Story in blue, quotes from Mr Parnell in red and source material in black. Alternative title, Hello, how are you?
His story is at the top of this blog and the evidence will be at the bottom.
CHAPTER ONE – 2013, THE END
“Don’t forget our children; they are our past for us in their future. Save the child’s mind – it’s where goodness lives.” Mr Parnell RIP
On Wednesday 11th September 2013 the police officer gained access to the family home to view the corpse. He was one of the worst offenders. Did he come out of shame, shock, jubilation, or to brief the Chief Constable? For whatever reason he jiggled a blade in the raw wound of the family’s ongoing sorrow.
After Mr Parnell’s death Stockport Council released letters from their birthmother to his daughters and Mrs Parnell. Also after the birthmother’s death. How horrible to have held on to that reaching out from a very sad mother. Those letters could well have helped the girls. Mrs Parnell told me that she and her husband would have welcomed contact from the girls’ natural mum. The council had been holding on to them for years. Why?
Dear all
Peaceful Protester
Hello, how are you? I wish you all are well. Firstly, let me introduce myself. My name is Michael. I am married to my dear wife Karen and we have two lovely adopted daughters. You will see from the subject title Stockport Town Hall has a peaceful protester and, yes, that is me who is now, if you would like, telling you all why I am stating I am a peaceful protester. I was not in the first instance having cause to protest, but there was a need to call on a request for services. That was not for myself but for our troubled, adopted children on their calls for help. I am of a kind and peaceful nature and always willing to help. I was a cub, boy scout and while being a venture scout volunteered to help less able persons through the duke of Edinburgh Award Scheme to assist their needs of help to do things which they could not normally do. It might look that I praise that which I am proud of and why shouldn’t I? Doing it has rewarded me to be able to help others. I am proud of everything I have done, but when it was that I couldn’t find a way to help those who had suffered a terrible trauma I asked for help – for someone to help me to help those in need. When that help is conditional at a cost and not as unconditional as given by myself – where are we now with me rambling on – well, when services are not forthcoming; if we are not happy I was told to make a complaint. This I was reluctant to do yet to help others this had to be done. It is not for my own selfish gains but for children I submitted the complaint. I won’t trouble you with the rights and wrongs of a complaints system, but help for children when they are children that the time taken to respond and then process the complaint the children then were no longer children but more surely troubled adults. Responding to these needs how can the requests progress? Well, I was told to be patient and wait; that is what I did outside Stockport Town Hall – neatly dressed and with polite manners and holding a A4 size piece of paper on which I had written HELLO HOW ARE YOU. I was there firstly each day for over 12 months, peacefully. Well, again, what is peaceful protest? Nobody, unless they asked, knew what my protest was about apart from Stockport Council who have cause to hide their failings. How did they do this? Peaceful protest! They falsely made allegations accompanied with assaults, discrimination, intimidation, victimisation and with other related unacceptable treatment. Where did this leave me? Assault injury caused Barretts cell and for an unlucky few, 2 percent risk, this develops into cancer. That is now something I have to stand up to and requires removal by high risk surgery. When in preparation to get my affairs in order, some loose ends had to be tied up. The council knowing my illness and in their cause tried to divert the true course of justice by alleging my arrest for a section 4A public order offence. By my putting in writing as requested from the police what threats had been made towards myself and that was that “Mr Stephen Duggan Council security guard has said he would smash my head in or kill me”, today 5th April 2013 I should have gone into hospital for an op tomorrow but surgeon was not available and it was postponed to next week. The above arrest trial was discontinued but today was revived and, as I was not going into hospital, was requested to attend court which I did to be acquitted in less then 10 minutes in and out of the courtroom. A stress was lifted but something not needed when facing high risk surgery,
I have to rest from this for a while. I will, if you would like to know more, carry on with what has happened further.
Keep well and all look after yourselves
Michael
I went to see Mr Parnell in his last days at the hospital where I worked. I understand the territory of death too well. I worked in a busy cancer department. Counter-intuitively it was brimming with laughter as well as some tears. I had also volunteered on a geriatric ward at the hospital for twelve years. I knew promises to the dying should be kept. Mr Parnell – he was a friend but I didn’t refer to him as Mike; I wanted to give him the respect the council panjandrums and (delete expletive) councillors hadn’t – asked me to tell his story after his death. He kept every last piece of evidence and he was leaving it to me. I have kept that promise every day since. It is my mission to tell the story of that rarity – a thoroughly decent man. It was a privilege to have known him.
He had been in tears during our penultimate conversation, difficult for a man who felt he had to be a strong protector. He had an appointment at the Christie Hospital for his stage 4 cancer surgery. The council was taking him to court again on the same day. After the police stopped arresting him on the whim of Executive LibDem councillors and senior council officers, the council attacked him in the Magistrates Courts again and again saying he owed money from previous years council tax arrears. They were taking money from current years to pay off these fictional arrears. When Mr Parnell objected saying he had evidence this wasn’t the case, the Magistrates shut him up claiming they weren’t interested in “history”. The evidence of Mr Parnell’s council tax history is listed below.
“If I don’t turn up at court” he said, “then they will have me back in prison”. They knew he had terminal cancer, they knew about the scheduled operation and he was recognised by them to be a vulnerable council taxpayer. If that is how they like to treat vulnerable people, heaven help those of us who are more robust. Mr Parnell wrote: “I will keep you informed but just use this at now between us. Karen wants it all to stop and if the council said we have to pay double the council tax she would agree she now feels we can never receive our rights when fighting against the council before one of us is dead”.
In June 2013, shortly before his death, Mr Parnell yet again wrote to Stockport Council’s Don’t Bring Your Complaints To Me Officer – Anwar Majothi – stating the Council had a duty of care to him in not allowing the council security guards to beat him up repeatedly. Mr Majothi closed the complaint without pointing out what further action Mr Parnell should take if he were dissatisfied. I know Mr Majothi of old – it is exactly what I would have expected of him. Mr Parnell is a man whom they knew at the time to be terminally ill with cancer – in fact just three months from death.
I offered Mr Parnell money to take his case to a solicitor. He politely declined not wanting to waste my money. He told me – “my belief is that justice will come through public disgust and in the public interest”. Maybe it will posthumously.
They started to film council meetings towards the end of Mr Parnell’s life. Had they done that at the start of his campaign and people seen the councillors screaming: “Off with his head”, like the Red Queen, the matter would have been settled promptly. I paraphrase, but not that much. Mr Parnell’s take – “can you as a councillor say cheese” ha ha if only, meetings would be seen as the circuses they are, the real things that need to be seen happen behind closed doors.
“I formally complain that Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council has failed in its Duty of Care to protect me as a service requesting customer in the council’s service centre, Stockport from harm (injuries sustained while attending council offices) on more than one occasion with results of injury occurring causing alarm distress and severe ill well-being.
For your further information supplied below please read previous correspondence sent to you (please read fully, skipping over the fact doesn’t represent your previous findings).”
On 26/3/213 Mr Parnell had a meeting with his LibDem MP Andrew, now Lord, Stunell at which he was told that the council doesn’t welcome him at any council offices or at the town hall and that to get anything done he should stay away, as his appearance to them was like a red rag to a bull. Mr Parnell had been trying for well over a decade to get the help he needed for his troubled, adopted daughters. One of them had the wrong details on her official documents, so if he took her to A & E she didn’t exist. That was all he was asking for. As with the Post Office Scandal, why did no-one express concern at all the police/court/CPS/prison time that was being wasted?
“2000 to 2005, contact was ongoing with meetings, written, by phone and by emails and nothing got done. 2005 October I was asked to stay away which I did again until January 2007. Nothing again happening so June 2007, I was told to be patient and wait, which I did starting by my further waiting at Stopford House. (I was no longer out of sight and out of mind) and this was when I believe the conspiracy started. There are no legal injunctions applied for or served yet the police were arresting me for breaching a non-existent injunction that was taken to be a banning order from the council just because the council said so. In law there was no such order, when the arrests for non-existent injunctions were not working, this started the fabrication of offences that the council was alleging about myself and if I attempted to defend myself it was responded to as a counter claim. Counter claims do not get acted upon until the first complaint is dealt with. Most cases never got to court and some were dropped at first hearing. Those that progressed further as far to appeal were granted and charges overturned and quashed. The further injustice towards myself, I believe, is a crime and I will continue to try and have my case heard. If crime is not stopped those who get away with it think it ok for them to carry on. Again I say: “Dicey, Rule of Law no one is above it”. Human Rights Act 1998 breaches are to be addressed as offences to the law, App article 2 HRA 1998, the right to have life protected. Article 10 the right to free speech, to be free to report crimes against myself without the fear of intimidation.“
This was in a Manchester Evening News article about John Timpson, who attended an event at Stockport Town Hall on the evening of April 04, 2011 and instead of going in to be fawned over by councillors and senior officers, spent quite a lot of time standing on the Town Hall steps talking to Mr Parnell, who was very impressed with him and, I think, vice versa:
As charities struggle to keep their heads above water in these tough economic times, the news of a £1m pledge from businessman John Timpson was music to the ears of Manchester-based After Adoption.
Mr Timpson has five children including two adopted sons. He has also fostered more than 90 youngsters over the years, with his wife Alex. The £1m funding commitment will be spent on a parenting programme aimed at reducing the high number of adoptions that break down – currently one in five.
It is the biggest donation of its kind to the charity in its 21 years. As a result more adoptive parents will be able to enrol on After Adoption’s Safebase course which equips them with techniques to help their children cope with attachment problems.
Mr Timpson, who lives in Cheshire and whose chain of shoe and watch repair and key-cutting shops is Wythenshawe-based, said: “Having two adopted children, my wife and I are aware of the problems adoptive parents face. It can be tough coping with attachment issues.
“Most people do not understand what you are going through. They’ll say things like, ‘let him come and stay with us for a couple of weeks, we’ll sort him out’. You feel you are doing something wrong. The behaviour can be difficult, running off, leaving home and generally being an absolute pain.
“Some people will say ‘oh well, all children are like that at some stage’ and this may well be true, but attachment problems make those common behavioural issues more extreme.
“From today onwards, we are going to make After Adoption our company charity and will commit to raise £200,000 a year through our shops.
“I want to help. I wish the Safebase programme had been around when we adopted our sons, who are now 35 and 23. They’re much better now, but it is very important to be very patient.”
Attachment problems occur in around half of the 2,300 children adopted annually in Britain today who have often had very troubled early lives with their birth families and in care. If the child does not feel secure and bonded with a parent in the vital first two years of life and is deprived of affection, caring and positive parenting, the impact on that child can be devastating and result in extreme behavioural problems or worse.
When adoptions break down and the child returns to local authority care the cost to the authority is between £30,000 and £50,000 a year. Another sobering statistic is that children who stay in care have a 40 per cent chance of developing problems such as mental health issues in adulthood. Twenty six per cent of children who grow up in care are not in education, employment or training at 19 – compared to just six per cent of the rest of the population.
Julia Mansfield, head of operations at After Adoption, said: “Everyone who has been on the course has said it has been an absolute life-saver.
“The cost of an adoption break down is huge not just in terms of pounds, shillings and pence but also in terms of human misery. Children who remain in care don’t tend to do well later in life.”
Jonathan Pearce, chief executive of Adoption UK, another charity that supports adoptive parents, and which is marking its 40th anniversary this week, said: “The generous donation and initiative highlights the extra support and help needed by families who are parenting traumatised children placed from the care system.
“A wide range of support services should be provided to all adoptive families to improve the chances of successful outcomes for adopted children.”
How embarrassing to have their star guest on the subject of adoption told in no uncertain terms exactly what was being done to a decent chap only trying to get counselling for his adopted daughters.
On 13/10/2012 the police admitted that he had attempted suicide in a police cell on 12/3/2010. Despite this fact Greater Manchester Police continued to hound him at the behest of the LibDem executive councillors at Stockport – Goddard, Roberts, Pantall, Shan Alexander, Meikle et al and on behalf of senior council officers such as the council solicitor Barry Khan. This was in the notorious Cheadle Health police station where people die in custody,
So, the police station was moving to Fred Perry House. Mr Parnell allegedly had a Criminal Anti-social Behaviour Order preventing him from entering Ponsonby House, which was completely knocked down and Fred Perry House was built in its place at a cost of £12 million. The CRASBO, if it ever existed, was no longer in place. I sent this to the then Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police – Fahy, who for some strange reason is the go-to Chief Constable for Radio 4’s Today programme.
A presumably very dodgy Stockport Crown Prosecution Officer by the name of John Derbyshire, (same surname as the the former council leader Sue Derbyshire) stated that Ponsonby House had been re-named Fred Perry House at a cost of £12million. I told all executive councillors and senior council officers about this ridiculous statement, but they ignored it and kept arresting sick, innocent Mr Parnell RIP.
