Stockport Council News

https://blogging.sheilaoliver.org/category/lordavebury/

Dear Mr  Vali

I told every LibDem panjandrum what was going on, even Lord Avebury:

Lord Avebury couldn’t have cared less – http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1352

Even after Mr Parnell attempted suicide in police custody the ludicrous arrests continued – http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1683

Again, the corrupt Stockport LibDems sent him to police custody – http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1348

Goddard’s  Masonic ?? henchmen at the Magistrate’s court refuse him bail. Why? http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1347

They won’t even let him have the electronic tag removed on Christmas Day – http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1345

Mr Parnell foretold that the Stockport LibDems would hound him to death – http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1344

Just some of the council meetings Mr Parnell attended to beg for his legal entitlement to help for his adopted daughters – http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1343

Another way of hounding him was to fabricate council tax arrears – http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1342

Simple request to vile Stunell – http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1340

Vulnerable council taxpayers hounded whilst terminally ill in Intensive Care over £24 he didn’t even owe – http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1341

More to follow

Sheila

Dear Mr Vali

Re your letter to me attached, I list below just some instances when I have raised the treatment of Mr Parnell at the hands of SMBC in an attempt to stop him being bullied to death.  There is masses of it and every LibDem Exec councillor knew.  Mr Parnell attended all these council meeting to beg for help as you well know.  I know you were kind to him at least once yourself.  http://www.sheilaoliver.org/begging-stockport-council-for-help.html and I can prove he attended these meetings.

I am constantly raising the issue with the council and constantly hitting a brick wall.

Taking him back to court shortly before his death –  http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1451

His useless MP Stunell won’t help but throws a hissy fit when I try to – http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1445

Firm whose staff had repeatedly beaten up Mr Parnell asked  by SMBC to do repair work on his house – http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1443

Due to the corrupt actions of the Stockport LibDems he couldn’t even travel to London – http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1441

Years down the line useless Stunell finally sorts out Mr Parnell’s daughter’s mistakes on her birth documents – http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1427

Pathetic Stunell gets a reply of sorts for Mr Parnell in 2007.  Nothing sorted out by the time of his death though years later – http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1426

Mr Parnell gets a writ of habeas corpus to try to get the corrupt Stockport LibDems from arresting and imprisoning him – http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1425

Just stay away from council buildings says the vile Stunell. When council tax arrears are being fabricated and he has to enter the town hall to try to sort them out. Corrupt LibDems won’t let me act on his behalf to stop him being arrested – http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1424

RE: FOI 9036 :RE: Did anyone at all at the Council question the cost to the public purse of what was being done to Mr Parnell RIP?

Response

FOI Officer <foi.officer@stockport.gov.uk>	08/07/2014
to me

Dear Mrs Oliver,

I am writing in response to your request for information (ref FOI 9036).

The information has been prepared by the relevant Council service and is as follows.

Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council does not hold the data you have requested.

If you are unhappy with the way we have handled your request for information, you are entitled to ask for an internal review; however you must do so within 40 working days of the date of this response. 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

www.ico.gov.uk

01625 545 745

Yours sincerely,

Phillipa

Phillipa Nazari

CSS Manager-Information Governance/

Deputy SIRO

Stockport Council

Town Hall

Stockport

SK1 3XE

Tel: 0161 474 4299

Fax: 0161 474 4006

http://www.stockport.gov.uk

From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 08 June 2014 08:30
To: FOI Officer
Subject: Did anyone at all at the Council question the cost to the public purse of what was being done to Mr Parnell RIP?

Dear FoI Officer

I constantly raised the issue of what was being done to Mr Parnell, amongst other things the cost to the public purse.  Did anyone else at the Council do this?

I enclose a link detailing just some of the abuses carried out on him:-

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/custodies,-arrests,-imprisonment.html

And these are some of the many times Mr Parnell RIP attended council meetings to beg for help, which I am in a position to prove.  For any meetings he did not attend he was either in a police cell or in prison:-

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/begging-stockport-council-for-help.html

So, did anyone – Goddard, Derbyshire, Weldon, Hogg, Roberts, Pantall, Bodsworth, John Smith, Meikle, Majoth, Boylan, Khan, Candler, Lucas, Mayors or any other official or ruling councillor raise the issue of what this was costing in Legal Aid, Magistrates’ Court time, Crown Prosecution Service time, Police time, Probation Service time, Crown Court time?

Obviously you can answer this question because in no way does it compromise Mr Parnell’s memory or his family to disclose such details.

If none of them did, then I would question their suitability to hold public office.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards

Sheila

FOI Officer <foi.officer@stockport.gov.uk>	01/07/2014
to me

Dear Ms Oliver

Thank you for your request for information submitted under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 which has been given the above mentioned reference number. Please quote this on any correspondence regarding your request.

Stockport Council will respond to your request within 20 working days from the date of receipt. If there will be a charge for disbursements e.g. photocopying in order to provide the information, we will inform you as soon as possible to see if you wish to proceed; however such charges are usually waived if they amount to less than £10.

Yours sincerely,

Information Governance

Lower Ground Floor

Stopford House

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.

From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 25 June 2014 07:04
To: FOI Officer
Cc: Sir Andrew Stunell MP
Subject: Stunell/Mr Parnell

Dear FoI Officer

Stunell, Mr Parnell’s MP, admits to him in a letter that he has viewed the videos of Mr Parnell’s shocking treatment at the hands of SMBC.

He was also made aware of every single arrest of Mr Parnell RIP, whom the Police have admitted was completely innocent.

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/custodies,-arrests,-imprisonment.html

My question is may I see all representations made by Mr Stunell on Mr Parnell’s behalf regarding what he saw in those videos?  I hope he was shocked; any normal person would have been.  I hope you don’t claim this would be a waste of money – the potential lawsuits here could run into tens of millions of pounds.  Mr Stunell himself may be financially liable – who knows!

Kind regards

Sheila

FOI Officer <foi.officer@stockport.gov.uk>	26/06/2014
to me

Dear Mrs Oliver,

Thank you for your request for information submitted under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 which has been given the above mentioned reference number. Please quote this on any correspondence regarding your request.

