In The Public Domain?

Tuesday, 23 November 2021

High Court Shafts Victorious Blogger For £22k

The Media and Communications Court - part of the High Court in London - is the playground of millionaires, celebs, Russian oligarchs and the like. Huge sums are spent on spats like the ongoing "Wagatha Christie" case between two footballers' wives.

I have had two experiences of this Court as people have tried to close this blog down and destroy me financially. It is my honest preception that the Judges there find my attempts to expose the major corruption, cronyism and incompetence at bent Labour Sandwell Council distasteful - certainly they abhor the style of my journalism. Unfortunately, for the wo/man on the street (or aboard the Clapham omnibus as lawyers say) the Court has a neat way of punishing even the victorious - disallow the costs of top lawyers for ordinary scum like me. Skew the roulette wheel so that the Establishment ALWAYS wins.

Earlier this year Lisa McNally, bent Sandwell's Director of Public Health. sued me for alleged harassment and data breach (the latter, unbelievably, for comments about stuff she herself had put on Twitter!). She self-describes suffering from serious mental health problems and, firstly, claimed that I was somehow mocking her mental health issues - which was always untrue. Secondly, she took umbrage when I pointed out that although the mainstream press call her "Dr" McNally when she is pronouncing on medical matters, "Dr" in her case is an academic title and she is not, not ever has been, a medical doctor (GMC-registered). Because this was true she couldn't sue me for defamation and so, with her co-conspirators at bent Sandwell (including Stevens, Tour and Crompton), cooked-up the ridiculous "harassment" charge. The unlawful use of taxpayers' money to support this conspiracy was even more bizarre as the case related to McNally's PERSONAL Twitter account.

This malicious woman sought an injunction, backed with a penal order, in the mosts draconian terms including that I did not go within 50 metres of her. In other words, if she got her Order she could seek to have me imprisoned if I went anywhere near her. As I have NEVER been near her or met her this was totally absurd.

McNally brought the case in her own name. But even though she earns in excess of £105,000 per annum (plus contributions to a gold-plated pension) she conspired with the top brass at bent Sandwell (who have spent YEARS trying to destroy me and this blog) and they agreed with Cllr Maria Crompton to unlawfully fund her ridiculous case with taxpayers' money.

In civil cases there is usually what is called a "protocol" process which is intended to encourage settlement of cases before they get to the issue of court proceedings. A team of lawyers at bent Sandwell including four solicitors, Surjit Tour, Maria Price, Julia Lynch and Vanessa Maher-Smith seemingly egged her-on, bolstered by the unlawful taxpayer-funding. It was quite obvious during the aggressive attitude towards me when I was desperately trying to sort out a lawyer that the Lynch mob had no intention of settling the matter without my total surrender. At a time when I was unrepresented, Lynch tried to force me to sign a "consent order" wherein I effectively admitted my guilt!

Lynch then served a 529-page bundle of papers on me (but missed a key document relevant to my defence) packed full of deeply prejudicial material going back years - and long before McNally was even employed at the Council. (Even more documents were to follow.) This was intended to swamp me with legal costs from the outset and force me to capitulate.

Lynch refused a protocol time extension when she was aware that I was close to securing legal representation and issued court proceedings (although she forgot to serve the emergency injunction application backed with the penal notice!)

Via an organisation, a top media lawyer in London looked at the papers and offered to act as he considered McNally's case to be hopeless. In the meantime, I had been speaking with the exceptional Mark Lewis of Patron Law and - by a matter of minutes - agreed terms with him before the other offer came in.

Mark is a force of nature. He is a top media lawyer working in high-profile cases. The first thing he did was give ME an almighty bollocking for even trying to agree terms with Lynch. But he was an absolute rock at a time of incredible stress and his team (Megan and Johnnie) also provided splendid support. Alas, lawyers of this quality do not come cheap (although Mark tried to help me - particularly in respect of the initial costs).

Mark Lewis is an incredible tactician and set about Lynch and "team" (they soon started complaining that HE was being aggressive at a time when THEY were trying to seek my eventual loss of liberty!).

Money was no object to the malevolent McNally as she wasn't paying for her own case and so she greedily added-in a claim for £10,000 damages for herself at the last minute. And only the "best" - or so she thought - as she was screwing us taxpayers, and she used a QC Aileen McColgan all the way. Thus she claimed:

An emergency injunction with penal notice;
Damages of £10,000;
A "permanent" injunction.
Costs (EVEN THOUGH SHE HAD NO COSTS LIABILTY AS SHE WAS SCREWING THE TAXPAYER TO PAY FOR HER!)

Mark fired a withering salvo at Lynch and instructed a top media barrister, Richard Munden (5RB Chambers), to represent me at the forthcoming hearing of the risible emergency injunction application. On his preliminary view, Richard opined that my journalism was protected by rules of free speech and that, in any event, my comments did not amount to harassment either "quantitavely or qualitatively". Even on a quick view he thought McNally's case was hopeless. Once again though, a top-lawyer like Richard (who frequently acts for millionaire celebs) does not come cheap.

Just before the emergency injunction hearing, McNally dropped this part of the claim but decided to fight on to try and get some money for herself and to get a "permanent" injunction.

Mark and Richard (rightly) thought from the off that she had no chance and applied to strike out her claim as having no real prospects of success. For non-lawyers, this is not quite as straightforward as it sounds since, for the purpose of the application only, the Judge has to accept that what McNally was saying was the truth (although we put in considerable evidence to the effect that most of it was not).

Another hearing was listed in London. Just beforehand, McNally dropped her ludicrous data protection claim. Richard Munden (great guy) was absolutely superb - both in his preparation and on the day. The decision was reserved and, unfortunately, there was no time to discuss the issue of costs which, with the benefit of hindsight, was unfortunate, to say the least.

The case was duly struck out. Just think about that for a minute. McNally herself withdrew her ridiculous emergency injunction application and the data breach claim when it was absolutely clear she has NO prospects of success. Then she suffered a humiliating defeat when the Judge decided he would not even allow her to proceed with her case. That is as comprehensive a victory as it was possible to get in these circumstances. But I have ended up out of pocket to the tune of £22,384.12p when the Judge decided that scum like me was not entitled to recover the full costs of using a top-class, though expensive, legal team - even when Sandwell had a whole team of solicitors and a QC on the case! Read on below the panel ...

***********************************************************************************

This has been a major financial hit for me and even given the generosity of Skidder readers I cannot recover that sort of loss. But I am not giving up in the face of this sort of intimidation. You good folk can help me keep the blog going with a small donation.

Please use the "donate" button on the side panel of this post. If you are reading via a mobile you need to click through to the "webpage" to find the "donate" button.

I know some folk prefer to send cheques. These too gratefully received payable to "J P Saunders" at 11 Chelworth Road, Birmingham B38 0BG

***********************************************************************************

The Judge had to decide the issue of costs via written submissions. What is not clear is whether he realised that bent Sandwell were unlawfully using taxpayers money to fund the highly-paid McNally rather than just providing "support". Did he think she was picking-up the tab personally and go easier on her? Or was he trying to save taxpayer money - which he seemimgly didn't realise was being used unlawfully - at MY expense? We just don't know.