Date: Friday, 14 January, 2011, 21:03
 | Help Centre | email options | report spam |
| MrPeacefulprotester has shared a video with you on YouTube: Tue 4th January 2011 This was the first day the Fred Perry House was opened to the public. I walked past and the council phoned the police and they were searching for me. The next day I stopped outside to talk to someone who told me about the day before. Then within 5 minutes the police came and arrested me. Two o’clock three police vehicles came. They took me to Cheadle Heath police station and held me until 23:45 hrs. Released no charge but on police bail to go back 19th Jan. On Tue 11th went into Fred Perry House to contact Welfare Rights Office and was again after only 5 minutes being there arrested at one o’clock released 19:30hrs police taking no further action when will the council stop victimising me with their disability, they say in this their film this building is to be accessable to all people, or is it as the council leader Dave Goddard says in the film he is to breach the people in Stockport he seems under the influence of the fall down medicine. I hope he didn’t drive home.  Official Opening of Fred Perry House Stockport Council’s new civic building, Fred Perry House was formally opened by His Royal Highness, the Earl of Wessex, on Thursday 18 November. | |
Two truly terrible cases of people let down by Stockport Council – Andrea Adams who jumped from a tower block and Alison Davies who jumped from the Humber Bridge with her young son Ryan. In the resulting serious case reviews Stockport Council promised to help people who needed support with children. Unbelievable what they were simultaneously and continuously doing to Mr Parnell and his family.
Mr Parnell was tagged 8am to midnight. He couldn’t even visit his dentist or his elderly mother even on Christmas Day.
Just a gentle reminder, after his death Greater Manchester Police admitted he had been a completely innocent man.
I was working in a busy cancer department, walking down to the Town Hall to ask public meeting questions about the £1 billion bypass, or the still gassing toxic waste dump primary school, Tesco’s planning abuses in Stockport, how the parents of severely disabled children in the town and, of course, about how Mr Parnell was being treated. After that taking my daughter to our kickboxing lessons, going home, cooking the dinner, tidying up and doing the laundry and then exhausted contacting everyone I could think of to stop what was being done to Mr Parnell. I begged LibDem Lords, LibDem MP, councillors at Stockport, the press, the Chief Constable. I told them they must intervene promptly before he died. No-one gave a reply or a sensible reply. Mr Parnell was contacting everyone too – absolutely nothing.
I wrote three times to Keir Starmer as Director of Public Prosecutions and he said he would look into it. The insanity persisted. I have no confidence in the ability of him to achieve anything in life. The Crown Prosecution Service obviously felt he was a joke and continued their abuses.
I sent an email to the FoI Officer on the 8th August 2009 and copied in the Executive Councillor responsible for Children’s Services – Mark Weldon as well as others. Weldon was one of those LibDem councillors calling the police to Mr Parnell every time he tried to ask a council meeting question. (Cllr Sue Derbyshire; Cllr Mark Weldon; Cllr David White; Cllr Dave Goddard; MICHAEL PARNELL; Barry Khan; Chief.Constable@gmp.police.uk; John Schultz; alan.rusbridger@guardian.co.uk; STUNELL, Andrew). Weldon replied as follows:
Dear Mrs Oliver, Please remove me from your email cc list. I have no desire or need to know of your enquiries
On 31st August 2010 I again asked the FoI Officer if I could act on Mr Parnell’s behalf. I had already provided a letter of authority from Mr Parnell. Her response:
Dear Mrs Oliver,
Further to your request for information regarding Mr Parnell, as I have informed you on a number of previous occasions, I have not received the information I require from Mr Parnell; therefore I have returned your £10 cheque in the post today. If the information I have requested directly from Mr Parnell is provided by him at some point in the future I will contact you to inform you, at which point the fee will be requested.
Yours sincerely,
Claire Naven
Data Protection & Freedom of Information Officer
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
Email from Councillor David White Mon 23/01/2012 10:37
Sheila,
With regard to Mr Parnell, well his issue was one which did not first of all was within my portfolio nor was Mr Parnell within my Ward. As for Mr Parnell being arrested, I would say that is a matter for the Chief Executive and the Police.
Not sure what I could do since the issue should have been dealt with by the Leader of the Council, Executive Member for Children and Young People and for Finance. There were discussion behind the scenes and these were to ask the relevant Executive Member to investigate and the Officers looked at the issue. We were assured that all possible actions had been taken.
No idea why this has come now apart from it is your last chance to make this complaint.
David
Councillor David White
Sheila,
Having heard the Security Guards view of the event I am disgusted by this “inflicting and a cold”, my description would be very different and Council staff should not be subjected to this.
Spitting on someone is not a “gentle, peaceful” act.
If he has been arrested, I have neither been involved or partaken in the event. Let justice take its course.
Like yourself you are entitled to your opinion but you treat people who don’t agree with you with contempt and never listen to them.
Dave
David White
Email: cllr.david.white@googlemail.com
Email sent Fri 01/05/2009 20:22
Sheila,
Your emails always just lack one thing, among many.
I don’t know about Mr Parnell, my only dealings with him have been his appearing at my Area Committee asking a public question.
Evidence!
Dave
David White
gp
Council Leader Dave now Lord Goddard – the instigator along with presumed paedophile Councillor John Smith of Mr Parnell being arrested rather than being ignored as was previously the case delights in informing the local press of Mr Parnell’s troubles. Should this man be in the Lords at all? I know the answer to that.
Leader Goddard and presumed paedophile Cllr Smith noted in the council log asking why Mr Parnell can’t be stopped from peacefully protesting.
From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 23 October 2013 16:40
To: FOI Officer
Subject: Meeting between Mr Parnell and Goddard held 23rd March 2011
Dear FoI Officer
There is no data protection for the dead. Please let me have all documents pertaining to the meeting referred to above, agenda, minutes, outcome, what action Goddard took. If there is any information in there referring to Mr Parnell’s family, please feel free to block it out.
The police have confirmed in writing that Mr Parnell was a completely innocent man. It beggars belief the treatment he received which everyone knew about not least because I told them.
Kind regards
Sheila
Dear Mrs Oliver,
I am writing in response to your email below (ref DP 3152).
The consent you provided from Mr Parnell was sent to the Council 12 months ago. With this in mind, I have written to Mr Parnell to confirm that he still consents to the Council releasing his personal and sensitive personal information to you. If the Council receives this consent, I will contact you again to confirm that your request on Mr Parnell’s behalf will proceed, at which point we will require the statutory £10 fee.
Yours sincerely,
Claire Naven
Claire Naven
Data Protection & Freedom of Information Officer
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
5/10/2009 This is to inform you that Mr Parnell has been arrested and is currently at Cheadle Heath Custody Office 0161 856 9831
This e mail carries a disclaimer, a copy of which may be read at:
http://www.gmp.police.uk/mainsite/pages/copyright.htm
Dear Ms Naven
Please could I have a reply? What was the grade of the Council officer who decided to take Mr. Parnell to court for allegedly sneezing, which may well cost the taxpayer hundreds of thousands of pounds?
Kind regards
Sheila
—– Original Message —–
From: Sheila Oliver
To: FOI Officer
Cc: MICHAEL PARNELL ; peter.devine@gmwn.co.uk
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2009 5:36 PM
Subject: Re: Your request for information to Stockport Council – ‘Town Hall protestor’ – Ref 1831 – Response
Dear FoI Officer
Then without identifying the council officer(s) by name, please state their grade within the organisation. I assume this would be someone of senior position. I may take this issue to the Information Commission, which won’t look good for Stockport Council. Maybe we can achieve the same end without getting SMBC even further black marks at the ICO.
Kind regards
Sheila
—– Original Message —–
From: FOI Officer
To: Sheila Oliver
Cc: FOI Officer
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 5:08 PM
Subject: Your request for information to Stockport Council – ‘Town Hall protestor’ – Ref 1831 – Response
Dear Mrs Oliver,
I am writing in response to your recent request for information (ref 1831) in which you requested ‘evidence of any senior council officer’s involvement in this case – which is the calling of the police to the peaceful town hall protester around 70 times’. I apologise for the delay responding.
Any information the Council may hold in relation to this request is likely to constitute the personal data of the individual concerned; therefore we are unable to provide the information you have requested because it is exempt information under section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA).
Section 40(2) FOIA states that information which constitutes personal data as defined by the Data Protection Act 1998 is exempt from disclosure if its release would contravene one or more of the data protection principles. Any information held in relation to your request is likely to constitute personal data because it relates to and identifies a living individual. Disclosure of these personal data would be unfair; therefore it would contravene the first data protection principle which requires the Council to process personal data fairly. This means that the information is exempt and will not be provided.
If you are unhappy with the way we have handled your request you are entitled to ask for an internal review. Any internal review will be carried out by a senior member of staff who was not involved with your original request. To ask for an internal review, contact foi.officer@stockport.gov.uk in the first instance.
If you are unhappy with the outcome of any internal review, you are entitled to complain to the Information Commissioner. To do so, contact:
Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
01625 545 745
Yours sincerely,
Claire Naven
Claire Naven
Data Protection & Freedom of Information Officer
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
Dear Ms Naven
In the interim I have found out the details for myself. Although criticised in the Serious Case Review for failure to document her case, hold joint meetings and liaise with other services which could help Ms Davies, despite this involving the death of a 9-year-old child when his mother jumped with him from the Humber Brige, a council meeting was told that the Council was under no obligation to produce a report on this tragic case.
I shall keep digging and request further information when I have gone through her NHS records.
With warmest best wishes
Sheila
—– Original Message —–
From: FOI Officer
To: Sheila Oliver
Cc: FOI Officer
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 11:08 AM
Subject: RE: Report put before Stockport Council regarding the lady who jumped off the Humber Bridge – Ref 2000 Further response
Dear Mrs Oliver,
As per my previous email, the Council is not aware of any such report regarding Ms Davies. It is clear from your email that you believe such a report exists and was taken to a Council meeting; therefore if you still maintain this is the case, please specify which Council meeting you believe this report was taken to. The response to your request as it stands is that no such report is held by the Council.
Yours sincerely,
Claire Naven
Claire Naven
Data Protection & Freedom of Information Officer
Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
Email sent Sun 09/08/2009 07:28 c.c Executive councillor Weldon
Dear Ms Naven
The persecution of the town hall protester may well cost the
taxpayer hundreds of thousands of pounds, if not more. So, we need to know the
grade within the Council of the person who decided to proceed with the court
case in January, which was abandoned on the day of the hearing, the calling of
the police over 80 times, the 11 arrests, the four days in prison, the further
trial in September and the possible High Court costs.
I very much doubt these decisions were taken by a lowly
security guard. If you won’t given me the actual name of the person who
made these decisions, then please let me know what grade they were.
I shall cc this to Councillor Weldon who believes all FoI
requests are answered by this Council and to the Information Commission.
Kind regards
Sheila
Email sent Sat 08/08/2009 17:44
Councillor Weldon
You are paid a lot of money to do the work you do. If I want to contact you I will.
Please could you clarify the appeal process regarding my being banned from asking public questions regarding Harcourt Street. You were of the eroneous opinion that I was given access to documents under the FOIA on this subject. The Information Commission has told the Council to reconsider under the EIR 2004. I asked in the first place under the EIR 2004, so it would appear the Council hasn’t got a leg to stand on.
I know a lot more about the FOIA than you do – when they reply I will be able to work out the cost of one night in such a prison and the cost of the abandoned trial in January, the one in July, the proposed one in September and the High Court Appeal. I am currently getting the cost of the police being called over 80 times, the 11 arrests and the nights spent in a police cell. I will take those figures when I have the final amount to the Taxpayers’ Alliance and with their help get a news story with a link to the actual CCTV footage of the non-incident involving Mr Parnell via the Internet. I am sure the cost will come to hundreds of thousands of pounds, if not more.
I want to know whether you checked the situation regarding my position and the FOI inquiries before you sent that email the other night. Either you checked and were lied to or you didn’t bother to check that I hadn’t had access to a large number of documetns. I shall be putting in a complaint to the Standards Board when, if ever, I receive a sensible response from you. There is already a complaint in about Goddard calling me a liar publicly which he hasn’t provided proof of and his gloating email about Mr. Parnell being in prison and him sending me confidential documents about Mr. Parnell. Someone is going to start asking questions about what on earth is going on in this town under the Liberal Democraps.
Sheila
Email sent Sat 08/08/2009 16:44
Dear FoI Officer
Following the newspaper reports of the £20,000 cost of a trial of a man found innocent of stealing one banana, please could you let me know – as accurately as possible, although a reasonable assessment would be acceptable – of the cost to the taxpayers of Mr. Parnell’s trial last January, which was dropped on the day of the hearing and the further trial which took place last month at Stockport Magistrates’ Court. At this trial he was given a CRASBO (criminal ASBO) pre swine flu for assault with a sneeze with intent to inflict a council employee with a cold. I believe CCTV footage of the incident was not allowed to be shown in court for some inexplicable reason.
