having abused their office and utilised public money to pay the salary of Peter Reeve in direct contravention of the EU rules to the tune of many £thousands, as admitted on video and exposed by Daniel Foggo in The Sunday Times?
Just what have OLAF, the police and Simon Timothy Orme Specialist Lawyer in the CPS Special Crime Division done towards the prosecution of Stuart Agnew a UKip MEPs and the then UKip member of the House of Lords Malcolm Pearson for having abused their office and admitting to launder donations and offering to launder further donations in direct contravention of British Electoral Law to the tune of £10s of thousands, as admitted on video and exposed by Daniel Foggo in The Sunday Times?
Just what have OLAF, the police and Simon Timothy Orme Specialist Lawyer in the CPS Special Crime Division done towards the prosecution of Janice Atkinson a UKip MEPs at the time when she was exposed for having abused her office and falsified a claim for expenses having organised a political party meetin during UKip Conference as exposed in the media?
Just what have OLAF, the police and Simon Timothy Orme Specialist Lawyer in the CPS Special Crime Division done towards the prosecution of John Ison for having deliberately misled the police relative to Nikki Sinclaire, and having colluded in criminality with Nigel Farage to pervert the course of justice, whilst openly admitting to having broken the computer data laws and being in breech of the Data Protection Act as officially cautioned in Court by the Judge and widely reported in the media?
Just what have OLAF, the police and Simon Timothy Orme Specialist Lawyer in the CPS Special Crime Division done towards the prosecution of Derek Clarke a UKip MEPs and at the time a UKip member for having abused his office and having misappropriated public funds to the tune of £10s of thousands, as admitted by his having repaid between £30 & £100K when caught?
Just what have OLAF, the police and Simon Timothy Orme Specialist Lawyer in the CPS Special Crime Division done towards the prosecution of Nigel Farage for having colluded with John Ison relative to Nikki Sinclaire, and having colluded in criminality with John Ison to pervert the course of justice, by vicerious participation in breech of The Data Protection Act and Misuse of Computers Act, as reported in open Court and confirmed by tape recorded evidence in Court as widely reported in the media?
One has to wonder when you consider these matters just how corrupt the process is and whether OLAF, the police and Simon Timothy Orme Specialist Lawyer in the CPS Special Crime Division are acting corruptly in collusion with selected members of UKip – One is forced to draw the conclussion that the case against Nikki Sinclaire was not, as she puts it, just a ‘vanity case’ but a deliberate and mallicious act against her for and on behalf of interests in UKip and/or elsewhere in the body politic.
Similarly minded that the police and Simon Timothy Orme Specialist Lawyer in the CPS Special Crime Division were involved in the persecution of Jasna Badzak in the most suspect of cases whether anyone could pretend her trial was other than mallicious and thus totally failed to display the tennet that ‘Justice must be seen to be done’ – particularly in the light of the subsequent rulings against Gerard batten!
One could continue with questions such as on what grounds has Annabelle Fuller under her original name or subsequent aliases not been prosecuted for her crimes. How is Jane Collins sheltering behind ‘Parliamentary Privilege’ for her undeniably libelous comments made at the UKip Conference to a large audience libeling various Labour MPs relative to grooming and child abuse.
There are so many cases that one is forced to the conclusion that this is not a matter of coincidents but does seem to be overt corruption!
Former MEP brands failed criminal prosecution a ‘vanity case’
Written by Martin Banks on 28 July 2016 in News
Former UK Independence Party MEP Nikki Sinclaire says that a failed criminal prosecution against her cost €1.78m – over an expenses claim of just €3800.
Former MEP Nikki Sinclaire | Photo credit: European Parliament audiovisual
She has branded the police investigation against her “a vanity case” after being found not guilty of fiddling €3800 in European parliamentary expenses claims and laundering the cash.
Sinclaire, who represented the West Midlands region until 2014, had denied deliberately submitting 10 dishonest claims for travel.
The 47-year-old said that instead some expenses had been “deliberately corrupted” by her former office assistant.
After being cleared, she criticised police handling of the inquiry, saying the 10 incorrect claims upon which the prosecution case rested were now seven years old, dating to October 2009.
Sinclaire said: “In times of police cutbacks I find it incredible that on the say-so of one embittered man, West Midlands police spent, I believe, in the region of €1.78m chasing a vanity case of €3800.”
The former MEP added: “I was arrested more than four years ago, and that event had blighted my political career and, more importantly, my life.
“I now welcome the opportunity to move forward.”
A West Midlands police spokesperson said: “This long, complex inquiry has been investigated in a diligent and professional manner. It resulted in extensive evidence being presented to the Crown Prosecution Service which they accepted as significant enough to charge Nikki Sinclaire.
“Our criminal justice system quite rightly demands a very high standard of proof and we acknowledge the verdict from the jury.”
The force defended its handling of a “diligent and professional” investigation, but declined to say how much the inquiry cost.
Birmingham Crown Court had heard there had been an atmosphere of “hostility” between Sinclaire and outgoing Ukip leader, Nigel Farage, and that her former aide had passed information about her to the party.
Jurors spent just three and a half hours in deliberations before clearing Sinclaire of both charges.
She had always admitted the claims on which the crown’s case rested were in “error”, but told jurors she “paid no attention” to travel expenses as it was her office staff’s job.
She told the jury: “I was negligent – I am embarrassed about it.” However, she denied any deliberate wrongdoing.
Sinclaire said the expenses were either mistakes by staff, or in at least one claim were “deliberately corrupted” by her former aide.
Jurors also heard of several examples where she could have made genuine claims, including parliamentary trips to Cyprus and Cuba, and staff costs, which were never submitted, and effectively left her out of pocket.
Sinclaire alleged that compiling expenses claims was dealt with by her Birmingham office staff, while she just copied information supplied by her assistants on to the forms before signing them off.
The jury had also heard about a background of Ukip infighting and how Sinclaire lost the party whip as a result of internal disagreements in January 2010.
She said that her subsequent arrest by West Midlands police blocked her from re-joining Ukip. She then failed to get re-elected in 2014.
Nigel Farage & John Ison – Evidence Of Their Collusion In Criminal Activity has been very clearly shown in Court in what seems to be the mallicious and questionable prosecution of Nikki Sinclaire!
A statement of opinion written and added by myself G.L-W. Sat-09-Jul-2016:
There may well have been a statement from the defence that:
There is no suggestion of any wrong-doing by Mr Farage or any other party official.
However it is clear that at very least John Ison would seem to be in breech of his employment contract and in breech of ‘The Computer Misuse Act’ and Nigel Farage is very clearly colluding with John Ison in criminal activity – thus it would seem clear that Nigel Farage and John Ison are involved together in criminal behaviour!
It also seems very clear that Nigel Farage, John Ison and possibly others conspired together on numerous occassions in criminal activity, including unlawfull entry, and breech of ‘The Data Protection Act’ involving confidential Government information and confidential data, and in breech of ‘The Computer Misuse Act’.
As this information has been in the hands of the Police and the CPS for some years it is hard to understand on what grounds they have persecuted Nikki Sinclaire over so many years when all they seem to have by way of evidence is some 10 receipts that seem to be administrative errors yet they had very clear evidence & proof of criminality, it would seem, involving and undenied by Nigel Farage and John Ison.
It would seem that this entire farago has been to frame Nikki Sinclaire with the collusion of the Police and CPS unless one can readily accept that both the Police and CPS are both incredibly gullible and very stupid!
Nikki Sinclaire has clearly misplaced her trust in John Ison and has been betrayed by him in a criminal manner; Nigel Farage’s mallicious behaviour is seemingly equally as criminal in that he colluded in criminality of a period of time with John Ison. Steve Morson was also clearly informed of the criminal behaviour but in obvious mittigation supplied what seem to be true and honest evidence of the criminality to the Police making it irrefutable that John Ison and Nigel Farage had acted and colluded in criminality together.
End of G.L-W comment added Sat-09-Jul-2016
.
Regards,
Greg_L-W.
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins
tel: 44 (0)1594 – 528 337
Calls from ‘Number Withheld’ phones Are Blocked
All unanswered messages are recorded.
Leave your name & a UK land line number & I will return your call.
Nikki Sinclaire COURT CASE Exposes Nigel Farage’s Involvement in what seems to be his plot with John Ison to corrupt information to ‘frame’ her for fraud – Described in Court by John Ison as ‘Plan B’
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
.
11:40hrs. Monday 11-Jul-2016
NOT GUILTY VERDICT
returned by the jury.
UNANIMOUSLY
Hi,
I am privy to a considerable amount of factual information regarding the trial, which I shall NOT be including until it has been brought to public attention in the Court.
That said I will be commenting, with due consideration of the law, and to assist I have drawn heavily on the reporting of the trial by The Express & Star (CLICK HERE) as of all the reports I have read they seem to have provided the most accurate and competent coverage available in the public domain. As is my style throughout this web site I have included all ‘quoted’ material in blue to differentiate between facts I have provided and my views and the comments of others.
This case pertaining to alleged crimes commited 7 years ago in 2009 and amounting to only £2,465 at most and an investigation and arrest not made until 2012, this after Nikki Sinclaire had spoken with the EU payments office, OLAF & British Police reporting that she was not happy about events in her constituency office, where the now proven duplicitous and dishonest liar John Ison worked, and she was eventually charged in 2014 without ever being questioned regarding the charges!
WHATEVER THE Jury’s decision is this is a travesty and clearly illustrates the utter irresponsibility of the Police, when one considers the facts and the paultry amount involved, even if she was guilty which she strenuously denies and the trial is likely to have to relly on desperation to prove, has cost the British tax payers, in a period of austerity, somewhere between £1,000,000 & £1,500,000 – a huge amount of Police and Judiciary time that should have been better spent.
Further: WHATEVER THE OUTCOME this is a classic example of ‘Justice delayed is Justice denied’, which has already sentenced Nikki Sinclaire to 4 years of punishment since her arrest, including the loss of her job and her carreer in politics, created huge stress for her, her elderly parents and wider family and friends since 2012, and precluded her from any meaningfull employment since she lost office as an MEP, as she was under threat of pending Court action.
How can this not be classified as an abuse of Justice, WHATEVER THE OUTCOME?
Here is some background media coverage:
Ex-MEP Nikki Sinclaire charged with money laundering
14:17, 23 Jul 2014
Updated 18:42, 23 Jul 2014
By Brett GibbonsMs Sinclaire faces allegations that she made false and dishonest submissions for travelling expenses
Nikki Sinclaire
Former West Midlands MEP Nikki Sinclaire is set to appear in court accused of making false expenses claims and money laundering following a lengthy police investigation.
Ms Sinclaire is due to appear at Birmingham Magistrates Court on 17 September to face allegations that she made false and dishonest submissions for travelling expenses and transferred the proceeds of fraud through a bank account in her name.
The offences are alleged to have taken place between October 2009 and July 2010 when Ms Sinclaire was a serving Member of the European Parliament.
The 45-year-old, of Velsheda Road, Shirley, was originally arrested on in February 2012 and has since been on police bail. Three other members of the public were also arrested but will face no further action.
Throughout the investigation West Midlands Police has been working jointly with officers from the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF).
Simon Orme, lawyer with the Crown Prosecution Service special crime division, said: “The CPS has authorised West Midlands Police to charge Ms Nicole Sinclaire, former MEP for the West Midlands, with the offences of money laundering and misconduct in public office.
“It is alleged that between October 2009 and July 2010, whilst serving as an MEP, Ms Sinclaire used funds paid into her bank account by the European Parliament in respect of false travelling expenses claims.
“Ms Sinclaire has also been charged with Misconduct in a Public Office with regard to her actions.
“The decision to prosecute was taken in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors. We have determined that there is a realistic prospect of conviction and that a prosecution is in the public interest.
“Criminal proceedings have now commenced and Ms Sinclaire has the right to a fair trial. It is extremely important that there should be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings.”
The ex-MEP lost her seat in the May elections for the European parliament. Update:
Ms Sinclaire has claimed that police have not questioned her during a two-and-a-half year probe into allegations of money laundering and misconduct in public office.
The Crown Prosecution Service confirmed today that the former UKIP politician would be facing charges relating to the claiming of travel expenses while she was serving in the European parliament. She lost her seat during the elections in May.
Sinclaire, pledged to fight the charges.
She said: “‘I am disappointed that the police have chosen to charge me with the above offences without questioning me on them, after a two-and-a-half-year investigation.
“The charges relate to my time as a UKIP MEP when I was under the guidance and oversight by the party in the Parliament. This will prove pivotal in resolving the matter.
“‘During my time as an MEP I put in more than £120,000 of my salary into the cost of my work activities.
“‘It was also me, who in 2010, drew the attention of the West Midlands Police, to irregularities I discovered had taken place, without my knowledge, in my UKIP office.
“‘I strongly refute these charges and will be firmly defending myself. I am certain I shall be found innocent of these ludicrous and unfounded accusations.”
As shown in Court this entire case, which must have cost the public purse (Tax Payers) over £1,000,000 and possibly around £1,599,000 to bring and conducy, is in reality nothing more than allegations more suited to the Small Claims Courts:
Sinclaire’s lawyers have claimed that the amount actually overpaid was about 3,000 euro (£2,465), but deny any wrong-doing on her part.
a sum which has not been challenged by the prosecution and which it does seem Sinclaire and her lawyer have shown was in no way a willfull attempt by Sinclaire to defraud the EU.