Unfortunately Aileen McColgan QC wrote a highly misleading email to the Court. Richard Munden put in his fees - which were on the high-side but reflected his mastery of the subject and the excellence of his presentation. Given her performance on the papers and in Court, McColgan had nothing to be proud of, but boasted to the Judge about her "Leading Counsel" status and that she had only charged £10k for the hearing. In effect she was saying that Richard - who is not a QC (yet!) - should get less irrespective of his far superior performance throughout. But what McColgan failed to tell the Court was that she was receiving plenty of taxpayers' loot via the bent Council before the hearing, and so her total fee was not £10k but, er, £40.717.50 plus VAT!

Richard Munden pointed out to the Court the vicious nature of McNally's claim:

"The relief sought in the claim was of great importance to the Defendant, a private individual. The Claimant, supported throughout by the Council (who have for years been trying to close the Defendant's blog) sought not only damages, interest and costs (which would have been very substantial had the matter continued), but also a wide-ranging injunction... the breach of which could have seen him imprisoned for five years.

"The matter was complex and specialised, being a claim in the Media and Communications List of the High Court raising particular freedom of expression issues. (And he pointed out that McNally had "chosen" to use Leading Counsel throughout.)

"The matter was also very important for the Defendant's reputation. If he had been found to have unlawfully harassed the Claimant, in addition to the financial and injunctive consequences, that would have been highly damaging to his reputation and would likely have made it very difficult for him to continue his journalism. The freedom of expression element in respect of bloggers (especially on political matters) raised issues of public importance.

"In the circumstances he was entitled to use specialist Media solicitors and counsel …"

The Judge considered that for the purposes of a strike out application it had been unnecessary to put in detailed evidence to rebut the hundreds of pages of irrelevant and highly prejudicial material McNally chucked in! One rule for one ...

And bent Sandwell's costs - over £100,000 - were still higher than mine in total but I still lost out when the Judge reduced MY recoverable costs.

And so the Judge ordered McNally - i.e. YOU the taxpayer - to only pay £49,747.20 despite being told that I had had to sell remaining equity in my home to fight off the malicious claim. This has left me out of pocket, despite defeating EVERY aspect of the case, in the above-mentioned sum of £22,284.12. This is what the British Establishment do to people who get a bit uppity. They talk about rights whilst shafting you up the derriere. This is British civil justice folks if you are an ordinary Jill or Joe - you win, but you still pay! British civil courts are only open to the rich.

In an extraordinary attempt to influence the Court, McNally had claimed that she would have to resign her job (!) if she didn't get her injunction but she continues in her highly-paid post having left you taxpayers with a bill in excess of £100,000 (including the costs of Sandwell's solicitors and McColgan) for matters relating to her personal Twitter account. Time Sandwell started clawing the costs back from her pay eh readers?

THE SANDWELL SKIDDER - COMMUNITY NEWS - READ THE SKIDDER, KIDDER!

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

Email: thesandwellskidder@gmail.com

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

PROUD TO HAVE BEEN TROLLED BY DICKHEAD DARREN COOPER DECEASED!

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 thesandwellskidder@gmail.com

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 thesandwellskidder@gmail.com 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 thesandwellskidder@gmail.com , 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 thesandwellskidder@gmail.com or telephone 07470 624207 forthwith. If your complaint has merit we shall endeavour to make immediate amends.

Friday, 19 November 2021

Technical Blog - Redactions from Statutory Payments List

This is a technical blog "for the record". It is a short post sent to today to the Interim Chief Executive of bent Labour Sandwell Council, Kim Bromley-Derry, copied to the Interim "Leader" Maria Crompton (for what that is worth) and to two of the Conservative opposition Councillors.

"Dear Mr Bromley-Derry,

THIS IS NOT A PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION AND IS BEING RELEASED VIA THE SANDWELL SKIDDER BLOG.

I have noticed that Sandwell Council is breaking the law (yet again) by failing to provide appropriate details on its list of Payments over £500 each month (a statutory requirement).

In particular, there are vast swathes of the recent lists redacted particularly from the "Resources" budget. Anecdotal evidence is that your legal department is attempting to censor the list using spurious data protection arguments but, if that is true, it won't wash as the payments - particularly Covid grants to businesses (even if one wo/man bands) since the payments are for businesses, not individuals.

There are allegations (and I put it no higher than that at present) that these redactions have been made to deliberately conceal payments to Labour members and cronies collecting these funds and/or receiving other SMBC payments out. I repeat that there is a statutory obligation to publish the full details except where the law permits redactions in very specific circumstances e.g in respect of children in care.

To avoid the expense of judicial review proceedings please ensure that the full unredacted details are published forthwith

Perhaps when replying you can kindly confirm whether KBD Solutions Limited or any other company controlled by you has received any payment which should have been listed but where the information has not yet been listed or has been redacted.

Julian Saunders

THE SANDWELL SKIDDER - COMMUNITY NEWS"

End.

THE SANDWELL SKIDDER - COMMUNITY NEWS - READ THE SKIDDER, KIDDER!

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

Email: thesandwellskidder@gmail.com

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

PROUD TO HAVE BEEN TROLLED BY DICKHEAD DARREN COOPER DECEASED!

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

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.

Thursday, 18 November 2021

Starmer's Useless Puppet Implodes!

Most of you will have heard the news that the arrogant tyro "Leader" of bent Labour Sandwell Council has mysteriously disappeared up his own ars*hole! Not only has "The Boy Blunder" Rajbir Singh quit as Leader [sic] but he has also given up his Bristnall seat! No explanation has been given but this is a very serious matter which reflects badly of the hapless Labour Party right up to Sir Woodenarse himself!

Keir Starmer said he was going to personally "sort out" the disastrous Sandwell Labour Group. Plan A was to make Tom Watson rimmer-extraordinaire, Liam Preece, the new Leader last May. But the voters of Charlemont and Grove Vale had suffered several years of this ineffectual greaser's failures and threw him out! He did not have the guts to stand in the marginal Tividale by-election - which bent Labour also lost - and remains in exile. Of course, John Spellar MP (who is said to have the ear of Sir Woodenarse) is heavily and malignly involved in internal Labour matters in Sadders despite purporting to represent his failing constituency from his South London/Kentish home. Thus he and his gallowglass, Gurinder Josan (a member of Labour's National Executive Committee), bizarrely appointed the arrogant Singh as Leader, even though he had only been on the Council for three years and displayed no discernible talent or ability.

Immediately, The Boy Blunder was out of his depth. He sacked David Stevens at huge (as yet undisclosed) cost to us taxpayers, failed to release the explosive Cox Review including evidence of appalling racism, tried to cover-up the SEND contract fiasco, presided over a bin strike, was caught out over the vicious Labour plan to close Walker Grange and sat helplessly by as the unapologetic Mayor let the last full Council meeting descend into chaos. There is much more if the rumours are true. Watch this space.