I look forward to hearing from you. If you need further details, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.
Kind regards
Sheila
Dear lighthearted folk
Email sent Thu 23/07/2009 10:00
Dear Councillor Goddard
When I have tried to ask questions about the appalling treatment of Mr Parnell in the past at council meetings you have commented that the matter is sub judice and you were not able to comment.
I am no legal expert but if Mr. Parnell is to appear before Stockport Magistrates court on 14th September, isn’t the matter sub judice now? Why have you sent me the email below?
I think Mr. Parnell should raise this issue with his solicitor.
Yours
Sheila
—– Original Message —–
From: Cllr Dave Goddard
To: sheilaoliver
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 5:40 PM
Subject: Mr. Parnell
Dear Sheila
Mr. Parnell was charged with breaching the ASBO on 16th and 17th July 2009 by entering the Town Hall. He appeared at Stockport Magistrates Court from custody on 18th July 2009. He was apparently adamant that he would not abide by bail conditions and so was remanded in custody to Forest Bank to appear today.
He did appear today. He pleaded not guilty and elected Crown Court trial. His next appearance is before the Magistrates on 14th September 2009. Today his solicitor applied for bail which was opposed by the CPS. The Magistrates did grant bail. I have attached the actual bail notice. His condition is not to come within 1 mile of the Town Hall. The only exception is when he is appearing in court or by prior written appointment made by his solicitor. There is no exception for attendance at any meeting within that exclusion zone and that was made clear to him. These conditions appear to be unambiguous. It is fair to say that Parnell was less than enthusiastic about these conditions.
Just keeping you in the loop.
Fondest wishes,
Dave,
Ps, Glad you enjoyed the Stepping Hill by-election it makes it all worth it.
**********************************************************************
Stockport Council is officially one of the best in the country.
Awarded four stars and improving strongly by the Audit Commission March 2009.
This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this email, or any response to it, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless the information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.
If you receive this email in error please notify Stockport ICT, Business Services via email.query@stockport.gov.uk and then permanently remove it from your system.
Thank you.
http://www.stockport.gov.uk
Email sent Thu 23/07/2009 08:35
Dear Mr Rusbridger
I read with interest the Guardian’s recent articles on miscarriages of justice. Please see below the apparently gloating email from the Leader of Stockport Council to me, which as I understand it is a very serious breach of Data Protection legislation, as well as revealing a worrying level of sarcasm and delight at the plight of a simple (and I mean that as a compliment), kind, helpful, gentle, determined and very brave man and the obvious detrimental effect his imprisonment will have on his already troubled daughters, whose lives were very seriously damaged by their birth family. Having got nowhere over a decade with his request to Stockport Council for help with his troubled adopted daughters – and they would be costing Stockport Council a lot of money were they still in care – he decided to stand on the town hall steps, which he did for two years constantly being harrassed by Stockport Council and having the police called to him repeatedly -one one occasion I witnessed with flashing blue lights, so called as an emergency. I do not blame the police, who have been extremely kind and helpful to Mr. Parnell and apparently have to respond if there is a breach of the peace alleged. There is a legal right to peaceful protest, but not in Stockport.
Why couldn’t the Council simply deal with his problem in a reasonable manner? You may well feel this is an isolated incident but I have been publicly abused and victimised for pointing out that a proposed school, costing millions and millions overbudget with no proper explanation of the increase in cost, which is illegally taking public open space, is actually going on a former toxic dump on which no contamination investigations at all have been carried out over the site of the proposed school, which is actually directly over the tip. I have had dirty tricks played on me too by this Council.
We need now to forensically find out what the many, many police call-outs have cost, the court time – one trial last January being abandoned on the day of the hearing. We need to find out what this cost in keeping Mr. Parnell in prison, where he was last week for breaching a court order not to come within a mile of the town hall. All he had done was use the public lavatory in the town hall. What a disgusting abuse of power by Stockport Council.
Well, they have picked on the wrong man. Mr. Parnell is honest and courageous and because his daughters are involved he can’t give up.
Mr. Rusbridger, I shall keep you informed step by step of what happens next in this miscarriage of justice we have the misfortune to be witnessing first hand.
With very warmest best wishes
Sheila
—– Original Message —–
From: Cllr Dave Goddard
To: sheilaoliver
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 5:40 PM
Subject: Mr. Parnell
Dear Sheila
Mr. Parnell was charged with breaching the ASBO on 16th and 17th July 2009 by entering the Town Hall. He appeared at Stockport Magistrates Court from custody on 18th July 2009. He was apparently adamant that he would not abide by bail conditions and so was remanded in custody to Forest Bank to appear today.
He did appear today. He pleaded not guilty and elected Crown Court trial. His next appearance is before the Magistrates on 14th September 2009. Today his solicitor applied for bail which was opposed by the CPS. The Magistrates did grant bail. I have attached the actual bail notice. His condition is not to come within 1 mile of the Town Hall. The only exception is when he is appearing in court or by prior written appointment made by his solicitor. There is no exception for attendance at any meeting within that exclusion zone and that was made clear to him. These conditions appear to be unambiguous. It is fair to say that Parnell was less than enthusiastic about these conditions.
Just keeping you in the loop.
Fondest wishes,
Dave,
Ps, Glad you enjoyed the Stepping Hill by-election it makes it all worth it.
**********************************************************************
Stockport Council is officially one of the best in the country.
Awarded four stars and improving strongly by the Audit Commission March 2009.
This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this email, or any response to it, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless the information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.
If you receive this email in error please notify Stockport ICT, Business Services via email.query@stockport.gov.uk and then permanently remove it from your system.
Thank you.
http://www.stockport.gov.uk
**********************************************************************
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.20/2250 – Release Date: 07/20/09 06:16:00
Dear Mr Rusbridger
I read with interest the Guardian’s recent articles on miscarriages of justice. Please see below the apparently gloating email from the Leader of Stockport Council to me, which as I understand it is a very serious breach of Data Protection legislation, as well as revealing a worrying level of sarcasm and delight at the plight of a simple (and I mean that as a compliment), kind, helpful, gentle, determined and very brave man and the obvious detrimental effect his imprisonment will have on his already troubled daughters, whose lives were very seriously damaged by their birth family. Having got nowhere over a decade with his request to Stockport Council for help with his troubled adopted daughters – and they would be costing Stockport Council a lot of money were they still in care – he decided to stand on the town hall steps, which he did for two years constantly being harrassed by Stockport Council and having the police called to him repeatedly -one one occasion I witnessed with flashing blue lights, so called as an emergency. I do not blame the police, who have been extremely kind and helpful to Mr. Parnell and apparently have to respond if there is a breach of the peace alleged. There is a legal right to peaceful protest, but not in Stockport.
Why couldn’t the Council simply deal with his problem in a reasonable manner? You may well feel this is an isolated incident but I have been publicly abused and victimised for pointing out that a proposed school, costing millions and millions overbudget with no proper explanation of the increase in cost, which is illegally taking public open space, is actually going on a former toxic dump on which no contamination investigations at all have been carried out over the site of the proposed school, which is actually directly over the tip. I have had dirty tricks played on me too by this Council.
We need now to forensically find out what the many, many police call-outs have cost, the court time – one trial last January being abandoned on the day of the hearing. We need to find out what this cost in keeping Mr. Parnell in prison, where he was last week for breaching a court order not to come within a mile of the town hall. All he had done was use the public lavatory in the town hall. What a disgusting abuse of power by Stockport Council.
Well, they have picked on the wrong man. Mr. Parnell is honest and courageous and because his daughters are involved he can’t give up.
Mr. Rusbridger, I shall keep you informed step by step of what happens next in this miscarriage of justice we have the misfortune to be witnessing first hand.
With very warmest best wishes
Sheila
—– Original Message —–
From: Cllr Dave Goddard
To: sheilaoliver
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 5:40 PM
Subject: Mr. Parnell
Dear Sheila
Mr. Parnell was charged with breaching the ASBO on 16th and 17th July 2009 by entering the Town Hall. He appeared at Stockport Magistrates Court from custody on 18th July 2009. He was apparently adamant that he would not abide by bail conditions and so was remanded in custody to Forest Bank to appear today.
He did appear today. He pleaded not guilty and elected Crown Court trial. His next appearance is before the Magistrates on 14th September 2009. Today his solicitor applied for bail which was opposed by the CPS. The Magistrates did grant bail. I have attached the actual bail notice. His condition is not to come within 1 mile of the Town Hall. The only exception is when he is appearing in court or by prior written appointment made by his solicitor. There is no exception for attendance at any meeting within that exclusion zone and that was made clear to him. These conditions appear to be unambiguous. It is fair to say that Parnell was less than enthusiastic about these conditions.
Just keeping you in the loop.
Fondest wishes,
Dave,
Ps, Glad you enjoyed the Stepping Hill by-election it makes it all worth it.
**********************************************************************
Stockport Council is officially one of the best in the country.
Awarded four stars and improving strongly by the Audit Commission March 2009.
This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this email, or any response to it, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless the information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.
If you receive this email in error please notify Stockport ICT, Business Services via email.query@stockport.gov.uk and then permanently remove it from your system.
Thank you.
http://www.stockport.gov.uk
**********************************************************************
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG – www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.20/2250 – Release Date: 07/20/09 06:16:00
Just a quick hello, if you phone Stockport council like I did last week you could be put on hold and left listening to the attached song by snow patrol, I was left for 20 minutes listening so while I was waiting I put the words to script and went and waited in Fred Perry house. I sat on the floor and while waiting played the song and lyrics on my phone. The funniest thing a lady on an internal phone was also waiting and laughed because she was listening to the same from two different sources. She liked mine best because she followed the lyrics with a smile followed by many others there who were also waiting. A kind police desk clerk informed myself the police had been called and were on their way, so to avoid arrest might I leave before they arrived. Council security guards were not very pleased, but it is quite OK for us to be kept waiting. Take note of the words that are sung in the lyrics. The council should read and listen themselves then they will understand. I did not get arrested and from later contact the police haven’t commented they will be taking any action. Only smiles the lighter side of peaceful protest. Make people smile and they will be on your side.
From Mike. Keep your chin up and a smile a day will keep the council at bay.
Click below and enjoy
Mr Parnell’s views of his and my LibDem MP, Andrew now Lord Stunell. My views of this for-display-purposes-only-Christian are someone worse than Mr Parnell’s.
Dear Sheila
Re: Stunell hang his head in shame enter a toilet and flush away his mistakes along with all his other s— , poo he causes an awful stink, holding our breath waiting for him to do the right thing will make him red faced,
Gasp it make me dizzy
Check link below Cameron photo laugh at the coalition government MP Stunell
Dear Sheila
Re: Stunell hang his head in shame enter a toilet and flush away his mistakes along with all his other s— , poo he causes an awful stink, holding our breath waiting for him to do the right thing will make him red faced,
Gasp it make me dizzy
Check link below Cameron photo laugh at the coalition government MP Stunell
http://www.planningresource.co.uk/news/1116007/Diary/?DCMP=ILC-SEARCH
The beatings of Mr Parnell. At his 3 day Crown Court Appeal the security guards were found by Judge Bernard Lever to have committed perjury when video evidence was shown to the jury of them abusing Mr Parnell.
Dear Sheila
Re; Assault by Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council SSK security guards,
Wednesday 11:02:2009 14:00 hrs
Arrived Stopford House no one in entrance lobby, entered freely for the purpose to gather evidence of CCTV signs, took a number of pictures from 4 different angles that are of and from the inside of the lobby only, I stood and waited and went no further than the centre of the lobby, Frank the security guard come in and started making suggestions (14:15 Approx) using threatening comments of what he would do and he got on his walkie talkie and called for Steve there was a notice that had been put up that came from GMP about making false allegations and what can be done during February there was also some small cards with on one side telling you what to do, and on the other side showing the word Liar, what is this now in the lobby of Stopford House, Frank pointed to this notice and cards and suggested to me I take one of the cards, which I did and give it to him he just threw it on the floor, Steve arrived and they both, Frank and Steve started and ganged up on me and were making comments to my sanity, I quoted “Things must be done within the law”, they both replied to this Steve first “You think your Perry Mason” Frank after Steve then said “More like Ironside”, (what I know of Ironside is he was in a wheelchair) I asked Frank does that mean you are going to break my legs, Frank said “I didn’t say that but that’s what it means”, third security guard arrives, and the three stood talking then the fourth and fifth security arrive, and all five start talking to me at the same time one guard keeps telling me not to look away from his eyes and keeps repeating why am I there, why am I there, when I try to reply the others keep interrupting and giving their answers, the guard who told me to look at his eyes was not standing for any of this and took me by my right elbow and wrist, someone tried to take my bag this contains my life, I held this close to my body another guard took my left elbow and shoulder and another guard was pushing in my back, I was commenting reasonable force to equal resistance we are not going to move anywhere unable to move my arms and activate my personal attack alarm I tried to stand firm I felt at this time if they carried me out through the doors they were going to push me into the hand rail and throw me down the stairs what happened next was they forced me down to the ground, with being held by my right wrist my hand was pushed hard to the floor with the whole weight of that guard down on it which caused injury of lacerations and stiffening finger joints and tender wrist, it was then said leave it and call the police, Frank was wanting more and two female reception staff were trying to calm him down and take him away he didn’t immediately take their advice he wanted to get at me I had got up and then just stood there waiting for the police to arrive, I saw through the window to Edward street turning right to Piccadilly a fast response police car arrive.