Further EU officials (or as described by The E&S: Mandarins) was not considered sufficiently significant for OLAF (The EU official investigators) to investigate as they did not believe the matter to be fraud – in the light of evidence presented in Court which the prosecution has accepted the amount they claim Sinclaire benefitted by is £2,465 which relative to over £90,000 of her own money which she personally paid in to doing her job as an MEP is rather put in perspective!
It has been made clear in Court, and not contested by the prosecution or Ison, that Ison was employed by Sinclaire and that part of his job was to manage her receipts and expenses claims – Further it is known that in his contract of employment it is clearly stated that his employment is dependent on his undertaking to act in Nikki Sinclaire’s best interest and keep confidentiality – Wyhich part of acting as a spy and a mole in her office and plotting to destroy her does this little man of clearly no integrity and questionable honesty consider was her best interests or a confidential action as he fed information to others such as Nigel Farage, Mike Nattrass & Steve Morson, which he has admitted!
Further it is clear from the tape recordings presented in Court that Nigel Farage and John Ison are seeking to damage Sinclaire in a manner which will lead to her removal. John Ison has admitted he was acting as a spy/mole for Nigel Farage, speaking with him once or twice a week, and has also admitted that he had sent a text message, having failed apparently to ‘stitch her up’ by one method that he needed to move to ‘Plan B – Fraud’:
Mr Ison agreed that he also sent a message to another Ukip party member during a conversation about the MEP, saying: “Ok, Plan B – fraud.”
I and many others can attest to the night of the election count, a night on which I spoke to Nigel Farage several times, when Nigel Farage openly stated that ‘… although he had 13 MEPs elected he wished it was only 12‘ and it was clear that he wished Sinclaire had not been elected.
That Farage had fallen out with one of his MEPs was hardly news as in the previous parliament he lost the support of almost half of those that were elected!
There seems to be clear evidence as led in Court that there is every possibility that the dishonest and corrupt John Ison was falsifying documents with the aim to oust Nikki Sinclaire and that Mike Nattrass and Nigel Farage were colluding with him so to do, though carefully ensuring their own deniability. Steve Morson having been more competently groomed by John Ison would seem to have been aware of these facts and thus involved but his only crime would seem to be as a witness of the facts, all be it a somewhat naive witness.
PUBLISHED: June 27, 2016 12:59 pm LAST UPDATED: June 27, 2016 9:01 pm
Nikki Sinclaire money laundering trial: Former West Midlands Ukip MEP ‘claimed thousands in car costs despite flying more cheaply’
A former Ukip MEP wrongly claimed thousands of euros in travel expenses for journeys to the European Parliament by car when she had actually flown more cheaply, a court has heard.
Nikki Sinclaire, who represented the West Midlands region in Brussels and Strasbourg until 2014, signed and submitted “significant” expenses “in excess of the flight costs”, according to the prosecution.
The jury was told that in one case Sinclaire would have needed a car that could “travel back in time”, based on the receipts she is accused of submitting.
Antonie Muller, prosecuting, said Sinclaire submitted 10 false claims through “dishonesty and deception” rather than in error.
Mr Muller said that in another claim, from October 10 2009, Sinclaire claimed she had driven from Solihull to Stoke-on-Trent when she was in Cyprus.
The prosecution produced a Hilton hotel receipt from Nicosia alleged to show Sinclaire buying a Kit-Kat, a drink, and later “some hairdressing” the same day.
Mr Muller said: “She claimed she travelled 127 miles (to Stoke) when you know she hadn’t even been in the country.”
Former MEP Nikki Sinclaire
Documents seized by police allegedly show Sinclaire received a Greek parking ticket for 25 euros while on the island.
He added that investigation of the UK’s automatic number plate recognition cameras found Sinclaire never made the trip to Staffordshire, as she claimed.
Opening the prosecution’s case in what is scheduled to be a three-week trial at Birmingham Crown Court, Mr Muller said: “In short, this is a case about a member of the European Parliament, an elected official, making false and dishonest claims for travel expenses during her office.
“Specifically, during the period in the latter part of 2009 to the summer of 2010.
“The Crown rely on a series of claims for travel expenses made by Miss Sinclaire.
“We contend – and I believe it is not really disputed – these claims are probably false and do not reflect the travel expenses that were actually incurred.
“Neither do they they represent the forms of travel actually taken.
“We allege Miss Sinclaire made false claims broadly of two different varieties.
“On some occasions she would claim for travel which she had not undertaken at all.
“On other occasions she made false claims for travel which enabled her to claim significantly higher sums than if she had correctly stated travel she’d actually undertaken.”
He told the jurors it may “seem odd” that travelling by car could be more financially advantageous than going by plane, but not when including the Brussels parliament’s “travel time” allowances.
The Crown’s barrister said six of the 10 claims saw Sinclaire claim for car and ferry travel when she had flown via Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport, Basel in Switzerland or Brussels.
Mr Muller said EU expenses files showed she had submitted Brussels Airlines boarding passes – with a request for “extra leg room” – for a return flight on October 9 2009, when she was in Cyprus.
On another occasion, she claimed a 1,271-mile round trip from her Solihull home to Strasbourg, by car, he said, but she allegedly flew from London Heathrow to Basel, returning on January 21 2010, where she booked herself into a Hilton Metropole hotel in London.
He said: “The air fares cost £130. The 1,200-odd miles of vehicle travel was worth in excess of 900 euros (£750).”
The Crown said Sinclaire submitted that claim – with a ferry booking made three hours before travel – supported by French toll road tickets and a petrol station receipt from 11.32am on January 18 2010.
Mr Muller said: “The ferry was only supposed to arrive at Dunkirk at 1pm, so unless that car can travel back in time, it is impossible for that to have happened.”
He added that similar allegedly false expense claims were submitted for October 19-23 2009, and then November 23-26.
Mr Muller said Sinclaire then put in a claim “just shy of 400 euros” for a 484-mile round trip from Solihull to Chester-le-Street on January 8 2010.
The court heard the MEP’s colleague had travelled to County Durham by train to collect a £6,000 Mercedes Vito for Sinclaire, while she was having lunch with an NFU official in Stratford-upon-Avon.
The 47-year-old, of Shirley, Solihull, West Midlands, is accused of misconduct in a public office between October 1 2009 and July 31 2010 while a serving member of the European Parliament by making or causing to be made false or dishonest claims for travel expenses.
She is further charged of fraudulently transferring criminal property into her bank account between October 14 2009 and December 31 2010.
At the start of the trial, Judge Stephen Eyre QC told the jury: “This is not a trial about politics, but about particular events in a particular time and about the intention of which certain things were done.
“Whether you agree or disagree with the defendant’s politics is irrelevant to this trial.”
Sinclaire, on bail, denies all the charges and the trial continued.
Nikki Sinclaire fraud trial: Former MEP told bureaucrats expenses claims had been “deliberately corrupted”
A former Ukip MEP told Brussels bureaucrats a member of her staff had “deliberately corrupted” her travel expenses claims, a court has heard.
Former MEP Nikki Sinclaire
Nikki Sinclaire, who represented the West Midlands region in Brussels and Strasbourg until 2014, signed and submitted “significant” expenses “in excess of the flight costs”, according to the prosecution.
On Wednesday, it emerged in court Sinclaire had gone to the European Parliament’s MEPs’ expenses chief to raise concerns about irregularities in her own claims.
Francisco Estela Burriel told Birmingham Crown Court that Sinclaire “told me that she is not sure, but probably the (expenses claims) declaration has been made by another person, a member of her staff”.
Her barrister Sean Hammond asked if he recalled the meeting in Mr Estela Burriel’s office, from late August 2010, over a year before her arrest by West Midlands Police in February 2012.
Addressing the EU mandarin, he said: “The concern she raised was she believed because of a document she had seen in her office in Birmingham, that a member of staff had deliberately corrupted expenses claims submitted to your office.”
The 56-year-old bureaucrat replied: “Yes, absolutely.”
He advised Sinclaire to contact the travel companies involved to trace the paperwork, but she later told him she was “unable to find the flights she flew and which company she took to travel” as she tried to trace and correct the errors.
Earlier, Sinclaire’s barrister had asked whether newly elected MEPs’ staff received any formal training on expenses.
The EU civil servant replied that there had been a three-week information drive at the European Parliament, and that all the information was “made public”.
Sinclaire’s lawyers have claimed that the amount actually overpaid was about 3,000 euro (£2,465), but deny any wrong-doing on her part.
But the Crown has alleged Sinclaire deliberately submitted 10 travel expense claims for road travel, which she actually undertook more cheaply by flying from Birmingham Airport to the heart of EU government.
Antonie Muller, opening the prosecution case on Monday, told jurors it was a quirk of the Brussels expenses system that an elected member could claim for their journey time “duration”, which would be longer for road trips than for a flight.
In six out of the 10 claims, the Crown has alleged that is what Sinclaire did, including one occasion where she claimed to have driven to Stoke-on-Trent when in fact she was in Cyprus.
In his evidence, Mr Estela Burriel revealed some of the inner workings of the MEPs’ expenses bureaucracy, including the fact elected members can claim for up to 800 kilometres (497 miles) of road travel within their home country without submitting receipts.
As he left the court, the Spaniard covered his face with his bag after spotting media photographers outside.
Opening the case on Monday, Mr Muller said: “In short this is a case about a member of the European Parliament thereafter, an elected official making false and dishonest claims for travel expenses during her office.”
Sinclaire, 47, of Shirley, Solihull, West Midlands, is accused of misconduct in a public office between October 1 2009 and July 31 2010 while a serving member of the European Parliament by making or causing to be made false or dishonest claims for travel expenses.
She is further charged between October 14 2009 and December 31 2010 of fraudulently transferring criminal property into her bank account.
At the start of the trial Judge Stephen Eyre QC told the jury: “This is not a trial about politics, but about particular events in a particular time and about the intention of which certain things were done.
“Whether you agree or disagree with the defendant’s politics is irrelevant to this trial.”
Sinclaire, on bail, denies all the charges and the trial continues.
PUBLISHED: July 1, 2016 5:00 pm LAST UPDATED: July 1, 2016 5:02 pm
Nikki Sinclaire fraud trial: ‘Spy aide’ passed on info to Nigel Farage, court hears
A former aide to an ex-Ukip MEP has told a court he gave regular updates about his employer to Nigel Farage, saying he did so “to protect the party”.
Former UKIP MEP Nikki Sinclaire is on trial for expenses fraud
John Ison was accused of allegedly stealing documents, installing computer spyware and making secret recordings while working for Nikki Sinclaire, to ingratiate himself with the party leadership.
His old boss, Sinclaire, who represented the West Midlands region in Brussels and Strasbourg until 2014, is currently on trial for allegedly submitting “significant” expenses claims she knew to be false, according to the prosecution.
The defence’s case is that prosecution witness Mr Ison first tried to “undermine” Sinclaire, and when that appeared to fail he took advantage of the confusion around the Brussels members’ expenses system to set up his employer.
Mr Ison denied that accusation in court, and also said he never stole documents.
A Birmingham Crown Court jury hearing evidence against Sinclaire on Friday was told by her barrister Sean Hammond there was “a background of hostility” between Mr Farage and the MEP.
In a short phone call to Mr Farage – covertly recorded by Mr Ison in January 2010 – the former aide told the politician it was likely Sinclaire would have the party whip restored.
Mr Farage is heard to reply: “Mad.”
Later, jurors heard how Sinclaire lost the party whip in 2010 over an internal disagreement, but was seeking to rejoin through an appeal to its national executive committee.
Mr Hammond claimed that during the period Sinclaire treated Mr Ison as a “confidante”.
However, in a text conversation about Sinclaire with a local party colleague in February 2010, he accepted replying: “Ok, Plan B – fraud.”
At one stage during proceedings Mr Ison used his right not to incriminate himself, by declining to answer whether he had breached the Computer Misuse Act, after being presented with evidence he hacked Sinclaire’s personal laptop.
Sinclaire’s barrister asked Mr Ison if he had installed spyware on an office computer, before bragging to a party colleague about the information he had gathered as a result.
In a message in January 2010 to Steve Morson, described in court as then chairman of the Ukip regional office, Mr Ison wrote “I have just captured the entire data from Nikki’s laptop”, ending the message with a smiley face.
A reply allegedly sent by Mr Morson read “lmao”, which the court heard was shorthand for “laughing my a**e off”.
Asked by Mr Hammond if he sent the laptop message, Mr Ison replied: “Yes.”
Mr Hammond put it to him: “Had you just done that (to the laptop)?”
Choosing to invoke legal privilege against incriminating himself, Mr Ison replied: “I decline to answer.”
When Mr Ison was asked by Mr Hammond if he was acting as a “spy or a mole”, he replied: “If you want to put it that way.”
Later, a message alleged to have been sent in reply by Mr Morson read: “I’ll see if I can get you an Oscar.”
Mr Ison replied “Nikki (Sinclaire) is going to get me a ‘foxtrot oscar’ when she finds out”, referring to a slang term meaning f*** off.
On the day when Sinclaire was due to make her case to the party’s national executive committee, a message was sent to Mr Ison allegedly from Mr Morson.
The text suggested Ukip, then led by Baron Pearson of Rannoch – known as Lord Pearson – had “backed down under the threat of legal action, which Lord P said we would lose”.
Mr Ison replied in his message: “Ok, Plan B – fraud.”