The Labour Party realised that the feeble Rajbir knew nothing and promised that Labour Party nannies would "mentor" him. But, being "socialists", they expected the taxpayer to fund this nonsense and appointed a Labour Party woman from Scotland to wipe Singh's botty. The former actress, Imogen Walker, was supposed to go on the payroll and take our money so that she could act "lol" as "Interim Head of the Leader's Office". Bent Labour said this unelected person would advise Sandwell Labour's answer to Mr Bean "on issues surrounding political strategy and leadership" ROFLMAO. That was our money well spent by Labour wasn't it folks? If this person is still on the payroll she needs to be got rid of instantly and I hope the Conservative opposition are on to this right now!

Curiously, I emailed Singh yesterday just minutes before I got the news he has also run away from his Council seat. I don't suppose he will reply now lol:

"Dear Cllr Singh,

THIS IS NOT A PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION

I know from debacles like the dismissal of Stevens that you are too weak to explain the exact cause of your sudden but well deserved fall from grace.

However, you stated to the press that you have responsibilities "to my businesses" - plural. On your Register of Interests you only refer to a single business, Ample Food {sic] Limited. Please confirm which other businesses you are involved with.

Incidentally, you state on your Register of Interests that you are "an owner and director of Ample Food [sic] Limited". You signed a legal declaration to that effect on 21st June, 2021 and yet your declaration appears to be false, since Companies House say you resigned as a Director on 5th April, 2019 (the termination notice being electronically filed on 2nd October, 2019 - long before your legal declaration.) Why did you lie about this?

Kindly reply by 4pm Thursday, 18th November."

Spellar has been a poisonous influence in Sandwell for far too long and Starmer needs to realise this if he is going to poke his nose in locally again!

Incidentally, Sir Woodenarse and Spellar are big supporters of Jewish causes and Starmer promised that he was going to tackle the rampant anti-semitism that festered under Corbyn. Which makes the appointment of Cllr Bob "Seig Heil" Piper (Labour, Abbey) to the Sandwell Cabinet completely perplexing. Like former Leader, "Red" Yvonne Davies, Piper would probably claim that he is not an anti-semite but "just" anti the State of Israel. His writing over the years has dripped with constant virulent criticism of Israel and its inhabitants but somehow all this mysteriously got deleted from his Twitter account before the Starmer suspensions started (including a spat with me when he demanded the Israelis "hand back the Golan Heights" when the Syrian Civil War was raging and when he failed to respond to my question to whom the Israelis were to give this land back to!) Piper laughably sees himself as a Labour Brahmin whereas he is just a nasty piece of work who shouts "Seig Heil" in crowded pubs and cannot seemingly distinguish between hoping that people who happen to live in Israel are somehow harmed and, er, Jews. Come on Piper, tell us all - and Starmer and Spellar - what you really think!"

Express and Star attack Crompton

I was wrong about Maria Crompton (Labour, Tividale). I always thought she was like the Harry Enfield character, "Nice-But-Dim". Whenever I have spoken with her she appears to have difficulty comprehending what I am saying (even when I'm sober). The lights appear to be on, but there is no-one in.

But she came to me directly for assistance over the shocking behaviour of former Sandwell Labour tyrant, Steve "Squealing" Eling. With her Cllr partner, Pete Allen (Labour, Great Bridge) they became supporters of The Skidder and were able to help me, including in particular, with the Jenny Chidley (Labour, Princes End) drug-taking story (and other info about her). Thus it was with some astonishment that she shafted me in February, 2021 by making the unlawful decision to force Sandwell folk to pay for Lisa McNally's hopeless case.

What is particularly galling is that I always considered Crompton to be feisty and brave but, alas, I was wrong again. I texted her when the McNally conspiracy started and she immediately tried to pass the buck to (now-sacked) Chief Exec, David Stevens. She was determined to destroy me but didn't have the bottle to look me in the eye whilst she did so.

And it gets worse. I now know that she was an active player in the conspiracy with McNally, Surjit Tour and Stevens to shaft me and that she personally signed-off the unlawful funding arrangements which eventually cost us taxpayers OVER £100,000 whilst the highly-paid McNally (over £105k pa plus gold-plated pension) has paid absolutely f all. I duly wrote to Crompton as follows:

"Dear Cllr Crompton,

THIS IS NOT A PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION

In February, you tried to pass the buck for the McNally conspiracy to Stevens whereas I now know that you directly approved the disastrous litigation yourself and have (unlawfully) cost the taxpayer over £100,000.

I suspect that your decision was ill-informed because you were fed incorrect legal and other advice from Stevens and/or Tour. Accordingly please send me the report from officers upon which you based your decision and a copy of your decision notice.

Please also confirm the enquiries you made of the officers, if any, before you gave your approval."

This gutless woman could not even muster a reply but instead passed it direct to the corrupt paid service who are treating it as a "Freedom of Information Request" so that Crompton can try and keep the truth concealed for many months, if not forever. Her reward - she has been appointed "Acting Leader" where, incredibly, she has promised "business as usual" - exactly what the people of Sadders are sh*t-scared of!

Incidentally, Rajbir Singh was immediately notified of the unlawful funding arrangement for McNally's case as soon as he became "Leader" but also did absolutely nothing as the ship sailed merrily towards the iceberg. Pathetic!

At least I am not alone in my criticism of the cowardly Crompton. The Wolvo-C*cksuckers are now publicly - and possibly libellously - describing her as being "the favourite" of ex-Cllr Mahboob Hussain, clearly implying, m'lud, that she is in his pocket!

Discriminatory Bullying of Council Tenants

In a recent post, I explained how vicious Labour fascists in bent Labour Sandwell Cabinet were trying to unlawfully persecute Council tenants:

http://thesandwellskidder.blogspot.com/2021/11/sandwell-labour-fascism-more.html

There has been widespread criticism of this evil plan of Crompton, Bostan and their "socialist" cronies and I want to recommend a piece by a nationally-known Housing Lawyer/Expert who is astounded by what these corrupt Labour so and so's are trying to get away with now:

https://nearlylegal.co.uk/2021/11/theyre-making-a-list-theyre-checking-it-twice/

But folk keep grovelling to bent Labour!

I remember watching an adapataion of Tom Brown's Schooldays hundreds of years ago. When the bullies caned the younger pupils the latter had to thank them for meting out severe punishment. A similar scene is often played out in corrupt Sandwell where Labour try to shaft local folk up the derriere and these people are then pathetically GRATEFUL when the "socialists" are forced to drop their assaults.

I think this form of grovelling is known as "Black Patch Syndrome" after the Labour plan to destroy the eponymous green space was thwarted by campaigners who then sat in OCH making thumbs-up and other sickening signs of obeisance at the tyrannical Squealer, an architect of the scheme.