The police came into Stopford House, spoke to security Guards and myself and they asked if I would leave, at this time my hand was bleeding, and I was taking in what had happened, I commented to the officer I would leave, and in my mind was trying to think how to put to them what had happened, if I was taken outside, it would again be that I would be told to go on my way, this has happened before when I was previously injured, and also when my property taken or when my laptop was damaged, I understand that the officers have to do what they see is needed, and in me taking time to collect myself together it might have seemed that I was not moving, the officer told me has he had asked me to leave but it seemed I was not doing so he informed me he would have to arrest me to prevent a further breach of the peace this I acknowledge and was arrested and put in the police car and conveyed to Cheadle’s Heath Police Station. I was the one arrested on what the police had been told by security and what they could see, and the long standing issues, it is now about time that this matter is sorted out so the police are no longer being used in the councils unlawful criminal actions.
The council again has acted disproportionably, and have stepped well beyond reasonable grounds all I am doing is trying to be patient and wait (the council is sorting things out) I am doing this minding my own business in the glass entrance lobby of Stopford House, What is the lawful restriction imposed legally, I put it to you now there is none, the actions of the council are all unlawful towards myself, the council is taking the law unto themselves and imposing their judgement and punishment as only they see fit, and with no regards to the law.
Gang intimidation, five sledgehammers to crack one nut, well this nut has now cracked and blood is spilt that is assault by beating, and it is now required to be reported to prevent further occurrence, or the event of a permanent injury or loss of my life, by others who are already acted unlawfully and are getting away with it.
Note:- this is made in relation to the following question, when myself is being asked to leave, this when I am asked to leave, I ask why, the answer I always get is you know why, I do not know why, it is only said to hearsay of a disturbance that could be caused, I have never caused a disturbance, it is the others trying oppress myself in uncovering their unlawfulness (whistleblowing on the council wrongdoings) they have been causing the disturbances in trying to cover up that which I am uncovering, being asked to leave politely or with a gentle hand of encouragement on ones shoulder might be permitted by me (technically an assault) but 1 plus another 3 Persons with force taking hold of my person is unreasonable excessive on anyone’s terms and is totally unacceptable.
Wednesday 11:02:2009 14:00 hrs -15:00 hrs Stopford House.
Assault occasioning actual bodily harm.
Offences against the Person Act 1861 (section 47) Specified offences for the purpose of:- section 224 Criminal Justice Act 2003.
This Assault is recorded on SMBC own CCTV Stockport councils representatives acting in a gang caused me to apprehend the fear of unlawful violence and the fear of that with the force of actual bodily contact (assault by beating) has occurred resulting in a bodily injury to my person, There was 5 other person involved that caused this assault, intentionally or recklessly against myself, Two of whom are known to me, one I have seen but don’t know, one that I have not seen before, one also not known that left had been involved in the fear of the act towards myself, the two security guards known to me are :- Mr Steve Duggan, Mr Frank Craughwell, the third guard I believe is their lead security officer, the fourth man came in a Solution SK van, the fifth I don’t know and don’t know where he came from.
Part of Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council unlawfulness.
How Mr Parnell was treated, day after day, year after year.
I was told to be patient and wait, which I did starting by my further waiting at Stopford House. (I was no longer out of sight and out of mind) and this was when I believe the conspiracy started. There are no legal injunctions applied for or served yet. The police were arresting me for breaching a non-existent injunction that was taken to be a banning order from the council just because the council said so. In law there was no such order. When the arrests for non-existent injunctions was not working, this started the fabrication of offences that the council was alleging about myself, and if I attempted to defend myself it was responded to as a counter claim. Counter claims do not get acted upon until the first complaint is dealt with. Most cases never got to court and some were dropped at first hearing. Those that progressed further as far to appeal were granted and charges overturned and quashed. The further injustice towards myself I believe is a crime and I will continue to try and have my case heard. If crime is not stopped those who get away with it think it is OK for them to carry on. Again I say “Dicey, Rule of Law no one is above it”. Human Rights Act 1998 breaches are to be addressed as offences to the law. App article 2 HRA 1998 the right to have life protected. Article 10 the right to free speech, to be free to report crimes against myself
— On Sun, 3/5/09, MICHAEL PARNELL <mickysara@btinternet.com> wrote: From: MICHAEL PARNELL <mickysara@btinternet.com> Subject: complaint procedure To: gettingitright@stockport.gov.uk Date: Sunday, 3 May, 2009, 1:53 PM Dear Sheila Just to let you know what has happened following Thursday questions, I was arrested on Friday and held at the police station because the person who I said was going to smash my head in and then kill me was not happy, and he works for the council, the council has asked for me to be arrested, that was Friday, I was released Saturday and again arrested Monday and put before the magistrates court released and then again arrested Monday afternoon released Tuesday morning again I was arrested Tuesday dinnertime released Wednesday dinnertime Thursday went to Manchester to see solicitor, Friday arrested again and held at police station to be put before magistrate Saturday, in court no charges released, only that Stockport council requested to the courts that I was not not to be let into all council buildings, and any meetings in the town hall, which the court agreed and trial for me to defend is on the 3rd of June so until then if I do go to any meetings I will be going against the courts, and if I walk on pavements around Stockport council owned property, or take photographs or display any signs naming the council or its employee’s I will be again arrested, I have copied you a email that I have sent to the council about complaining to the council, and to let you know that on Friday after the council meeting there was on the council’s web site our questions and all our details were posted for all to see they were still there Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, they can do these thing to us but it seems we have no right to complain as to how we feel, our alarm and distress there is no one to protect us, the police go the side with the local authority. Friday I was arrested for putting up my tent on the grass outside Stopford House and going inside the tent and closing the front and was just minding my own business and just waiting for the council to go through the council’s complaint procedure. The police said I can’t do this because I would be there forever. The police did force their way into the tent – 3 of them dragged me out put me into a van and took me away. This was not fair on me there were a lot of members of the public watching on as with how do council whoever you feel you must – you have my consent. Love and all the best – keep going Mike Dear Sir or Madam On Friday the 24th day of April in this year of 2009, I sent your an email, through the direct access to the council, and this was from the pc in the contact centre at Stopford House, Piccadilly Stockport. this was monitored on the council’s own CCTV system in the reception area. the email was about a complaint to the council of which in your own policies and procedures I am trying to follow, and in doing so the first thing is I put forward my concerns, then you will reply and confirm the complaint in 5 days ( I have not by email or post had as yet any acknowledgement or correspondence to this matter,). Delay is indeed a matter for which that complaint can be put to the Local Ombudman, and with there not yet being any reply on this day of the 3rd of May in this year of 2009 is at now as it stands is 9 days for you to deal with this complaint in the manner which you tell myself is how you should. If you want to follow the same delay as you have with my complaint that the council was made aware of in October 2005 and is as yet still not acted upon and resolved, then I Michael Stewart Parnell do formally complain that to your complaint procedure, you are not following to the guidance that you say is that how you will perform. (If you perform well I will praise you, do not perform at all or perform poorly then it is our civic duty to complain). You are failing us all and that includes yourselves and this is one issue of my complaint, we all deserve a service that is second to no other and we all should be ashamed that where we don’t perform we are coming in last, please tell me if you know of any other council that performs at a lower standard than Stockport MBC (because I am sure that a lot would like to know that we have a lower standard than theirs). Please put yourselves in the frame – who are you? I know that from the email address you are gettingitright@stockport.gov.uk is this correct or will there be a posted link to that you are gettingitwrong@stockport.gov.uk is this how you would want to be known? With deepest concerns Yours sincerely M S Parnell |
From: mickysara@btinternet.com
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2013 17:46:58
To: <andrewstunnellmp@gov.uk>; <enquiries@andrewstunnell.org.uk>
Reply-To: mickysara@btinternet.com
Cc: <mickysara@btinternet.com>; anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk<anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk>; <enquiries@ipcc.gsi.gov.uk>; advice@lgo.org.uk<advice@lgo.org.uk>; <Alan.Clitherow@gmp.police.uk>
Subject: The Adoption Support Services Regulations 2005
MP request
Breaches of legislation – does my MP petition Parliament to enforce the rules, laws and regulations, or is this for police or my civil action to be requested. What is it, that needs to be done? Please advise.
Thank you
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2005/691/contents/made
—————————————————————————————–
Fabricated Council Tax Arrears
https://www.sheilaoliver.org/fabricated-council-tax-arrears.html
——————————————————————————————
I offered to pay something towards a solicitor for Mr Parnell.
Dear Sheila
Thank you greatly for your offer but I have to decline, not that I don’t appreciate it but the loss of well earned money would be a crime to waste it, its not that I decline your help but justice should be free, Pannones in Manchester I had consultation with in 2008 and they agreed then without the later issues as now my case would require a judicial review which would demand 85 hours of investigative work at £198 per hour for an under clerk and that I could be required to have securities of £800K and they don’t operate pro-bono….
The council won’t be able lawfully to keep suppressing their accountability with them under the spotlight they will become hot around the collar and when they sweat the salts of my case will come out. Media attention is now on our side we can film and record them and even though my past filming is hurtful I look forward to the fun filming them in the future.
Today I received a letter from Stunell Mr Parnell’s wishing my operation went well and that my belief of his appointment of the Queens honour is he will now have to be seen to work harder, not that he can just sit back because of his title, he says he stands ready to assist again if I wish.
He is not a newcomer to being filmed if I do take him at his word my contact and any meeting will be filmed he can no longer hide and if he now fails he could be required to answer to the queen.
I think we will just for a while have to keep chipping at their hard faced skin to get under their guilt, for acknowledgement rather than denial
When they start to fall I will be there to catch them, they will not take the easy way out Schulz, Lucas et al I will be after them, if they keep coming after me or wishing to I will stand fast to my rights, justice will remove the blindfold from the lady with the scales and sword so she is clear to see the facts.
Sheila thank you, your offer warms my heart but no the money can not be used to challenge the faceless ones to their gain but no I won’t allow it.
Love and many thanks
Mike
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
From: “Sheila Oliver” <sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:46:54 +0100
To: MICHAEL PARNELL<mickysara@btinternet.com>
Subject: Mike, I want you to go to Pannones
Mike
They do human rights cases and they are not likely to be in the same Masonic Lodge as SMBC officers and councillors which Stockport solicitors might.
If I give you some money would you be able to do that?
Love
Sheila
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG – www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3199/6424 – Release Date: 06/19/13
Dear Sheila
Sheila you are a true believer in the needs of others and you’ve taken to help others before and without thinking to your own needs, I can’t thank you enough for your help support and recognition of mine or everyone’s rights but you also need to think of yourself, I see your true heart felt compassion that makes you the most sincere person I have ever met and no amount could ever repay you for what you do and try to achieve, you have achieved that which should be recognised by the whole world you are a good person and true from the heart in all you do for the good of others you need the highest praise that which I give you, thank you, I don’t know where I would have been without your help.
Sheila I can’t thank you enough for you help and your offer, but sheila that offer is yours and should only be used for you and your family.
I do not believe in money, family is the most important thing anyone can have, any lack of money can not compare with a lack of family or the loss of it or any part of it, Sheila I am truly sorry for you and your family but Gareth I know was and would be very proud of his Mum,
You say you wish to help to that which they have done to me, you are giving your help but how can I help you for that which was taken from you, I didn’t know Gareth but if he was anything like the rest of his family I would have love to have known him and been his friend.
Sheila as I said I don’t believe in money what I do believe in is truth honesty and the hopes that justice comes where it is due, justice on morals should not be at a financial cost, and even that it may be hard now the truth will never go away and justice will come one day.
Sheila thank you for that what you offer but no I could not you waste any amount of money to the faceless ones thank you but you must use it for you and yours.
Love and many thanks
Mike
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
From: “Sheila Oliver” <sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 18:03:35 +0100
To: MICHAEL PARNELL<mickysara@btinternet.com>
Subject: Hopefully
Mike
I might have access to a bit of money shortly which would help to pay for some legal advice for you. What do you think? Not enough to take them through the courts but enough to send them a solicitor’s letter over what they have done to you and for some more advice following that.