Asked in court whether he sent that message, he replied: “Yes, I did.”
He added “obviously that comment looks very bad”, but denied any wrong-doing.
Earlier, asked by Mr Hammond how often he spoke to Mr Farage about Sinclaire, Mr Ison replied it was at least “once a week” by January 2010.
The ex-MEP’s barrister then asked: “You would regularly brief him and give him sensitive information from your employer?”
Mr Ison replied: “Yes I would.”
When Mr Hammond then asked if he did so to “undermine” Sinclaire, Mr Ison said: “It was to protect the party, sir.”
There is no suggestion of any wrong-doing by Mr Farage or any other party official.
Sinclaire, 47, of Shirley, Solihull, West Midlands, denies misconduct in a public office between October 1 2009 and July 31 2010 while a serving member of the European Parliament by making or causing to be made false or dishonest claims for travel expenses.
She further denies a charge that between October 14 2009 and December 31 2010 she fraudulently transferred criminal property into her bank account.
The trial continues, with Sinclaire herself expected to give evidence next week.
A statement of opinion written and added by myself G.L-W. Sat-09-Jul-2016:
There may well have been a statement from the defence that:
There is no suggestion of any wrong-doing by Mr Farage or any other party official.
However it is clear that at very least John Ison would seem to be in breech of his employment contract and in breech of ‘The Computer Misuse Act’ and Nigel Farage is very clearly colluding with John Ison in criminal activity – thus it would seem clear that Nigel Farage and John Ison are involved together in criminal behaviour!
It also seems very clear that Nigel Farage, John Ison and possibly others conspired together on numerous occassions in criminal activity, including unlawfull entry, and breech of ‘The Data Protection Act’ involving confidential Government information and confidential data, and in breech of ‘The Computer Misuse Act’.
As this information has been in the hands of the Police and the CPS for some years it is hard to understand on what grounds they have persecuted Nikki Sinclaire over so many years when all they seem to have by way of evidence is some 10 receipts that seem to be administrative errors yet they had very clear evidence & proof of criminality, it would seem, involving and undenied by Nigel Farage and John Ison.
It would seem that this entire farago has been to frame Nikki Sinclaire with the collusion of the Police and CPS unless one can readily accept that both the Police and CPS are both incredibly gullible and very stupid!
Nikki Sinclaire has clearly misplaced her trust in John Ison and has been betrayed by him in a criminal manner; Nigel Farage’s mallicious behaviour is seemingly equally as criminal in that he colluded in criminality of a period of time with John Ison. Steve Morson was also clearly informed of the criminal behaviour but in obvious mittigation supplied what seem to be true and honest evidence of the criminality to the Police making it irrefutable that John Ison and Nigel Farage had acted and colluded in criminality together.
End of G.L-W comment added Sat-09-Jul-2016
PUBLISHED: July 4, 2016 4:42 pm
Nikki Sinclaire fraud trial: Former Ukip MEP’s staff ‘knew passwords’
An ex Ukip MEP accused of filing dodgy expenses claims told a court her staff knew her passwords and credit card numbers to make travel bookings. Former MEP Nikki Sinclaire
Nikki Sinclaire, who represented the West Midlands region in Brussels and Strasbourg until 2014, is on trial for allegedly submitting “significant” expenses claims that prosecutors say she knew to be false.
Giving evidence for the first time at her Birmingham Crown Court trial on Monday, she said: “Staff had access to the office credit card and also my other credit card – they knew the numbers.”
She added that her “immense workload”, representing five million constituents, meant she probably gave “mundane” queries about her travel arrangements from her own staff short shrift and “did not know” what they did with her receipts once handed over
The 47-year-old said she had “so many objectives to achieve” politically, she expected her expenses to be dealt with by her office.
Sinclaire also told how she had sought “clarification” from the Brussels’ parliamentary expenses officials on how to make claims, after being handed a “foot-and-a-half”-high pile of EU paperwork.
Describing her background, she told the jury she was born in 1968, one of four children to a lorry driver father and a nurse mother, and grew up in south London.
She charted how she knew from the age of four of her issues regarding her gender identity and had gender reassignment surgery in 1995.
In emotional testimony, she described how she saw herself as “the first person ever to be in that situation to be elected”.
She said: “I wanted to show that somebody like me could do that job.”
Recalling her rise within the party, the former MEP added that throughout her time with Ukip from 1997, there was hostility and distrust between her and Nigel Farage.
But she said: “There was also an element of respect – we were two different wings of the same party.”
Asked by her barrister Sean Hammond if she had dishonestly submitted 10 claims, she battled tears as she replied: “No.
“I wanted to be different, I wanted to show it was possible to positively represent people.”
Sinclaire herself went to the EU anti-fraud unit and the police when she claimed to have realised all was not right with her claims.
She claimed her approach to making expenses claims was to empty out a handbag full of receipts and leave them on desk of her office staff to deal with, as it was “not really my skillset”.
Instead, she left the task was down to her UK office administration assistant Paula Murray, or her political aide and later office manager John Ison to sort them.
Sinclaire said: “On a Friday afternoon, I would empty my handbag of all receipts, and put it by John’s (Ison’s) desk.
“After employing Paula, it would be on her desk.”
Sinclaire also claimed that new MEPs were not shown the ropes of the parliamentary expenses system and instead relied on a “fresher’s fair” held in Brussels, and a huge bundle of documentation.
Having to set up her office from scratch, she recruited West Midlands regional party worker and Ukip campaigner Mr Ison to help her with setting up the rules and procedures of her administration.
In August, 2009, seeking clarification about the expenses paperwork, she went with Mr Ison to the parliamentary cash office in Brussels to speak with the bureaucrat in charge.
Mr Hammond asked: “So at that stage in terms of physically pulling together of expenses claims and the paperwork, things like that, who took over the administration work?
Sinclaire replied it was Mr Ison who set up the system and he who supervised its function.
Sinclaire said: “The time I spent in my office, the workload I had, I spent so little time in the Birmingham office.
“There were many pressures because of my position.
“I probably wouldn’t have reacted well to being asked a mundane question about my claims.”
Asked by Mr Hammond how travel bookings were arranged, she said these were dealt with by her staff who had access to her email account, credit cards and passwords.
Sinclaire claimed she was actually attempting to highlight what she alleged was the wastefulness of the EU bureaucracy and expenses system, during her tenure, which ended in 2014 when she failed to get re-elected.
Sinclaire, of Shirley, Solihull, West Midlands, denies misconduct in a public office between October 1 2009 and July 31 2010 while a serving member of the European Parliament by making or causing to be made false or dishonest claims for travel expenses.
She further denies a charge that between October 14 2009 and December 31 2010 she fraudulently transferred criminal property into her bank account.
Nikki Sinclaire fraud trial: Former Ukip MEP questions why she would have started making allegedly dodgy expenses claims
An ex-Ukip MEP has urged a trial jury to consider why she would have started making allegedly dodgy expenses claims in the same month she was warned about a British colleague later jailed for a similar claims fiddle.
Nikki Sinclaire
Nikki Sinclaire, who represented the West Midlands region in Brussels and Strasbourg until 2014, is currently on trial for allegedly submitting “significant” expenses claims she knew to be false, according to the prosecution.
Sinclaire has alleged her expenses were submitted by her staff, and at least one claim was “deliberately corrupted” by a former aide, who was acting as a spy in her camp for the Ukip hierarchy.
Today, she told Birmingham Crown Court that in October 2009 Ukip called all its elected members together and briefed them about wrong-doing by then-MEP Tom Wise.
Wise admitted fiddling £36,000 of his Brussels travel expenses at his trial the following month.
The jury in Sinclaire’s case has already heard how the first of what the Crown alleges were 10 dodgy claims date from October 2009 – the month of the Wise briefing.
Sinclaire, in the witness box, told jurors it would have defied sense for her to start filing false claims straight after being informed that Mr Wise, who represented the UK’s East region, was being prosecuted.
She said: “All Ukip MEPs were called to either Brussels of Strasbourg, I don’t remember which.
“We were briefed about Tom Wise, who was charged over expenses fraud – and what to say to the media if we were asked about it.
“The reason I say that is because the first claims of the allegations against me were right at this time.”
She added: “Why would that be the time I would decide to start fiddling my expenses?”
Sinclaire’s lawyers have claimed she did not deliberately sign off incorrect claims to gain financially, saying the total amount she could have made was “about 3,000 euro” – £2,465.
Sinclaire has also claimed at least one of her claims was “deliberately corrupted” by her former aide, John Ison – though he has denied any wrong-doing.
Jurors have also heard of several examples where she could have made genuine claims, including parliamentary trips to Cyprus and Cuba, which were never submitted.
The court has already heard about a background of party infighting, with “hostility” between Sinclaire and Nigel Farage.
Sinclaire lost the party whip as a result of internal disagreements in January 2010.
Jurors have also heard evidence from key prosecution witness Mr Ison.
Under cross-examination from her barrister Sean Hammond last week, Mr Ison accepted being a “spy or a mole” in her office, and he admitted passing information about the MEP to Nigel Farage in 2009-10.
Mr Ison also accepted making 30-40 hours of covert recordings of Sinclaire, but said he only acted “for the good of the party” during the period.
Mr Ison agreed that he also sent a message to another Ukip party member during a conversation about the MEP, saying: “Ok, Plan B – fraud.”
On Tuesday, jurors heard that despite Sinclaire herself telling the EU anti-fraud unit of her suspicions about Mr Ison, no investigation was launched.
Sinclaire also contacted British police about her fears in September 2010, but was herself arrested in February 2012.
Unknown to her at the time, Mr Ison had reported her to the police in May 2010.
Asked by Mr Hammond why she made no comment in both her police interviews in February and October 2012, Sinclaire claimed she was just following her solicitor’s advice.
She said that her arrest by West Midlands Police blocked her from rejoining Ukip – which she claimed had already been agreed. She then failed to get re-elected in 2014.
The 47-year-old, of Shirley, Solihull, West Midlands, denies misconduct in a public office between October 1 2009 and July 31 2010 while a serving member of the European Parliament by making or causing to be made false or dishonest claims for travel expenses.
She further denies a charge that between October 14 2009 and December 31 2010 she fraudulently transferred criminal property into her bank account.
On the strength of the evidence to date there is no doubt that the Jury would be perverse to find Nikki Sinclaire Guilty as there is absolutely no way that the prosecution has proved its case let alone beyond reasonable doubt.
That the EU official the expert witness Mr. Burriel confirmed all that Nikki Sinclaire had said and that it was confirmed by the EU official that Sinclaire had reported her suspicions regarding her expenses long before the Police even claim to have been involved and there was no evidence from the prosecution that Burriel or Sinclaire were disbelieved on this point makes the prosecution evidence clearly unsound it would seem.
That the prosecution evidence was unsound, as a display of criminal behaviour by Sinclaire seems clearly to be the case as no intent was shown, nor is there any sign that it is other than a clerical error or even a criminal action by John Ison designed to damage Sinclaire for Nigel Farage, as it has been undeniably shown by tape recordings played in court that Nigel Farage and John Ison were colluding. If John Ison at very least is not prosecuted it would be clearly perverse as he has admitted that he has lied under oath and the Judge has officially cautioned him relative to the risks of his dishonesty – that Nigel Farage may also be prosecuted may well also be a possibility!
It does seem that the most concrete evidence of criminality brought by the prosecution was, as the prosecution barrister stated in his summing up (closing argument), merely ‘coincidence’!
That the sum total of the allegations revolve around £2.1/2K when it has been proven in Court, and accepted by the prosecution, that Sinclaire not only did not claim for trips to Cyprus and also a trip to Cuba – all as a legitimate part of her work as an MEP nor did she draw down all of her budget in the 2 years concerned leaving over £40K unclaimed and further that in her first 3 years as an MEP Sinclaire paid from her own moniey over £90K into her work as an MEP – this case seems to me to be little more than vexatious and seemingly by a malicious action that duped an incompetent or corrupt police force!
Bear in mind neither the EU payments office nor The EU’s fraud department were remotely interested in the claims, even when told about them and had they been Sinclaire had long before informed them and the Police that she had concerns that someone was acting unlawfully in her office but she had neither the time, due to pressure of duties as an MEP, nor the skills required to investigate the problem she had reported!
That Nikki Sinclaire was able to call an independent forensic accountant to substantiate her every claim and verify the details of her account yet the police prosecution were unable to present any corroborated evidence or lead any evidence of consequence after spending a sum approaching £1.1/2Million (estimate) of public money trying to build a case out of errors amounting to £2.1/2K speaks volumes!
Fri-08-Jul-2016
We have now heard all the evidence for both the prosecution and the defence also the closing arguments of first the prosecution barrister Antonie Muller and the barrister for the defence Sean Hammond.
Today Judge Stephen Eyre QC has informed the Court he will be summing up the case for the jury, which he estimates will take upto 3 hours, in that the Court will sit from 10am that implies that by 1pm the trial will be over at which time it will be a matter for the judge to decide whether to ajourn the court until Monday or to immediately send out the jury for deliberation. We shall see!
12:00hrs. Fri-08-2016
I have just been notified that the Judge’s summing up has been completed and was reasonable and balanced and neutral in tone. The Judge has sent the jury out to deliberate and based on the facts it is my opinion that for the jury to find guilty would be a perverse decision. The jury will take as long as they wish/need to deliberate before returning to court later today or on Monday to deliver their verdict. We shall see!
