Adrian Scarrott as Head of “neighbourhoods” has replied to the “independent” stage two investigators report following my complaint about the manner in which Sandwell council officers appeared to have lied about “relocating” geese that they knew had really been culled, or were going to be. The lies and threats made by John Satchwell and lies told by other officers have been upheld. There are however other parts to my complaint that have not been upheld, and which I fully intend to challenge with The Local Government Ombudsman.
As head of neighbourhoods, it is also the same Adrian Scarrott that co- authored the biased presentation to the Health and Neighbourhoods Scrutiny board, (he actually read some of this out at the meeting), with Steve Handley (streetscene) sitting next to him like some mute vegetable. They also penned the clear as mud “statement of purpose” which the council are now supposed to be consulting on. We all know what “consultation” means with this rotten borough- they have made the decision already.
The independent investigator emailed me on February 11th confirming that she had finished her report and that it had been sent to Sandwell council for their consideration and reply. This went to Adrian Scarrott himself. I was told by Sandwell Council’s head of complaints Teresa Armstrong that this report would be sent out with the council response by 25th February, ironically the date of the meeting where Scarrott and Handley, as well as Satchwell were to give evidence under scrutiny.
It came as little surprise that I did not receive it before this meeting, and therefore had no knowledge of what the report contained or concluded. In fact I did not receive the response or report until March 25th, despite being given several false timescales. Apparently Scarrott was “very busy” and had also been on leave, though it should be noted that this excuse avoided me being able to cross examine the liars at the council over their conduct at the Health and Neighbourhoods scrutiny board meeting- a clear and deliberate attempt to do this- in my humble opinion.
Despite her claimed “independence” there are elements in the report written by the investigator that appear so council biased that it makes it difficult to believe this. She appears to blend ESTABLISHED FACTS, those which can be evidenced through recorded means, eg responses in Freedom Of Information Requests, with personal opinions, both of the officers questioned and also more toxically her own. Opinions are not facts at all.
Whereas my statements in the report to her remain “belief” and “claim”, the officers’ opinions, (whom she has identified and have admitted were lying), are believed as telling the truth and appear to be promoted by her as established FACT. It is difficult to marry this dichotomy and perhaps she is unable to understand that if they have conspired to lie once, they had ample time to do so again before receiving her audience. All three Sandwell valley officers were interviewed by her on the same day. Their story was well rehearsed by now, or so I would claim.
She also in my interview with her expressed her own opinion of Canada geese as being “dirty”, also remarking jocularly that they may have been taken to “the crem” located off Sandwell Valley.
Perhaps they were
Her “findings” are therefore often opinions rather than established facts, nor is it stated to what evidence she bases her findings on for clarity; indeed her findings are highly refutable, given my own investigations into this case as well as tough questioning of certain officers. Here below is what she wrote on this part of my complaint. I will then label for clarity with relevant evidence the inaccuracies which can be verified with evidence. I have chosen to redact some sections for legal reasons because I intend to contest certain portions with the Local Government Ombudsman, also noting that there are some very paranoid people who I do not intend to give the oxygen of the label “victimisation” without being able to back up their claims with direct evidence.
It is also clear that whatever she may claim about having ALL documents concerning this issue made available she has not been given all the documents and evidence that they have, and some of this was only revealed at the Health and Neighbourhoods Scrutiny board meeting, which of course followed the completion of her report. There are still many questions which Sandwell have to answer regarding evidence that they actually do have for basing their decision on scientific evidence and process rather than kneejerk reaction to a bunch of whining elderly windbags with a grudge against non native species.