Love
Sheila
Dear Sheila
Re Accountability under the spotlight we could now film meetings.
let’s hope there are no expense claims for makeup and hair do’s, councillors will want to look their best, If there’s a possibility they might appear on youtube.
Roberts has been tweeting meeting for a long while already but we can now film him in close up and expose him for like driving and using the phone, tweeting at meetings his mind is not on why he is there its somewhere else.
Filmed meetings, public question time might be taken off agendas the council won’t like the direct spotlight attention, if I had 2 questions to ask the first would be (1) “can you as a councillor look towards the camera” and the second would be (2) “can you as a councillor say cheese” ha ha if only, meeting would be seen as the circuses they are, the real things that need to be seen, happens behind closed doors,
Wonder what roberts now thinks about pickles.
Council your Rights
——————————————————————————————
Dear Sheila
Response to Majorthi reply
Mike
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
From: mickysara@btinternet.com
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 11:19:44 +0000
To: anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk<anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk>
ReplyTo: mickysara@btinternet.com
Subject: Re: Assault complaints
Mr Majothi
Re: reply to your email
Thank you for your prompt reply, your response does not grasp the issues that was submitted, your reply does not mention what is the main issue founding the grounds to my complaint Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council’s DUTY OF CARE.
In addressing your reply in the first line you state that “I am afraid that I will not be investigating your complaint further, at this stage.” If this is a correct statement then could you correctly follow procedures and confirm the next course to take if a complainant is not in agreement with your findings (appeal or direction towards the local government ombudsman),
To my submission formally I present my representation, Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council has failed in its Duty of Care to protect me from harm when attending as a service customer at council service counters, the harm suffered is both physical injury and psychological trauma, (with reference to your reply one officer has since left the council, this doesn’t take away the councils liability, to the behaviour causing injury, and that the other officer has been warned in relation to his dealing with myself (M Parnell),
You state ” I therefore see no purpose in investigating your complaint further”, this representation is not a complaint about those officers behaviour but is to Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council’ liability to the injuries and trauma’s caused by the council’s officers while performing their council duties.
In representation to the failing of the Duty of Care, my application is made to an award for damages under Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council’s Public Liability.
Michael Parnell
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
From: Anwar Majothi <anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 15:14:55 +0000
To: ‘mickysara@btinternet.com'<mickysara@btinternet.com>
Subject: RE: Assault complaints
Dear Mr Parnell,
Thank you for your email.
I am afraid that I will not be investigating your complaint further, at this stage. You previously drew attention to video clips which appeared on a website involving you and two members of Council staff which I was not aware of until quite recently (as you know one
Officer has since left the Council). I have been advised that the remaining Officer has already been warned in relation to his dealings with you during the period relating to when the video footage appears to have been shot. I therefore see no purpose in investigating your complaint further, unless you have further video footage which I would be happy to review. You may recall that I have already asked you for further information, which has thus far not been forthcoming.
Yours sincerely,
Anwar Majothi
Corporate Complaints Manager
Stopford House
Stockport Council
SK1 3XE
Tel: 0161 474 3182
Fax: 0161 474 4006
From: mickysara@btinternet.com [mailto:mickysara@btinternet.com]
Sent: 09 June 2013 13:47
To: Anwar Majothi
Subject: Fw: Assault complaints
Mr Majothi
RE: Complaints of assaults that took place on council property, “Duty of Care”
Following correspondence from the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), received on 22/05/2013 i must inform you that I complain that Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council has not complied with its statutory duty of care,
I formally complain that Stockport metropolitan Borough Council has failed in its Duty of Care to protect me as a service requesting customer in the council’s service center stockport from harm (injuries sustained while attending council offices) on more than one occasion with results of injury occurring causing alarm distress and severe ill well-being.
For your further information supplied below please read previous correspondence sent to you (please read fully, skipping over the fact doesn’t represent your previous findings).
As instructed please correspond receipt of the complaint within 5 days, further delays would be open to complaint.
Michael S Parnell.
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
From: MICHAEL PARNELL <mickysara@btinternet.com>
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2013 12:41:58 +0100 (BST)
To: <Mickysara@btinternet.com>
Subject: Fw: Your Stage 2 complaints
— On Fri, 4/5/12, MICHAEL PARNELL <mickysara@btinternet.com> wrote: From: MICHAEL PARNELL <mickysara@btinternet.com> Subject: Fw: Your Stage 2 complaints To: “anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk” <anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk> Date: Friday, 4 May, 2012, 2:54 —– Forwarded Message —– From: MICHAEL PARNELL <mickysara@btinternet.com> To: “mickysara@btinternet.com” <mickysara@btinternet.com> Sent: Friday, 4 May 2012, 2:43 Subject: Fw: Your Stage 2 complaints Dear Anwar Majothi I write in reply to your Email dated 2nd May 2012 10:54hrs which I opened on the 3rd May 2012 at 16:00hrs. In rely to your request for the dates and names to progress my complaint to stage 2, the facts for further investigation must be those that would cause no further delay to the same as those said to have been already investigated at stage 1. So as not to duplicate my complaint, please could you supply to me the dates and names that were investigated by Mr Denis McCarthy at stage 1 which was found by him not to contain any evidence that the security guards had assaulted me or made threats to my life. There are many assaults on different dates that are required to be submitted separately for investigation and each of those individual complaints justification. Following our meeting on Monday the 30th April 2012 I forward in this reply submit a further complaint that is one of the many assaults that have been reported to the police, following levies paid to the police service from the council tax I forward the correspondence (below) sent of the assault by coumcil employee’s, the council has a duty for submitting complaints to the policing service within the stockport community neighbourhood policing teams. (As above) letter submitted to the police along with attached statement Chief Superintendant Neil Wain Stockport Police Station Lee Street Stockport Greater Manchester SK1 3DR Mr M S Parnell 5 Osborne Street Bredbury Stockport SK6 2BT Tel 0161 430 2611 Mob 07857047543 Email mickysara@btinternet.com Date 17th February 2009 Dear Chief Superintendent Neil Wain Hello Chief Superintendent Neil Wain I hope you are well, I Michael Stewart Parnell write to you. following my visit to Cheadle Heath police Station Sunday 15th February 2009 at 08:00 hrs, on that day I was called there to give statement to the assault that happened on the 11th February 2009 the FWIN number is 1317, 12/02/09. I call upon you to look into this on my behalf and please accordingly write stating why this matter is not being investigated by GMP, this matter on Sunday 15th February 2009 between 15:00 hrs 19:00hrs was brought to the attention of Cheshire Constabulary headquarters at Blacon Chester, the advice I was given there over the four hours attended was that if this matter was put forward to their force they would have to investigate, There was contact between Greater Manchester Police and Cheshire Constabulary on Sunday night, as there was concerns for my safety. I will be truly grateful if you could look into this matter and also answer to the letter I sent to you on 17th January 2009 I have not yet received a reply or acknowledgement, please accept my statement I tried to put forward Sunday morning for the assault 11/02/09 the enclosed 5 pages. Yours Sincerely M S Parnell, esq. Tuesday 10:02:2009 16:54 hrs On passing Stopford House to return to my car, Steve (Mr Duggan) came to the doors of the lobby, and shouted to myself “sad mad man you’re an idiot, don’t start taking your pictures” and indicated to the notice on the window, and then said, “in five minutes I’m off duty and then you’ll know about it“. Notice on window Important Notice NO ONE IS PERITTED TO TAKE PHOTOGRAPHS OF COUNCIL BUILDINGS OR STAFF WITHOUT PRIOR ARRANGEMENTS I have taken photographs and video clip of this notice, but where are the notices warning the public that CCTV is being taken of them, no one has ever got permission by prior arrangement to take images of me, CCTV codes of practice, signs of at least A3 should be displayed to show that images are being monitored, and the recordings are under protection of the data protection Act 1998. Local authorities whose premises have CCTV systems in operation must alert the Information Commissioner that they are gathering personal information about the people they are recording. They must also put up signs at entrances into, to warn the public that recording is taking place. On finishing the writing of these notes and setting of to go to my car I noticed Steve was sat in his parked car , he was parked on the pavement of Edward street opposite the magistrates court between the entrance and exit to garage and snooker club, I started to walk and cross over Piccadilly, he started his car and with his wheels screeching sped towards me, I had my camera in my hand in my pocket I flicked the lens cover open took it out of my pocket, pointed to the oncoming car and got behind bollards, top of Piccadilly, Steve on seeing camera was shouting and swerved to the other side of the road and stopped, with the fear of what he might do I proceeded to Lee Street Police station, Steve had got out of his car and was following me he came into the station shouting to officers that I had his picture on my camera, and he didn’t what me to have it and was insisting that the police took my camera and deleted the picture, this I believe is recorded on the Police’s legal obtained correctly signed CCTV system, the time was approximately 17:20 hrs, Steve was quite aggressive and was told to leave because the matter was a civil one, I don’t know if panic alarm was activated but a number of plain clothed officers came into reception to see what was happening, when a short while had passed I was told it was ok for me to leave and has Steve had gone to the left, I should leave and go to the right, on exiting the door Steve was stood at the top of lee street watching towards police station, I came back through the door and while looking through glass saw Steve turn and leave, I quickly exited the door to the right and went down to Hillgate, I went and got in my car and then drove home, I didn’t rest or sleep very well that evening and night, I believe that Steve, because of what he has commented to me he has got my address from my correspondence in Stopford House and that he and frank know where I live, this is a concern to me I feel he could be capable now of doing something bad. Wednesday 11:02:2009 13:30 hrs Attended Stockport Police Station Lee Street, the purpose of this visit was to discuss last nights incident, and to ask about Chief Superintendent Neil Wain and his reply to my letter 17th January 2009, his secretary was on lunch but the desk clerk passed on information to myself that the request had been sent to Chester House Police Headquarters and I should have had a reply from them by now, was given phone number 856 2534 to contact them as the delay might be to do with data protection issues, I put to the desk clerk about last nights incident and I informed him that the pictures I took last night were still in my camera in the memory and I would not delete them as they are required as evidence, I pointed out about my safety and the security trying to hurt me although the desk clerk was sympathetic the long standing issues being civil he could only advise that I just took care of myself, I left police station and went round to magistrates court there was to be no court sitting that afternoon so I did not stay and decided to, if it was clear check Stopford House to further evidence, no signs too, of CCTV is displayed to public about monitoring and recording of data. Wednesday 11:02:2009 14:00 hrs Arrived Stopford House no one in entrance lobby, entered freely for the purpose to gather evidence of CCTV signs, took a number of pictures from 4 different angles that are of and from the inside of the lobby only, I stood and waited and went no further than the centre of the lobby, Frank the security guard come in and started making suggestions (14:15 Approx) using threatening comments of what he would do and he got on his walkie talkie and called for Steve there was a notice that had been put up that came from GMP about making false allegations and what can be done during February there was also some small cards with on one side telling you what to do, and on the other side showing the word Liar, what is this now in the lobby of Stopford House, Frank pointed to this notice and cards and suggested to me I take one of the cards, which I did and give it to him he just threw it on the floor, Steve arrived and they both, Frank and Steve started and ganged up on me and were making comments to my sanity, I quoted “Things must be done within the law”, they both replied to this Steve first “You think your Perry Mason” Frank after Steve then said “More like Ironside”, (what I know of Ironside is he was in a wheelchair) I asked Frank does that mean you are going to break my legs, Frank said “I didn’t say that but that’s what it means”, third security guard arrives, and the three stood talking then the fourth and fifth security arrive, and all five start talking to me at the same time one guard keeps