I have been surprised that Simon Timothy Orme Specialist Lawyer in the CPS Special Crime Division, their London office I believe, sat in through more than half the trial as dis at least 2 police officers each day and on some days as many as 3 police – the reason for their presence at such a cost is concerning!
15:40hrs. Fri-08-2016
I have just heard that the jury has been sent home for the weekend, as having not reached a verdict yet.
11:30hrs. Monday 11-Jul-2016
Court has reconvened and the jury is still out continuing its deliberations after 2.1/2hrs. failing to come to a verdict on Friday.
11:40hrs. Monday 11-Jul-2016
NOT GUILTY VERDICT
returned by the jury.
UNANIMOUSLY
PUBLISHED: July 11, 2016 11:40 am LAST UPDATED: July 11, 2016 11:51 am
Nikki Sinclaire fraud trial: Former Ukip MEP found not guilty over expenses claims
A former Ukip MEP has been found not guilty of fiddling £3,250 in European parliamentary expenses claims and laundering the cash.
Nikki SinclaireNikki Sinclaire, who represented the West Midlands region in Brussels and Strasbourg until 2014, had denied deliberately submitting 10 dishonest claims for road travel she never made when she had flown more cheaply.The 47-year-old and her lawyers maintained that instead the expenses had been “deliberately corrupted” by her former office aide, John Ison.Mr Ison had admitted in court sending a message to another party about the 47-year-old, which read: “Ok, Plan B – fraud.”The jury at Birmingham Crown Court heard there had been at atmosphere of “hostility” between Ms Sinclaire and Ukip leader Nigel Farage, and that Mr Ison had passed information about her to the senior party figure.Sinclaire of Shirley, Solihull, had denied misconduct in a public office between October 1 2009 and July 31 2010 while a serving member of the European Parliament by making or causing to be made false or dishonest claims for travel expenses.She further denied a charge that between October 14 2009 and December 31 2010 she fraudulently transferred criminal property into her bank account.Jurors spent just three-and-a-half hours in deliberations before clearing Sinclaire of both charges.Sitting in the dock wearing a white jacket and blue top, Sinclaire looked relieved as the verdicts were read out and hugged tearful supporters in the public gallery.
Sinclaire had always admitted the claims on which the Crown’s case rested were in “error”, but told jurors she “paid no attention” to travel expenses as it was her office staff’s job.
She told the jury: “I was negligent – I am embarrassed about it” – however, she denied any deliberate wrong-doing.
Sinclaire said the expenses were either mistakes by staff, or in at least one claim were “deliberately corrupted” by her former aide Mr Ison.
In his evidence, Mr Ison admitted before the jury acting as a spy in her camp for senior Ukip figures.
The ex-MEP’s lawyers instructed a forensic accountant who found she would have made just over £3,000 from the claims, while the Crown only placed the figure in “the thousands of pounds”.
But Sinclaire, speaking during her trial, said: “I’d just achieved a lifetime ambition to become an MEP and what, I’d throw it away for £3,000, when there was ample budget in the (parliamentary) allowances which I could just take?”
Jurors also heard of several examples where she could have made genuine claims, including parliamentary trips to Cyprus and Cuba, and staff costs, which were never submitted, and effectively left her out of pocket.
Sinclaire alleged that compiling expenses claims was dealt with by her Birmingham office staff, while she just copied information supplied by her assistants onto the forms, before signing them off.
The jury had also heard about a background of Ukip infighting and how Sinclaire lost the party whip as a result of internal disagreements in January 2010.
Jurors heard evidence from key prosecution witness Mr Ison.
Under cross examination from Sinclaire’s barrister Sean Hammond, Mr Ison accepted being a “spy or a mole” in her office, and admitted passing information about the MEP to Nigel Farage in 2009-10.
Mr Ison also accepted making 30-40 hours of covert recordings of Sinclaire, and sending a message to another Ukip colleague claiming he had hacked her laptop.
He said he had only acted “for the good of the party” and when asked in court, denied any wrongdoing.
Sinclaire told the EU anti-fraud unit she suspected Mr Ison had filed bogus claims in her name, but no investigation was launched.
She contacted British police in September 2010, but was herself arrested in February 2012.
Unknown to her at the time, Mr Ison had reported her to the police in May 2010.
She said that her subsequent arrest by West Midlands Police, blocked her from re-joining Ukip. She then failed to get re-elected in 2014.
Nikki Sinclaire cleared: Expenses probe was ‘vanity’ case
Image caption Nikki Sinclaire represented the West Midlands as an MEP until 2014
A former UKIP MEP cleared of expenses fraud has criticised police for leading a “vanity case” against her.
Nikki Sinclaire, who represented the West Midlands until 2014, had denied deliberately submitting 10 dishonest claims for road travel she never made.
She said her expenses were “deliberately corrupted” by ex-office aide John Ison. The court heard he gave details to UKIP leader Nigel Farage.
West Midlands Police said it had acted in a “diligent and professional” way.
Ms Sinclaire, of Shirley, Solihull, West Midlands, had been accused of fiddling £3,250 in European parliamentary expenses claims and laundering the cash.
Mr Ison had admitted in court sending a message to another party about Ms Sinclaire, which read: “Ok, Plan B – fraud.”
The jury at Birmingham Crown Court also heard there had been at atmosphere of “hostility” between Ms Sinclaire and Mr Farage.
‘Unnecessary’ case
Speaking outside court, Ms Sinclaire, 47, said: “In times of police cutbacks I find it incredible that on the say-so of one embittered man, West Midlands (Police) spent, I believe, in the region of £1.5 million chasing a vanity case of £3,200.”
She had said the expenses were either mistakes by staff, or in at least one case were “deliberately corrupted” by her former aide.
She admitted being negligent and said she was “embarrassed” by her errors, but denied any deliberate wrong-doing, saying she “paid no attention” to travel expenses as it was her office staff’s job.
Following the verdict, Ms Sinclaire – the first ever transgender parliamentarian in the UK – spoke of her relief, saying her acquittal was “the only just verdict”.
“I was arrested more than four years ago, and that unnecessary event had blighted my political career and, more importantly, my life,” she said.
“I now welcome the opportunity to move forward.”
A spokesman for West Midlands Police said the force “acknowledged” the verdict, but defended the investigation.
“Our criminal justice system quite rightly demands a very high standard of proof,” he said.
Nikki Sinclaire: ‘I have this thing about injustice’
Share
Image copyrightAFPImage captionNikki Sinclaire became interested in politics aged just eight
The UK’s first transgender parliamentary politician Nikki Sinclaire has spent much of her life fighting battles – personal and professional.
As she is cleared of misconduct in a public office and fraud charges the BBC looks at her political and private life.
The title of Nikki Sinclaire’s second book, Never Give Up, is a clear indication of her determination.
“Because of the things that have happened to me, I have this thing about injustice. I feel I have to stand up whether it’s myself, or other people,” she told the BBC following its launch.
“I hate it when authorities put down ordinary people and I feel the need to stand up for them.”
Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionThe court heard Nikkie Sinclaire had a “poor” relationship with then UKIP leader Nigel Farage
Her resolve emerged at a very young age. She was just eight years old when she became interested in politics while watching the news after school.
But it was a couple of years later, during the Winter of Discontent, that her interest really peaked.
“My father supported the unions and I would question him – why this conflict? I thought the unions were supposed to be for the working man, and also the Labour Party?
“He could never answer that satisfactorily to me. Coming from a very poor, working-class council estate, I began to think ‘why don’t we have these things?’
Her “very working class” father was “perturbed” when he learned of her admiration for Margaret Thatcher.
As her political obsession intensified in her teens, so did a very private struggle.
Since the age of three, she believed she was trapped in the wrong body.
It wasn’t until she reached 16 that Ms Sinclaire confided her feelings to a doctor, spilling out “16 years of hurt”, only to be told it was a “fantasy”.
Undeterred, she eventually underwent gender reassignment surgery at 23.
A staunch Eurosceptic, she became an active member of UKIP and held many positions within the party. After 10 years – and two defeats in UK general elections – she was successfully voted in as the party’s MEP for the West Midlands in June 2009.
Image copyrightGETTY IMAGESImage captionSinclaire gathered 100,000 signatures on a petition calling for an EU referendum
But her success within UKIP was short-lived. Just nine months later, in March 2010, Ms Sinclaire was expelled from the party after refusing to take part in a multi-national group it had joined in the European Parliament, citing some members “homophobic views”.
It was a blow she was not going to accept easily. In December that year, having taken her former bosses to a tribunal, a judge found in her favour when UKIP failed to file a defence in time.
As an independent MEP, Ms Sinclaire continued her tireless campaign for a referendum on Europe.
In 2011, she gathered 100,000 names to a petition, which led to a Conservative rebellion of about 70 MPs, and “forced David Cameron to the despatch box”, a proud Ms Sinclaire later told the BBC.
Again, the joy was short-lived. By February 2012, West Midlands Police had begun their fraud investigation and arrested Ms Sinclaire on suspicion of defrauding the European Parliament.
Image copyrightPAImage captionNikki Sinclaire arriving at court for her trial. She said the expenses were either mistakes by staff or, in at least one claim, were “deliberately corrupted”.
“The allegations at hand are old allegations from a disgruntled ex-employee”, Ms Sinclaire said in a statement, adding she had “nothing to hide”.
The following year, Ms Sinclaire decided to reveal her gender reassignment secret, which she said was the result of threats from UKIP and journalists.
She later went on to say she had been “overwhelmed” by the support from members of the public.
In June 2014, Ms Sinclaire lost her seat to Labour’s Neena Gill and a month later, more than two years after her first police interview, she was charged with money laundering and misconduct in public office.
She was accused of making false and dishonest submissions for travelling expenses and transferring the proceeds of fraud through a bank account – something the politician said she “strongly refuted”.
It took another two years for the case to come to court, ironically, scheduled just days after Ms Sinclaire’s British independence dream came true.
The day after the referendum, there was not a hint of the impending court proceedings on her Twitter account.
Instead, as she celebrated the victory, her doggedness shone through once again.
“We did it Maggie,” she tweeted. “We did it. We got our country back. I never gave up.”
It is worth asking just how widespread was the criminal conspiracy against Nikki Sinclaire – clearly it involved Nigel Farage & John Ison conspiring to pervert the course of justice together possibly with others as was led as evidence in Court including tape recording of a conversation between Nigel Farage and John Ison and the details surrounding that conspiracy between them as shown in evidence.
Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice involving John Ison is indisputable as also shown by the various text messages and his message ‘Plan B – Fraud‘.
However there would seem to be evidence that the conspiracy was more widespread as this Tweet from the odious halfwit Mick McGough of May 2014 shows:
This would seem to show that Ukip officials and leadership were colluding with the Police.
Sadly this would seem not to be as far fetched as it would seem, not only are the police under the spotlight for their activities with regard to the allegedly unsound conviction of Jasna Badzak and I too have experience of the apparent collusion between Police of the Met. and Gerard Batten when the police acted for Gerard Batten on a half baked claim he made against me – fortunately I was beyond the jurisdiction of the Met. in these circumstances and after a 3 hour interview under caution on tape the Met’s. vexatious claims were unsustainable.
It is also worth noting that John Ison has admitted to stealing material from Nikki Sinclaire and gaining unlawful entry to her offices he has also made it abundantly clear that he is criminally in breech of the Misuse of computers Act’ and has put sophisticated spyware on Nikki Sinclaire’s computers together with downloading the entire contents of her laptop. These charges must be prosecuted against John Ison for not only Justice to be seen to be done but also for closure of this obscene chapter in British politics.
Let us also remember that irresponsibly and profligately in a period of National austerity the Police & CPS squandered an estimated £1,500,000 in trying to prove a hard working MEP Nikki Sinclaire who whilst other MEPs cash in on every bit on which they can claim Nikki Sinclaire was proven to have not claimed on numerous costly claims she could have made and in the 3 years in question paid in £91,000 of her own money to support her work as an MEP – yet the police were persuing her for about £3,000 they claimed she had ‘fiddled’ to enrich herself.
The entire case would have come to a juddering halt if the police had rubbed two brain cells together and had asked her about the so called documentary proof they claimed to have – particularly as she had reported problems and discrepancies to the EU Payments Office, OLAF and the British Police long before she had any possible incling that the police were aiding those trying to set her up!
It is also apposite to ask what the hell Simon Orm’s role in all this was on behalf of Ukip or the CPS, minded that it was also he who authorised the prosecution of Jasna Badzak in London was that for the CPS or for Ukip?
May I suggest for further clarification of the corruption in Nigel Farage’s Ukip party that you watch the BBC West Midlands TV clip of another Ukip MEP and past deputy leader of Ukip: CLICK HERE
Do also note:
Speaking outside court, she said: “In times of police cutbacks I find it incredible that on the say-so of one embittered man West Midlands Police spent, I believe in the region of £1.5 million chasing a vanity case of £3,200.”
The force defended its handling of a “diligent and professional” investigation, but has declined to say how much the inquiry cost.
which leads me to believe that it may well have been even more and when you realise, as the BBC confirmed, the Police had at least 27 serving officers working on this case the rate at which they were wasting public money was quite staggering, all on the sayso of one embittered liar seeking to curry favour with his handler Nigel Farage,to whom he was reporting, as he spied on his employer and betrayed her.
Surely the police must have dome a CRB check on John Ison and found out some of the basic facts about him – note what I was able to ascertain about the odious little man with a bit of effort on Google CLICK HERE
.