We saw it again with the Goldicroft Park debacle where many campaigners cheered Labour to the rooftops for backing down on their own crazed plan. Those folk should take a look at this link and see how Labour are still covering-up the truth of what happened and who was responsible. Ask yourselves, naive Goldicroft folk - why is this Freedom of Information request not being answered by Labour?

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/proposed_development_of_goldicro#outgoing-1198013

Now, and I am really sorry to say this, the brilliant Walker Grange campaigners are at it. Bent Labour wanted to close Walker Grange Care Home and sell off the site. They posited that a survey was needed in the hope that they "might find major structural faults" as an excuse to destroy it. The campaigners have been indefatigable and absolutely brilliant but what did they do when the corrupt Council signalled defeat - they sickeningly gave one Rajbir Singh (who he? Ed) and Labour a photo opportunity as the saviours of the Home! And today the likes of the Haranguing Hamster, Cllr Carmichael (Labour, ~~Trailer Park~~ Blackheath) have been crowing that, er, Labour have saved the Home they were, er, intent on destroying!

This must be sickening for all the Tories who worked so hard to save the Home, notably Shaun Bailey MP (WBW) and the exceptional and valiant Cllr Archer Williams (Conservative, Princes End). But people in Sandwell seem to like the Tom Brown Schooldays treatment and I am sure Labour will soon be along to f you over again soon! Still, you reap what you sow!

A Pre-Xmas Quiz

I was in a pub in a quiet part of Brum the other day. Inside, I met a Sandwell Councillor, boozing with a pal. By an odd coincidence I met another Sadders Councillor when I left - he was at work. One was Labour, the other Conservative. Guess which was which!

What's Randhawa Trying to Hide?

I have always thought that Cllr Pam Randhawa (Labour, Greets Green & Lyng) had plenty to say for herself (I am becoming more polite in my dotage) but she has suddenly lost her tongue. No doubt she is yet another Labour prosletyiser for "openness and transparency" which is why she is concealing vital public information from voters in her ward and Sandwell folk generally. I wrote to Randhawa yesterday about her Register of Interests but she has failed to reply:

Dear Cllr Randhawa,

THIS IS NOT A PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION - PRESS ENQUIRY

You have attempted to conceal information about yourself from your Register of Interests in Parts A1 and A4.

Further, you have failed to disclose at least one very important post from the public, where many would say there is a very clear conflict of interest with your role as a Councillor. My understanding is that you have been Chair of the Sandwell Police Independent Advisory Group.

Please confirm whatever it is you are trying to hide from the public and confirm your position with the IAG.

Kindly reply by 4pm Thursday, 18th November.

It would be wholly inappropriate for a Labour Councillor to be on, let alone chairing, the local IAG noting, inter alia, the corrupt relationshiip between the dodgy Council and the Bent Blues (posts passim ad nauseum).

As Randhawa is keeping her mouth shut and concealing lawful information we shall have to continue with investigations as to what she is, very deliberately, hiding from us.

THE SANDWELL SKIDDER - COMMUNITY NEWS - READ THE SKIDDER, KIDDER!

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

Email: thesandwellskidder@gmail.com

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

PROUD TO HAVE BEEN TROLLED BY DICKHEAD DARREN COOPER DECEASED!

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

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 thesandwellskidder@gmail.com and we shall

use our best endeavours to publish appropriate corrections forthwith.

Friday, 5 November 2021

Sandwell Labour Fascism + More

Until fairly recently, bent Sandwell Labour spent most of their 47 years of dictatorship unquestioned by the cowardly folk of the benighted Borough. Happily, people are rising-up all over Sadders and fighting back against these petty tyrants. And they don't like it up 'em, Captain Mainwaring!

We saw that at the last full Council many of the pusillanimous Labour Councillors sneaked through the offices and across the bridge to the Council chamber rather than walk past the THREE peaceful demonstrations by the linkway.*

(The glass corridor shown above the apex of the linkway entrance is where the Labour cowards scurried through).

At present Labour are cynically using the appalling murder of a Tory MP to "tighten security" i.e. stop members of the public getting close to them.

But the most egregious example of their determination to stifle free speech is the proposed "amendment" to the tenancy agreements of council-house dwellers. No doubt on the advice of legal supremo "lol", Surjit Tour, this is the unlawful and discriminatory clause these Labour fascists intend to sneak in:

There is already a zero-tolerance policy against abuse and threats to staff and a whole range of legal remedies to prevent such obnoxious behaviour. But Labour are unhappy with the bad publicity they are receiving via social media and so want to, er, ban it altogether!

Note especially that this threatening legal nonsense includes criticism of "councillors" which rather gives the game away. The obvious flaw here is that this is a direct threat purely to Council tenants - therefore it is unlawful and discriminatory. The other problem is the definition - if a Council house tenant says critical things about a joke Labour Councillor like Peter "Zorro" Hughes, is that within their absurd "definition" even if the tenant is commenting on something that is nothing whatsoever to do with their tenancy?

Surjit Tour was directly involved in the conspiracy surrounding McNally's legal case which cost the taxpayer over £100,000. Tour (with the now sacked Stevens and Cllr Maria Crompton) unlawfully used taxpayers' money to fund McNally's disastrous claim which he and at least three other Sandwell solicitors, Price, Lynch and Maher-Smith, tried to frame in terms of "harassment". A High Court judge stated that there was no "harassment" and yet here Tour is using the exact same word again to stop local council house residents ONLY criticising the Council and Councillors about ANYTHING! They are not getting the message are they readers?

I will shortly be talking to some of the housing charities to ask if we can form a legal fighting fund to stop this nonsense and, if Labour force it through via the likes of Cllr Bostan, that we can provide assistance to any tenant who faces misguided legal action. (Any lawyers or charity workers who can help with this - please get in touch. Contact details below.)

McNally Attacks Tories - Again!

Lisa McNally, the Director of Public Health at bent Sandwell Labour Council, earns over £105k per annum (plus gold-plated pension) and is specifically in a politically-restricted post. But, seemingly, she can't resist having a go at local Conservatives.

Readers will remember that last year, she threatened Nicola Richards, the MP for WBE, with legal action. Incredibly, The Skidder is now hearing that she made a formal standards complaint against one of the growing band of Tory Councillors for having the temerity to question why the taxpayer is on the hook for her legal bill of more than £100k!

Surjit Tour (the Monitoring Officer) was, as above, directly involved in the conspiracy to bring her ridiculous case against me yet has blocked the Conservative Group from asking a question about McNally's costs at the last full Council meeting - despite his clearest possible personal conflict of interest. Somehow I don't think the opposition will be going away on this one, especially now it is known that then-Labour Leader Maria Crompton (Tividale) sanctioned the absurd litigation but is now too cowardly to disclose the papers relating to her costly and disastrous decision!

Rajbir "The Puppet" Singh - the race is on!

