Sunday, 27 February 2022

Here it is folks! The Cox Review revealed!

Exclusive - here is the explosive Cox Review (excluding the appendices) which bent Sandwell Labour have been desperately trying to stop you seeing despite it being widely leaked some months ago.

Neil Cox - a massive groveller to (now) sacked Chief Executive David Stevens - was "tasked" with investigating the rigging of the Wragge Report by Sandwell Labour and the sacked and disgraced Chief Executive, Jan Britton. Incredibly, Cox reported in June 2020 and bent Labour have been suppressing it ever since

There was an extremely long Audit Committee last year when at least two white Labour Councillors - Paul Moore and (then) Cllr Liam Preece - are said to have fought to continue the suppression of the Review, including the evidence of racism. Some Councillors including Ahmad Bostan, Zahir Hussain and Manjit Gill put on a show of seeking an apology for those affected by the alleged bias and racism, but they have been absolutely feeble and ineffectual in forcing disclosure.

Eventually, the Cox Review was leaked last October to various news outlets including The Skidder. As usual, the local mainstream media have shown little interest with the honourable exception of Rhi Storer, the Local Democracy Reporter now covering Sadders. 

The Skidder understands that the Cox Review was also leaked to many other interested parties in Sandwell including the local MP's. 

It should be remembered that the original Wragge Report was leaked by Labour despite ongoing High Court litigation! Of the two journalists who received the Report, Adrian Goldberg was (and is) a massive rimmer of Tom Watson (the former lazy MP for West Brom East) and the other was p*sshead weirdo, Adam Smith (Skidders passim) - the "King of the Rimmers", and a*se-licker-in-chief to, inter alia, Watson, Cllrs Hackett, Carmichael and Paul Moore, and the notorious masturbator, ex-Cllr John Tipper.

Curiously Eling and Jan Britton failed to order an investigation into the leak even though it appears to have been a very serious contempt of court. As will be seen below, the Wragge Report was also leaked to the Labour Party - an egregious data breach.

The Skidder now shows herewith the Cox Review (with minor redactions - mostly to protect the identity of an employee witness, and without the appendices). The sections relating to Willetts, Bubalo, Scarrott and Co are not redacted as they were exposed in the Wragge Report and other places. Britton has also featured extensively in this blog before his sacking. It has to be said, however, that the Review is disclosed because it is of very significant public interest but it is the handiwork of Neil Cox and his team and does not represent any investigations made by, or opinions of, this blog. 

The Skidder has been told by informed sources that Moore and Preece pleaded that a full "maxwellisation" process should take place with all interested parties. In other words - those who were criticised by Cox should have the full opportunity to respond to the accusations. This was seen at the time as a deliberate attempt to further delay any disclosure of the Review.

However, as a journalist I wrote to Jan Britton even though I personally witnessed him lying in a court witness box, SMBC itself reported him to the Police for colluding with others in presenting evidence in a criminal trial (no charges were brought by the employers of his son) and he was sacked for deliberately subverting the standards investigation into Hackett. His failures at Sandwell have been chronicled elesewhere in the blog and, as ever, the legal notice below applies. It has recently been shown that Britton used private methods of communication so that he could conceal his personal involvement in numerous matters. West Midlands Police are currently refusing to investigate this prima facie case of misconduct in public office but then they also refused years ago to interview him under caution regarding the revelations in this blog. In any event, the Skidder gave this scum the chance to comment but he has declined to do so.

I wrote to Mr Greenburgh and received an intially threatening reply. As previously disclosed, Greenburgh (still a solicitor) was disciplined for his "inbreeding" "joke" after deciding to drop an appeal against the slap on the wrist he was offered. Interestingly he told me that he had received no communications from bent Labour Sandwell Council at all in respect of the Cox Review - whether via a process of "maxwellisation" or otherwise. He claims not to have seen the Cox Review but he vehemently denies any allegations of bias and any allegations of racism apart from his disgusting "inbreeding" "quip". He is entitled to defend himself and I will be happy to print any comments he may wish to make now the main part of the Review is set out below.

I also wrote to Vivienne Reeve of Wragges (now Gowling WLG) on 10th January, 2022 but she has also failed to respond, for whatever reason:

Dear Ms Reeve,


You were the principal author of the appalling "Wragge Report" together with Mark Greenburgh. 

A Review into the inadequacies of the Report - The Cox Review - and an Opinion from Jenni Richards QC are being suppressed by Sandwell Labour Councillors but have now been widely leaked to politicians and the press, including myself.