Regards,
Greg_L-W.
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins
tel: 44 (0)1594 – 528 337
Calls from ‘Number Withheld’ phones Are Blocked
All unanswered messages are recorded.
Leave your name & a UK land line number & I will return your call.
Nigel Farage So Clearly Exposed As Un-Trustworthy & Inept, as the media are more frequently exposing and as denounced by one of his more, until recently, loyal partners in crime, Douglas Denny
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
.
Hi,
it must be particularly gaulling for Nigel Farage that this cartoon, showing that the media has seen through his paper thin self publicity and have clearly got the message of his being no ‘Superman’ in a cape but just a silly little man in a seedy spivs shabby chique coat, made fashionable as a spin off of the ‘Teddy Boy’ era when Saville Row’s aim to issue an Edwardian style of long jackets and were gazzumped by their own cutters and workshops in the East End slums of London.
Nigel Farage is shown in the cartoon as more akin to the insecure tantrums of Kim Jong-Un(hinged), and all in public circulation the day before Ukip’s anniversary, having been founded 22 years ago on 03-Sep-1993.
Even his staggeringly dishonest and corrupt erstwhile fixer Douglas Denny has once again denounced him – such a pity Douglas Denny lacks the integrity and backbone to expose the truth in full; of the corruption, fraud, bullying, rigging and profligacy Nigel Farage has been so closely involved in, using useful idiots like Denny, John Moran, John Whittaker, David Bannerman, Mark Croucher, John Ison, David Lott, Annabelle Fuller, Mick McGough, Christopher Gill, Gerard Batten and the like as his mouthpieces and fixers.
(Farage must be aware that some of his worms have turned!)
I guess it is hardly surprising that a little man like Denny lacks the backbone and ethics to tell the truth as he was so involved in the corruption and huge sums of money that seem to have unaccountably spiritted away (trousered?) by Nigel Farage and his direct cronies, that he may fear for his own liberty!
It is quite surprising that in 22 years Ukip have achieved so staggeringly little, relative to the colossal amount of money they have had, for Britain other than the enrichment and patform Nigel Farage has achieved for himself and the enrichment of the unsavoury clique he has gathered around him to prop up his ineptitude as a politician, bereft of clear and sound, ethical and workable policies – dependent on populism – he is to Britain as Alex salmon and Nicolla Sturgeon are, just as Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Jack Straw and thwe present leadership contenders are to the Labour Party – catastrophicly divisive.
Even the media are finally plucking up the courage to point out that despite Ukip garnering just under 4M votes dotted around the country Nigel Farage is very much a ‘marmite’ character liked by a vociferous minority yet reveiled and held in contempt by the vaste majority – so much so that the General Election was, like all other domestic elections, an abject failure for Ukip and for Nigel Farage even more so having had his 8th. failure to get elected as an MP. His unpopularity is so dangerous and divisive for these United Kingdoms many now realise his involvement in the upcoming EU Referendum may well be the most damaging input to the Campaign to Leave_The_EU, causing many who would vote for the proposition to reconsider their stance and either abstain or vote against!
I note in the Adams cartoon in The Daily Telegraph (Wed 2nd Sept), it is clear the news media have Nigel “sussed” exactly.
It was always the danger of having a dictatorial leader that he would lead in a manner to enhance his own image rather than join in with the larger and far better organised ‘NO’ campaign for the greater good of the EU -OUT cause.
By being so self-centred, by having no response or answers to the referendum in terms of party policy, by denying and ignoring the obvious fundamental changes which have now occurred in British politics with the announcement of the referendum, …this has adversely affected the very rationale of UKIP’s existence and what it stands for as per the UKIP constitution. It is clear Nigel Farage has not thought it out. UKIP’s very future as a political party is thrown into doubt: for what can UKIP do in British politics after the referendum? What then is the point of UKIP? I believe UKIP events have left UKIP behind, and as a party it has therefore now become defunct…obsolete.
Nigel has never addressed the main issue which has always been the Achilles Heel of UKIP – what to do in the event that a government actually does give the British people a referendum for being IN or OUT of the EU. Such a referendum is precisely what I and most others in UKIP have been campaigning for in the last sixteen years or more that I have been inside UKIP, and longer outside of UKIP before that.
The Conservatives having now conceded that crucial referendum have, in doing so, cut the legs from under Nigel and his non-policies, thereby crippling UKIP.
UKIP did have a minor role to play in the lead up to the referendum – but only if the Leader Nigle Farage had accepted UKIP being a part of the ‘NO’ campaign – which will gain momentum in due course. He has foolishly rejected that for the sake of his own vanity, hence the NO campaign will leave Nigel and UKIP behind in it’s dust-wake as it forges ahead with good funding and high-powered people to speak on the ‘NO’ campaign’s behalf. Nigel has cut himself and UKIP off from this vital role…. a very stupid decision in my opinion.
This charging of Nikki Sinclaire Rather Looks Like A Sad Reflection On British Justice when in the context of the €Billions the EU squanders, overpays and loses to fraud particularly relative to 29 months on bail where justice delayed is clearly justice denied!
.
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
.
This Rather Looks Like A Sad Reflection On British Justice!Hi,
You may find some of the facts below; and there many downloads and screen captures which I have supporting the opinions below; of interest IF you value campaigning for British Justice, responsible & competent police and cleaning-up Ukip to make it fit for purpose!
It is believed that John Ison used to post occasionally as “Paul Beech”, which is BP backwards – Bob Pacific on blog also. It was removed (changed to Dave Briggs!) I hear this was done after it was shown to a UKIP MEP in Sept 2010!
“The Common Man” (Oh so Very common!) was MC backwards – Mark Croucher. This was verified for me by a UKIP Brussels insider (Croucher admitted it) at the time.
Mjolnir post on the subject was removed by BDF Moderators!
I can’t find an internet archive of Skeptyk’s BDF entry on the subject or his sordid and dishonest blog, and my source of screenshots have gone missing! It was December 2010, and posted Gregg Beeman’s salary details, but I doubt it was Ison as he was driving to the Alps about that time, so my guess is Croucher.
The information in the downloads was seemingly obtained in a burglary of Nikki Sinclaire’s office by John Ison and I hold a copy of the eMail he sent, containing copies of the material he obtained, some dozens of scans, obtained either by burglary or at very least dishonestly, supplied to the duplicitous and dishonest Mark Croucher – who worked as Nigel Farage’s sewer rat seeking out any material that could be used by Farage and his cronies to manipulate and control people – Notably it was Nigel Farage’s son who commented to Roger Knapman that he was the only person on whom his father did not have a (black) file!
The so called evidence against Nikki Sinclaire would seem to have been obtained by theft including burglary also recordings of phone calls recorded by John Ison and edited by Mark Croucher is also available – whether the police know that the evidence was stolen and the recordings edited I know not! However after almost 30 months on bail it is clear the police have had to drop a number of their original claims against Sinclaire & the 3 members of her staff originally bailed, as they obviously have failed to stand them up even when aided by the dishonest and self serving John Ison or anyone who worked for Farage!
There is absolutely no doubt that any errors of claiming by Nikki Sinclaire (or more likely her staff and most probably deliberate claims inserted into her accounts by third party efforts to damage her) do NOT justify the prolonged period of bail used to smear her name on the grounds of ‘Justice delayed is justice denied’!
The standards of behaviour by the police and others in these allegations give one every concern for the calibre of justice that can be expected and even a guilty verdict would not seem justice in the long run!
Clearly Justice should be seen to be done and much of the behaviour of those involved in the accusations and allegations, not to mention gathering of information and the vile gutter commentaries of a personal nature against Nikki Sinclaire by many of the low lifes associated with Ukip that this shoddy police activity has caused is a matter not of dignity or competence on the part of the police or Ukip and its associates but a slur on both the body politic and the tenets of Justice in these United Kingdoms.
It has been suggested by a retired police Acting Chief Supt. of 30 years distinguished service that:
‘….no interview / charges presented face-face + hand delivered summons (charges) (after this period on bail+ investigation) = possible’ “strong grounds for malicious prosecution charge”.
Misconduct in Public Office does carry a maximum life sentence and is presented under common law, not statute.
ALSO the fact that despite his many lies and efforts to deny his crimes and seek to claim they were invented by myself Derek Clark UKIP MEP was found guilty by OLAF of extensive false claims of EU expenses and was merely ordered to repay somewhere between £50K & £100,000 and seemingly no further action was taken.
In the case of Stuart Agnew MEP UKIP no action was seemingly taken to recoup the numerous £1,000s he falsely claimed as expenses as he admitted on camera to The Sunday Times nor against David Bannerman MEP UKIP (now a Tory MEP!) similarly implicated and neither have cleared their name!
Similarly UKIP leader & MEP Nigel Farage and a previous MEP leader of UKIP Jeffrey Titford were ordered to repay monies they had falsely claimed in expenses!
It is also worthy of note that Nigel Farage has also been accused of dishonest accounting having failed to declare donations to UKIP of over £200,000 and there is also still the issue of what happened to what may have been as much as £1M collected through the Ashford ‘scheme’ which he described as ‘UKIP’s best ever money maker’, however the party chairman, David Bannerman spoke on a point of orderr in reasponse to Richard Suchorzewski at a public meeting in Derbyshire, conceding that less than 15% of the money raised was ever presented to UKIP!
There was it seemed extensive money laundering in that large sums of money were processed through credit card donations which were processed through the credit card machine of Graham Booth UKIP MEP’s Hotel in Torquay!
Similarly there were many £1,000s collected in buckets and if accounted at all only loosely, as the outcome of the Court case brought against UKip by The Electoral Commission, which UKip lost, though UKip turned the issue to advantage seeking to raise the money and costs by bucket collections at a series of public events and by seeking donations. Contrary to claims the donation made by Alan Bown was clearly a breech of the rules as Alan Bown had removed himself from the electoral register as, I understand a part of his divorce proceedings when he left his wife and was co-habiting with one of his betting shop manageresses. Thus the donation was not legal!
A situation bearing many similarities to the donation UKip received some years previously when they accepted a sizeable donation from the owner of a UK football club who was not on the electoral register. UKip, without complaint, refunded the money that had been an unlawfull donation and arrangements were made by thwe donor to have it re-donated in a legal manner (in that case I believe it was by his wife who was on the electoral register) – Just as could have been done relative to Alan Bown’s donation.
Despite claims by dishonest or ill informed UKip members this was not a case of ElCom picking on UKip relative to the large donation made by an individual, subsequently found to be criminal, made to the Lib.Dims. as in that case they had carried out due diligence, even going so far as to contact ElCom for a ruling on the matter before utilising the money. I understand at the time of rec eipt of the money the individual was on the electoral register and neither the Lib.Dims. nor ElCom could have had any idea he was subsequerntly to be found guilty of criminality!
I was reliably informed, at the time of the start of this sorry debacle, that as soon as the tampering with her accounts took place and she was aware of it she immediately contacted the EU Payments Office and provided all the details she could and whether the EU Payments Office arranged repayment or merely wrote it off as being a paltry amount relative to the normal level of squandering of tax payer’s money that is endemic in the undemocratic and corrupt EU, I know not.
On these few comments alone and the links given it becomes all too apparently clear, in my opinion, that this is little short of malicious prosecution, seemingly for political gain or pure malice, of some sort, of individuals or groups of individuals and that the lack of ethical behaviour in extending the bail period from Feb-2012 (after Nikki Sinclaire herself had made public, and I believe had reported this to the police, she had reason to believe her accounts had been maliciously tampered with by a member of staff she believed had possibly made false claims and stolen from her) until this week.
Some 29 months on bail, with no further questioning and apparently no details of the police claims supplied, is little short of harassment and could justifiably be claimed as having ensured she was not re-elected as an MEP and is thus currently unemployed, technically, with a case pending which ensures she will be unable to get responsible employment until justice has been seen to be done and her name cleared – presumably with a healthy level of compensation!
Particularly as it is clearly shown and provable, in her accounts, that Nikki Sinclaire injected a sum in excess of £120,000 of her own money from salary and other personal sources also used a large sum of fully audited money, raised through donations, to fund her work and responsibilities, as she believed them to be (viz: obtaining 220,000 signatures to her petition to HM Government which was the direct and sole cause of David Cameron being forced to hold a debate of the House of Commons relative to Britain’s membership of the EU and thus the undertaking of an IN/OUT referendum, which he clearly led thwe public to believe would be binding).
It is bizarre to believe that an individual who donated a sum well in excess of £100K would then bother with some penny ante sum (by the standards of fraud in the EU by MEPs) – had she wished to gain more income a few £1.000 on mistakenly claimed travel expenses would be dwarfed by her net loss of personal monies through her donations. Even were the police able to engineer a conviction I do not believe Justice would be seen to be done and it is my opinion the entire matter is seeking to ‘get egg off the face of The police’ for having firstly believed the miscreants who would seem to have dishonestly and deliberately ‘set her up’ and for secondly having so tardily acted to bring the matter to Court even if they believe they have a case.
Nikki Sinclaire’s biography, UKIP’s threats, the BBC interview & Police corruption of justice!!
.
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
.
Hi,one wonders who is alleged to have acted criminally in this instance – as Nikki Sinclaire has shown she has donated around £30,000 of her income each year, since she was elected as an MEP, just how plausible are the allegat6ions of fraud!
