Stockport Council News

Ms Lynn Charlton

Chief Executive

After Adoption,
Unit 5 Citygate,
5 Blantyre Street,
Castlefield,
Manchester
M15 4JJ

Sunday,
November 17, 2013

Dear Ms Charlton

Re: Mr
Michael Stuart Parnell RIP, who had been receiving an excellent service from After Adoption, until Stockport Council stopped funding it.

A gentle, peaceful protester adopted two troubled daughters
from Stockport Council. The girls had had a terrible time with their birth
parents. One had the incorrect details
on her official documents, so if she was taken to Accident and Emergency she
didn’t officially exist and couldn’t be treated. Mr Parnell just asked for his legal right of
counselling for his two daughters.

After a decade of having this refused by Stockport Council,
he decided to stand on the town hall steps – night and day – until the Council
helped him. What happened was hundreds of times the police were called to him,
dozens of arrests, an attempted suicide in a police cell, repeated
incarceration in a tough Manchester prison, 2 years 8am to 8pm house arrest,
persecution from the Council with fictitious council tax arrears, cancer he and
his family felt was brought on by the stress, the hounding of this man whilst
he was in Intensive Care over an alleged debt of £24 and taking him to court on
the day of his cancer operation. He has
now sadly died.

This was state-condoned human rights abuse. I sent Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg
evidence of what was being done to this man by his party members over many
years; he refused to act. I told the
Liberal Democrats propaganda newspaper, LibDem Voice, what was going on; I told
every LibDem MP and I told the LibDem Member of the European Parliament Chris
Davies. No-one could have cared any less.

I told the Liberal Democrat Lords, including Lord Avebury,
who bleats about human rights abuses but not when they are carried out by his
own political cohorts, I told Secretary of State Eric Pickles, I told the
Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer, I told the Chief Constable of
Greater Manchester Fahy, I told the Chair of the Police Authority for Greater
Manchester Councillor Murphy. Everyone was blind to what was being done to this
gentle, peaceful man who only wanted his lawful right to help for his lovely
daughters.

I am sure you will be as shocked as I have been through all
this disgusting process and how Andrew Webb can continue in high office with
all this at his door is beyond my
comprehension.

Yours sincerely

Sheila Oliver (Mrs)

PS I need no
acknowledgment of this letter

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/town-hall-protester.html

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/town-hall-protester-council-tax.html

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/council-taxpayer-sworn-at-by-council-employee.html

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/if-i-beat-you-up.html

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/arrested-for-trying-to-report-a-data-protection-offence.html

http://www.sheilaoliver.org/arrested-for-trying-to-report-a-data-protection-offence.html

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

Email from – Alan.Clitherow@gmp.police.uk

Email received – 09 September 2013 14:23

Sheila,

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

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

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

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

Many thanks

Alan

Insp Alan Clitherow
J1 North INPT
X 69701
Mobile 07795 811575

But he had written permission from then Chief Executive of Stockport Council, John Schulz, to do so.

This document can be more clearly read here:- http://www.sheilaoliver.org/mr-parnell-s-fear-of-violence.html

Goddard became Leader May 2007 and Mr Parnell banned from the Town Hall June 2007. It states in the Council Incident log – “Dave Goddard and Cllr Smith enquired via JC as to why we are allowing Mr P to continue to demonstrate.”

Because he had a legal right to do so Goddard!

This document can be more clearly read here :- http://www.sheilaoliver.org/lord-goddard-stops-him-protesting.html

Judge Bernard
Lever

Crown Court

Minshull
Street

Manchester

Saturday, January 14, 2012

Dear Judge Lever

Re: Mr Parnell

I am sure you will
remember the case of Mr. Parnell.

A restraining
order under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 Section 5 (which is what he
was given) can only be given on conviction. Mr Parnell has never been convicted
of any offence, so how can he have a restraining order? Mr Khan, as Council
Solicitor, must have been aware of this fact. It was certainly brought to his
attention repeatedly by Mr Parnell. Why did he not act? This order was made in
November 2010.

