9th March 2017
A tweet from 8 months ago…
In answer to the question in the post title, we have it on very good authority that this is the charge.
Putting to one side the fact that Angela Eagle was not in attendance at the AGM of 24th June and therefore could not have been ‘bullied’ or ‘intimidated’, the top and tail of the charges against Paul Davies, at the forthcoming Labour Party internal trial, are this:
…his public and written suggestion back in July last year that he would voluntarily pay for a lie detector test for himself and Angela Eagle, ironically to determine whether there’d been any bullying of Angela Eagle (absent from location of alleged bullying).
He also suggested this in a letter addressed to a local councillor which, given the prevailing, heavy-handed behaviour from above, formed a very reasonable defence of Wallasey CLP, dated 22nd July 2016:
c/o Wallasey CLP Office
By Hand and to follow by Registered Post
Alleged Homophobic Behaviour
The allegations made by you against Wallasey Labour Party are horrendous and are supposed to have occurred at our Annual Meeting on 24th June . Forty four upstanding Wallasey citizens were at that meeting including two members of Angela’s staff and four Councillors one of whom was yourself. It is alleged that there was intimidation and homophobic behaviour because Angela Eagle was challenging Jeremy Corbyn for the Leadership.
The alleged actions, by persons unknown to me, are a serious Criminal Act and should be reported to the Police and I would ask you to do so.
If I had witnessed this behaviour, and felt unable to stop it at the time, I would have already been to the Police and indeed did visit them in Manor Road when I first heard of the allegations and they assured me that if witnesses come forward they would treat this as a serious matter.
I also challenge you to take part in a Lie Detector test, along with myself, and would be happy to do this under the supervision of the Liverpool Echo. Truth and Justice are needed.
What happened to the original homophobia, bullying and intimidation allegations that the newspapers told us would be brought against unknown Wallasey Labour members in due course?
They no longer exist, and have melted into the ether. But Angela the politician appears to have achieved her cynical aim, at least for the time being; massive, enduring damage to the reputations of the local Corbyn supporting members.
All done to rescue her career.
Did Angela Eagle or any of her supporters – including the above councillor – go to the police at the time, as Labour Party rules dictate, to report the alleged instances of criminal homophobia at the AGM of 24th June 2016?
No. And they still haven’t. As we now know, the allegations had been maliciously dreamt up, and the police would likely have responded with charges of ‘wasting police time”.
Which does not look good even on an MP’s CV.
Did Angela Eagle go public at the time claiming that the above letter and the suggestion of taking a lie detector test was another example of ‘bullying and intimidation’?
Did Jessica Elgot or any other press journalist opine or report in any news items at the time that the above letter should be interpreted as ‘bullying and intimidation’?
Did any senior party apparatchiks at the Labour Party NEC go public with an opinion at the time that here was another instance of ‘bullying and intimidation’?
So, why have shadowy figures at the same Labour Party NEC now determined – a full EIGHT months later – that yes, here is an example of ‘bullying and intimidation’ which needs addressing through a disciplinary procedure?
Nothing has changed in the interim. So, why the extended delay and eventually, the sudden faux outrage and call for action?
Was the delay put in place to facilitate extra collusion time between those who’d found themselves lumbered with the challenging and unenviable task of fingering Paul Davies?
Despite the publicised attendance of professional barristers at these proceedings, we won’t be getting to know the identities of those who’ll be sitting in judgment. Why? Because that’s been deemed off limits.
So don’t be fooled into thinking that this behind closed doors, private hearing will be an upstanding, rigorous and balanced affair, or will represent anything approaching due process. Because it won’t. That will be avoided.
The longer this farce goes on, the more the whole process feels staged, contrived, and even made up as it goes along.
Are we about to witness the final stages of a long, drawn-out, manipulated, absurd kangaroo court – where any chance of justice being served has become extremely remote?