Stockport Council will respond to your request within 20 working days from the date of receipt. If there will be a charge for disbursements e.g. photocopying in order to provide the information, we will inform you as soon as possible to see if you wish to proceed; however such charges are usually waived if they amount to less than £10.

Yours sincerely,

Business Support Officer (Information Governance)
Stockport Council
Town Hall
Stockport
SK1 3XE

Tel: 0161 474 4299

http://www.stockport.gov.uk

Need further information? See our Information Management FAQs

From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 23 June 2014 13:31
To: Chief Constable
Cc: Cllr Dave Goddard; Leader; Eamonn Boylan; Parveen Akhtar
Subject: FoI request

FOI request

What action was taken by the Police regarding Mr Parnell’s complaint of violence and threats carried out against him by Stockport Council security guards?  There is no data protection for the dead.  I believe the police were shown video links of abuse and threats; I certainly saw some of those videos in Mr Parnell’s Crown Court Acquittal hearing and shocking they were too. The reference number is: – FWIN 1037 27/4/2012.

Kind regards

Sheila

FOI Officer <foi.officer@stockport.gov.uk>	24/02/2014
to me

Dear Mrs Oliver,

I am writing in response to your request for information (ref FOI 8379).

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

The information you have requested is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act by virtue of Section 40 (Personal Data) and Section 41 (Confidential Information).

Section 40 relates to personal information, where the disclosure of this information may result in a breach of any of the Data Protection principles. As the records you have requested relate to a deceased individual, their information does not meet the criteria which defines ‘personal information’.

However, the information you have requested may also identify any number of other individuals and this information is exempt from disclosure under Section 40 of the FOI.

Section 41 relates to information which is confidential in nature and/or which was provided in confidence. The information you have requested relates to sensitive information of another. The Council holds a responsibility to the subject of this data to keep it confidential and protected from inappropriate disclosure. This duty of confidentiality survives death and the release of this information into the public domain under the FOIA would breach this.

Therefore the information you have requested cannot be provided under this legislation.

If you are unhappy with the way we have handled your request for information, you are entitled to ask for an internal review; however you must do so within 40 working days of the date of this response. 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

www.ico.gov.uk

01625 545 745

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

Need further information? See our Information Management FAQs
 

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.

From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 24 January 2014 18:56
To: FOI Officer
Subject: Bispham, Burns, Lees, Corris, Porgess, Grice

Dear FoI Officer

I am detailing, and proof exists, how many times Mr Parnell attended Stockport Council meetings to beg for his legal right to counselling help for his troubled daughters adopted from Stockport Council.  Mr Parnell, the Police have admitted in writing, was completely innocent.  The councillor mentioned below must have witness him many times being dragged away and arrested for such crimes as trying to leave a council meeting early

Burns and Lees were Mayors during this time.  Did either they or Bispham, Lees, Corris, Porgess or Grice ever at any time officially raise the matter of Mr Parnell’s problem with a view to finding out what was going on or to help him?  If they did there should be email or written evidence.

http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&category=2

Many thanks

Sheila

FOI Officer <foi.officer@stockport.gov.uk>	18/12/2013
to me

Dear Mrs Oliver,

I am writing in response to your request for an internal review of FOI 7887.

I have conducted an impartial reassessment of your original request and my findings are as follows.

I can confirm that the original response issued by on 20th November is correct and I uphold the exemptions applied.

It would not be appropriate to disclose information relating to individuals, deceased or otherwise, into the public domain under the Freedom of Information Act.

Although the Data Protection Act defines personal data as relating to a ‘living individual’, this does not mean that once a person becomes deceased information that was previously ‘personal data’ will now become routinely publically accessible.

The Council holds a duty, to both the deceased individual and their families, to protect information relating to individuals from inappropriate disclosure.

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

www.ico.gov.uk

01625 545 745

Yours sincerely,

Barry Khan

Council Solicitor

Service Director (Legal, Democratic, Property and Information Services)

Corporate & Support Services

Stockport Council

http://www.stockport.gov.uk

Need further information? See our Information Management FAQs
 

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.

From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 20 November 2013 16:34
To: FOI Officer
Subject: Re: FOI 7887: Meeting between Mr Parnell and Goddard held 23rd March 2011 – Response

Dear FoI Officer

Just tell  me any outcome of that meeting.  You can redact all you like – just tell me what action if any they decided to take.

This matter is not going away and I shall put your reply up on the Internet.

Kind regards

Sheila

—– Original Message —–

From: FOI Officer

To: ‘Sheila Oliver’

Cc: FOI Officer

Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 9:13 AM

Subject: FOI 7887: Meeting between Mr Parnell and Goddard held 23rd March 2011 – Response

Dear Mrs Oliver,

I am writing in response to your request for information (ref FOI 7887).

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

The information you have requested is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act by virtue of Section 40 (Personal Data) and Section 41 (Confidential Information).

Section 40 relates to personal information, where the disclosure of this information may result in a breach of any of the Data Protection principles. As the records you have requested relate to a deceased individual, their information does not meet the criteria which defines ‘personal information’.

However, the information you have requested may also identify any number of other individuals and this information is exempt from disclosure under Section 40 of the FOI.

Section 41 relates to information which is confidential in nature and/or which was provided in confidence. The information you have requested relates to sensitive information of another. The Council holds a responsibility to the subject of this data to keep it confidential and protected from inappropriate disclosure. This duty of confidentiality survives death and the release of this information into the public domain under the FOIA would breach this.

Therefore the information you have requested cannot be provided under this legislation.

The Information Commissioner’s Office has produced some guidance on this subject which may be of assistance to you. This can be found at the following link.

http://www.ico.org.uk/upload/documents/library/freedom_of_information/detailed_specialist_guides/informationaboutthedeceased.pdf

If you are unhappy with the way we have handled your request for information, you are entitled to ask for an internal review; however you must do so within 40 working days of the date of this response. 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

www.ico.gov.uk

01625 545 745

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

Need further information? See our Information Management FAQs
 

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.

From: Simon Oldfield On Behalf Of FOI Officer
Sent: 25 October 2013 09:26
To: ‘sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com‘
Cc: FOI Officer
Subject: FOI 7887: Meeting between Mr Parnell and Goddard held 23rd March 2011 – Acknowledgement

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your request for information submitted under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 which has been given the above mentioned reference number. Please quote this on any correspondence regarding your request.

