You may remember the case of Labour councillor Miranda Grell (see HERE and HERE) who was convicted of smearing her LibDem opponent in Waltham Forest, accusing him of being a paedophile. He had to flee the area. She lost her appeal last week and is now disqualified from office for the next three years.
Incredibly, the Labour Party backed here right up until the last minute, effectively paying for her appeal. LibDem blogger Andy Mayer catalogues how Labour brought shame on itself HERE and highlights how Labour bloggers also supported Grell right to the bitter end. Perhaps they will now have the good grace to admit they were wrong. Chris Paul ( who has sort of, kind of admitted he may gave got it wrong without directly saying so), Jon Worth Paul Burgin, Calvin Jones. No hiding at the back, I can see you.
26 comments:
Will the "Just-us" Secretary Mr Straw condemn Grendel's Mother in light of his new Gay Hate bill?
What am I thinking!
May I ask why all the MSM appear to be 'standing by' Lee Jasper and not reporting on the scandal in City Hall?
Iain, you must know enough journalists to be able to ask them "why the silence?".
What is being discovered appears to be an appalling abuse of public money and public office, yet only the scantiest attention is being paid to it. Funny how much time and police attention, on the other hand, is being paid to the stupid canoeist and his foolish wife. They undoubtedly appear to have committed criminal offences, and should be brought to justice, but it's nothing like on the scale of disappearing hundreds of thousands of my money siphoned from the LDA.
Please, please can you highlight this?
Dear Iain
Leaving aside the case itself the information I have is that Grell's costs were met by an insurance company and not by the Labour Party itself. Not quite the same thing at all. An important difference and I wish I had known about that earlier.
I have acknowledged that I got my initial post on the matter dead wrong. The MSM reports were spot on - if slight on the case presented and the arguments for the judgement. I was wrong to doubt them. But I did acknowledge this quite quickly in fact. As soon as I found a fuller report.
So it was unsatisfactory from my point of view that people linked to that initial post even weeks later when it was clearly superceded.
So good to see you now linking to my second most recent post on the matter. The most recent, linking to Tatchell's Comment if Free piece is here.
This lays out some witness evidence which I had no knowledge of before. Perhaps it was available all along and I didn't try hard enough to find it.
But the comment I quote suggests why Mayer and Tatchell's generalising about Labour is unfair.
I do think that such a case - particularly cases - should be tried at a level above magistrates so there is a full transcript and better court reporting.
And I do think that serious bloggers should opt in to reporting protocols on pre-trial reporting.
And I do think it was right and proper that Grell should be able to appeal and see that the financial arrangements for this are currently appalling. I link to a Lib Dem barrister on that at the post you have linked to.
And finally I am concerned that because Grell has now been twice found guilty of such very extreme offences it is not at all clear the range of lesser offences that would and would not lead to conviction.
We don't know whether Grell's admissions would have been enough to convict her for example.
The other Labour bloggers you mention may choose to speak up for themselves but generally I think provided character references as they knew Grell personally and so found the prosecution case hard to believe.
Similar I suppose to your speaking up for Andy Hayman a few days ago in that respect. You clearly don't know about his personal conduct, his expenses claims, or his professional conduct around the Stockwell inquiry. But you believed in him and so gave fulsome backing.
A bit of a hostage to fortune but in its way admirable loyalty to someone you respect.
I have never met or spoken to Grell. I was mostly interested in seeing the law calibrated properly. And not seeing the right to appeal held in contempt.
None of us were apologists for the behaviour.
I began to think the appeal case was not going to cut through the prosecution evidence when her side did not notify me of the court date, did not send me court notes and generally went quiet.
And then the LP or I believe their insurers pulled the plug and the rest is history.
Best w
Chris P
PS Does Tory or Lib Dem election insurance include this kind of cover?
@ Chris Paul
Just whose Insurance Company might that be? Given that the insurers were commissioned by the Labour Party then it was the Labour Party who funded her costs. How they managed to do that is another thing altogether.
And I'm sorry, I still think that Ms Grell's behaviour was utterly disgusting, not that you have acknowledged quite how appalling it was. And for her to present the initial judgement against in the manner in which she did was scandalous.
It's a great pity that she has got away with so much. She should have been sued in a big way, instead of which the Labour Party by supporting her with their insurers have allowed her to get away very lightly.
No doubt we'll soon see her putting herself forward as a councillor elsewhere. Will she be receiving Labour Party support again?
There is no case whatsoever for such trials to be held 'at a higher level'. This has been a grubby sordid piece of local politicing. It does not merit a High Court consideration and judgement. But if Ms Grell seriously wanted to go to the High Court there are any number of ways that could have been arranged. I'd suggest that the Labour Party insurers knew much better. She was on a loser and was too thick to simply offer an apology and cut her losses.