Since May, bent Labour have had opposition on their corrupt Council. A weird manifestation of their reaction to this is that new Leader, the Boy Blunder, Rajbir Singh, keeps popping up all over the place for photo opportunities. He is like Captain Scott racing to be first at the South Pole but Amundsen, in the form of Tory Group Leader, David Fisher, keeps beating him to it.

On 12th October I alerted Cllr Fisher to the concerns of local residents about a proposed House of Multiple Occupation in Singh's own ward. Cllr Fisher contacted residents on the following day, the 13th. Twitter describes Singh getting around to telephoning local residents on the 21st. And Singh proudly showed himself with locals on the 23rd - but after Cllr Fisher had already visited!

This looks like being one to watch in the coming months! And after 47 years of failure, Labour are finally having to do some work!

Self-described "thief" joins Express and Star

I recently wrote about the vile mysogynistic writing of Sandwell Labour puppet and propagandist, Adam Smith. You can access the post via this link but please heed the specific warning that the post contains disgusting material of a most unpleasant nature. This is NOT suitable for the easily-shocked or for under-18's:

http://thesandwellskidder.blogspot.com/2021/08/the-misogyny-of-adam-smith-journalist.html

Smith was/is a mouthpiece for the following local Labour former and current "politicians" (and others): Mick Davies, Tom "Lazy Tom" Watson, Simon Hackett, Liam Preece, Kerry Carmichael and, of course, the infamous masturbator, John Tipper. His famous "exclusives" for the, er, Halesowen News, were direct leaks that his pals wanted in the public domain for their own political purposes.

Since this "award-winning journalist" left the HN, he had a spell in London which didn't last long and some sort of position on the mighty "Erdington Local". Whilst in London he received a visitor from Sandwell. He described to that person how he had worked out the times when the security man at a branch of a well-known local store took his breaks and then went in and stole goods. I am not saying this is true since, as stated before, it is difficult to know where Smith's constant bragging begins and ends. He might just have been bullsh*tting but that is the story he told. The visitor also stated, however, that when they went into a tube station he was progressing through the ticket barrier and Smith literally leapt onto his back and clung on to avoid paying the fare!

In my recent post I quoted Smith's own words (the asterisk was missing from the original):

"I'm not a journalist. Was gonna go to Glasgow to be one again but the Mrs wants me to stay in Brum and, as u know, no f*cker will employ me in this town."

Happily the editors of the Wolvo C*ck-Suckers are not so squeamish as their Brum counterparts since they have now employed Smith as, I sh*t ye not, a "Senior Reporter".

Besides being very, very, "brave" of the E&S, this is also another aspect of the mystery why they constantly rim bent Sandwell Labour. They know from a picture posted in the public domain (and much else) that Smith has worked specifically for the Labour Party at elections:

Curiously they also know that, even very recently, he openly and very publicly lied about the video his mate Tipper took of himself masturbating (using a Sandwell Council-owned phone). He very deliberately defamed a former Councillor when, as he very well knows, there are a number of witnesses who saw the video:

"The phone story was a Mahboob smear hence no actual journalist would touch it with a barge pole."

Incidentally, I was the only journalist who did publish this and Tipper phoned saying he would sue me if I didn't remove the story. Having obtained evidence from others pre-publication, I gave him the famous Private Eye magazine response to such threats - the second word being "off". Tipper didn't sue.

No surprise given their track record but clearly the Wolvo C-S's weren't looking for anyone politically unbiased lol.

Smith recently boasted that "if" he was a local journalist he would be "all over" Mahboob Hussain. Now that he - amazingly - is, I am not sure the E&S lawyers will be so enthusiastic given his past output!

A legal letter is also winging its way towards Smith on another matter!

Once again, one to watch this one and this should be fun!

But you can't trust The Star!

This blog has said this many times over the years. The Wolvo C'S's have constantly omitted news stories unfavourable to bent Sandwell Labour or misreported the facts (the most egregious example being that they have said FOR YEARS that Sandwell College is paying rent for The Public when it is not AND the E&S KNOW this since I sent them the relevant clause from the actual lease)!

Now here is an odd story of their constant grovelling to SMBC. The Star has very frequently referred to McNally as "Dr". Of course, she can use that formal title as she has a PhD but she is NOT a medical doctor - something she complained about me saying in the High Court even though it is, er, true. I am going over old ground a bit, but EVERYONE, and I mean EVERYONE - 100% - of the people I spoke to in Sadders were of the view that she IS a GMC-registered doctor before I wrote my blog on the subject. As before, and for the avoidance of doubt, one does not have to be a medical doctor to be a Director of Public Health and so she is properly qualified for her highly-paid position.

But I pointed out to The Star on 1st February, 2021 that their readers were genuinely confused. They THOUGHT she was a medical doctor when The C-S's constantly referred to her as "Dr Lisa McNally". I questioned whether this was appropriate and sensible in the middle of a global pandemic, and when McNally was openly challenging the opinions of highly-qualified medics. In one article alone, she was referred to as "Dr" no less than 5 times. In my email of 1st February, 2021 I very specifically stated that she has a PhD and is entitled to use the term "Dr". The question - as we had to eventually thrash out in the High Court - was whether or not I was able, as a journalist, to report on her qualifications and comment that she is not,in fact, a medic.

McNally and her co-conspirators, Crompton, Stevens and Tour, alleged that this was "harassment"! She told the High Court:

"On 21st February, 2021 I had an interview with an Express and Star reporter about vaccination. [The E&S will not say who the reporter is, but it is believed to be Jamie Brassington who no longer works for them.] At the end he said he needed to raise something difficult, which in summary was that they received a complaint from Julian Saunders about me being referred to as 'Dr'... I found this extremely upsetting."

If we unpick this a bit, this was some 20 days after my email to the Editor. No response had been received and The Star continued to call McNally "Dr" in the interim. They then, according to McNally, got a junior reporter to raise this with her which, for some bizarre reason, "he" found personally difficult even though the full facts had been clearly shown on this blog. Quite why McNally found this "extremely upsetting" was never stated.

Given her allegation that the E&S reporter had named me to her about this matter even though the information was publicly available, I wrote again to the C-S's asking what actually happened. Clearly someone is lying since this was the response from one Mark Drew, the "Group Deputy Editor":

"Having spoken to the reporter involved, your name was not divulged to Ms McNally or any member of her team when we contacted her for a response to your initial email. The council has told us in response to your query that she is referred to as Doctor because she has a doctorate."

So there we have it. A bizarre response denying that the reporter named me to McNally as she alleges but unspecified contact between The Star and their pals at bent Sandwell Council (and as above, I had stated in this blog and in my email to them that she DOES hold a doctorate!) Despite a follow-up email, Drew did not attempt to answer the point that E&S readers, who pay his wages, were confused about the terminology used and that many (all) were indeed mislead into believing that McNally is a medic. But then, perhaps Drew and Co don't care what mere readers think?

All a bit rum eh readers?