telling me not to look away from his eyes and keeps repeating why am I there, why am I there, when I try to reply the others keep interrupting and giving their answers, the guard who told me to look at his eyes was not standing for any of this and took me by my right elbow and wrist, someone tried to take my bag this contains my life, I held this close to my body another guard took my left elbow and shoulder and another guard was pushing in my back, I was commenting reasonable force to equal resistance we are not going to move anywhere unable to move my arms and activate my personal attack alarm I tried to stand firm I felt at this time if they carried me out through the doors they were going to push me into the hand rail and throw me down the stairs what happened next was they forced me down to the ground, with being held by my right wrist my hand was pushed hard to the floor with the whole weight of that guard down on it which caused injury of lacerations and stiffening finger joints and tender wrist, it was then said leave it and call the police, Frank was wanting more and two female reception staff were trying to calm him down and take him away he didn’t immediately take their advice he wanted to get at me I had got up and then just stood there waiting for the police to arrive, I saw through the window to Edward street turning right to Piccadilly a fast response police car arrive. The police came into Stopford House, spoke to security Guards and myself and they asked if I would leave, at this time my hand was bleeding, and I was taking in what had happened, I commented to the officer I would leave, and in my mind was trying to think how to put to them what had happened, if I was taken outside, it would again be that I would be told to go on my way, this has happened before when I was previously injured, and also when my property taken or when my laptop was damaged, I understand that the officers have to do what they see is needed, and in me taking time to collect myself together it might have seemed that I was not moving, the officer told me has he had asked me to leave but it seemed I was not doing so he informed me he would have to arrest me to prevent a further breach of the peace this I acknowledge and was arrested and put in the police car and conveyed to Cheadle’s Heath Police Station. I was the one arrested on what the police had been told by security and what they could see, and the long standing issues, it is now about time that this matter is sorted out so the police are no longer being used in the councils unlawful criminal actions. The council again has acted disproportionably, and have stepped well beyond reasonable grounds all I am doing is trying to be patient and wait (the council is sorting things out) I am doing this minding my own business in the glass entrance lobby of Stopford House, What is the lawful restriction imposed legally, I put it to you now there is none, the actions of the council are all unlawful towards myself, the council is taking the law unto themselves and imposing their judgement and punishment as only they see fit, and with no regards to the law. Gang intimidation, five sledgehammers to crack one nut, well this nut has now cracked and blood is spilt that is assault by beating, and it is now required to be reported to prevent further occurrence, or the event of a permanent injury or loss of my life, by others who are already acted unlawfully and are getting away with it. Note:- this is made in relation to the following question, when myself is being asked to leave, this when I am asked to leave, I ask why, the answer I always get is you know why, I do not know why, it is only said to hearsay of a disturbance that could be caused, I have never caused a disturbance, it is the others trying oppress myself in uncovering their unlawfulness (whistleblowing on the council wrongdoings) they have been causing the disturbances in trying to cover up that which I am uncovering, being asked to leave politely or with a gentle hand of encouragement on ones shoulder might be permitted by me (technically an assault) but 1 plus another 3 Persons with force taking hold of my person is unreasonable excessive on anyone’s terms and is totally unacceptable. Wednesday 11:02:2009 14:00 hrs -15:00 hrs Stopford House. Assault occasioning actual bodily harm. Offences against the Person Act 1861 (section 47) Specified offences for the purpose of:- section 224 Criminal Justice Act 2003. This Assault is recorded on SMBC own CCTV Stockport councils representatives acting in a gang caused me to apprehend the fear of unlawful violence and the fear of that with the force of actual bodily contact (assault by beating) has occurred resulting in a bodily injury to my person, There was 5 other person involved that caused this assault, intentionally or recklessly against myself, Two of whom are known to me, one I have seen but don’t know, one that I have not seen before, one also not known that left had been involved in the fear of the act towards myself, the two security guards known to me are :- Mr Steve Duggan, Mr Frank Craughwell, the third guard I believe is their lead security officer, the forth man came in a Solution SK van, the fifth I don’t know and don’t know where he came from. Part of Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council unlawfulness. Butterworths STONES JUSTICES MANUAL PART VI —– Family Law 6-3195a 1, considerations applying to exercise of powers 6-3195b 2, basic definitions 6-3195c 3, maintenance of Adoption Service 6-3195d 4, Assessments etc for Adoption Support Services (1) A local authority must at the request of:- (a) any persons mentioned in paragraphs (a) to (c) of section 3(1) or (b) any other person who falls within a description prescribed by regulations (subject to subsection 7(a)) carry out an assessment of that persons needs for adoption support services. The case is that the Local authority keeps telling me to report the children to the police, how can I do this when I know of their suffering and what are to their needs, the Council has put me in dispute with them over me requesting support under the laws of, the Children’s Act 1989, the Adoption Act 1976, and the Adoption and Children’s Act 2002. I have requested Assessment of Adoption Support Services. —– Forwarded Message —– From: Anwar Majothi <anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk> To: “mickysara@btinternet.com” <mickysara@btinternet.com> Sent: Wednesday, 2 May 2012, 10:54 Subject: Re: Your Stage 2 complaints Dear Mr Parnell, I write following our meeting on Monday. I would be grateful if you could provide me with the dates, rough times and the names of individuals you have stated have assaulted you; including your recent report last week. I would be grateful to receive the dates via email and can arrange another meeting with you to go through any additional CCTV footage you have in support of your complaint. I look forward to hearing from you soon. Yours sincerely, Anwar Majothi Corporate Complaints Manager Stopford House Stockport Council SK1 3XE Tel: 0161 474 3182 Fax: 0161 474 4006 Confidentiality:- This email, its contents and any attachments are intended only for the above named. As the email may contain confidential or legally privileged information, if you are not, or suspect that you are not, the above named or the person responsible for delivery of the message to the above named, please delete or destroy the email and any attachments immediately and inform the sender of the error. |
Dear sheila
Hello mike here, I hope you are well, I feel a lot better because. Today a great stress was lifted. What is derogatory when the council can report me to the police and ask for my arrest contrary to s4A POA 1986 and today at the revived trial in Stockport magistrates court I was acquitted in less than 5 minutes of that allegation, so false the reporting was to divert the true course of justice if the council’s pointing finger is not defamatory because I’m not an official, then my arrest was and now the courts have made it official and I will have the requested memorandum to show so, the council’s hate crime towards myself will end them in court and then we will see who has been true full in doing and intent, (deformation to damage a persons true character is unacceptable)
Restored character lawful citizen, mike,
(Learning law from questioning the council’s lawlessness)
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
From: “Sheila Oliver” <sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2013 16:18:06 +0100
To: Info Services<infoservices@stockport.gov.uk>
Cc: Mike Parnell<mickysara@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: I wish to take my and Mr Parnell’s complaints against the Council to the Board set up under the Localism Act 2012
Dear Mr Oldfield
What remarks are derogatory? Let me know and we can go through them one by one!
I object to being defamed across the entire Internet by corrupt officials, and I shall fight that any way I please. If officers won’t tolerate being defamed, let’s take it through the courts, shall we? Obviously, the council taxpayer won’t be footing the bill.
How exactly can anyone complain to this corrupt council?
http://www.sheilaoliver.org/anwar-majothi.html
http://www.sheilaoliver.org/anwar-majothi-2.html
Sheila
—– Original Message —–
From: Info Services
To: ‘Sheila Oliver’
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 12:32 PM
Subject: RE: I wish to take my and Mr Parnell’s complaints against the Council to the Board set up under the Localism Act 2012
Dear Mrs Oliver
I am unclear which Board you are referring to in your e-mail. However the Council did create an ethical framework for dealing with complaints against Councillors under the Localism Act 2011. This provides a procedure that deals with complaints regarding the behaviour of Councillors and whether they have breached the Code of Conduct for Members. A copy of the Code and details of how a complaint can be made are contained in the following link:
http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/mgCommitteeDetails.aspx?ID=119
However I would also like to address your comments with regard to officers of the Council and state that the Council does not tolerate officers being defamed in any way and would remind you that complaints can be addressed to the Council without the need for making derogatory remarks about officers of the Council.
If a matter that is being complained about has been addressed by the Local Government Ombudsman then you are advised to contact them directly.
Yours sincerely,
Simon Oldfield
Freedom of Information/ Data Protection Officer & RIPA Coordinator
Stockport Council
Town Hall
Stockport
SK1 3XE
Tel: 0161 474 4048
Fax: 0161 474 4006
http://www.stockport.gov.uk
From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 30 March 2013 15:24
To: FOI Officer
Cc: MICHAEL PARNELL
Subject: I wish to take my and Mr Parnell’s complaints against the Council to the Board set up under the Localism Act 2012
Dear FoI Officer
I am supposed to contact the council via you. The Council is in possesion of written authority from Mr Parnell for me to act on his behalf.
I wish to bring my and his complaints against Stockport Council to the Board set up under the Localism Act 2012. Obviously, I want nothing to do with Khan or Majothi, who are both creators of problems and not solvers of them.
Yours sincerely
Sheila Oliver
——————————————————————————————-
To: <mickysara@btinternet.com>
Reply-To: mickysara@btinternet.com
Subject: S4A POA 1986 display sign or writings of threatening words
The subject above was what I was arrested for
See section (1)(b) below
Police had requested allegation of a crime to be put in writing of what happened which I wrote:- ” Mr Stephen Duggan Council security guard has said he will smash my head in or kill me.”
Council reported this writing to police following which they arrested me
Please note on the 7/11/2012 Mr Duggan was displaying and speculating to others (that of which I had witnessed) the said writings of which he obtained from my pass code protected library account the day before the day of the 8/11/2012 for that of which I was arrested and charged.
Mr Duggan council security guard has of yet 30/03/2013 not been brought to question about this let alone arrested and charged for the same as I was, who made the threats and who was reporting them? What conspiracy who’s harassment who’s intimidation and who’s alarm and distress, Dicey’ Rule of Law no one is above it!.
[F1] 4A Intentional harassment, alarm or distress.
(1)A person is guilty of an offence if, with intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress, he— (a)uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or (b)displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,thereby causing that or another person harassment, alarm or distress.
(2)An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation is displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and the person who is harassed, alarmed or distressed is also inside that or another dwelling.
(3)It is a defence for the accused to prove— (a)that he was inside a dwelling and had no reason to believe that the words or behaviour used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation displayed, would be heard or seen by a person outside that or any other dwelling, or (b)that his conduct was reasonable.
(4)A constable may arrest without warrant anyone he reasonably suspects is committing an offence under this section.
(5)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or both.] Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
—–
From: Anwar Majothi <anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk>
Subject: Re: Your new complaint
To: “mickysara@btinternet.com” <mickysara@btinternet.com>
Date: Thursday, 16 August, 2012, 12:20
Dear Mr Parnell,
I have been informed by our Contact Centre that you have raised a new complaint. This appears to concern a question you raised at a full Council meeting, and the question you raised along with your signature was put on the Council website where it remained for 6 months. You believe that this constituted a breach of data protection.
Please can you confirm whether the above is an accurate summary of your complaint? If so, please can you provide additional information about when the full Council meeting took place and what, if any, action was taken by whom as a result of your signature appearing on the Council website.
I look forward to hearing from you within the next 10 days. I will then commence investigation of your complaint.
To confirm, your other complaint about the alleged assault on you by a member of the security staff has now been exhausted under the complaints procedure and you would need to raise this particular complaint with the Local Government Ombudsman.