Stockport Council will respond to your request within 20 working days from the date of receipt. If there will be a charge for disbursements e.g. photocopying in order to provide the information, we will inform you as soon as possible to see if you wish to proceed; however such charges are usually waived if they amount to less than £10.

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

Need further information? See our Information Management FAQs
 

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.

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

Get Involved and register to vote. Complete your registration form now or visit www.stockport.gov.uk/registertovote to find out more.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG – www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4158 / Virus Database: 3629/6849 – Release Date: 11/19/13

Reply

Forward

Sheila Oliver <sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com>	18/12/2013
to Bailey.Harding, Andrew, FOI

Dear FoI Officer

Wow, a reply from Barry Khan, no less!  The man (bent official – offenced under Fraud Act 2006)  who bears the main responsibility for having an innocent man repeatedly imprisoned decides that he will keep quiet details of his appalling behaviour.  Well, well, well – one for Twitter I think.

Kind regards

Sheila

—– Original Message —–

From: FOI Officer

To: ‘Sheila Oliver’

Cc: FOI Officer

Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 12:03 PM

Subject: FOI 7887: Meeting between Mr Parnell and Goddard held 23rd March 2011 – Internal Review Response

Dear Mrs Oliver,

I am writing in response to your request for an internal review of FOI 7887.

I have conducted an impartial reassessment of your original request and my findings are as follows.

I can confirm that the original response issued by on 20th November is correct and I uphold the exemptions applied.

It would not be appropriate to disclose information relating to individuals, deceased or otherwise, into the public domain under the Freedom of Information Act.

Although the Data Protection Act defines personal data as relating to a ‘living individual’, this does not mean that once a person becomes deceased information that was previously ‘personal data’ will now become routinely publically accessible.

The Council holds a duty, to both the deceased individual and their families, to protect information relating to individuals from inappropriate disclosure.

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

www.ico.gov.uk

01625 545 745

Yours sincerely,

Barry Khan

Council Solicitor

Service Director (Legal, Democratic, Property and Information Services)

Corporate & Support Services

Stockport Council

http://www.stockport.gov.uk

Need further information? See our Information Management FAQs
 

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.

From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 20 November 2013 16:34
To: FOI Officer
Subject: Re: FOI 7887: Meeting between Mr Parnell and Goddard held 23rd March 2011 – Response

Dear FoI Officer

Just tell  me any outcome of that meeting.  You can redact all you like – just tell me what action if any they decided to take.

This matter is not going away and I shall put your reply up on the Internet.

Kind regards

Sheila

—– Original Message —–

From: FOI Officer

To: ‘Sheila Oliver’

Cc: FOI Officer

Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 9:13 AM

Subject: FOI 7887: Meeting between Mr Parnell and Goddard held 23rd March 2011 – Response

Dear Mrs Oliver,

I am writing in response to your request for information (ref FOI 7887).

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

The information you have requested is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act by virtue of Section 40 (Personal Data) and Section 41 (Confidential Information).

Section 40 relates to personal information, where the disclosure of this information may result in a breach of any of the Data Protection principles. As the records you have requested relate to a deceased individual, their information does not meet the criteria which defines ‘personal information’.

However, the information you have requested may also identify any number of other individuals and this information is exempt from disclosure under Section 40 of the FOI.

Section 41 relates to information which is confidential in nature and/or which was provided in confidence. The information you have requested relates to sensitive information of another. The Council holds a responsibility to the subject of this data to keep it confidential and protected from inappropriate disclosure. This duty of confidentiality survives death and the release of this information into the public domain under the FOIA would breach this.

Therefore the information you have requested cannot be provided under this legislation.

The Information Commissioner’s Office has produced some guidance on this subject which may be of assistance to you. This can be found at the following link.

http://www.ico.org.uk/upload/documents/library/freedom_of_information/detailed_specialist_guides/informationaboutthedeceased.pdf

If you are unhappy with the way we have handled your request for information, you are entitled to ask for an internal review; however you must do so within 40 working days of the date of this response. 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

www.ico.gov.uk

01625 545 745

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

Need further information? See our Information Management FAQs
 

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.

From: Simon Oldfield On Behalf Of FOI Officer
Sent: 25 October 2013 09:26
To: ‘sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com‘
Cc: FOI Officer
Subject: FOI 7887: Meeting between Mr Parnell and Goddard held 23rd March 2011 – Acknowledgement

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your request for information submitted under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 which has been given the above mentioned reference number. Please quote this on any correspondence regarding your request.

Stockport Council will respond to your request within 20 working days from the date of receipt. If there will be a charge for disbursements e.g. photocopying in order to provide the information, we will inform you as soon as possible to see if you wish to proceed; however such charges are usually waived if they amount to less than £10.

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

Need further information? See our Information Management FAQs
 

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.

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

Get Involved and register to vote. Complete your registration form now or visit www.stockport.gov.uk/registertovote to find out more.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG – www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4158 / Virus Database: 3629/6849 – Release Date: 11/19/13

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG – www.avg.com

Version: 2014.0.4259 / Virus Database: 3658/6931 – Release Date: 12/18/13

—
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “Poynton Against Unnecessary Link roads to the Airport” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to paula555+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply

Reply to all

Forward

---

From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 18 December 2013 17:06
To: FOI Officer
Cc: Bailey.Harding; Andrew Gwynne
Subject: Re: FOI 7887: Meeting between Mr Parnell and Goddard held 23rd March 2011 – Internal Review Response

Dear FoI Officer

Wow, a reply from Barry Khan, no less!  The man (bent official – offenced under Fraud Act 2006)  who bears the main responsibility for having an innocent man repeatedly imprisoned decides that he will keep quiet details of his appalling behaviour.  Well, well, well – one for Twitter I think.

Kind regards

Sheila

—– Original Message —–

From: FOI Officer

To: ‘Sheila Oliver’

Cc: FOI Officer

Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 12:03 PM

Subject: FOI 7887: Meeting between Mr Parnell and Goddard held 23rd March 2011 – Internal Review Response

Dear Mrs Oliver,

I am writing in response to your request for an internal review of FOI 7887.