It seems completely implausible that someone might commit fraud when all they needed to do was not donate their own salary!
Then again let us consider the primary source of the so called fraud allegations would seem to have been John Ison who would seem to be completely discreditted, and also seems to have been acting in cahoots with the liar Mark Croucher who is known to be willing to cheat and lie when it comes to the Courts and British justice. Ms Sinclaire remains on police bail following her arrest in February 2012 on suspicion of conspiracy to defraud the European Parliament.
The arrest was part of an inquiry following an allegation made in 2010 into allowances and expenses.
She told 5 live that she denied the allegations.
It is of course widely believed that justice delayed is justice denied!
I believe the ineptitude of West Midlands Police in this instance is far more disgraceful than even the most extreme of the implausible allegations of fraud which they may be trying to prove Nikki Sinclaire guilty of.
The behaviour of the Police in this instance is little more than a disgrace – it looks for all the world as if they are having difficulty fabricating a case!
Let us consider the wider aspects of Nikki Sinclaire’s life which she has finally felt able to divulge in her book, which I do, having read it, commend as an open, transparent, frank and very brave effort.The BBC has its own take on the issues as shown by Victoria Derbyshire who from her Twitter name @VicDerbyshire may well have a story of her own to tell – so come on Vic 😉
Nikki Sinclaire MEP: ‘UKIP made sex change revelation threats’
Nikki Sinclaire said she was warned by a doctor she would end up living as a drug addict and a prostitute
An MEP has told the BBC she revealed her gender reassignment secret because of threats from journalists and her former colleagues in UKIP.
Nikki Sinclaire, 45, an independent MEP for the West Midlands, left UKIP in 2010 after winning a sex discrimination case against the party.
Ms Sinclaire, the UK’s first openly transsexual parliamentarian, told BBC Radio 5 live’s Victoria Derbyshire that she feared other people would expose the fact she had undergone gender reassignment surgery.
The MEP said: “One of the reasons I’ve had to reveal this was threats from journalists and UKIP.
“They threatened to expose this and this is why I felt the need. Because people asked: ‘Why are you saying this now?’
“Basically, I wanted to put my side of it before someone else put a distorted side out.”
Expenses probe UKIP leader Nigel Farage, who is in hospital recovering from a back operation, said he had not spoken to Ms Sinclaire for years and was “unaware of any threats to her”.
She said she had complained about UKIP members’ behaviour towards her at the European Parliament, which she said was conducting an investigation into the matter.
The arrest was part of an inquiry following an allegation made in 2010 into allowances and expenses.
She told 5 live that she denied the allegations.
Speaking about the reaction to the revelation of her gender reassignment, Ms Sinclaire said none of her constituents at her surgery in Redditch this week had even mentioned it.
The MEP also spoke of the torment she experienced in the years before her surgery, revealing that a doctor had warned her that if she pursued her wish to no longer be a man she would “end up living in London as a drug addict and a prostitute”.
Speaking of her misery at the time, she said she would not wish this on “the worst person on the world”.
Ms Sinclaire also revealed that she suffered from deep vein thrombosis after the surgery, and almost died.
She said she was housebound for a year and suffered from “terrible” depression.
Interestingly, showing just how implausible are many of the allegations against Nikki Sinclaire we are asked to believe that the BBC interviewed Nigel Farage in hospital where he is recovering from major spinal surgery! – Somewhat implausible as with his Twitter and FaceBook accounts!.It is interesting to note just howmany inadequates seem to resent Sinclaire’s success over adversity and seem to feel it is acceptable to try to attack and insult her for having achieved so much more than they ever have – people like Robin Tillbrook who has shown all too clearly why his nasty little racist EDP cult has made so little progress in politics, with his pathetic need to gratuitously insult people who have achieved more in life than he ever had or is likely to.
Tillbrook’s example, seems to be followed by the odious Robert Edwards and the many others who you will find displaying their sad and embittered inadequacies on the internet, abusing those who have achieved or those who have dared to question their odious style.
Typical playground bullies who have never matured!The shameful behaviour of the West Midlands Police seem not to be dissimilar in their efforts to invent evidence to move forward with their case and having failed – which they have when you consider how long they have strung out their efforts – they clearly lack the integrity to admit they were wrong and have strung their case out for 3 years, no evidence now will be plausible if to save face they construct a case!
UKIP Finances are clearly shabby and believed by many to be utterly corrupt with 100s of £1,000s if not £Millions having gone missing or been trousered or syphoned off into private accounts and through money laundering scams and schemes: The Staggering Hypocrisy of UKIP and its leadership is Called to Account!!!
.
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
.
Hi,
There has always been a perception in UKIP that it is a bad idea to donate cash to the party, as it just vanishes into a black hole marked ‘Farages’s legal costs‘.
This may well be the reason that UKIP MEPs have in the main made very few donations to the party or financial contribution, other than when investing in their own personal re-election which grants them personal enrichment beyond their wildest dreams of actual personal ability!
This Black Hole of perceived corruption and inability to account for large sums of money that have seemed to vanish into the pockets of the leadership and senior officials and their puppets would seem to explain why the current largest backer, Stuart Wheeler who made his money as a professional gambler was unwilling to gamble on UKIP but linked his willingness to donate to controlling his donations by being appointed Treasurer!
On the matter of his donations when challenged on Hard Talk informed the interviewer that his donations to UKIP were but a fraction of those he made to the Tories admitted he was far less wealthy now than then!
Wheeler elsewhere has admitted that his investment skills and personal judgement, after selling out his gambling business, had proved catastrophic having halved his wealth! Perhaps another reason he was unwilling to trust his judgement of his new colleagues and insisted on being Treasurer to protect his donations and was unwilling to act honourably and investigate the apparently corrupt activities of his predecessors and new chums who seemed to have stolen, purloined, trousered or lost huge sums of public money, often criminally!
Two headlines that appeared this weekend might support that theory.
One read “Ex-FTSE chief donates five figure sum to UKIP”.
We guess that a five figure sum ought to cover a legal battle with the BBC. The donor in question might be a bit peeved, however, when he learns how his money is likely to be wasted.
The funny thing is that the donor prefers not to be named!
Was it explained to him that as his donation exceeds £7.5k his name will be, by law, made public? Or was this a donation channelled through Lord PearShaped’s dodgy money-laundering foundation?
Possibly OL:AF will leap into dynamic action to investigate this corruption and produce a verdict in two or three years time!
You will recall OLAF’s utter ineptitude in delivering transparent verdicts timeously as with Tom Wise, Nigel Farage, Stuart Wheeler, Derek Clark, David Bannerman, Jeffrey Titford, Mike Nattrass, Graham Booth and others – some finding themselves in prison, others having to repay large sums of public money they had misappropriated or stolen. Theser investigations took years and some are even now ongoing!
Interestingly OLAF have never shown any interest in the accounts of Nikki Sinclair as The EU Payments Office have stated they are entirely satisfied with the probity of her accounts which unlike UKIP MEPs are largely published on line in a manner more transparent than any other British MEP I know of! It is the ineptitude and fundamental dishonesty of the British Police that has led to the ongoing and seemingly completely unjustified claims regarding her accounts which seem larghely dependent on the dishonest and corrupt John Ison.
Justice delayed is Justice denied and so far the Police have set out to interfere with the democratic process for questionable reasons in the case of Nikki Sinclair for 3 years it seems!
If it was Lord Pearson’s money laundering scam that has been used for recent donations Stuart Wheeler might come in for a bit of stick for letting the cat out of the bag.
Clever money in Westminster says we will have the name of the donor by the end of the week!
So will the press.
And so will those who seek to pervert British democratic process such as Hope Not Hate and the various ‘Hate Preachers & Propagandists‘ like The BNP & EDL!
In the light of the many apparent scams in UKIP involving its leadership team and staff it is quite staggering to read the hypocrisy of the comments from Nigel Farage in the massively loss making left wing propaganda publishers The Guardian:
Ukip’s Nigel Farage Slams MP Sleaze
Ukip leader wants Britain to copy United States with stricter rules on lobbying
Mike Nattrass, Marta Andreasen, Gerard Batten, Mick McGough, Douglas Denny, Linda Robson and many others show what trash UKIP really are!!!
.
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
.
Hi,
the details of the overt corruption in the fundamental structures of UKIP as exposed by its own senior members below should prove of interest to anyone who believes in British values, ethics, integrity and our future ,as a Country.Astonishingly UKIP have permitted Nigel Farage to seize control of every office and appointment and every selection list in the party it seems.Presumably this has been done so that he can put in place the weak and the useless who will kiss his hand in return for their preferrment and be certain not to try to outshine him. Very much the reason why there isn’t a single honest individual of integrity amongst UKIP’s leadership, its toadies and its staff NOT ONE.
What exactly is the point of the pretence of an NEC if Farage cruises in at the end and announcing how the decision WILL be made as shown by Gerard Batten & Marta Andreasen out of self interest!
You will be unsurprised that we have very little sympathy for these two individuals the odious and outspoken racist Gerard Batten to go by the pamphlets he produces which incline to incite racial hatred based on his personal fear and superstitions.Let us not forget the totally dishonest Marta Andreasen who tries to pass herself off as a self styled whistle blower which was shown to be a pack of lies in Court see CLICK HERE
Both Batten & andreasen were only too happy to take advantage of corrupt UKIP selections and elections in the past!
Details of the rigged selection process will be noted from Linda Robson’s letter, she was a senior member of Gerard Batten’s staff:
I am writing about numerous breaches of the Rules for Candidates by three candidates in London. One of them is Ralph Atkinson, but I will not go into details as I know Gerard Batten has already informed you about his activities.The other two are Marta Andreassen and Tim Worstall who I believe should be disqualified from this election. I am aware that Marta has decided to run in SE Region but believe that she should be disqualified in London and her votes reallocated since she was not entitled to them. This is quite a long email, I’m afraid, but there are an awful lot of rules being broken.The reasons I believe they have both breached the rules are as follows: 1. Eligibility (external, under Electoral Commission Rules)
Under Section 4, Becoming a Candidate, of its European Parliamentary Election Rules, Elcom says that candidates must be:
Quote:
A British citizen…. or a citizen of another member state who is resident in the UK or Gibraltar during the nomination period.
Both Marta and Tim are clearly not UK residents. When asked about this at the London hustings Marta airily replied she was ‘addressing’ this issue. Some people I spoke to afterwards interpreted this (possibly cynically, but in the light of recent developments perhaps not) as roughly meaning ‘ if I get a high place on the list I will find an accommodation address in the UK for the minimum time necessary to meet Elcom criteria’. Tim has apparently said he will move back to the UK ‘soon’. Seems odd since he is reportedly a tax exile who can only spend 183 days in the UK and he is building a house in Portugal for himself and his family and they are currently all resident there.
Christopher Gill’s response to this was that he had not bothered to consult Elcom or check its rules as this was an internal election – unbelievable!
One would hope that UKIP will not be a party to any breach of certainly the spirit, if not the letter, of the Electoral Commission rules but according to Christopher Gill: ‘At a later stage all candidates will of course have to comply with whatever electoral legislation is then in force or otherwise be disqualified from standing’ which seems to confirm the cynics’ idea that an accommodation address will be found for them for the minimum amount of time necessary.
2. Eligibility (internal, under UKIP rules)
Under its constitution UKIP restricts full membership to UK citizens and resident foreign nationals. It also requires its Parliamentary candidates to be fully paid-up members in good standing.
Marta could therefore not possibly be a full member at the time her nomination was made and must therefore be ineligible.
Christopher Gill says she is an Associate Member but cannot tell me exactly how many other Associate members we have in the Party and indeed how many of them there were before Marta was given this (possibly) unique status.
Certainly nowhere on the membership application form is there an option to become an Associate Member. The UKIP constitution also states (16.4) ‘All parliamentary candidates must be paid-up members of the Party in good standing…’ – no mention of associate members there, I see.
3. Same Proposer
Marta and Tim had the same proposer – Lord Pearson. This is expressly forbidden but Christopher Gill has told me categorically he is not prepared to take any action as he felt ‘Lord P. was only being helpful’! Apparently breaking rules is OK if it is Lord P. doing it for Marta and Tim!
4. CRB checks
All candidates were mandated to have a full, advanced CRB check (not something vaguely similar in another country, but the full UK version). Indeed, £41 of the £250 deposit was for this purpose. So important are these checks considered to be when identifying suitable candidates that the London Assembly candidates list was delayed for two months last year because of the requirement by the leadership, at a late stage, for all candidates to have these checks. You will all recall Nigel Farage stressing the importance of these checks and saying that if we had them in place in 2004 they would have picked up Ashley Mote’s transgressions – therefore it was imperative that all candidates must have them in 2008.
But to have a CRB check you need a UK address at which you reside and for which you can produce utility bills. Once again neither Tim (who I believe can only spend a certain amount of days in the UK, which would indicate he is non-resident for tax purposes) nor Marta (who lives in Barcelona) would have been able to obtain a UK advanced CRB check as neither is resident in the UK. Why was an exception made for them?
Very odd reply from CG to this one ‘Marta has never made any attempt to hide the fact that she lives in Barcelona’!! and ‘Tim lives in Bath’. However, TW told me that although he owns a flat in Bath this was rented out and he was living in Portugal with his family.