"Incredibly, the Labour Party backed here right up until the last minute, effectively paying for her appeal. "
Grell has, it now appears, performed in a very sh!tty way. However one does have to admit that the law in this country is based on presumption of innocence, and that everyone is entitled to a defence and fair trial.
I appreciate that there may have been some sharp practice here, but the alternative is the 'lynch mob' mentality which put Colin Stagg in stir for a crime he didn't commit.
Chris,
Your source for the 'insurance' story is an anonymous quote that has appeared on a number of blogs in a systematic way over the last week.
This is more 'sock puppetry' isn't it? Much like the mysterious 'Joanna' who fabricated court-reports on Lib Dem Voice.
The report that Labour funded Grell (rather than an insurance company) appears in a number of mainstream media stories. If it wasn't true Labour would have sought corrections.
This is not new information it is unsubstantiated disinformation, and it does you no credit to peddle it as though it were fact.
I read somewhere yesterday that she's still working/being paid by some Labour organisation. Sorry I didnt make note of it as I thought the bloggers would be on it.
She is a vile piece of work and if the Labour Party want to waste their money on defending the indefensible, it only goes to show how inept and moronic they are.
I picked up the original story about Compass as it was published in Private eye and blogged in about a month ago.I have also made regular trips to the Compass sigh t to remind them of the fact she remained on their board until last week. Further more Compass have other questions to answer as I also blogged recently . …
“Now we know that that GLA funds were being channelled into campaigning groups ( Blink), what about Compass who , 'out of the goodness of their hearts’ mounted an astonishing and sustained attack on Boris . , a subject that they , as a national and international far left ginger group , have nothing to do with. It is far from easy to discover the source of their funding ,I have tried ,but they are closely associated with Ken, and just to give you an idea of tCompass, they have retained Miranda Grell on their board after her conviction for false representations .She claimed her opponent was a paedophile .“ Have you heard about him sleeping with Thai boys , his boyfriend is sixteen and , he is dirty”…said the ambitious associate of Ken Livingstone . And yet she is still on the board. Compass with its close associations with Ken Livintsone and its gratis campaigning and its being Ken`s favourite think tank are bound to come under scrutiny now as the GLAs corrupt practices bubble to the surface .The deliberate obscurity of the ultimate benefactors must cease and the GLA must give a full account of the depth of its corruption “
I am certain Compass have received GLA finds and yet it is hard to prove. If anyone has a good idea about where to go to investigate the matter further I would be grateful
BTW Verity is almost certainly right I have been saying for a long time that London`s Municipal left is turning into outright gangsterism
IS that Chris Paul guy(I assume) not a bit a sleaze anyway ??
Just a few things he/she has said done
hence I am not surprsied of he/shes involvement in the Lib Dums issue
But it just goes to show the types Labour are left with these days
None of us were apologists for the behaviour.
Jesus do you ever stop pontificating. Let us say you were a ‘Paedophile slur ’ denier shall we .I also notice the growing theme of making quasi legal threats and demand for order in the blogasphere . That of course is where it starts with your sort and before we know it we will all be doing as we are told by some jumped up Blog Bureaucrat who probably will sound as much of a self important pillock as you do. Labour have already suggested it and I bet they wouod love to stop anyone talking . London laboue in particular have a history of trying to disguise their corruption with legal attacks . Hodge leaps to kind
"Grell's costs were met by an insurance company and not by the Labour Party itself"
..and yet you appear to have the mind of a six year old . Yes but who paid the Premium Dumbo , or are you under the impression that insurance companies wander around like good Samaritans looking for nasty little Labour cheats to help out . I must say I would be fascinated to hear how it works. I am fairly confident that Grell did not have the foresight to purchase her own personal legal costs policy which surely would not respond in any case. I wonder if this is basically a lie with some flimsy cover and someone has panicked thinking how her quotes are going to look next to Labour Party money in the Papers ...Who said it , anyone , or just the nit here ?
I will say this for Compass , many of its regular commenters were disgusted by Grell staying on the board and are equally disgusted with New Labour and its endless sleazy contempt for the public . Shows there are some good if misguided people on the left.
I wish some of them would comment here where all we ever get it is this fawning spaniel and his monomaniacal slavering over Brown`s toe cheese.
Does anyone else think that Miranda Grell is a terribly funny name? There's something ridiculous about it. JRR Tolkeinesque in some way I can't define.
Verity NAMES
Your porn star name is supposed to be your first pets name and first street...in my case 'Pussy Woodstock'
Your BLues name is a description of a holiday you think of plus the first President you think of " Long lazy Clinton"
But your Star Wars name is supposed to be the last thing you bought at the chemist plus your first car..." Gel Mini"
I think Miranda Grell is more if Star wars name.