I enclose the Review, Appendices and Opinion herewith. 

Given that these documents reflect on your own professional integrity, have you been contacted by SMBC for your comments on them?

Do you have any comments on the enclosed documents which you wish to make to me? In this regard you will note that Greenburgh's racist comment about alleged "inbreeding" in the Muslim Community was portrayed an isolated, one-off, "quip" (an appalling statement in itself) whereas it appears that it was nothing of the sort. Surely you must have been aware of Greenburgh's other racist comments at the time? Did you refer these other incidents to your employers?

(Incidentally your employers have profited from this racism but refuse to repay their huge fee.)

Another specific issue arises. I refer you to Paragraph 1.29 of the Review. I now hold contemporaneous documentary evidence that YOU personally were aware that Jan Britton was using unofficial channels of communication. Why did YOU permit this?

Perhaps your employers would consent to disclosure of each and every means Britton communicated with Gowling WLG at the material time?

Did YOU or, to your knowledge, Greenburgh, use unofficial methods of communication (i.e. not official Gowling WLG phones, emails, texts, messages etc) to communicate with Britton and/or SMBC? If yes, why? Please provide details

Unless you require a time extension for vaild reasons please reply by 5pm on Thursday, 13th January, 2022.

Last week there was another demo outside the offices of Gowling WLG since they still intend to keep the £181,000 they charged us taxpayers and to profit from (a) an inadequate job and (b) racism (these are just some of the demonstrators).

It is a matter of considerable public interest that the - already leaked - Cox Review is set out for the people of Sandwell to read if they so wish. The main reasons are:

  1. The Cox Review was commissioned to investigate longstanding concerns about the Wragge Report (also acquired at massive public expense) - both political and procedural. It is difficult to understand the rationale for Labour deliberately concealing the Cox Review (although the personal animosity of a number of Councillors towards the Hussain family may be the primary motivation). When Labour were themselves pleading with the High Court for the Wragge Report to be disclosed (before THEY leaked it) they claimed that publication would enable the public to see "the full picture". Publication "avoided any impression of concealment." The Report (as with the Cox Review) discloses serious prima facie cases to be answered they told the High Court. Disclosure may have a deterrent effect of those contemplating wrongdoing the corrupt bunch claimed. Any detriment to those affected by the diclosure was outweighed by the powerful public interest in openness, transparency and accountability (! in Sandwell lol!) This all applies equally to the Cox Review which should not have been concealed by the bent Authority.
  2. In the High Court Wragge Report case, Mr Justice Green said: "The conclusion [to diclose] is supported by the fact that there were already comments in the press and on social media suggesting the Council was seeking to suppress information about the investigation. Disclosure was necessary to dispel the impression and maintain public confidence." Of course, the position is worse here because the likes of Kerrie Carmichael are very deliberately trying to conceal disclosure despite media coverage of the leaked documents!
  3. Kerrie Carmichael, the joke new "Leader" of the bent Labour Council, is reported to have told a Labour Group meeting - when she was approved as the latest in a long line of duds as Captain of The Titanic - that she would ensure the Cox Review never saw the light of day. This is a political decision with no legal justification. (It is noteworthy that Carmichael has also presided over the decision to re-tender the SEND Contract where an internal review found no wrongdoing but some Labour Councillors wanted to see the contract stripped from ex-Cllr Hussain's son.) This has thrown the bent Council open to legal action and it is to be hoped for their sake that the personal animosity of some Labour Councillors is not examined in the High Court in due course! Of course, Carmichael was a pathetic acolyte and excuser of the appaling behaviour of Steve "Squealing" Eling (a disgraced former "Leader") whose malice against Hussain and former Cllr Ian Jones knew no bounds.
  4. We saw recently that Lisa McNally savaged Oliver Knight of the Internal Audit Team on video. Are we to read into the non-disclosure that Carmichael and her cronies disagree with Cox's findings and/or the competency of his Review? Is that her reason for non-disclosure and, if so, will Cox be facing disciplinary action?
  5. Various pro-Labour factions claim that the truth should never come out because the issues are "historic". Foolishly the likes of Grant Thornton, the supposedly "independent" external auditors, have seemed at times to also favour a cover-up of illegality and racism - and this is outside their legal remit. The exposure of racism should never be classed as unworthy of investigation because of the passage of time. And look at the original Wragge Report High Court decision. The case was held in 2016 and went back to issues arising in 1997. Mr Justice Green stated: "that allegations go back to 1997 is not determinative. What matters is that that the investigation is fair."
  6. Literally minutes after being formally accepted as Leader, Carmichael lied to the full Council saying she didn't know what the Cox Review was and that she hadn't read it (cf her reported comments to the Labour Group shortly beforehand). A standards complaint has ludicrously exonerated her (there's a blog coming on this) even though the lie is on the SMBC video of the meeting for all to see. If Labour is saying Boris must go for allegedly "lying to the House", then Carmichael must go for actually lying to the full Council (and the people of Sandwell).