Yours sincerely,
Anwar Majothi
Corporate Complaints Manager
Stopford House
Stockport Council
| mail demon please re-apply iainroberts@styockport.gov.uk as this address cannot be found — On Mon, 1/4/13, MICHAEL PARNELL <mickysara@btinternet.com> wrote: From: MICHAEL PARNELL <mickysara@btinternet.com> Subject: Re: Hate related crimes To: Alan.Clitherow@gmp.police.uk Cc: mickysara@btinternet.com, “sheila oliver” <sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com>, anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk, barry.khan@stockport.gov.uk, thecouncilleader@stockport.gov.uk, iainroberts@styockport.gov.uk, enquiries@ipcc.gsi.gov.uk, COINyork@lgo.org.uk Date: Monday, 1 April, 2013, 0:05 Insp Alan Clitherow In reply, 9:30 will be fine, I will attend at Fred Perry House, GMP customer service counter promptly to avoid any question to whether I am welcomed by SMBC, that I should be there only by appointment, (this comment is made following my meeting with my MP Andrew Stunnell 26/03/2013 that at which he said [“the council don’t welcome myself at any council offices or town hall and he suggests to get any thing done (if i do, it is like a red flag to a bull) I should stay away”.] 2000 to 2005, contact was ongoing with meetings, written, by phone and by emails and nothing got done, 2005 October I was asked to stay away which I did again until January 2007 nothing again happening so June 2007, I was told to be patient and wait, which I did starting by my further waiting at Stopford House (I was no longer out of sight and out of mind) and this was when I believe the conspiracy started, there is no legal injunctions applied for or served yet the police were arresting me for breaching a non existent injunction that was taken to be a banning order from the council just because the council said so. in law there was no such order, when the arrests for non erxistent injunctions was not working, this started the fabrication of offences that the council was alledging about myself, and if I attempted to defend myself it was responded to as a counter claim, counter claims do not get acted upon untill the first complaint is dealt with, most cases never got to court and some were dropped at first hearing those that progressed further as far to appeal were granted and charges overturned and quashed, the further injustice towards myself I believe is a crime and I will continue to try and have my case heard, if crime is not stopped those who get away with it think it ok for them to carry on, again I say “Dicey, Rule of Law no one is above it”. Human Rights Act 1998 breaches are to be addressed as offences to the law, App article 2 HRA 1998 the right to have life protected. article 10 the right to free speech,to be free to report crimes against myself without the fear of intimidation. awaiting tuesdays meeting Michael Parnell — On Sun, 31/3/13, Alan.Clitherow@gmp.police.uk <Alan.Clitherow@gmp.police.uk> wrote: From: Alan.Clitherow@gmp.police.uk <Alan.Clitherow@gmp.police.uk> Subject: Re: Hate related crimes To: mickysara@btinternet.com Date: Sunday, 31 March, 2013, 8:26 Mr Parnell, If you could come in for 9.30 am on Tuesday I will come appropriately prepared. Alan Insp Alan Clitherow J1 – Stockport Central NPT X 69701 Mobile 07795 811575 From: mickysara@btinternet.com To: Alan.Clitherow@gmp.police.uk Cc: “anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk” <anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk>, enquiries@ipcc.gsi.gov.uk, “COINyork@lgo.org.uk” <COINyork@lgo.org.uk>, cllr.iain.roberts@stockport.gov.uk, “sheila oliver” <sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com> Date: 28/03/2013 00:49 Subject: Hate related crimes Inspector Alan Clitherow When you arrange our meeting for Tuesday 2nd April 2013 please bring to the table, the GMP policies about reporting hate crime, as with each time our contact revolves it gathers more issues, like an onion removing each layer it makes your eyes water yet when you get deep down to what is at the centre we will see that what has been the same all the way through, offences committed, crimes reported and complaints submitted, time now to investigate what is at the core of any injustices. Below are twitter contact conversations trying to find what to do and where to get help. Just posted up Mr Parnell’s details on Julie Bindel of the Spectator’s Twitter page. Let’s get the disgusting treatment of a decent human being out there. Sheila —– Original Message —– From: <mickysara@btinternet.com> To: <cllr.iain.roberts@stockport.gov.uk> Cc: <Alan.Clitherow@gmp.police.uk>; <anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk>; “sheila oliver” <sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 3:21 PM Subject: Contact via your ALDC site > Hate crime > council employee has expressed issues by expressions that are hate related > towards myself as an illegal immigrant and I need to get a job but he > says I can’t do that if I have no national insurance number and I am a sad > gay old man with no purpose, and a pervert. > The hate related issues that I have been made to suffer by the council > employee have by him been disclosed without truth to members of the public > who have treated myself in prejudiced by what he has said and is still > repeating . > > Reporting hate crime what can you do because I don’t seem to be getting > anywhere complaining to the council when will this hurtful hate crimes > come to an end can you help? > > Respectfully michael parnell > Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange > > —– > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG – www.avg.com > Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 2641/6203 – Release Date: 03/25/13 > Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange To contact the police in an emergency call 999 or to contact Greater Manchester Police for a less urgent matter call 101. For the latest news and information about your Neighbourhood Policing Team visit www.gmp.police.uk. You can also follow us on Twitter: www.twitter.com/gmpolice or find us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/GtrManchesterPolice , Flickr: www.flickr.com/gmpolice or YouTube: www.youtube.com/gmpolice This e mail carries a disclaimer, a copy of which may be read at: http://www.gmp.police.uk/emaildisclaimer |
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG – www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 2641/6216 – Release Date: 03/31/13
Insp Alan Clitherow
In reply, 9:30 will be fine,
I will attend at Fred Perry House, GMP customer service counter promptly to avoid any question to whether I am welcomed by SMBC, that I should be there only by appointment, (this comment is made following my meeting with my MP Andrew Stunnell 26/03/2013 that at which he said [“the council don’t welcome myself at any council offices or town hall and he suggests to get any thing done (if i do, it is like a red flag to a bull) I should stay away”.] 2000 to 2005, contact was ongoing with meetings, written, by phone and by emails and nothing got done, 2005 October I was asked to stay away which I did again untill January 2007 nothing again happening so June 2007, I was told to be patient and wait, which I did starting by my further waiting at stopford house (I was no longer out of sight and out of mind) and this was when I believe the conspiracy started, there is no legal injunctions applied for or served yet the police were arresting me for breaching a non existent injunction that was taken to be a banning order from the council just because the council said so. in law there was no such order, when the arrests for non erxistent injunctions was not working, this started the fabrication of offences that the council was alledging about myself, and if I attempted to defend myself it was responded to as a counter claim, counter claims do not get acted upon untill the first complaint is dealt with, most cases never got to court and some were dropped at first hearing those that progressed further as far to appeal were granted and charges overturned and quashed, the further injustice towards myself I believe is a crime and I will continue to try and have my case heard, if crime is not stopped those who get away with it think it ok for them to carry on, again I say “Dicey, Rule of Law no one is above it”.
Human Rights Act 1998 breaches are to be addressed as offences to the law, App article 2 HRA 1998 the right to have life protected. article 10 the right to free speech,to be free to report crimes against myself without the fear of intimidation.
awaiting tuesdays meeting
Michael Parnell
From: MICHAEL PARNELL <mickysara@btinternet.com>
To: “mickysara@btinternet.com” <mickysara@btinternet.com>
Sent: Wednesday, 1 February 2012, 15:09
Subject:
Dear Sheila
Mike here i am dropping you a line to let you know what is happening at this end, today i received a letter from our MP Mr Stunell and within that letter it makes reference to; at my request he has arranged a meeting with senior council officials to see what he can sort out, also contained in the letter (this is what is in my mind i am thinking, because he is lib dem and along with the council they might be on the back foot and ready to turn and then be on the run) he makes reference to yourself and as stated reads; “In the meantime I received the attached email from Mrs Oliver” and also is wrote If you intend to re-engage Mrs Oliver to act on your behalf please let me know so that he can withdraw, and then he says “As you know, I am ready to help, but not in competition with Mrs Oliver”, Sheila how dare he say that and act in such a way he is to both of us our MP and he has a duty to act on both our behalves to that we have concerns over, You are the only person that has so far given support, you truly care and that is a big part in our wellbeing, you help because you willing choose too, and your help is greatly apriciated with my warmest Thank You, Sheila i back you all the way in questioning the accountability of the council, it is your right as it is mine to question when things go wrong and also question those who have caused it, and that is whether it is those who have suffered the wrong or those who have seen it happening , i am greatly pleased that you are asking questions this helps me and i feel helps us both to question, from just one questioner it cant carry as much response than that which will be given to a community of questioners, please with my backing keep asking all your questions, today i phoned our MP and Steve Houston office and instructed them that your emails, you were asking questions because you have concerns and i back your rights to ask those question and your asking of those questions was on your own behalf and that there could be others that might start asking to same questions, I spoke with Jayne Reynolds from Mr Houston’s office and she was taking notes I told her I had no rights to stop you asking any question and i backed you fully in your right to ask any question even if it related to matters concerning myself, and if you requested information from myself I would be freely providing it, sheila thank you many times i’ll finish short of all i have to say my pc is running slow and i want to send this before it packs up. catch up later.
Love Mike
Dear WhatDoTheyKnow volunteer Richard Taylor
Hello How are You, please let me introduce myself my name is Michael Parnell and I am a resident of stockport and in my dealings with the Local Authority, Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council I have had concerns how the council has dealt with my requests, in the need of help and for information of how and where to get that help, with the action of the council in refusing to meet their statutory duty they have unlawfully placed restrictions upon me, which were not legal and never legally backed by an enforceable court order, the council on their own say so, do ban persons who complain or ask questions which the council does not like, in my issue the council blocked my only form of access to them, my request were for the help and towards the needs of two young children that stockport placed with my wife and myself from the care system, the children were under a section 31 care order (Local Authority Care), and with not getting any help I was told to complain, waiting 9 years for a social worker is a long time and it was the children’s welfare that was most important, on the 26th june 2007 stockport council told me to be patient and wait so I did on the town hall steps each day during their opening hours, and I attended all council meetings at the town hall each night when they were held, at these meetings I meet with many others that seemed to also have a council’s unlawful ban on them, I became aware of Mrs Sheila Oliver and in the council meetings I witnessed certain treatment of her, in a full council meeting the leader of the council called her a liar, which she is not, what she was then saying is only that which the council themselves had in reports, the council’s behaviour I believe was defamatory, disgraceful and totally unacceptable in a law-biding society and Mrs Oliver does not deserve that treatment, I must inform you if you feel I am bias to Mrs Oliver this is with good cause she has in the last few years shown more support to the children than that shown ever by Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council, if bias is from way of support then bias can also be from the unlawfulness of how Stockport Council have behaved, Mrs Sheila Oliver has opened her heart to help and in doing so has opened herself to attack and it deeply upsets me to see the WhatDoTheyKnow .com website has suspended her account, I appeal to you that WhatDoTheyKnow.com reconsider her suspension, she is a lady who is trying to help, in her support I was forwarding to her how I was being treated because I could no longer take the council’s assaults, false allegations that they kept putting to the police with all the following arrests and incarcerations while on remand and that all charges have never been brought to trial, I could no longer take the council’s treatment and I now stay in my home every day, every week and will be every year coming up now to the start of the second one, Mrs Oliver has attended my home and give me hope to carry on in my life and be it when it is made known how the council has behaved and I can leave my home without the fear what the council might do, Mrs Oliver is an advocate for myself she is only doing that for me that which I could not do for myself, but if I have to I would put My Life on the line to support Her, this lady Mrs Oliver is a good person and she should be cherished, I question the reason why her account has been suspended I have today signed up to WhatDoTheyKnow website and could not find anywhere within the site the terms and conditions of what is a question for information or how the questions are to be asked, as an example if I request information from Stockport Council as to what information does the council hold in its records on the amounts of how many times have council security guards assaulted a customer when the customer has attended a council office to provide information following that at the council’s request to do so.
Please can you respond to this my appeal to you to reconsider Mrs Oliver’s account suspension, if her suspension is to continue I put it Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council account should be withdrawn and they then be boycotted and blacklisted as an authority who breaches their statutory duty to respond and perform as they should.
Yours sincerely Michael Stewart Parnell
Dear Sheila
Read on and tell me what you think
love mike
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: MICHAEL PARNELL <mickysara@btinternet.com>
To: “mickysara@btinternet.com” <mickysara@btinternet.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 31 January 2012, 19:27
Subject: How much does Stockport Council cost the tax payers
The Town Hall’s plumbing is now 104 years old and the Council’s office toilets are bound to have a few leaks, the stink that was flushed out of the drip in the system that puddled around our feet could only flood the waste(ful) treatment of complaints by just flushing them down the pan, when the council sits on its throne constipated with the strain of its wrongdoing it will take more than wipe of a tissue to clear up its mess, dont forget to wash your hands when you use the council you dont catch undisinfected discriminatory cleansic flushing, i dont know if there is any known cure if caught on attack from this diseased council. (An internal council source who is only a tap on the plumbing system that releases the pressure put on the whole system which is old and failing)
Council pays out in race claim
December 12, 2007
A NORTH west council is believed to have paid out around £250,000 after settling two race discrimination claims by a former employee.
The cases involved Justin Idehen, who earlier this year took Stockport Council to an industrial tribunal for a second time. Mr Idehen, former head of engineering services, won damages of £160,000 after alleging racial harassment back in 2001.
In the latest claim, he alleged to an industrial tribunal in Manchester that in May 2006, he had applied for a new position with a council contractor only to be told: ‘You can’t work for Stockport Council in any capacity at all.’
It is understood that the second case has now been settled out of court for a figure believed to be above £80,000. The latest settlement suggests Mr Idehen’s cases have cost Stockport council tax payers around £240,000 in compensation, before legal fees.
An internal council source who asked not to be named, said: “The latest amount, which was offered was £80,000, but it is my understanding that this was rejected by him.
“However, by April all parties agreed on the final figure, which suggests it was much higher than that original offer.
“However, that settlement would take no account of paying barrister’s fees for the preparation work, the three-day hearing involving Mr Idehen’s London barrister and/or the local authority’s own legal bills. The cost to the authority must have been astronomical.”
The settlement came ahead of a three-day hearing in the spring at which the authority was warned a decision due in July could award “exemplary damages” against Stockport council.
Labour councillor Sheila Bailey claimed the case could have been avoided second time around if the people allegedly committing racist acts had been dealt with swiftly.
She said: “If the local authority settles out of court, it is accepting it has a problem, but apart from paying out a huge amount, it a duty to deal with the people at fault. At the very least there should have been an internal inquiry not only to look at this, but at its general policy to make sure it is being adhered to.”
The council has repeatedly refused to comment, claiming to do so would be an infringement of the Data Protection Act.