I have conducted an impartial reassessment of your original request and my findings are as follows.

I can confirm that the original response issued by on 20th November is correct and I uphold the exemptions applied.

It would not be appropriate to disclose information relating to individuals, deceased or otherwise, into the public domain under the Freedom of Information Act.

Although the Data Protection Act defines personal data as relating to a ‘living individual’, this does not mean that once a person becomes deceased information that was previously ‘personal data’ will now become routinely publically accessible.

The Council holds a duty, to both the deceased individual and their families, to protect information relating to individuals from inappropriate disclosure.

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

www.ico.gov.uk

01625 545 745

Yours sincerely,

Barry Khan

Council Solicitor

Service Director (Legal, Democratic, Property and Information Services)

Corporate & Support Services

Stockport Council

http://www.stockport.gov.uk

Need further information? See our Information Management FAQs
 

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.

From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 20 November 2013 16:34
To: FOI Officer
Subject: Re: FOI 7887: Meeting between Mr Parnell and Goddard held 23rd March 2011 – Response

Dear FoI Officer

Just tell  me any outcome of that meeting.  You can redact all you like – just tell me what action if any they decided to take.

This matter is not going away and I shall put your reply up on the Internet.

Kind regards

Sheila

—– Original Message —–

From: FOI Officer

To: ‘Sheila Oliver’

Cc: FOI Officer

Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 9:13 AM

Subject: FOI 7887: Meeting between Mr Parnell and Goddard held 23rd March 2011 – Response

Dear Mrs Oliver,

I am writing in response to your request for information (ref FOI 7887).

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

The information you have requested is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act by virtue of Section 40 (Personal Data) and Section 41 (Confidential Information).

Section 40 relates to personal information, where the disclosure of this information may result in a breach of any of the Data Protection principles. As the records you have requested relate to a deceased individual, their information does not meet the criteria which defines ‘personal information’.

However, the information you have requested may also identify any number of other individuals and this information is exempt from disclosure under Section 40 of the FOI.

Section 41 relates to information which is confidential in nature and/or which was provided in confidence. The information you have requested relates to sensitive information of another. The Council holds a responsibility to the subject of this data to keep it confidential and protected from inappropriate disclosure. This duty of confidentiality survives death and the release of this information into the public domain under the FOIA would breach this.

Therefore the information you have requested cannot be provided under this legislation.

The Information Commissioner’s Office has produced some guidance on this subject which may be of assistance to you. This can be found at the following link.

http://www.ico.org.uk/upload/documents/library/freedom_of_information/detailed_specialist_guides/informationaboutthedeceased.pdf

If you are unhappy with the way we have handled your request for information, you are entitled to ask for an internal review; however you must do so within 40 working days of the date of this response. 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

www.ico.gov.uk

01625 545 745

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

Need further information? See our Information Management FAQs
 

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.

From: Simon Oldfield On Behalf Of FOI Officer
Sent: 25 October 2013 09:26
To: ‘sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com‘
Cc: FOI Officer
Subject: FOI 7887: Meeting between Mr Parnell and Goddard held 23rd March 2011 – Acknowledgement

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your request for information submitted under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 which has been given the above mentioned reference number. Please quote this on any correspondence regarding your request.

Stockport Council will respond to your request within 20 working days from the date of receipt. If there will be a charge for disbursements e.g. photocopying in order to provide the information, we will inform you as soon as possible to see if you wish to proceed; however such charges are usually waived if they amount to less than £10.

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

Need further information? See our Information Management FAQs
 

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.

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

Get Involved and register to vote. Complete your registration form now or visit www.stockport.gov.uk/registertovote to find out more.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG – www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4158 / Virus Database: 3629/6849 – Release Date: 11/19/13

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG – www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4259 / Virus Database: 3658/6931 – Release Date: 12/18/13

FOI Officer <foi.officer@stockport.gov.uk>	16/10/2013
to me

Dear Mrs Oliver,

I am writing in response to your request for information (ref FOI 7835).

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

The information you have requested is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act by virtue of Section 40 (Personal Data) and Section 41 (Confidential Information).

Section 40 relates to personal information, where the disclosure of this information may result in a breach of any of the Data Protection principles. As the records you have requested relate to a deceased individual, their information does not meet the criteria which defines ‘personal information’.

However, the information you have requested will also identify any number of other individuals and this information is exempt from disclosure under Section 40 of the FOI.

Section 41 relates to information which is confidential in nature and/or which was provided in confidence. The information you have requested relates to sensitive information of another. The Council holds a responsibility to the subject of this data to keep it confidential and protected from inappropriate disclosure. This duty of confidentiality survives death and the release of this information under the FOIA would breach this.

Therefore the information you have requested cannot be provided under this legislation.

The Information Commissioner’s Office has produced some guidance on this subject which may be of assistance to you. This can be found at the following link.

http://www.ico.org.uk/upload/documents/library/freedom_of_information/detailed_specialist_guides/informationaboutthedeceased.pdf

If you are unhappy with the way we have handled your request for information, you are entitled to ask for an internal review; however you must do so within 40 working days of the date of this response. 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

www.ico.gov.uk

01625 545 745

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

Need further information? See our Information Management FAQs
 

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.

From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 23 September 2013 09:08
To: FOI Officer
Cc: Cllr Sheila Bailey(EXT)
Subject: Mr Parnell

Dear FoI Officer

Please may I have details of what steps were taken to help Mr Parnell  to sort out his simple problems in the last year of his life.  The Council knew he was seriously ill by then.  Documentary evidence is requested and, as you will know, there is no data protection for the dead.

Kind regards

Sheila

mickysara@btinternet.com	26/03/2013
to Iain, Alan.Clitherow, anwar.majothi, me

Councillor Roberts

I tried yesterday 25th March 2013 at fred perry house but the police would not receive the reporting of crime about the employee of the council as they would also not do in the past, there is a Rule of Law that no one is above the law, but justice needs to be seen that it is being done or public confidence would be lost,
My trust is being eroded where should I turn for any help or should I just give up our rights and not live the life we all deserve.
Hate crime can be reported by anyone not just the victims so can you help now that I made you aware and the need to report hate crimes in the community.
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

—–Original Message—–
From: Iain Roberts <iainroberts70@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 15:28:40
To: <mickysara@btinternet.com><mickysara@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Contact via your ALDC site

Dear Mr Parnell

If you believe you are the victim of a crime, you should report it to
the police.