5. Candidates standing in more than one Region
It was clearly required that candidates make it clear, both at the hustings and by other means, if they are standing in more than one Region. Marta certainly didn’t mention it at the London Hustings, nor is it in her published candidate details. Many of these members who might otherwise vote for a certain candidate would be far less inclined to do so if they knew he/she actually considered our Region second best.
Christopher Gill’s response was: ‘The point you make about declaring an interest in another region is well made – in a message to all MEP Interview Panel Chairmen dated 10th July David Challice highlighted the fact that the onus was upon candidates to publicly disclose if they were standing in more than one region. This instruction seems to have been ignored in at least one other region to my certain knowledge and will feature in my report’.
What use is ‘featuring in his report’ going to be? The damage has been done and another rule broken.
I know that the fact the shortlists were published on the UKIP website should apparently have enabled members to do some detective work and identify who was standing in more than one Region – but again this does not seem to comply with the spirit of the rule or why it was made, as very few of our members ever look at the website, let alone delve deeply into the members section, and I doubt one in a thousand of our ‘ordinary’ members, as opposed to those of us more involved with the Party, is aware of multi-region candidates.
6. Electoral Roll number
All candidates were required to give their UK electoral roll number on the application form. Unless they have given a false address, neither of these candidates can possibly be on the UK electoral register.
Christopher Gill acknowledges this is a problem for MA which should have been noticed and addressed earlier, although he contends that TW is a UK resident (wonder if HMRC know this?) but again refuses to take any action.
From this litany you will realise why many of us are extremely sceptical about the validity of these two candidates. At every turn it would appear that exceptions and accommodations are being made, and rules broken and ignored, to get them on, and keep them on, the candidate lists. I would appreciate a full explanation of why they were exempted from the stringent criteria that the rest of us had to comply with in order to be considered and would ask the NEC to disqualify both of them.
To paraphrase George Orwell: ‘Why are some candidates more equal than others?’ I am absolutely sure that if when I had applied I had said :
I’m not a UK resident
I’m not a fully paid-up member of UKIP
I can’t get a CRB check
My proposer has also proposed someone else
I’m not on the UK electoral Register; and
I have no intention of mentioning I will be standing in two Regions
I believe I would have been very firmly rejected – and rightly so.
Such chicanery will not play well with Elcom or our other enemies in the media and the community at large. And there are a number of people already aware of these facts, and upset about them. Indeed some of these questions have already been asked on the Democracy Forum – whose members number many who most certainly do not wish us well – so are thus in the public domain . This really could badly damage our chances in the 2009 elections and we should not be putting ourselves in this position.
I would formally ask the NEC to disqualify these two candidates from standing in London Region.
Please do not think I have anything personal against Marta – on the contrary, my limited acquaintance with her has always been a pleasure. And Tim seems a personable sort of fellow. But rules are being broken and distorted to keep these two candidates on the list and this is simply WRONG.I have already informed Christopher Gill that should this request be ignored then I wish to withdraw from the London list, and whilst I will do everything to ensure Gerard is elected I will not campaign or fund-raise if Atkinson, Andreassen or Worstall remain on the List.
I have also told him that I want my £250 returned as this has obviously been taken from me under false pretences. The false pretext in this case being that all candidates would be treated equally and subject to the same rules, which is patently not the case.
It is also worth remembering the ways in which UKIP leadership chose to corrupt, rig and manipulate results as shown in the Party’s own report drawn up by the Party Returning Officer at CLICK HEREAnd Mr Batten was content to remain silent when complaints were brought to his attention regarding the same subject.
They are now, in my opinion, only expressing concerns because both their seats are due to be handed over to Farage’s toadies in 2014.Do excuse my scepticism perhaps even cynicism based on bitter experience and close observation of the underhand behaviour of UKIP’s leadership team and its weak and low life gofers.Frankly the corrupt around Farage have made a rod for their own backs – a problem the electorate have clearly noted and hence the constant and risible results UKIP gets in domestic elections whilst the media play them for fools and try to use them to bring pressure on the Government.Let us hope Britain survives long enough to Leave-The-EU and these corrupt self serving low lifes behind – though as a result of almost 100 years of idiots for politicians and the final straw of the economic illiteracy of Gordon Brown & the war crimes and lies of Tony Blair and his cabinet survival is by no means a certainty.
Someone has to find a way to repay some £10Trillion in debt and forward fund the overblown public services _ I fear it may prove impossible
See:
I have recently received information from Gerard Batten (see below) about the procedure that the NEC will be implementing for the coming 2014 European elections.I am of the opinion that the process, under which I was put second on the South East list in 2009, was a satisfactory one, notably in regards the involvement of the regional committees and the exercise of democratic rights by the members. Under the new rules, the Regional Committees will not establish the list of candidates; this will be determined by the NEC after certain interviews. More importantly the local party members will not have any say over the placement on the list, who you would prefer to see elected. Instead this will be done under the auspices of the NEC, but in reality by the Party Leader.A sitting MEP will not know if they will be permitted to stand again until literally just before the polls, giving no time to prepare or run a campaign or operate in a normal way. I value and respect your views as local members and activists. If you no longer want me to represent you, then that should be your choice.
But what has prompted me to communicate with you at this point in time, is the fact that this NEC has decided that for the period 2013-2014, no sitting MEPs will be allowed to communicate with you on any level. This is ostensibly to allow a level playing field for other candidates.
This restriction on communication is against my mandate, and therefore illegal, and prevents me as an MEP and you as a party activist or member from doing our jobs, effectively shutting down the region for twelve months in terms of campaign preparation and fund-raising.
As UKIP members and activists we are justly proud of our position in favour of individual freedom and minimal state interference. It is why we work against the anti-democratic laws and the government by decree emerging from the European Union.
I work everyday to uphold these principles and further our cause locally and at national level through constituency work and our activities in the media.
While we learn about this selection procedure we are also hearing rumours about Patrick O’Flynn and the Hamiltons having already been given top positions on the list in the South East and South West.
I want to see UKIP getting seats at the next European and the General elections. It is one of the things I have been working for since I was elected, second only to the objective of getting the UK out of the EU. But these arrangements are not the way to achieve it. There is a danger of coercion and cronyism, which should have no place in our party.
I am writing to you to bring these concerns to your notice, and ask you to speak out to the party leadership if you share my concerns at the direction that the party seems to be taking. I also wish to say that I intend to continue to communicate with you to the extent that it is necessary for my functioning as an MEP, regardless of any possible sanction.
If you agree, I ask you to show your support by writing to the leadership to demand a more democratic and transparent selection process which allows your voice to be heard and respected.
This would also have the benefit of allowing candidates to be selected in good time, and for sitting MEPs to function effectively both as MEPs and as candidates.
It seems ironic that a party which stands on a platform of opposing the undemocratic decrees of the institutions of Brussels is in danger of mirroring those very same methods. Thank you for your time and trouble in reading this, and for your continuing support.
Sincerely,
Marta Andreasen
——————————————————————————
Then there is this letter from Batten which I received earlier this month:
Gerard Batten MEP
Report to the UKIP MEPs on the UKIP NEC meeting
3rd December 2012
MEP Selection 2014.
This subject arose towards the end of the meeting. Party Chairman, Steve Crowther, gave verbal report outlining the proposals for MEP selection in 2014. He said that written proposals would be circulated later.
I summarise what he said (I hope accurately) as follows:
Objectives
These are threefold:
1. To ensure all MEP list are made up of quality candidates.
2. To maximise the enthusiasm of the activists and members
3. To avoid the perception that the Leader has picked the candidates
The Process
1. This would begin in the New Year, and finalise just before the 2014 elections begin. The process is summarised as follows:
2. Nominations to open in early 2013
3. Applications for one Region only
4. Assessment of candidates for March 2013
5. Assessment to include: retrospective assessment of existing MEP performance; psychometric testing; media testing; etc
6. Provisional selection would be by a ballot of the Region’s members, but this would only decide the list not the placing on the list
7. NEC to discuss candidates if any problems perceived
8. Regional list places to be decided by a ballot of the members in the first quarter of 2014
9. Formal adopting of candidates by the NEC just before the campaign begins
Further conditions
Steve said that during the period 2013-2014 sitting MEPs would not be allowed to communicate with their Regional membership as this gave them an unfair advantage. Not deciding the places on the list for twelve month it was proposed by Steve that this would stimulate competition in the Region between the candidates in terms of positive activity.
I made the obvious point that MEPs not being able to communicate with their Regions would impede them from doing their job, and would impact adversely on the members’ perception of their performance. It is also totally impractical since MEPs cannot be prevented from communicating with their constituents who may, or may not be, UKIP members. I made the point that sitting MPs and MEPs etc would always have an advantage over other candidates (unless they were seen to underperform) and that other parties usually had some kind of preferential system for them.
I repeated my view that the best system would be as used before: for the Regional members to rank the candidates twelve months before by a ballot; if the lead candidates proved themselves unsuitable before the election they could be removed.
Paul Nuttall made the point that this process would effectively shut down the Region for twelve months in terms of campaign preparation and fund-raising.
At this point I had to leave the meeting.
I understand from others at the meeting that Nigel then returned to the meeting (having been absent for this part of the agenda) and on being told what had been discussed said that a secondary ballot with members ranking the candidates was unnecessary and the ranking would the decision of the Leader and NEC. Nigel also thought that we should have the flexibility to slot people in at the end of the process.
.
Then of course there was the anti homosexual ranting of UKIP NEC member Douglas Denny.
The criminal spamming and attempted harrassment by NEC member and serial liar and cheat as proven Mick McGough.
The astonishing efforts of Farage to try to rehabilitate the corrupt and disgraced failed Tory MP Neil Hamilton.The fact that we reliably hear that every UKIP MEP is currently under investigation over financial irregularities by the British Police and OLAF – Interestingly to date not only are OLAF Not interested in the financial activities of Nikki Sinclaire but The WQest Midlands Police have clearly been unable to establish any culpible deliberate offence in her accounts and some indication may be that after 2.1/2 years they have taken absolutely no action and I gather there is every possibility John Ison and others have realistic expectation of being charged and prosecuted – interestingly it seems that the odious little John Ison is no longer a member of UKIP whether by his choice to distance himself or in a duplicitous attempt by UKIP to disown his behaviour!
Consider the self serving duplicity and betrayal by Mike Nattrass CLICK HERE but lets face it once you are thrown out by your wife for your stupidity and you show that for lack of brains in your big head you have destroyed people’s lives by thinking with the blood in your little head I guess after that – Even if you have openly boasted of spending £!M in cash on your Portuguese villa where you spend so much time on ‘holiday’ – after that betraying your allies, friends, electorate, members and Country by trying to buy your re-election prostituting your views and values for personal gain AND of course because without having someone else make your choices almost everything turns to rubbish.
The betrayal of Team Sinclaire and the electorate by Mike Nattrass is beneath contempt and it is worth noting that it is quite astonishing just how much publicity Team Sinclaire have generated for the Referendum and inspite of the endless poisonous sabotage by UKIP who have done so very little towards the campaign and considering the £Millions of public money they have so blatantly stolen or at very least guided to their personal gain.And of course Mike Nattrass’ toxic betrayals.
UKIP are in almost every aspect a disgrace with their extremist associates and their overt racism and their openly anti homosexual stance as they support anti Jewish, Holocaust deniers and racist criminals.
Now we see the spectacle of UKIP having to close its own incestuous supposedly in house Forum to hide the fact of just how barking mad are some of their members and how despite rigid censorship even their NEC members are prone to rant and vilely at that!It seems that the latest of many i8diotic rants from the fantasist and fool Douglas Denny was the final straw with his outpouring of hate and fear of homosexuals and ever permitting them to have legitimised marriages or some such.
The Guardian, I gather, were fascinated by this odious ranting not to mention the streams of abuse and the near institutionalising of attacks on Nikki Sinclaire who had already left the party, openly stating her reason to be revulsion as it was so bound up in racism and extremist politics and involved in the corruption of their EU partners in the EFD – Cash cow as that may be for Nigel Farage!
The Guardian would seem to have rather broadened the issue, stealing something of a march on the serious researchers of the more serious and plausible media – whose time is coming!To quote The Guardian:
I gather divorces are very expensive for philanderers so to buy friends extremism, racism, anti homosexuality and corruption are just details!
Mike Nattrass, MEP (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Here is what Mike Nattrass really thinks of Farage & UKIP:
Dear All,
It may be too late but after all these years I can no longer stay silent.In the previous Leadership Election I, together with all candidates EXCEPT LORD PEARSON were rubbished by Nigel Farage on TV and elsewhere. This ensured the election of Nigel’s puppet Lord Pearson and allowed Nigel to continue to be the face of the party. That is Nigel’s view of the election rules and I think it is only fair and high time that his methods were exposed, USING HIS OWN RULES.
Nigel already Leads the parliamentary Group and when he is also elected Leader this will amount to total control. Increasingly I am hearing the word “Spiv” used to describe him, from people who are not members but see his image. I am concerned that the UKIP party brand will be tarnished, even holed below the water line, by his monopoly of power.
Whilst Nigel is a very good speaker, he is also a control freak. He grabs all UKIP publicity to the detriment of any other UKIP spokesperson or MEP. He employs assistants with the MEP’s budgets without allowing those MEPs any say. This, despite the fact that UKIP MEPs demanded a chance to interview those who were being employed with their money. Nigel agreed, then totally ignored that promise. Consequently he has his own “group funded” team around him and all “hiring” takes place via his close friend Godfrey Bloom MEP (this person is said to be banned by 4 hotels for urinating in the corridors)
Nigel’s lack of experience in good staff management and his refusal to allow MEP consultation is complimented by the morals of an Alley Cat (and I will not go there). I have always said that this does not matter, because so long as we are all in the trench together with guns pointing at the enemy all are welcome. But he shot Nikki Sinclaire in the back when she became an MEP, for no Party reason, while she was giving all the effort she could give. She was expelled as a UKIP MEP for pointing out the Group facts. He does not like truth or competition.
