Stockport Council News

On 7th December 2008 I asked a public question at Stepping Hill Area Committee. On this committee were the Council Leader, Executive Councillors Hogg, John Smith and Mark Weldon, two Corris’s, Ben Alexander and Wendy Meikle.

“I often attend Stepping Hill Area Committee meetings to hear the police representative castigated by councillors for the police’s failure to respond to citizens in need of their help.

As I understand it, the Council has called the police 30 – 40 times to our gentle and well-mannered town hall protester, with the resulting hours and hours of police officer and duty solicitor time being tied up with paperwork.

Now, as I understand it, the town protester is on bail charged with common assault with a sneeze with intent to inflict a cold on a council employee.

Do you feel this is a productive use of police time?”

Sheila Oliver

(Mr Parnell was aquitted of all charges in a 3 day £10,000 per day Crown Court appeal. The council security guards were found in court to have perjured themselves regarding this matter and CCTV evidence in court showed no sneeze. However, the police continued to accept the lies told by these same security guards regarding Mr Parnell in future arrests. Something really, really stinks in LibDem Stockport where the police appear to be at the beck and call of grubby local politicians with the full connivance of the Chief Constable Fahy.)

In the end there was no point in meeting Inspector Clitherow. The police won’t release documents related to his case, so I am not getting tied up with the same waste of time merry-go-round tactics they used with Mr Parnell.

Email sent – 13 October 2013 04:36

Dear Inspector Clitherow

I would like to take up your offer of a meeting to discuss Mr Parnell’s case. Obviously, I don’t want the sort of meeting to say that we have had a meeting meeting (tick that box), with no outcome or proper record of what has been done, as Mr Parnell was subjected to for years.

I can meet you late afternoon and I would like to schedule the meeting once I have had the reply from the police to my Freedom of Information requests.

Some of the points I would like to address are:-

1) Following Mr Parnell’s suicide attempt in a police cell, what serious attempts were made to sort out his simple problem? This suicide attempt was referred to by Judge Bernard Lever in Mr Parnell’s 3 day Crown Court aquittal.

2) There were many incidents I did not witness, but I did experience Mr Parnell being arrested with blue flashing lights for using the town hall public lavatory, when he had written authority to do so from the Council Chief Executive. I also had to beg to stop him being arrested for the “crime” of leaving a council meeting early. Please remember at no time was Mr Parnell ever found guilty of any crime. He was almost Gandi-like in the peaceful nature of his protest. During his trials no evidence was submitted of him ever being rude, aggressive or violent and if they had it on CCTV they would have shown it, believe me. Why did the police allow themselves to be used in this manner by local politicians? Many police officers were extremely kind to Mr Parnell. When Mrs Parnell unexpectedly found him dead, two of the police officers who responded to the 999 call were lovely, knew Mike and had been kind to him in the past. The problem lies with senior officers who allowed this Schweinerei to continue.

3) When Mr Parnell tried to report the Data Protection crime by Stockport Council of putting his name, address and signature up on the Council’s website and refusing for five days after it was brought to their attention in a public meeting to remove it, why was Mr Parnell arrested for this “crime” of reporting a crime three times over one weekend? The Council also committed the offence of refusing to remove my name, address and signature too.

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/three-arrests-for-trying-to-rectify-a-data-protection-issue.html

4) Why was Mr Parnell repeatedly arrested for reporting with video evidence that Council employees were threatening to “kick his f*cking head in” or threatening to kill him? This evidence was shown in his 3 day Crown Court aquittal process.

5) What action do the police intend to take with regards to Mr Parnell’s family. The main issue, I believe, is to clear his name. He never was a criminal. He was never found guilty of anything except asking for his legal right to counselling help for his lovely daughters adopted from Stockport Council who had had a terrible time with their birth parents. One of the girls had the wrong details on her official documents, so if he took her to A & E she didn’t exist. He wanted that legal anomaly sorted out for her. Not a lot to ask for, is it? Not worth driving him to his death for. And how much worse have the police, council, CPS and Magistrates’ Court made the lives of those young girls?

I look forward to finally sorting this mess out, posthumously for Mr Parnell.

Yours sincerely

Sheila

Email sent – 21 October 2013 15.37

Dear Inspector Clitherow

Thank you for your kind response and your confirmation that Mr Parnell was never a criminal. That statement alone would mean an awful lot to his family. He was the most honest man I have ever come across.

I may be wrong, and I will correct it if I am, but I feel sure that Mr Parnell copied you into emails years prior to July 2012 about his problems.

I would willingly meet you if you have a genuine desire to sort this out. What I don’t want is what Mr Parnell was subjected to – years of pointless meetings which got him nowhere.