Best wishes,

Iain

Cllr Iain Roberts
Lib Dem councillor, Cheadle & Gatley ward
Executive member for Economic Development & Regeneration, Stockport Council

On 26 Mar 2013, at 15:21, “mickysara@btinternet.com“

<mickysara@btinternet.com> wrote:

> 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

Reply

Reply to all

Forward

mickysara@btinternet.com	26/03/2013
to Iain, Alan.Clitherow, anwar.majothi, me

Councillor Roberts

For your information as you suggest I can only do what is requested by procedure but what obstacles from SMBC employees are causing the injustice from failures to receive or record reports.
Tweet ting by yourself on issues of reporting hate related crimes in the real world does not follow the virtual world of the internet but it is a good tool for communication as enclosed you will see attempts to your suggestions don’t always work by ordinary people of no standing, a democratic society appoints those to act on behalf of the electorate to their needs and rights
Is there anything you could do.

Thank you michael parnell

Copied and pasted IPCC communication of complaint investigation being dispensed with as below:-
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.
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

From: Iain Roberts <iainroberts70@gmail.com>

Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 16:09:59 +0000

To: <mickysara@btinternet.com><mickysara@btinternet.com>

Subject: Re: Contact via your ALDC site

Dear Mr Parnell,

If you believe a crime has been committed and the police will not take your report, you should raise the issue with the complaints body within the police.  Greater Manchester’s Police and Crime Commissioner may be able to help if other avenues do not work.

Best wishes,

Iain

On 26 March 2013 15:59, <mickysara@btinternet.com> wrote:

Councillor Roberts

I tried yesterday 25th March 2013 at fred perry house but the police would not receive the reporting of crime about the employee of the council as they would also not do in the past, there is a Rule of Law that no one is above the law, but justice needs to be seen that it is being done or public confidence would be lost,
My trust is being eroded where should I turn for any help or should I just give up our rights and not live the life we all deserve.
Hate crime can be reported by anyone not just the victims so can you help now that I made you aware and the need to report hate crimes in the community.

Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

—–Original Message—–
From: Iain Roberts <iainroberts70@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 15:28:40
To: <mickysara@btinternet.com><mickysara@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Contact via your ALDC site

Dear Mr Parnell

If you believe you are the victim of a crime, you should report it to
the police.

Best wishes,

Iain

Cllr Iain Roberts
Lib Dem councillor, Cheadle & Gatley ward
Executive member for Economic Development & Regeneration, Stockport Council

On 26 Mar 2013, at 15:21, “mickysara@btinternet.com“
<mickysara@btinternet.com> wrote:

> 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

—
Iain Roberts
Liberal Democrat Councillor for Cheadle & Gatley ward
Executive Member for Economic Development and Regeneration, Stockport Council
07958 570202  http://iainroberts.mycouncillor.org.uk  @cllriainroberts

Reply

Reply to all

Forward

Alan.Clitherow@gmp.police.uk	31/03/2013
to me, Iain

Sheila,

The external police line at Fred Perry house is 0161 8569502.  This is staffed by support staff between 7am and 6pm Monday to Friday. I’m sure you can appreciate that the nature of our job means we have to be out of the station a lot and the public want us to be out patrolling. There is a voicemail facility on this line which we will always pick up and reply to within 24 hrs.

I am more than happy to discuss specific issues to do with the police however would ask that you refrain from copying me in to emails of the nature of the below. Mr Parnell’s complaint is a matter for Mr Parnell and I, and although I’m happy to deal with concerns raised in a constructive manner I do not expect to receive emails containing spurious allegations and threats.

Thank you

Insp Alan Clitherow
J1 – Stockport Central NPT
X 69701
Mobile 07795 811575

    Follow us on Twitter @gmpstockcentral

From:	“Sheila Oliver” <sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com>
To:	<mickysara@btinternet.com>
Cc:	<Alan.Clitherow@gmp.police.uk>,< anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk>
Date:	26/03/2013 19:30
Subject:	Re: Contact via your ALDC site

Dear Councillor Roberts
 
I have Mr Parnell’s written authority, submitted to the Council, to act on his behalf.
 
Having sat through his 3 day £10,000 per day acquittal at the Crown Court, I know that if he enters Fred Perry House he will face 5 years in prison as punishment for a crime of which he was acquitted!  The Police, now established at Fred Perry House, are well known for not don’t answering the phone. Therefore, I ask you to act to sort out the deplorable situation this completely innocent man finds himself in. All the Executive Councillors were full aware of what was being done to him and sneeringly condoned it, as were Majothi, Khan et al.
 
I will share this email exchange  via my blog with Twitter and Facebook.  I have today posted up Mr Parnell’s case on Michael Crick’s Twitter page, as he is asking why the LibDems failed to act regarding Mike Hancock MP.  I shall tweet it to Nigel Farage and Rupert Murdoch.  Neither of these two is particularly enamoured of the LibDems.  You, Councillor Roberts, might find yourself featured in The Sun, and not in a good way.
 
Of interest, I note from Councillor Goddard’s Twitter account what a close relationship he has with the Police, and I have always maintained the only explanation of what happened to Mr Parnell is one of  a Masonic Revenge club.
 
So, I ask you to look into Mr Parnell’s disgusting treatment at the hands of LibDem-for-a-decade Stockport Council of which you are an Executive Councillor,  and will post up any reply on Twitter.
 
Yours
 
Sheila

—– Original Message —–
From: mickysara@btinternet.com
To: Iain Roberts
Cc: Alan.Clitherow@gmp.police.uk ; anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk ; sheila oliver
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 5:35 PM
Subject: Re: Contact via your ALDC site

Councillor Roberts

For your information as you suggest I can only do what is requested by procedure but what obstacles from SMBC employees are causing the injustice from failures to receive or record reports.
Tweet ting by yourself on issues of reporting hate related crimes in the real world does not follow the virtual world of the internet but it is a good tool for communication as enclosed you will see attempts to your suggestions don’t always work by ordinary people of no standing, a democratic society appoints those to act on behalf of the electorate to their needs and rights
Is there anything you could do.