From: MICHAEL PARNELL <mickysara@btinternet.com>
Subject: SKMBT_C45009072011260[1].pdf
To: mickysara@btinternet.com
Date: Thursday, 26 January, 2012, 14:46
| The attachments contained within this email is first “SKMBT” this is Harassment by email that came from at source the CPS then followed by the leader of stockport council, who you will also see he is a member of the greater Manchester police authority ( i think in 2009 he was the chair of committee) and he does gain financial reward from this post as published on the authorities websites, questioning his position in this role and with regards to operation leopard, (harassment by the police) should he in his role as council leader breach The Data Protection Act 1998 part vi section 56 by service over the council web email service that of the service he has of the police authority committee, Jacqui Smith operation leopard.wps, the police to harass persons with ASBO’S, The programme in Essex has been successful, even though it may raise human rights issues about such tough tactics, especially if those harassed by the police have not been found guilty of any criminal offence.Smith will say: “There is no let-up in tackling antisocial behaviour. We know that getting in early to stop troublemakers works, but I want stronger action to deal with persistent offenders. I want police and local agencies to focus on them by giving them a taste of their own medicine: daily visits, repeated warnings and relentless filming of offenders to create an environment where there is nowhere to hide. Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council want an unlawful ASBO to be in place and serviced with the unlawful backing of harassment by a Greater Manchester Police Authority member who sits in both roles that of a leadership position (abuse of authority if you ask me, as victim breach my human rights) |
Stockport’s Breach of regulation, (see reg 2(5) no directions to request 12 month instalments included or written in the council tax demand.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2012/3087/note/made
Look andrew stunnelhttp://www.lgiu.org.uk/2012/02/08/the-localism-act-over-to-you/
Dear Sheila
Hello, below is the reply from CPS complaints of my email sent on 14/03/2013 of why nothing was being done about notice given on 21/01/2013 at Stockport Magistrates Court.
Under s23(7) POA 1985 I was given 35 days to serve notice (which was done in 7). yet the CPS can take 3 months to do nothing, and it is then myself who’s being asked why things take so long they end up out of time.
If the CPS wait for listing, which, if it is after 7/5/2013 they won’t be able to do anything, as I will be in hospital from 4/4/2013 for approx up to 28 days
That only leaves 3 days to investigate bring charges to put before the courts so that justice could be done.
Independent Police Complaints Commission Reference number 2013/004375 Your letter date 18 March 2013
You inform me that Greater Manchester Police Professional Standards Branch have applied to dispense with the need to investigate my complaint, on the grounds that it is more than 12 months since an incident that give raise for the complaint.
You instruct me to provide good reason for (if there is any) the delay in submitting the complaint.
The complaint is made following my 999 call on the incident date, following which the attending Greater Manchester Police Officers (GMP) instructed me the issues were not police matters and these matters should be reported to the local authority Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council (SMBC), these directions from the officers then backed up in a letter, that the GMP were not taken any action (no offence committed) led to on the same day as receiving letter from GMP (no delay first chance) submitting the complaint to SMBC, their investigation also upheld no offence no evidence, and complaint progressed to the Local Government Ombudsman York (LGO) complaint in progress still no delay,
Following the LGO’s investigation and on receipt by letter the complaint was not within their remit and the incident as directed was a matter for the police, on receiving the LGO findings 17 October 2012 the complaint was then forwarded to GMP professional standards no delay complaint come full circle (Greater Manchester Police to Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council. to Local Government Ombudsman York back to Greater Manchester Police and now passed to Independent Police Complaints Commission, same complaint no delay’s by myself in submitting complaint, only that the misdirection from GMP officers has contributed to the time active investigations by all bodies involved in the same complaint).
Further information if there is any delay then why on the 8th November 2012 was I arrested following receipt. of a letter from GMP professional standards branch dated 6th November 2012 over the issues of the incident in 2009 (if my complaint can’t be investigated then would it be proportional not to be arrested for submitting my complaint).
On this application, I request to apply The Rule of Law to the investigation into my complaint, and give notice to breaches of The Human Rights Act 1998 Article 6 by Local Authorities to act compatible with the agreed rights.
I do not believe I have delayed my complaint the question, open to further complaint if required “is there any delay to process the complaint which came about any action of the Local Authorities”, it is in my understanding that the IPCC only investigate police Misconduct (GMP officers in their delay by mis-guidance “this is not a police matter and guidance to put any complaint elsewhere is subject of misdirection and failure to protect those to un-lawfulness and injustice.
Further information the GMP Professional Standards Branch informed me that they could not investigate while trial was pending for the arrest 8th November 2012 with hearing date 21st January 2013 no trial date revived discontinuance, the Greater Manchester Police, The Crown Prosecution Service and Stockport Magistrates Court give no information to when a hearing or trial date is to be heard (breach art 6 HRA 1998).
Please consider my request not to dispense the need to investigate my complaint, as this is required to bring about a stopping of the harassment victimisation and suffering, also associated losses, time and finances.
Yours respectfully M S Parnell.
Dear Mrs Oliver,
In response to your message I would advise that the Council do not
have specific claim forms for use in circumstances you describe.
If you wish to make a claim please do so in writing setting out the
nature of the claim and the loss that it has given rise to, if any.
If you intend to issue proceedings they should be served formally
on the Council via the Council Solicitor who is authorised to accept service of
any proceedings. Please note that claims against the Council will be defended
and costs will be sought against any losing party.
You may wish to consider taking specific legal advice if you are
contemplating the issue of proceedings.
Mike.Halsall
Services
Business Services Directorate
Tel: 0161-474 3211
Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email is for the intended recipient(s) alone. It may contain legallyprivileged and confidential information that is exempt from disclosure under English law and if you are not an intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this email in error, please notify us immediately either by using the reply facility on your email system or by contacting us at the address below. If this message is being transmitted over the Internet, be aware that it may be intercepted by third parties. No contractual relationship is created by this email by any person or partner unless specifically indicated otherwise by agreement in writing via means other than email.
If you receive this email in
error please notify Stockport Legal Services Business development Unit by
telephone to 0161 474 3263.
From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 04 July 2009 17:37
To: Mike Halsall
Cc: MICHAEL PARNELL;
John Schultz
Subject: Defamation and wrongful arrest
Dear
Mr Halsall
Please
send me a claim form. I wish to make a claim regarding the publicly and
wrongly branding me rude and offensive at council meetings, to possibly thousands
of council employees and also with regards to the
repeatedly calling me a liar in council meetings. You will, no doubt, be
aware of the recent
cost £450,000 in legal costs. I am sure the Council’s insurers would want
to settle rather than go through several such cases. I have first class
references from the Lord Mayor of
the Chief Executive of Manchester City Council and the German Diplomatic
Service – I have worked for all of these and would not be suitable for such
posts had I a rude and offensive nature.
I
cannot speak for Mr. Parnell but my impression is that your insurers will have
to pay him a large amount of money for the appalling treatment he has received
at the hands of this council. And to have dragged the Chief Constable
into this row, who following his predecessor cannot afford any embarrassment,
is astonishing.
Please
see the attached news report.
I
expect to hear from you within 10 working days as per the Council’s Charter.
Yours
sincerely
Sheila
**********************************************************************
Stockport Council is officially one of the best in the country.
Awarded four stars and improving strongly by the Audit Commission March 2009.
This email, and any files transmitted with it, is confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. As a public body, the Council may be required to disclose this
email, or any response to it, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, unless
the information in it is covered by one of the exemptions in the Act.
If you receive this email in error please notify Stockport ICT, Business
Services via email.query@stockport.gov.uk
and then permanently remove it from your system.
Thank you.
http://www.stockport.gov.uk
********************************************************************
Mike
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
From: Manchester Complaints <Manchester.Complaints@cps.gsi.gov.uk>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 11:32:23 +0000
To: ‘mickysara@btinternet.com'<mickysara@btinternet.com>
Subject: C7455
Dear Mr Michael Parnell
I am in receipt of your email received via the Crown Prosecution Service Complaints and Feedback system on 25th March 2013.
In your email you refer to your contact with Greater Manchester Police Professional Standards branch. Please liaise with them about the progress of your complaint about the police.
At the conclusion of your email you refer to a recently discontinued case before Stockport Magistrates Court.
I can confirm that the court has notified us that you wish to exercise your right to have the proceedings revived; we are waiting for the matter to be listed by the court. I hope this explains the situation.
I enclose a copy of the Complaints and Feedback booklet.
Yours sincerely
Elaine Goodchild
Complaints Co-ordinator
Tameside/Oldham/Trafford/Stockport
“No man is punishable or can be lawfully made to suffer in body or goods except from a distinct breach of the law established by ordinary courts of the land.” A V Dicey
(Except in LibDem run Stockport)
I am emailing and tweeting every person who hates the LibDems and every LibDem who professes respect for civil liberties evidence of what is going on in Stockport. Mr Parnell is a very sick man, as you all well know. I suggest you start now in trying to make amends for the disgusting traumas and trials you have put him and his family through.
I suggest you offer to make amends to me for the defamatory remarks coverin up fraud which you have publicly made about me.
Sheila
Chapter 1 Appendix A 2013
Chapter 2 Appendix B 2012
Chapter 3 Appendix C 2011
Chapter 4 Appendix D 2010
Chapter 5 Appendix E 2009
Email sent 23/07/2009 09:29
Mike
Please give the email below from Goddard to your solicitor. He has committed an offence against you with regards to Data Protection. Although you sent me the authority to act on your behalf and I sent it to the Council, the Freedom of Information Officer emailed me yesterday to say she couldn’t open the attachment, therefore Goddard had seen no authorisation for your details to be disclosed to me. Mike, this is another brick in the wall.
Plus, I think it shows the Council is not impartial but quite vindictive.
Mike Wacker died. I think you maybe met him – her certainly was very concerned about your plight. I am gutted
Lots of love
Sheila
—– Original Message —–
From: Cllr Dave Goddard
To: sheilaoliver
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 5:40 PM
Subject: Mr. Parnell
Dear Sheila
Mr. Parnell was charged with breaching the ASBO on 16th and 17th July 2009 by entering the Town Hall. He appeared at Stockport Magistrates Court from custody on 18th July 2009. He was apparently adamant that he would not abide by bail conditions and so was remanded in custody to Forest Bank to appear today.
He did appear today. He pleaded not guilty and elected Crown Court trial. His next appearance is before the Magistrates on 14th September 2009. Today his solicitor applied for bail which was opposed by the CPS. The Magistrates did grant bail. I have attached the actual bail notice. His condition is not to come within 1 mile of the Town Hall. The only exception is when he is appearing in court or by prior written appointment made by his solicitor. There is no exception for attendance at any meeting within that exclusion zone and that was made clear to him. These conditions appear to be unambiguous. It is fair to say that Parnell was less than enthusiastic about these conditions.
Just keeping you in the loop.
Fondest wishes,
Dave,
Ps, Glad you enjoyed the Stepping Hill by-election it makes it all worth it.
Mon 13/07/2009 05:57
Dear Charlotte
A very sincere Thank You with the dearest of gratitude for your support on Friday, it will be that with your devoted caring support and your time spent on reporting my case that we will together, along with united others be able to take on the council and uncover their unlawful wrongdoings, the council will not be able to hide behind their cover ups, because together all those who stand up for what is duly right, then justice will prevail above everything else, I’m deeply in your debt for your support both at the trial and your time spent afterwards writing up the report how would I ever be able to repay you for your support and that you have done for me, well if I can be there for you I am here and ready to go, there is one goal we and many others like us have in common that is this council (Stockport MBC Maliciously Brutalizes Citizens) which picks on the defenceless, those who cant object back to how they are treated, the council attacks the young who cant defend themselves, they also attack the venerable because they are easy targets, is this the supportive acting council that we want for our following generations, if when we all get old and become venerable then it would be our younger generation that would support our needs, but if they! were not supported, then how would those in the council who blatantly abused their duty cope if their needs were neglected, how would they feel if they were treated like they treat others, I for myself require little but the need to help others is great, to show this council’s wrongdoing I shall be wearing their honorary order of crasbo on my chest and in their dictatorship of the justice system, then with the judgement of guilt to a phantom sneeze, then as I uphold the law and punishment to be correctly served, then I will have erected outside Stopford House a set of head stocks in which I will place myself to serve my sentence 24 months that the order lasts, the council will not just get away with dictating a financial penalty to which they know that I cant cover and would be left to my dear wife and at a loss to our needy children, I shall without hesitation stand in the stocks to show the council’s wrongdoing well isn’t that what I have already done for the last 2 years I’m sure Stockport Council will welcome being seen nationwide through the eyes of the media as a council that is still in the dark ages who orders it residents to do as it says, because it places its citizens lower than itself, if its treats us fairly then we will all prosper together, treat us unfairly and they give us no other direction than to revolt, if they keep pushing us to the edge of the quarry which they use to where as to place the worthless refuse then there will be a time when in 2012 this council will be forced to recycle its unwanted, how will the council cope when we are given our day we wont treat them the way they treat us, we are not like them we care and have morals, the council will hang it’s head in shame, I hold my head up high, though be it in the stocks but I am proud of that what I have ever done, but shame on them of their allegations to cover up and disguise their actions and their failings.
Charlotte again my dearest thanks, you helped me greatly and from that help will keep me strong, it will be the people when they are shown the truth of that which this council has failed, and it will be them and only them who will to justice demand, that the council be brought to account for their actions.
All my dearest sincere thanks love and happiness
Mike A GREAT BIG THANK YOU
Chapter 6 Appendix F 2008
Chapter 7 Appendix G2007
Chapter 6 Appendix H 2006
Court Documents