My complaint is not with the police – Mr Parnell told me of the many instances where the police officers were kind to him. My point is how could senior police officers like the Chief Constable allow this to go on year after year? The hours of police time wasted in the court appearances alone was shocking, never mind being called to the town hall with blue flashing lights as an emergency when he used the town hall lavatory, which he had written permission to do.

It might be more important from someone from the police to contact Mrs Parnell than to have a meeting with me, and I leave that in your hands. She told me: “If only someone had said sorry.”

Regarding the Council, this matter should have been resolved years ago by people like Sherwood, Majothi, Khan, Goddard, Webb, Derbyshire et al. They would rather abuse police resources than do the job they are highly paid to do and have a legal duty to carry out. I am trying to get them to act responsibly – I have tried for years – I shall carry on until I get somewhere with them. Also the part of the CPS in all this needs scrutiny. Vast amounts of police time was being criminally wasted by third rate local politicians, one of whom was named under Parliamentary Privilege as a cohort of a notorious gangster. It fair takes your breath away.

Again, thank you for your response. Clearing his name was one of my major objectives because his good reputation was important to him.

Kind regards

Sheila

———————————————————-

Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 1:41 PM

Subject: Re: I would like to take up your offer of a meeting to discuss Mr Parnell’s case

Sheila,

I have received notification of the freedom of information request. I fully understand your point regarding meeting for meeting sake however whilst this request is processed I would like to sit down and discuss the case and the conversations I had with Mr Parnell.

As you know I only dealt with this issue after July ’12 and the issues you highlight below were prior to this.

Mr Parnell is not a criminal and our records clearly show the details of his arrests and the public records show he was not convicted. I am more than happy to address the police elements of your email but there are other elements that should be directed to the Council.

I would be grateful if you would agree to meet this matter requires resolution.

Many thanks

Alan

Insp Alan Clitherow
J1 North INPT
X 69701
Mobile 07795 811575

Although I have a legal right to see them, the police are refusing to release relevant documents pertaining to Mr Parnell.

13 October 2013 17:27

Dear Inspector Clitheroe

Just one example of what was done to Mr Parnell. This gives clear dates. Perhaps you and I could discuss the reason Mr Parnell was arrested and the outcome. Perhaps you could let me have copies of the arrest documents/bail paperwork in advance of our meeting

“Tue 4th January 2011 this was the first day the Fred Perry House was opened to the public, i walked passed 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 2 oclock three police vehicals they took me to cheadle heath police station 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 1 oclock 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 didnt drive home as the cou… “

Kind regards

Sheila

These documents can be more clearly read here:- http://www.sheilaoliver.org/town-hall-protester.html

I told Jack Straw, then Secretary of State responsible, what the LibDems at Stockport were doing to Mr Parnell. I copied in the Council Solicitor, Barry Khan, the Chief Constable Fahy, Executive LibDem councillors Goddard, White, Weldon, Bodsworth, Candler, Derbyshire, John Schulz then Chief Executive, Majothi, the Council’s Don’t Bring Your Complaints to Me Officer, Nick Clegg, Stunell, Mr Parnell’s useless MP, Vince Cable, David Cameron and Gordon Brown. But, the LibDems were allowed to continue with their corrupt and destructive abuse of this innocent man until his untimely death at the age of 58, hounded to the last even whilst in Intensive Care (and they knew he was in Intensive Care).

09 December 2013 10.18

Dear Mrs Oliver,

I am writing in response to your request for information (ref FOI 8023).

The relevant Council Service(s) has searched for the requested information and our response is as follows.

Having contacted SSK I have been informed that they are not currently working at the Junction 25 recycling plant…

Yours sincerely,

Simon Oldfield

Freedom of Information/ Data Protection Officer & RIPA Coordinator

Stockport Council
Town Hall
Stockport
SK1 3XE
———————————————————————-

Subject: What are SKSolutions doing at the Junction 25 Recycling plant?

Dear FoI Officer

Apparently SK Solutions are at the Juncion 25 Recyling plant site. Why?

Kind regards

Sheila

Attn Mr Barry Khan

Legal Advisor to the Stockport Borough Council

Dear Mr Khan

As you are aware, my FOIA case is now before the First Tier Tribunal and it will continue though to the Upper Tier.

In the meantime, the Vale View school is operating in a legal void owing to lightning defects. You have made false statements to the ICO ref the facts on the Vale View school Ref the Lightning Protection System (LPS).

For the avoidance of doubt for all parties the Vale View school LPS is unsafe and unfit for purpose and it is NOT what it is purported to be by you and the Information Commissioner’s Office.

It beggars belief how you can argue my FOIA request is vexatious when you actually released the sought after data i.e., Lightning Protection Data.

You have simply failed to provide the LPS risk assessment and the LPS test results for the remedial LPS works. It beggars belief that a brand new school would require any LPS remedial works.

I call upon your office to come clean……

With thanks

Yours sincerely

Alan M Dransfield