Thank you michael parnell

Copied and pasted IPCC communication of complaint investigation being dispensed with as below:-
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.
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

From: Iain Roberts <iainroberts70@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 16:09:59 +0000
To: <mickysara@btinternet.com><mickysara@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Contact via your ALDC site

Dear Mr Parnell,

If you believe a crime has been committed and the police will not take your report, you should raise the issue with the complaints body within the police.  Greater Manchester’s Police and Crime Commissioner may be able to help if other avenues do not work.

Best wishes,

Iain


On 26 March 2013 15:59, <mickysara@btinternet.com>wrote:
Councillor Roberts

I tried yesterday 25th March 2013 at fred perry house but the police would not receive the reporting of crime about the employee of the council as they would also not do in the past, there is a Rule of Law that no one is above the law, but justice needs to be seen that it is being done or public confidence would be lost,
My trust is being eroded where should I turn for any help or should I just give up our rights and not live the life we all deserve.
Hate crime can be reported by anyone not just the victims so can you help now that I made you aware and the need to report hate crimes in the community.
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

—–Original Message—–
From: Iain Roberts <iainroberts70@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 15:28:40
To: <mickysara@btinternet.com><mickysara@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Contact via your ALDC site

Dear Mr Parnell

If you believe you are the victim of a crime, you should report it to
the police.

Best wishes,

Iain

Cllr Iain Roberts
Lib Dem councillor, Cheadle & Gatley ward
Executive member for Economic Development & Regeneration, Stockport Council

On 26 Mar 2013, at 15:21, “mickysara@btinternet.com“
<mickysara@btinternet.com>wrote:

> 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



—
Iain Roberts
Liberal Democrat Councillor for Cheadle & Gatley ward
Executive Member for Economic Development and Regeneration, Stockport Council
07958 570202  http://iainroberts.mycouncillor.org.uk  @cllriainroberts

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG – www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 2641/6205 – Release Date: 03/26/13

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

Reply

Reply to all

Forward

Alan.Clitherow@gmp.police.uk	09/09/2013
to me

Sheila,

I spoke to Mr Parnell shortly before he was due to go into hospital. He hoped to be well enough to see me in 3/6 months after the operation and I am waiting for some sort of update as to his health.

As I said to him when we spoke his health and recovery are far more important than his complaint – which spans numerous years – and I am more than happy to give him an update when convenient.
I have not contacted him or emailed him as he gave me the distinct impression there was a real risk of him not surviving the surgery and I wanted to wait to see that he did and still wanted updates regarding this.

I did ask for some confirmation from Mr Parnell as to how he would like his complaint finalising and have information for him should he wish. Please pass on my best wishes, I am happy to discuss this with him further.

Thanks for your email

Alan Clitherow

Insp Alan Clitherow
J1 North  INPT
X 69701
Mobile 07795 811575

    Follow us on Twitter @gmpstocknorth

From:	“Sheila Oliver” <sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com>
To:	<Alan.Clitherow@gmp.police.uk>
Date:	08/09/2013 15:42
Subject:	Re: Contact via your ALDC site

Inspector Clitherow
 
Mr Parnell is paralysed with a spinal tumour and dying and you have still done nothing.  His family is very bitter about what has been done to him by the presumably Masonically linked Council, Police, CPS and Magistrates’ Court.  What has gone on will be broadcast as widely as I am able.
 
Yours in disgust
 
Sheila
 
PC Panda would do a better job than you.
—– Original Message —–
From: Alan.Clitherow@gmp.police.uk
To: Sheila Oliver
Cc: Iain Roberts
Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2013 9:43 AM
Subject: Re: Contact via your ALDC site

Sheila,

The external police line at Fred Perry house is 0161 8569502.  This is staffed by support staff between 7am and 6pm Monday to Friday. I’m sure you can appreciate that the nature of our job means we have to be out of the station a lot and the public want us to be out patrolling. There is a voicemail facility on this line which we will always pick up and reply to within 24 hrs.

I am more than happy to discuss specific issues to do with the police however would ask that you refrain from copying me in to emails of the nature of the below. Mr Parnell’s complaint is a matter for Mr Parnell and I, and although I’m happy to deal with concerns raised in a constructive manner I do not expect to receive emails containing spurious allegations and threats.

Thank you

Insp Alan Clitherow
J1 – Stockport Central NPT
X 69701
Mobile 07795 811575

   Follow us on Twitter @gmpstockcentral

From:	“Sheila Oliver”< sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com>
To:	<mickysara@btinternet.com>
Cc:	<Alan.Clitherow@gmp.police.uk>,< anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk>
Date:	26/03/2013 19:30
Subject:	Re: Contact via your ALDC site

Dear Councillor Roberts
 
I have Mr Parnell’s written authority, submitted to the Council, to act on his behalf.
 
Having sat through his 3 day £10,000 per day acquittal at the Crown Court, I know that if he enters Fred Perry House he will face 5 years in prison as punishment for a crime of which he was acquitted!  The Police, now established at Fred Perry House, are well known for not don’t answering the phone. Therefore, I ask you to act to sort out the deplorable situation this completely innocent man finds himself in. All the Executive Councillors were full aware of what was being done to him and sneeringly condoned it, as were Majothi, Khan et al.
 
I will share this email exchange  via my blog with Twitter and Facebook.  I have today posted up Mr Parnell’s case on Michael Crick’s Twitter page, as he is asking why the LibDems failed to act regarding Mike Hancock MP.  I shall tweet it to Nigel Farage and Rupert Murdoch.  Neither of these two is particularly enamoured of the LibDems.  You, Councillor Roberts, might find yourself featured in The Sun, and not in a good way.
 
Of interest, I note from Councillor Goddard’s Twitter account what a close relationship he has with the Police, and I have always maintained the only explanation of what happened to Mr Parnell is one of  a Masonic Revenge club.
 
So, I ask you to look into Mr Parnell’s disgusting treatment at the hands of LibDem-for-a-decade Stockport Council of which you are an Executive Councillor,  and will post up any reply on Twitter.
 