Stll no apology from The Mayor

I also wrote recently about the appalling behaviour of the Mayor of Sadders, Labour's Mushtaq Hussain at the last full Council. I invited him to publicly apologise but I can't trace a response. I now call formally for the Deputy Mayor to take the Chair at the next Council meeting in December.

Incidentally, local WBW MP Shaun Bailey was present to witness the disgraceful spectacle and his letter to the Mayor is shown following the legal notice below. I am not aware of Shaun having received a reply as yet either.

Readers will know that The Skidder takes the view that the parochial Enoch & Eli-type nonsense actually holds the Black Country back, but there is a great clip on Shaun's Facebook page where he upbraids some apparatchik for lumping the Black Country in as an appendage of Brum! It's worth a watch just to see the guy squirming:

https://www.facebook.com/ShaunBaileyMP/videos/342768710948990

Levelling-up Fund

Many "left-behind" areas were celebrating the receipt of money from the Government's "levelling-up fund" recently and folk in Sandwell were mystified why their sh*thole area had not qualified. The answer is simple: bent Labour didn't bother to apply!

Nicola Richards MP was furious and stated on social media that she had written to then "Leader" Maria Crompton sometime ago reminding Labour to get bids in but the "socialists" obviously feel that you are rich enough in Sadders since they ignored her!

And finally - URGENT - BRANDHALL CONSULTATION

Labour's determination to destroy most of the green space left in Sandwell continues and their utter cynicism on green issues is laid bare by the plan to destroy the Brandhall site and build a, wait for it, wait for it, "village" there.

There is a consultation document out (for what that is worth given that the comrades have already decided to destroy the green space) but it is still important for locals and all Sandwell residents who care about saving the shrinking green areas to complete the exercise. Here is a link:

https://www.sandwell.gov.uk/brandhall

The fake consultation (look what they did to Londonderry Fields if you think this is for real) runs until 28th November but, who knows, there may be a legal challenge to this vandalism and there will certainly be planning objections - so make your views known NOW!

The Save Brandhall Green Space campaign will also be out in force on Tuesday 16th November from 4.30pm at Brandhall Library, Tame Road. There are in fact 2 sessions at the Library that day about the destruction - noon until 3.30pm amd then 4.30pm until 8.00pm. Do go along and make your views known! And the Group will be happy to have new members on board.

* In a recent post I described how Labour Cllr Ellen Fenton (Bristnall) was one of those seen using the bridge - which was correct - but I am advised by the Save Brandhall team that she did stop and speak to their "sub-demo" on the other side of the building and I am happy to put the record straight.

THE SANDWELL SKIDDER - COMMUNITY NEWS - READ THE SKIDDER, KIDDER!

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

Email: thesandwellskidder@gmail.com

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

PROUD TO HAVE BEEN TROLLED BY DICKHEAD DARREN COOPER DECEASED!

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

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.

Shaun Bailey MP's letter:

Thursday, 28 October 2021

Technical Blog - McNally's Particulars of Claim

This post may not be for the general reader although many will be intrigued at the malicious nature of the claim brought against me and this blog by Lisa McNally, the Director of Public Health at bent Labour Sandwell Council, which she expects the taxpayer to pay in excess of £100,000 for.

This is how this greedy and malevolent woman put her meretricious claim with the connivance of David Stevens (the now-sacked Chief Executive), Surjit Tour (the head of Sandwell's Legal [sic] team and statutory Monitoring Officer) and Cllr Maria Crompton (the political leader of the Council at the time).

McNally's QC (Queen's Counsel) - Aileen McColgan - has received in excess of £40,000 from the taxpayer - for this poorly pleaded document and other work on the disastrous, failed, case.

Page 1

The bullet points to note from this page are:

that the case is in McNally's own name. This is her case. She should pay for it and not try to **** over the people of Sandwell and beyond for over £100,000;
she is making an allegation of harassment and a supposed data breach claim;
the hand of scumbag David Stevens - the now sacked Chief Executive - in this conspiracy is immediately apparent;
the bent Labour Council owes no duty of care to an employee in respect of his/her personal Twitter account. This is pure fiction to try and f*ck local taxpayers for McNally's costs.

Page 2

Bullet points:

there is a completely gratuitous comment about my wife intended to imply an ulterior motive in respect of my journalism. This is a standard trope that bent Labour have been using over and over again for several YEARS;
once again you will see that Stevens (with Tour's support) is pulling the strings here. Sandwell thought that his evidence would automatically be believed by the Court because of his status but robust evidence was submitted to counter his nasty and fictitious hatchet job;
McNally cynically brought her pal "Dr" Alison Knight into the case. The odd thing here is that Knight did not provide a formal witness statement;
in replying to this nonsense I stood by everything I had written about the hapless Knight. Yes, she was friends with Pam Pulsford/Eling; yes, she played a major role in the disastrous Click Sandwell shambles; yes, her second stint at Sandwell was also a disaster-zone;
it is just going over the page but Stevens claimed that Knight's absolutely disastrous performance at the infamous bent Audit Meeting in 2018 was due to me being present! (The video is on YouTube for all to see.) The venomous McNally signed the document saying all this was true which is odd as she wasn't there and wasn't even working for Sandwell then! How the f*ck could any of this constitute harassment of her? Of course, it doesn't, and this was just a vicious smear by McNally, Stevens, Tour and Crompton.

Page 3

Bullet Points:

McNally has signed a statement of truth which makes it plain that she will be in contempt of court if she is not telling the truth. So is she saying the stuff I have written about Alison Knight is untrue? As above, I gave a robust defence of my writing about the hapless "Dr" Knight to the Court;
Why is Knight hiding behind McNally and Stevens? Why is Stevens giving her evidence, on her behalf, in an attempt to smear me?
Note McNally's QC has used the word "vitriol" to denigrate my journalism?;
Look who pops up providing evidence now - Surjit Tour! McNally gave a statement confirming that Stevens and Tour "persuaded" her to bring her spiteful case. This was shortly after I had made a formal complaint about Tour. Incredibly he was part of the conspiracy to bring the case using taxpayers' money and yet also provided evidence against me in the same case (I matter which is the subject of a formal complaint to the appropriate authorities.) Once again, Tour's attempted smear is not provided in a statement by him but via Stevens and yet the QC is pleading it as true information. Why?

Page 4

Bullet Points:

Once again Tour is part of the conspiracy to bring the case using public money and is then a participant in trying to smear me. How is this being allowed to happen? He is the statutory Monitoring Officer of the Council!;
Amy Hodgkins joins in the attack and I have written about that elesewhere*. McNally was quite happy to misuse junior staff to further her own ends;
I put in a very robust response to Stevens's lies about me supposedly harassing staff. I have stood outside OCH for years and never shouted abuse as alleged by him or at all. You will see that vengeful McNally, Stevens and Tour are throwing the kitchen sink at me to destroy my reputation;
It is patently obvious that Stevens, Tour and McNally are seeking to prevent me attending OCH and holding the corrupt Council to account - a direct collateral purpose to McNally's vicious claim - also apparently supported by Crompton;
Note the absurd but particulalry nasty smear that staff fear for the safety of family members. This is outright lying and McNally was so desperate to destroy me she signed a statement of truth confirming what he says is true!