I have put a lot of money, time and energy into promoting UKIP in the West Midlands and I watched it wrecked at the General Election by Nigel’s chosen people (Lords Pearson and Monckton) who appeared from nowhere and failed to understand our basic strategy or even comprehend from where our votes are derived. Worse, Nikki, who has vast energy at election time, was stopped from being a UKIP MEP by Nigel and has not been given a chance to defend herself or to state her case (legal matters are pending). She and I were told by Lord Pearson not to get involved in the election and not to fund the campaign. In fact you will see that we both made considerable financial contributions but our campaign was deeply damaged. Also the subsequent enquiry into the campaign, requested by the WM candidates, was “dealt with” by Monckton (who thought I was behind it) and because of this we have had resignations from very keen activists.
All this West Midlands destruction because Nigel hates Nikki and wants to rubbish me!! Do you know how much money Nigel has contributed to this party…next to nothing.
I found allegations of fraud were brought against me when I stood for Leadership. These were in the Sunday Times. They melted away afterwards and had no foundation in truth, but they did the job intended.(My legal case against the Times is pending) Nigel has had a number of very real cases against him.. funny how that word does not get out.
My first major annoyance with Nigel’s manipulations stem from the time when I was first elected in 2004 and all UKIP MEPs had a meeting to agree three very basic points. One was that we could not employ wives (other Parties did) and this was agreed. In fact my wife comes to each Parliament and does not get paid (not even travel expenses) and I said that she wanted to contribute any proper payment to the Party, but no, rules were rules and she could be paid nothing. It was then later exposed that Nigel’s wife was being secretly paid out of his budget, breaking this rule. He did not seek any permission (to change his own rule) from the MEPs. He was simply “caught out” with both hands in the till. I fear that the whole Parliamentary Group in the EU is run for Nigel’s financial and public image. I left that ugly group.
Nigel has derailed every leader since the very first, except peacemaker Jeffery Titford (under whom I was Party Chairman). He is therefore hated by them all (except JT). plus never to be leader Kilroy Silk who must feel that Nigel gave him a wrong prospectus.
I expect that Nigel will be elected leader as no one else is effectively allowed to stand without a spin campaign against them. I can see less MEPs in the UKIP squad when he does win.
There is a false attack on Tim Congdon from Boggers 4 UKIP, this must mean he is a real threat! Good.
Minded of the huge damage done to the EUroSceptic movement at large by UKIP, its corruption, its racism, its anti homosexuality, its anti Islamism, anti Judaism and seeming terror of foreigners, to judge by its behaviour and the allies it chooses, there is one yet more unedifying spectacle!Here we see the naked greed and rivalry of the leadership members squabbling, presumably for position, whether that was John Wittacker in the past, who was described by a Judge in Court as ‘without credibility’ whilst Chairman of UKIP or his resignation in revultion at having to support Nigel Farage’s unstable doxy Annabelle Fuller who had breeched UKIP trust to criminally harass a contender in a UKIP selection process.Subsequently she went on to falsely accuse an MP of groping her in the presence of others when she went to his flat at after midninght and stole his Blackberry & House of Commons Pass.
Or The criminal and dishonest behaviour of Mick McGough, the fantasies and stupidity of the extremist Douglas Denny, the jockeying for position by Nigel Farage in negotiations with The BNP or the lies and deceit of Mark Croucher or even the braggadocio of Stuart Agnew in stealing public funds or Derek Clark’s theft of over £30,000 from the public purse on a par with Tom Wise.
Or of course the willingness of Mike Nattrass to apparently betray people besides his wife and family and prostitute what he claimed as principles, seemingly to fund a pending divorce, as he lept back into bed in Portugal & The EFD!
Indeed, little that UKIP leadership does would seem to bring more than opprobrium on the EUroSceptic movement.Yet again internecine warfare has broken out amongst the leadership with the utterly discreditted and dishonourable EX MP Neil Hamilton, seemingly in fear of losing his rumoured route to riches by exposure and defending his implausible posturings like any rat in a corner.It takes a fertile imagination to guess what merit there is in having this odious self publicist on UKIP NEC, as I would put that on a par with the crass appointment of Mick McGough, Andrew Smith, Michael Zuckerman, Peter Reeve, Oxley, Duffy, Croucher, Fuller, Nattrass, Clark, Lott, Legg, Crowther, Collett or any of the other puppets & muppets Farage has appointed as the low lifes in his claque.
A rabble of toxic waste befouling the EUroSceptic cause.
Yet the legend in his own lunchtime and political failure Hamilton chooses to do open battle, regardless of the effect on UKIP or EUroScepticism, against the elected, if proven corrupt and dishonest, Marta Andreasen UKIP MEP like Spanish Fly in the ointment!
Dear Marta, Your e-mail about MEP selection, apparently sent to SE UKIP members, contains a false and defamatory statement about me and Christine: “While we learn about this selection procedure we are also hearing rumours about ….the Hamiltons having already been given top positions on the list in……. the South West.” Firstly, Christine has no intention whatever of being a candidate in any elections.
Secondly, it is completely untrue that either of us has been ‘given top positions on the list in the…South West.”
I should be grateful to know why you have chosen to spread false rumours about Christine and me, without either identifying your source or having the courtesy to check the facts with either of us.
As you may know, I am a barrister by profession and a very experienced libel litigant. Your e-mail is defamatory and damaging to Christine and my reputations both within and beyond UKIP in its implication that we would countenance (still less be complicit in) any manipulation of the selection process for our own personal advantage.
Please identify
(1) the source of the ‘rumours’ to which you refer; (2) who made the alleged offer of top positions on the SW list and (3) where, when and by what means such alleged offer was made; (4) Please also supply me with a list of every recipient of the e-mail containing the false statement of which we complain.
Unless you can answer the above questions to our satisfaction, we require you immediately by e-mail to apologise and retract your false statements about us.
We also require you to send an apology and retraction (in terms to be agreed with me) to all recipents of the offending e-mail. You should also warn them that if they, in turn, repeat your false statements, they would also be exposing themselves to the threat of legal action.
I am copying this e-mail to the Party Chairman and Party Secretary for obvious reasons. Yours sincerely,
Neil H
Andreasen’s response is nothing if not informative both of the situation and her willingness to defend her position whatever damage it does to EUroScepticism, but did anyone ever believe she had climbed on the band wagon for other than personal gain, and were that the case why did she tell so many lies to achieve her income stream?Dear Members, I have received the email ABOVE from Mr. Neil Hamilton which is self-explanatory. He asks for apology and retraction: Well, the fact is that I heard the rumours I mentioned in my prior email. However I did not refer to the veracity of the rumours as I cannot verify if they are true or not, nor did I intend to portray them as true. I just wanted to point out how they became more credible to me when I learned about the new selection process. Whilst the rumours are in the public domain, I have not found any rebuttal from any of the parties mentioned.
Furthermore Mr. Neil Hamilton establishes a link which I did not certainly raise in my email when he refers to ” its implication that we would countenance (still less be complicit in) any manipulation of the selection process for our own personal advantage”. I have to say that I was not aware of his or his wife’s involvement in the make over of the MEP selection process when I wrote the email to you. I was told NEC members wanting to stand as MEP would not be involved in defining the selection process or any part of it. I now feel I might have been misinformed.
Overall I feel that Neil´s email is an attempt to deflect from the points that I was making in mine. He has not referred at all to the proposed gagging of MEPs in flagrant disregard for the terms of their mandate. Nor has he attempted to rebuff the claim that the now highly centralised NEC and the party leader have taken over the placement of candidates on the list in something that I have to say really resembles a totalitarian party.
Please note his warning to you, the recipients of my email, at the end of his message.
In any case I think it is disgraceful that as an elected representative of the British people I am threatened in such a way following a communication to my voters and UKIP executive should not tolerate this behaviour….but, in this respect, I only get silence from that corner.
While you will now hear that the procedure I forwarded to you in regards MEP selection is ” only a draft” for discussion…to be modified…inaccurate, etc., the fact is that if I had not made you aware the decision would have been taken in the next few days and be presented to all of us as a “fait accompli”.
Clearly, with the new party constitution, the decision on who will eventually become a UKIP MEP in 2014 has been left in the hands of the Party Leader, which is very different from saying that it is in the hands of the Party (its members). And there lies the problem.
Monday, 05-Aug-2012
This article in full was published first at CLICK HERE
Monday, 30 July 2012
The section published by Junius on 30-Jul-2012 was published first at CLICK HERE
UKIP: Jon Ison continues his destruction in the West Midlands
A West Midlands regional membership spread sheet, showing the variations in membership numbers by month shown to the Junius team reveal that its Solihull and Meriden Branch chairman John Ison has set a new party record in losing his association a staggering 16 members since April 2012, that’s nearly a 30% decrease in just 4 months!
Ison has resided over the collapse of the (until recently) largest branch in the West Midlands! Before he took over the branch was thriving had 100+ members, BUT is now down to a pitiful 45 members. (So a near loss of 65 members over his entire chairmanship of just over 12 months!)
In the same period all branch activity as stopped, before ISON took over the branch it had 17 candidates in place for the 2010 local elections. This year he didn’t put up a single candidate!
Proof that more and more people are distancing themselves from this vindictive and largely untrustworthy individual !
Mr Ison now appears to ruling his sinking ship with an iron fist to hold some level of position within UKIP. Aware of his own local unpopularity Ison has refused on hold an AGM for the branch fearing that a vote of no confidence will be issued and passed against him!
Constitutionally this is not allowed though how much longer will UKIP let it continue???????? Will the West Midlands RO step in a either to dissolve the branch or demand an EGM to hold the yearly elections as per party rules ?
isn’t Gordon Parkin having the same result in his region for much the same reasons? Also I do gather that other than their own personal interests Peter Reeve & Lisa Duffy are having a near catastrophic effect in their region and with UKIP Yoof!
Then of course we note the catastrophic behaviour of Derek Clark who has not only abused his office and the trust of the electorate but lied to his committee, his members and his electorate and been aided by his hugely over salaried staff Ron Ransome The Regional Organiser and his wife in their region.
The abysmal results and general embarrassment of the results in London are irrefutable and as London MEP Gerard Batten has shown the public clearly reject his racist views and incitement to race hate as he works with extremist groups and criminals to promote his personal values (or transparent lack of!).
That the party chairman was sat upon to carry the can and pretended to resign speaks volumes – that even this turned out to be a dishonest move and he is still publishing idiotic newsletters as Party Chairman is plain for all to see. Clearly no one of gravitas, competence or integrity sat on that particular ‘Chair’ with any plausible effect!
Clearly the party lacks any credible leadership or understanding of duty, integrity, morality or responsibility – Farage is on record stating UK elections dont matter! Well no, not to him as his pockets are stuffed with the bribes of The EU!
UKIP couldn’t care less about honesty, probity, democracy or basic common decency it is clear.
The party makes huge claims of leaps forward and expectations of glory yet imn reality they never seem to reflect in the ballot box.There may well be more members than at their all time low, not so long ago, when estimates had them at 8>10,000 members based upon their turnout to vote and track record in internal elections.
That they have grown is hardly worthy of dispute as one need only look at the caliber of those who they put forward in leadership and the only means of defending themselves would seem not to be results or even sound argument but desperate efforts to denigrate and defame those supporters who dare to have a view contrary to their self interests on the gravy train.
Yes to be fair UKIP has gained a Town councillor in Lydney and describe his result to be based on ‘a strong turnout’ OK let us judge UKIP by their claims:
Alan Preest was elected.
Alan Preest would seem to have had to quit as a Tory County Councillor.
Alan Preest was seemingly forced to resign from The Tory Party.
Alan Preest is a common thief who has been unable to clear his name!
The actual ‘strong turnout’ was in fact only 22%
Thus, yes Alan Preest won but on a vote of indifference with only 16% of the electorate in his sector of this little town even bothering to vote!
Is linking their name with low lifes and liars, thieves and dissemblers, liars and cheats really the way forward for UKIP?
One need only consider those in positions of leadership and responsibility to know the party is of no consequence and going nowhere in its present state.
Mick McGough – Liar, Cheat, criminal (UKIP NEC)
Derek Clark Liar, Cheat, Thief, dishonourable and utterly dishonest (UKIP & EFD MEP)
Gerard Batten Dishonest, proven Liar, Racist, inciter of Racial Hatred, associate of The BNP, EDL, EFD & other extremist groups (UKIP & EFD MEP)
I am surprised ANYONE would want UKIP in its present form as their candidate, at a time when the majority of the population would support a party seeking to Leave-The-EU IKIP is still bumping along the bottom & of no relevance due to its behaviour.
I am a dedicated UKIP supporter but will ONLY vote for it when it is cleaned up and fit for purpose – which as Junius regularly shows, it is not!
Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W)
. Re-TWEET my Twitterings
Ukippered! The party chairman who posed as a pilot on a… 
Former MEP Nikki Sinclaire
Nikki Sinclaire
Ukip-vs-EUkip 