Yours
 
Sheila
—– Original Message —–
From: mickysara@btinternet.com
To: Iain Roberts
Cc: Alan.Clitherow@gmp.police.uk ; anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk ; sheila oliver
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 5:35 PM
Subject: Re: Contact via your ALDC site

Councillor Roberts

For your information as you suggest I can only do what is requested by procedure but what obstacles from SMBC employees are causing the injustice from failures to receive or record reports.
Tweet ting by yourself on issues of reporting hate related crimes in the real world does not follow the virtual world of the internet but it is a good tool for communication as enclosed you will see attempts to your suggestions don’t always work by ordinary people of no standing, a democratic society appoints those to act on behalf of the electorate to their needs and rights
Is there anything you could do.

Thank you michael parnell

Copied and pasted IPCC communication of complaint investigation being dispensed with as below:-
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.
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

From: Iain Roberts <iainroberts70@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 16:09:59 +0000
To: <mickysara@btinternet.com><mickysara@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Contact via your ALDC site

Dear Mr Parnell,

If you believe a crime has been committed and the police will not take your report, you should raise the issue with the complaints body within the police.  Greater Manchester’s Police and Crime Commissioner may be able to help if other avenues do not work.

Best wishes,

Iain


On 26 March 2013 15:59, <mickysara@btinternet.com>wrote:
Councillor Roberts

I tried yesterday 25th March 2013 at fred perry house but the police would not receive the reporting of crime about the employee of the council as they would also not do in the past, there is a Rule of Law that no one is above the law, but justice needs to be seen that it is being done or public confidence would be lost,
My trust is being eroded where should I turn for any help or should I just give up our rights and not live the life we all deserve.
Hate crime can be reported by anyone not just the victims so can you help now that I made you aware and the need to report hate crimes in the community.
Sent using BlackBerry® from Orange

—–Original Message—–
From: Iain Roberts <iainroberts70@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 15:28:40
To: <mickysara@btinternet.com><mickysara@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Contact via your ALDC site

Dear Mr Parnell

If you believe you are the victim of a crime, you should report it to
the police.

Best wishes,

Iain

Cllr Iain Roberts
Lib Dem councillor, Cheadle & Gatley ward
Executive member for Economic Development & Regeneration, Stockport Council

On 26 Mar 2013, at 15:21, “mickysara@btinternet.com“
< mickysara@btinternet.com>wrote:

> 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



—
Iain Roberts
Liberal Democrat Councillor for Cheadle & Gatley ward
Executive Member for Economic Development and Regeneration, Stockport Council
07958 570202  http://iainroberts.mycouncillor.org.uk  @cllriainroberts

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG – www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 2641/6205 – Release Date: 03/26/13

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: 2641/6214 – Release Date: 03/30/13

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

Reply

Forward

Reply

Forward

---

FOI Officer <foi.officer@stockport.gov.uk>	22/11/2013
to me

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for your request for information submitted under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 which has been given the above mentioned reference number. Please quote this on any correspondence regarding your request.

Stockport Council will respond to your request within 20 working days from the date of receipt. If there will be a charge for disbursements e.g. photocopying in order to provide the information, we will inform you as soon as possible to see if you wish to proceed; however such charges are usually waived if they amount to less than £10.

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

Need further information? See our Information Management FAQs
 

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.

From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 15 November 2013 16:58
To: FOI Officer
Cc: Mark Hunter – MP; cleggn@parliament.uk; Cllr Mark Weldon; Cllr Keith Holloway; Cllr Stuart Bodsworth; Cllr Wendy Meikle; Cllr John Pantall; Cllr Iain Roberts; Sir Andrew Stunell MP; Leader; Cllr Kevin Hogg; Cllr Shan Alexander; Barry Khan; Anwar Majothi; Andrew Webb
Subject: Council meeting questions

Dear FoI Officer

This question was asked of Weldon at the Executive Meetin on 8th September 2008 by Mr Parnell.  What was Weldon’s response or what action did he subsequently take to assist Mr Parnell with his problem?

Main question – “Adoption & Children’s Act 2002. Under this statutory act you can request an assessment of your adoption needs. Does this Local Authority following a request for an assessment have a time frame in which an assessment is done and then concluded?”

Supplementary question – “Who has the legal duty in this Local Authority to perform this assessment, and if this is not done, then who is responsible to enforce what is passed in law..”

Kind regards

Sheila

PS  Obviously the answer or lack of it will be posted up on the Internet.

Mr Vali

Please forward this to the villains mentioned.

Kind regards

Sheila

From: Sheila Oliver [mailto:sheilaoliver@ntlworld.com]
Sent: 17 August 2015 21:28
To: ‘privateoffice.external@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk’; ‘mayt@parliament.uk’
Cc: tim@timfarron.co.uk; Chief Constable
Subject: Closure of Stockport Magistrates Court.

Dear Home Secretary

Thank you so much for deciding to close Stockport Magistrates Court.

Then Leader of Stockport Council, Dave – now Lord – Goddard, the current Leader and Deputy Leader – Sue Derbyshire and Iain Roberts, the Chief Executives and Council Solicitors past and present at Stockport used their connections to the Magistrates  Courts to imprison a sick, innocent dissenter – who only asked for counselling for his lovely,  troubled daughters adopted from Stockport Council

The Chief Constable went along with this lunacy until I finally embarrassed him publicly. Then the corrupt councillors and senior council officers fabricated council tax arrears against him to enable to keep taking him to court. He constantly had court cases hanging over him. They took money from completed earlier years to pay off fictional current debts. When he objected in the Magistrates Court he was told they weren’t interested in history.

He was imprisoned for an alleged assault with a sneeze.  It didn’t happen. The Council had CCTV of the alleged incident they would not allow to be shown at his Magistrates Court – when it was shown at his three day Crown Court appeal his appeal was granted.

http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&post=1680

Grubby local politicians like Derbyshire, Goddard and the rest of those running Stockport Council were able to waste ? 1000s of hours of court time persecuting an innocent man. They did things like call him to a meeting, phone  his home to cancel the meeting (he didn’t have a mobile phone at the time) then arrest him when he turned up for the cancelled meeting for being in the Town Hall without permission.  They arrested him to using the town hall loo when he had written permission from the then Chief Executive to do so. They arrested him three times one weekend for trying to get his name, address and signature removed from the Council’s website in a serious Data Protection breach.