* http://thesandwellskidder.blogspot.com/2021/09/silent-sikhs-solicitors-promotion-for.html

Page 5

Bullet Points:

I do not accept, of course, that my journalism about McNally's private Twitter account constitued abuse (and neither did the High Court);
At this time McNally was beginning to make what became very frequent appearances in the local media;
McNally and Aileen McColgan QC chose selected extracts from my blog for this Court document whilst deliberately omitting further passages which put my comments in context;
McNally makes it clear that the video was not put up on her personal Twitter account as part of her employment with SMBC;
Even from the passages quoted I - perfectly reasonably - made it quite clear that many would not agree with my view which hardly chimes with me "harassing" McNally.

Page 6

Bullet Points:

I accepted in my evidence to the Court that my use of the words "the f*ck" was probably going too far and that had McNally complained to me at the time, it is highly probable that I would have removed those words - but only those two words. I pointed out that McNally did NOT complain either via the legal notice appended to each blog post, or otherwise, and she confirmed to the Court that she made no complaint to me at the time. Of course, McNally's journo mates did try and stitch me up and attempted to organise a Twitter "pile-on" against me. They were Jane Haynes - an editor, no less, of the Birmingham Mail and the now dead troll, George Makin. McNally gave evidence that she made a complaint to Twitter but when challenged to produce the documentation relating to this she was unable or unwilling to comply;
The point about "blocking" on Twitter is important since it shows yet again that McNally's malicious claim related solely to stuff she was putting on her own personal Twitter account. This had/has nothing whatsoever to do with her employers. For those unfamiliar with the workings of Twitter, "blocking" is a safety feature whereby a person can block interactions with anyone they don't want to communicate with - for whatever reason. McNally blocked me and then started going through the list of my followers and blocking them too (though in garbled evidence she suggested at one point that this was untrue leading to me presenting the Court with a number of "screenshots" showing that it most definitely was). She only stopped this absurd campaign when there was a torrent of complaints from people she was blocking - especially from folk who said she was discriminating against them in depriving them of her Covid output! In a particularly bizarre incident she blocked an old school-friend of mine in Lincolnshire who has no interest in Sandwell matters whatsoever!

Page 7

Bullet Points:

My comment several months before this spiteful litigation that McNally had/has a thin skin was prescient;
McNally attacked my description of her (twice) on Twitter as a "weirdo" after the "blocking" episode referred to above. Quite why a minor Twitter spat was being litigated in the High Court - unlawfully, at taxpayers' expense - remains a mystery and one for Sandwell's External Auditor, Mark Stocks of Grant Thornton, to unravel. In any event, I gave evidence to the Court that McNally's obsessive stalking and blocking of my own Twitter followers was, indeed, "weird" and so there was nothing wrong in describing her strange behaviour as such;
Paragraph 22 is very interesting. Shortly before Stevens, Tour, McNally & Crompton conspired to use taxpayers' money for this litigation I had made formal complaints to SMBC about Tour and McNally. My complaint about McNally related specifically to what I perceived - along with many others - to be her overtly "political" propaganda. For reasons that I explained to the Court, I head 99% of correspondence to bent Sandwell with a header that the content is not "private and confidential". McNally seemed to be arguing - with unlawful taxpayer funding - that she was not complaining about the fact that I had made a formal complaint about her but that I had said this might be made public. This, she claimed, constituted "harassment". This is, of course, complete nonsense particularly as I am a journalist. My barrister made submissions that this appeared to be a chilling attempt by SMBC to prevent or hamper complaints being made about staff. Insofar as the rambling submissions of Aileen McColgan QC at the hearing in London made any sense, she appeared to retreat from this and many other parts of the malicious claim. Under pressure from the Judge she conceeded that her argument on this b*llocks was "not her best point"!

Page 8

Bullet Points:

As a responsible journalist wishing to write about McNally's qualifications to question top Governement scientists, I had written to her about her CV. She claimed to the Court that the email went into "spam" but I will write further about this in another post. Suffice to say, mine seems to be the only email sent to her that "went missing". In any event, McNally did not provide information concerning her qualifications and career;
Once again, McNally and McColgan QC have been highly selective in the parts of my blog posts they refer to. I did not question McNally's qualifications to be a Director of Public Health. What I did question was her medical qualifications as against those of the likes of Chris Whitty, Chief Medical Officer, and the members of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation;
McNally was somehow embarrassed when she was outed as a "clinical psychologist" (a perfectly respectable professional position) rather than as a medical practitioner (which ALL the people in Sandwell I have been in communciation with thought she was, due to the constant references to her as "Dr Lisa McNally"). The point here is that McNally could not sue me for defamation since what I was saying was absolutely true - she is not, and never has been, a GMC-registered doctor. Hence why the absurd "harassment" claim was cooked-up against me instead.

Page 9

Bullet Points:

There is nothing much to add here. I make it completely clear that McNally has a PhD;
I also go on to say that it is not her qualification per se that is relevant but her experience and expertise compared to others that is the whole point. Obviously I made this point forcibly myself and via my legal team once the unlawfully taxpayer-funded litigation commenced.

Page 10

Bullet Points:

Again there is selective editing of the posts but I stood foursquare behind what I had written during the Court process. My lawyers (and another top media lawyer who looked at the papers early doors) were amazed that the quoted passages were being described as "harassment". At the hearing itself McColgan QC became increasingly desperate and basically fell back on a generic - and untrue - allegation that I was "denigrating" McNally's self-described serious mental health issues;
Paragraph 26 contains the most absurd and desperate attempt to smear me by McNally even by the standards of this heap of ordure. It is true, as I explained in a detailed statement to the Court, that when I disseminate the blog via Facebook and Twitter the first photo in any blog post is shown with the title of the post. The post complained of did refer to McNally along with other issues. But the image of the "Bell End" Sandwell road sign was specifically illustrating a piece where I referred to an allegation that a male councillor was shagging a Sandwell employee whilst she was "working from home". Unbelievably, McNally is so poisonous that she claimed I was referring to HER as a "bell end". I pointed out to the Court that the term was a specific reference to the male anatomy, that - as above - the piece clearly referred not to McNally but to a male councillor and that it was ridiculous to suggest that this was peculiarly male insult was directed at a female! Desperate stuff.