In a letter from John Derbyshire, Paralegal Officer, CPS, Stockport reference:
06jj0131510/DH/JD it states:

“I refer to the above named
and the Restraining Order made at the Crown Court on 15th January 2010 for a
period of 18 months. I enclose a copy of the said Restraining Order for your
reference. Unfortunately, within this order there is a discrepancy with the
wording in that the second paragraph refers to “Entering any part of
Stopford Direct Centre including the foyer” this is wrong, the Service is Stockport
Direct Centre and not Stopford.

Further since the Restraining Order was made the building Ponsonby House has
been re-named Fred Perry House.

The wording of the Order therefore needs to be varied to reflect the above and
with this in mind I would respectfully request the Court list this matter as
soon as possible”

So, on a Restraining Order
which should have only been imposed on conviction and not for a crime someone
was actually not guilty of, not only are vital details incorrect, further lies
are told. Ponsonby House has certainly not been re-named Fred Perry House.
Ponsonby House was completely demolished and a new building put in its place.

All this was brought to Mr Khan’s attention. He did nothing about this illegal
Restraining Order except to continue to enforce it.

On 24th February 201 the Crown Prosecution Service issued to Mr Parnell a Notice
of Discontinuance. Reference – 06JJ0007211/NB Operational reference No/PT1
URN:06jj007211. It states:-

“I am writing to inform you that I
have today sent a notice to the Justices’ Chief Executive, under Section 23 of
the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985, discontinuing the following charges
against you/your client:

Breach of Restraining Order

The effect of this notice is that you no longer need to attend court in respect
of these charges and that any bail conditions imposed in relation to them cease
to apply.

The decision to discontinue these charges has been taken because

There is not enough evidence to provide a realistic prospect of
conviction….”

On 12th December 2011 Mr Parnell had to appear before the Crown Court at
Manchester for being in breach of his restraining order (imposed for a crime he
didn’t commit) in that he had not done his community service. Mr Parnell had a
sick note at the time of his Fast Delivery Pre-Sentence Report from the
National Probation Service due to nervous disability, caused by the actions of
Stockport Council in repeatedly having him arrested, staff issuing threats to
kill him and swearing at him, the problems at home because no help had been
given to his troubled daughters, the attempted suicide in a police cell, the 2
years 8am to 8pm house arrest when he couldn’t even visit his dentist or doctor
etc etc. He has evidence that he was being seen by a Professor at Sheffield University for the problems caused to him by
Stockport Council and by a Psychiatric consultant at the local hospital. If
anyone thinks this is an unreasonable thing for him to claim to be affected by,
wait until I tell the entire story of what has been done to him over the years,
and everyone will understand his mental anguish. I am going to write a book about this case
and, no doubt, you will feature in it!

So, if he had a sick note at the time of the pre-sentence report and on this
report no mention was made of his illness, how can he still be being repeatedly
taken to court for being too sick to do his community service, when account
should have been taken of that fact at the outset prior to sentencing? Court
time, lawyers time – more anguish for Mr Parnell. Before a judgment can be made
in court to receive a sentence the pre sentence report must be filled in to
weigh up if people are actually in a position to do their community service.
Nothing was ticked on that report to make note of his quite serious medical
problems. Yet another failing – one of very, very many.

I have repeatedly
heard you in court refer to your dislike of the waste of public money. Well, I think you have been responsible
yourself for quite a lot regarding Mr Parnell’s case.

I would like to
think some common sense will prevail, but having watched what goes on at
Stockport Council and in your court, I am not hopeful.

Yours sincerely

Sheila Oliver

Local Human Rights, Freedom of Information and
Environmental Campaigner

These documents are so large they take a while to load.

One is evidence of some of the court cases brought against sick, innocent Mr Parnell RIP who had the audacity to simply ask LibDem run Stockport Council for counselling help for his lovely, daughters adopted from Stockport Council. One had the wrong details on her official documents, so if he took her to A & E she simply didn’t exist. He wanted that to be put right too, which his useless local MP Andrew Stunell finally did.

The other document is a page by page explanation.

There is a lot more evidence to follow, which is being submitted to the Parliamentary Committee on Standards in public life.