Chris Paul takes 500+ words to say, "I screwed up but only because I couldn't believe the Tory press had got their facts right."
That's about the best you can hope for from a misguided liberal. But give him credit; usually they just change the subject and talk about something else.
And Chris, why do you suggest these cases should be dealt with in a higher court? The magistrates dealt with the case fairly and reached the correct verdict. What's wrong with that
By the way, there is nothing sacrosant about the appeal process. Appealing a conviction when you know you are guilty and the evidence is overwhelming is called "wasting everybody's time."
Thanks for that Newmania. Now if you could just post your bank account number as well...
Its 1,2 3 4 ,
Grell is German for shrill, as in eye piercing coloration.
Also, Miranda is a kind of fruit drink, carbonated orange flavoured.
Nomen est omen...
Ps.: some rich anagram pickings here... Mandrill Rage anyone? :-D
Enjoy:
http://wordsmith.org/anagram/anagram.cgi?anagram=miranda+grell&t=1000
10:05 - And if Newmania gets uppity and doesn't post his bank account number and other details, I can do a search on this CD I purchased on eBay.
what none of you are saying is that there would never have been a prosecution if it wasn't for the fact that certain people in her own Labour group were out to get her - as usually happens with uppity high-achieving women, especially if they are black. You who are so quick to condemn Labour, why not focus on that?
I'd imagine Jane because it's an unverifiable smear, based on no credible evidence, that makes no sense. There are several high achieving woman, some of whom are black as elected Labour Councillors in Waltham Forest. More than half of their Council group is BME.
Who then was so 'out to get her' on the grounds you state, that they were prepared to perjure themselves in court twice or convince others to do that on their behalf? Why? What's their compelling motive that they'd be prepared to risk expulsion from their own party? Is that conspiracy more likely than the simple case that Grell made a bad error of judgement during her campaign in her desire to win?
At this stage, having had that theory tested and rejected in court twice it's simply disgraceful for JFL supporters to keep peddling the lie that Grell is a victim, particulary a victim of some kind of institutional prejudice.
The only victim here was Barry Smith who lost his seat, was threatened, and abused, and decided he had to move out of the area, as a direct result of Grell's decision to exploit prejudice by running a hate-campaign.
It's time to apologise. And if there's an institutional problem at all, it's the culture of a party that encourages people to believe that anything goes to win.
I do not think anybody has brought shame on themselves by supporting Miranda throughout her right to due legal process.
What would Mr Dale prefer? Trial by blog?
I don't know much about the case itself, but I do know that Miranda worked very hard for her Ward members and at a national level for other causes she believed in.
Jane - Oh! So [yawn], it's a bunch of men disapproving of a brilliant uppity woman, especially as she's black. Gosh, I wonder why five million other people didn't think of posting this trite idea. Oh, wait a minute! They did!
Commissar writes: "What would Mr Dale prefer? Trial by blog?" Sounds good to me, as long as it's a conservative blog.
"I don't know much about the case itself," - then why not read about it before giving us your considered opinion? - "but I do know that Miranda worked very hard for her Ward members and at a national level for other causes she believed in." Like accusing a rival of being a paedophile? Her rival happens to be gay - kind of like the way ol' Miranda happens to be black - and has led a respectable, stable life with his gay partner for a number of years.
So. Now you know something about the case. Mandrill Rage behaved with great sleaze.
Cinnamon
"Miranda is a kind of fruit drink"
Yes.It has been available in Thailand for many years.Grape as well as orange flavour.
Her campaign (JFL)... Calvin (Commissar), was and remains that she is innocent. And by implication her victim and prosecution witnesses are all liars who have committed perjury.
That is the campaign you signed up to and remain signed up to at the moment. Do you still regard Barry Smith and Nick Russell as liars?
If your support was based on deep ignorance of the case and simply about supporting due process, that process is now over.
Isn't about time then that you read up on the case, made an intelligent assessment as to whether Grell's conspiracy theory holds any water, withdrew your support and said something about whether or not you regard it as wrong to use hate-smears as an election tactic?
@ Commissar
"I don't know much about the case itself, but I do know that Miranda worked very hard for her Ward members and at a national level for other causes she believed in."
So, do yourself and everyone else a favour and look at the evidence before making fatuous comment.
And, while we're at it, does Ms Grell's (as reported by you) 'very hard' 'work for other causes she believed in' include such disgusting behaviour? No doubt it does. No doubt she 'believed in' that wholeheartedly. I'll bet she spent a hell of a lot of time and effort on that one.
Passing over without comment on the absence of one well-known Labour supporter from the charge sheet, can I ask if the next post in this line will condemn Boris Johnson and William Hague for their statements of support for Conrad Black? And what about those Conservatives who stood by Lord Archer?
OK, you got me. Mea culpa.
Post a Comment