Stockport Council is run by vicious and corrupt people totally devoid of a moral compass, and the closure of the Magistrates Courts seals off one avenue of persecution for them.

I told the CPS, I told Kier Starmer, I told the Crime Commissioner and his Deputy Dawg, I told the Chief Constable. The abuse and waste of court and police resources continued until Mr Parnell was hounded to death aged just 58, even being pursued by legal action for £24 council tax arrears he didn’t owe when they knew he was terminally ill in Intensive Care.

Again, thank you for shutting this corrupt institution, although I do feel sorry for the little people who have lost their jobs as a result of the closure.

Kind regards

Sheila

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/custodies,-arrests,-imprisonment.html

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/can-t-even-cross-town-for-a-medical-appointment.html

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/cps-manchester.html

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/punished,-even-though-innocent.html

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/gm-police—crime–commissioner.html

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/still-under-house-arrest-november-2009.html

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/arrested-for-using-the-town-hall-loo.html

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/begging-stockport-council-for-help.html

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/john-derbyshire,-cps.html

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/inmate-.html

http://iloapp.sheilaoliver.org/blog/blogging?Home&category=2

Email sent – Sun 30/08/2009 15:39

Anwar Majothi anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk; cllr.sue.derbyshire@stockport.gov.uk; Cllr David White cllr.david.white@stockport.gov.uk; Cllr Mark Weldon cllr.mark.weldon@stockport.gov.uk; martin.candler@stockport.gov.uk; Donna Sager donna.sager@stockport.gov.uk; Chief.Constable@gmp.police.uk; Michael Warburton Michael.Warburton@ico.gsi.gov.uk; MICHAEL PARNELL mickysara@btinternet.com; Syd Lloyd syd@sparkling-ice.com; Philip.Farrar@rmpartners.co.uk; barry khan barry.khan@stockport.gov.uk

Dear Mr Schultz

Please see the attached. Again, this young person has been let down by Stockport Council.  I note the Council decided to produce no report on Alison Davies, the Stockport lady who jumped from the Humber Bridge with her 9 year old autistic son, despite criticism of the Council in the Serious Case Review report.  All attempts by me to find out if she was persecuted by this Council for complaining, as Mr. Parnell has been, have been blocked by Donna Sager, Assistant Director of the Children’s and Young People’s Directorate, possibly the person who decided no report was needed on Ms Davies.

We have the probable death of the pensioner due to maintenance not being carried out in 62 council properties due to funds having to be diverted to deal the asbestos in schools issue, which another councillor claimed had been known about for years (court case April 2009). 

It is a testment to Mr. Parnell’s strength of character that he hasn’t himself committed suicide following the 90 times the police were called to him, 12 arrests, one court case dropped on the day of the hearing, one magistrate’s court case in which CCTV evidence was not allowed to be shown for an alleged pre-swine flu sneeze offence, four days in a particularly tough Manchester prison for breaching his CRASBO (criminal asbo) conditions in using the public lavatory at the town hall, for which he was arrested by police who came in a police car with flashing blue lights, so the police were called as an emergency.  Mr Parnell has been asking for help with his troubled adopted daughters for over a decade, he has spent a further  2 years on the town hall steps.  It is a wonder his daughters have not also decided to end their lives, given the extra problems this family has had to endure as a result of the actions of this council (four days in prison and a fine the family can’t afford).  To cap it all the Leader of the Council sent me an apparently gloating email about this decent chap being sent to prison and included confidential court documents. Why is the Council harassing and persecuting this man?

Finally, the decision to build a school, massively overbudget, not big enough for the children who need to attend, no room to hold a sports day, with dangerous traffic arrangements on a still gassing former toxic waste dump extensively dumped from 1954 to 1974 with NO contamination investigation pits dug over the site of the proposed school which is directly over the infilled tip will lead to more deaths.  In contravention of the Council’s fraud and financial irregularity policy, financial anomalies of circa £2.4 million  being brought to the attention of the Council have led to me being branded as a liar, rude, offensive and from September 1st apparently  über-vexatious.  Why is the man in charge of this appalling situation – Andrew Webb – lauded on  prestigious government committees?  Why doesn’t he spend time in Stockport sorting out this horrible mess?

There are more issues which I don’t want to talk to the Council about because the people telling me these things are scared of reprisals.  I shall send the details to the press.  Potentially, there are more suicides as a result of this.

I don’t suppose you will respond – you never do, Mr. Schulz.

Sheila Oliver

Stockport’s Freedom of Information Campaigner

Email sent – Fri 21/08/2009 21:08

Cllr Dave Goddard cllr.dave.goddard@stockport.gov.uk; Cllr David White cllr.david.white@stockport.gov.uk; Cllr Mark Weldon cllr.mark.weldon@stockport.gov.uk; cllr.sue.derbyshire@stockport.gov.uk,MICHAEL PARNELL mickysara@btinternet.com; Anwar Majothi anwar.majothi@stockport.gov.uk; Chief.Constable@gmp.police.uk; John Schultz chief.executive@stockport.gov.uk

Dear Councillors and Officials

Please see the attached.  I just want to say how reassuring it is that  no expense is spared in keeping us all safe from evil villains, like – well – sneezers for instance.

Thank you very much for allowing me to sleep easy in my bed. Your efforts are much appreciated.

With warmest best wishes

Sheila

Stockport’s Freedom of Information Fighter

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,
My belief is justice will come in the easiest way Common Law for common people will come in a common way public disgust in the public interest.

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 for Stunell wishing my operation went well and that my belief of his appointment of the queens honour 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 schults 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

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

http://www.stockport.gov.uk

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 http://www.stockport.gov.uk     Remember to use your vote in local elections on Thursday 3rd May 2012. For more information about voting and Stockport Council elections go to http://www.stockport.gov.uk/services/councildemocracy/elections/localelections2012/   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.

You can do more than you think online: Find it. Report it. Apply for it. Pay for it. Visit us at www.stockport.gov.uk and find out more.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG – www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2904 / Virus Database: 3199/6405 – Release Date: 06/12/13