Page 11

Bullet Points:

Once again McNally is scraping the barrel. A third party put up a tweet that she should be sacked. I quoted the Tweet saying that Crompton thought she was "brilliant" and that we would have to wait and see how things turn out. In other words, I was specifically NOT agreeing that she should be dismissed (and I also did not call for this when I made the formal complaint referred to above) but McNally claimed that it did! (You, dear readers, have paid through the nose for this nonsense, as have I.);
Of course, paragraph 28 is absurd. There was no "course of conduct" and it was perfectly obvious that my posts were newsworthy responses to McNally's personal Twitter output. In my responses to the Court I also explained that a Director being paid in excess of £105,000 per annum (+ gold-plated pension) out to have the sang-froid to accept legitimate criticism;
I don't want to go into McNally's medical situation in any detail. Suffice to say that I presented evidence to the Court contemporaneous to her alleged "problems" wherein she boasted about her fitness levels etc. With regard to the alleged "facial twitch" I viewed much footage of her via her frequent media appearances and there was no visible evidence of this at all. Despite making these claims (as we shall see, to try and obtain financial compensation) McNally was upset that I investigated them to provide myself with a defence and accused me of "stalking her"! It should be remembered that she signed a statement of truth claiming all this stuff was true and that she realised she would be in contempt of court if it was not;
I produced a schedule that her media appearances did not tail off as alleged;
You will clearly see the plot by Stevens, Tour, McNally and Crompton to stop me attending Oldbury Council House. She was bizarrely trying to get an injunction to stop me going within 50m of her WHEN I HAD NEVER EVEN MET HER!;
McNally has boasted of her close relationship with the Sandwell trade unions and they were only too happy to try to help her with her claim although the evidence was discounted as irrelevant. Once again, McNally had no compulsion in using junior staff to try and further her malicious claim;
Please notice how the evidence is all manufactured "in house" - McNally tells the CEO etc etc. [There will be a further post on this soon.] The Court is expected to accept that these highly-placed individuals are not lying which placed me in a very difficult position. Happily, they so egregiously over-egged the pudding, their attempted stitch-up was all too obvious;
The Claimant is only aware of matters before she started at SMBC though hearsay evidence that was certainly not impartial to say the least! Note also how Knight purported to give evidence through Stevens again rather than directly.

Page 12

Bullet Points:

We are back to pure fiction. I have never met McNally and have no idea if she was at the meetings she refers to (where she fails to provide specific dates or details). If she was there when I was there she would have been surrounded my colleagues and councillors. You will see how desperate the little band is to nail me with ludicrous claims like "he has a loud voice". It is very rare for me to "loiter" in the Link reception unless I am in conversation with coundillors and have never seen her in that area of OCH. But here she makes the key admission that she cooked this nasty claim up with Stevens and Tour on 27th January, 2021. (She later told the Court - twice - she would resign if she didn't get an injunction - a preposterous threat to the High Court - but has not actually done so.);
We are then into pure fantasy about me somehow suggesting SHE is a danger - which I didn't. Of course, when this started I knew nothing whatsoever abour her husband (although I do now following his attempts to infiltrate the blog Facebook Group etc);
I will write in a separate post about the "in house" evidence manufactured re "counselling" etc;
What is clear is that this woman did not want ANYONE "calling into question my qualifications and suitability for the job" - but especially me, and this suited the purposes of Stevens, Tour and Crompton to unlawfully splash the taxpayers' cash;
I will deal with the date protection point in the next section.

Page 13

Note this first image was the original Particulars of Claim - see further below for the Amended Version as there is an important change:

Bullet Points:

McColgan QC pleaded this fantastical data protection claim based on McNally's vengeful and risible allegation that I should not be allowed to comment on things she herself had put on her personal Twitter account! In particular, her "Lisa's Story" video. Leaving aside for the moment that I am a journalist, what she is saying is that it was fine for complete strangers to comment on her video but not me. This was totally absurd and McNally withdrew this part of the Claim on the morning of the hearing - but only after my legal team had expended time and money preparing a counter-argument. McColgan also left this Claim "hanging" under the rules of Court pleading. It's a bit arcane and technical but the QC did not repeat the claim under the "prayer for relief" - the bit that starts: "And the Claimant Claims". It is all absurd to the lay reader but not funny for me as Iwas paying hundreds of pounds an hour to my legal team who were concerned that the Pleading was deficient and as to what effect this might have on our application to strike out McNally's case. This was shoddy work by the QC which ended up costing me hard cash even though this part of the Claim was withdrawn on the day of the hearing. For the sake of completeness, the Judge also gave this aspect of the matter - and alleged Human Rights issues arising from McNally's own posts on her personal Twitter account - short shrift.
McNally maliciously applied for an "interim" injunction and then a "permanent" one. She sought draconian provisions eg, that I did not go within 50 yeards of her in a seperate application. ONCE AGAIN I HAD NEVER EVEN MET HER! She later withdrew the "interim" application shortly before a hearing;
It should be remembered that Cllr Rajbir Singh took over as political Leader at bent Sandwell from Crompton but was quickly made aware of the unlawful nature of Sandwell's attempts to use taxpayers' money to bring McNally's personal claim. Singh apparently did nothing to halt this nonsense and to save further costs.

Amended Page 13:

Bullet Points:

This is a key page. Not only does it show the shocking greed of McNally but, even if there is a scintilla of doubt that Sandwell taxpayers' paying for her might somehow be legal, this blows that right out of the water. McNally - with no financial risk to herself (and remember she earns over £105k per annum plus all the trimmings) on the basis that YOU and I would pay for this nonsense - decided to also try and enrich herself at my expense. This avaricious xxxx made a personal claim with your money for £10,000. MCNALLY'S FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH STEVENS, TOUR AND CROMPTON WAS UNLAWFUL ANYWAY BUT THIS SHOWS THAT THIS WAS HER PERSONAL CLAIM BEYOND ANY QUESTION OF ANY MINISCULE ELEMENT OF DOUBT.
Incidentally, quite where McNally thought I would get the money from if she won I don't know but I believe this embittered woman was just out to bankrupt me and this blog.

Page 14

Bullet Points:

Julia Lynch, a senior Solicitor at bent Sandwell, messed this up as she used the wrong "statement of truth". This was corrected with, as above, McNally signing to say that she understood that she must tell the truth and that she would be in contempt of court if she did not. I will leave you to judge how much of the above is "true".

A quick reminder of what happened in the case:

McNally withdrew her interim injunction application on the Friday before the hearing on the following Tuesday;
My legal team applied to strike out her claim in its entirety, at the earliest opportunity;
McNally withdrew her absurd data protection claim on the morning of the strike out hearing;
The Court struck out her claim;
McNally's costs exceed £100,000 which she expects the taxpayer to pay for her.

AGAIN, A SPECIAL SHOUT OUT FOR MY AMAZING SOLICITOR, MARK LEWIS OF PATRON LAW, AND MY BRILLIANT BARRISTER, RICHARD MUNDEN OF 5RB CHAMBERS.

THE SANDWELL SKIDDER - COMMUNITY NEWS - READ THE SKIDDER, KIDDER!

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

Email: thesandwellskidder@gmail.com

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

PROUD TO HAVE BEEN TROLLED BY DICKHEAD DARREN COOPER DECEASED!

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

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 thesandwellskidder@gmail.com and we shall

use our best endeavours to publish appropriate corrections forthwith.