Skip to main content

Various PJP Arrests

All we know is that a number of PJP Activists have been arrested. What we cannot understand is that if they had all the warrants on Tuesday when all the people were in court they had to wait until 7.30am this morning. They could have gone to the court and arrested all of them in one go.

It appears to be that the police have gone around to witnesses for the Election Court. The witnesses have been asked by the police whether they have signed statements. A few have then been frightened by this so that they have denied signing the original statements and signed further statements to this effect. When you compare the statements they normally end up having the same signature. The end result is that the police are claiming that the original statements may be perjury which is absurd generically on the basis that the witnesses could have been called into court had the respondents been bothered. I am told that one witnesses grandson signed on behalf of her.

All this really shows is how easily people get frightened in these areas.

Interestingly it appears that Labour's new line on the Election Courts is that if they had lost they would have raised an election petition - pull the other one.


Bob Piper said…
So... were the witnesses frightened by the police... or were they intimidated into making statements, or the statements were false in the first place. JH's attitude to these things is that if it doesn't fit his jig-saw puzzle, he bends the piece until it does.
john said…
The point I made was that all it shows is that people are frightened. I haven't checked the details of the situation myself yet. The most reliable evidence is that of the police witnesses and handwriting expert. All other witnesses tend to be partisan one way or the other.
PoliticalHack said…
You actually state that the witnesses have been frightened by the police inquiries and have denied making the original statements.

Have West Mids Police joined the Labour Party and senior council officers on your list of co-conspirators? I'm waiting for Dan Brown to write the book.
john said…
Firstly I have not seen the documentation relating to this and have only talked to the solicitor involved. There may be more than I am aware of.

My understanding is that some of the statements taken by the police (which cover a minority of the statements in the court in any event) are where the witness claims not to have made a statement and then signs it with the same signature as on the original statement.

Now if the witness was claiming that they had been originally intimidated then it would stack up. However, that (from what I have been told on the phone) is not the case.

People in Bordesley are quite scared at the moment. When TV crews go there only about 10% of people will actually talk to them.

Given that most of the witnesses were identified by the fact that the signature on the DoI did not match the application the fact that there was some fraud in either the application or casting of the vote is clear.

I am expecting to look in more detail into this over the weekend.

To quote the original post:
"All this really shows is how easily people get frightened in these areas."

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.

I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…