Just as a corollary to the last point, I mentioned above that Cllr Ahmad Bostan was supposedly in favour of the racism element of the Cox Review (at least) being disclosed, but he is a deeply ambitious man and despite his constant ranting at Council meetings he is now in Carmichael's Cabinet and I wonder whether his much vaunted "principles" are now "on ice". Indeed as this picture shows, he sits in the "Chief Rimmer's Seat" behind the "Leader".

Some readers may not know that Bostan is blind but when I asked him about his failure to contradict Carmichael's blatant lie he appeared to also lose the powers of hearing and speech as shown in the following short video. [Cllr Bostan is aware of, and agrees to, being filmed by The Skidder at Council meetings and gave his express permission to me to put this question to him.]

The Cox Review:

Note re Para 3.2 - it transpired that the so-called "police investigation" was extremely limited in remit. It is not clear why Britton chose to order his own "audit" whilst the police investigation was ongoing.

Note re Para 3.7 - It is believed Greenburgh was personally known to Jan Britton and Neeraj Sharma prior to being instructed. West Midlands Police (WMP) have never interviewed Jan Britton under caution in respect of this or other matters:

Note the early involvement of Cllr Steve Eling. And you will see why it was necessary for Eling to pay Melanie Dudley a huge sum when he and Jan Britton sacked her.

Jan Britton - according to Neil Cox - flagrantly breaches Procurement and Payment rules:

We are introduced to Mark Greenburgh - the lead Wragge (now Gowling WLG) lawyer along with an assistant, Vivienne Reeve:

Dave Willetts is well-known to Sandwell Skidder readers for his role in the Boggate and other scandals. WMP declined to interview under cau

This refers to an employee witness hence the redaction. (Ironically this same person gave evidence against Cllr Simon Hackett in another matter:

Jan Britton told the High Court and the world at large that Greenburgh's appalling remark about "inbreeding" in the Muslim community was "an isolated quip" when, according to Cox this was not the case.

There is evidence, according to Cox, of Jan Britton communicating with Greenburgh and steering him towards the result desired by Britton and Eling. Indeed we are now able to show that Britton used private means to communicate with Greenburgh and Reeve including his own BT internet email account.

Here is another reason why Labour Councillors are desperate to keep this Review secret. The disclosure of the draft Wragge Report to the Labour Party was a gross data breach and another example of how the whole procedure was rigged by Eling and his cronies:



**** Phone No: 07470 624207 ****


Facebook: Julian Saunders  

Facebook Group: The Sandwell Skidder - Speaking Truth To Power!

Twitter: Publisher: @CrowMultimedia; Julian Saunders: @SandwellSkidder            

Post:  Jules Saunders, 11 Chelworth Road, Birmingham B38 0BG


LEGAL NOTICE (Version 3 from 14th February, 2021)

I cannot list every previous mention of individuals referred to in the entirety of this blog. Where I refer to a specific story please follow the supplied hyperlink since this forms legal justification for later comments. Similarly references to “posts passim” and to earlier posts mean any individuals concerned about purported defamatory or otherwise unlawful material must read later posts in the context of earlier posts. Full information can also be supplied within a reasonable time upon application via email to

In most cases we try to give the subjects of these blog posts the opportunity to comment on our journalism pre-publication to ensure the accuracy of our work.

Every now and again we make a genuine honest error and get something wrong. If an error in the blog affects you please email and we shall use our best endeavours to publish appropriate corrections forthwith.

We have had to remove the direct comment facility from this blog due to the activity of a West Bromwich woman but we are pleased to receive comments via email to , on Twitter via our publishers @CrowMultimedia or via our dedicated Facebook Group: “The Sandwell Skidder - Speaking Truth to Power!” We are happy to publish any sensible commentary and offer a right of reply where applicable.

If you consider that anything written is defamatory or otherwise unlawful please email or telephone 07470 624207 forthwith. If your complaint has merit we shall endeavour to make immediate amends.

Please ignore the following duplicate images:

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.