POINTS 1-12 are ESTABLISHED FACT
POINT 13 IS COMPLETELY INCORRECT. JOHN SATCHWELL DID NOT ADMIT ANYTHING TO MYSELF. I FOUND OUT ABOUT THE CULL ONLY THROUGH LETTERS RECEIVED ON THE SAME DAY FROM STEVE HANDLEY, THE FOI REQUEST, AND MARIA CROMPTON, A RESPONSE TO THE MESSAGE LEFT ON HER ANSWERPHONE, WHICH SHE CHOSE TO NOT REPLY TO IN PERSON. NEITHER OF THEM CONFIRMED JOHN SATCHWELL OR ANYONE ELSE HAD LIED, EVEN THOUGH THEY MUST HAVE KNOWN BY NOW THAT THEY HAD.
POINTS 14 and 15 are ESTABLISHED FACT
POINTS 16 AND 17 ESTABLISHED FACT
FINDINGS
2. THIS IS OPINION OF THE OFFICERS AND WHEREAS IT IS THEIR OPINION THE INVESTIGATOR SHOULD NOT WITHOUT REQUESTING RELEVANT EVIDENCE REPRODUCE IT AS AN ESTABLISHED FACT. THE OPINIONS ARE ALL REFUTABLE.
VN850223
- “Tracts of green space being destroyed”-
Did they show her any evidence that could be classed as ESTABLISHED FACT? This is irrelevant to the culling licence given the legal requirement to adhere to the type of licence being relied upon- in this case we learn as ESTABLISHED FACT from SMBC that this was about preserving public health and safety.
- “native species and plant life were being endangered”-
Opinion not established fact. Where is the evidence to substantiate this claim, and also this point is irrelevant to the type of licence the council are relying upon.
- “members of the public were making officers aware of their concern about the adverse impact the growing numbers of geese were having on park amenities.”
These members of the public are not identified, and it is merely their OPINION that goose numbers were causing any issue at all. We have learnt as established fact, that only 8 complaints were recorded by this council in these two parks. In any case, the licence Sandwell council rely on is for public health and safety, not “park amenities.”
Letters presented at the health and Neighbourhoods scrutiny board meeting written deliberately for the purpose are all dated 2015.
4 The briefing note did not state that other options should be explored, it stated that birds would be culled in two unspecified parks with egg pricking continuing. This can be read HERE as established Fact.
5 Established FACT, it did state this, and it has received widespread public condemnation. “Certain sections of the public” is a derogatory term, which although well disguised shields the personal opinion of the investigator to whom this appears to stem from. It is a “certain section of the public”- as described above that want wildlife slaughtered in parks for their own selfish reasons. NB THE TERM “ADVERSE PUBLICITY” IS THE TERM USED BY JOHN SATCHWELL.
6 The cabinet member for Neighbourhoods was the member for whom the issue was presented. WAS THIS MARIA CROMPTON AT THE TIME?
7 Established fact,
The video footage was taken on the day of 10th July 2013.
Points 8,9,10 ESTABLISHED FACT.
I was sent pictures by Matt Darby, senior countryside ranger. There are some questions which he has never answered about this, at least to myself.
Point 11
“IC did receive some pictures of geese being unloaded from a trailer but the geese were not those from Victoria park.”
This statement is bizarre, and is not explained which it must be. The geese are clearly being released if they were unloaded from the trailer. If not from Victoria Park then where had these captured birds been released from? This is admitting to a criminal offence, and yet the supposed wildlife officer PC Rob Pritchard has claimed that no offences were committed, though he does not state as to whom he questioned or whether any of this was under caution.
Matt Darby took these pictures, that is undisputable. He sent the pictures from his phone to his Sandwell.Gov email account where he then later forwarded them to me. So how can this be? There are some serious questions to answer for all those who were involved in this illegal release as well as the person claimed to be “investigating” this illegal activity. WATCH THIS SPACE ON THAT ONE.
Points 12-14 Established fact
Point 15 John Satchwell did not admit to me that he had told lies about relocation, this is completely false. My complaint and question to Maria Crompton contained no mention of John Satchwell admitting to lie, at this point I had no confirmation as to what had really happened to the geese, though I suspected that they had been killed.
Only her response and the pathetic reasons for the cull were revealed at this time in her letter, and formally by Steve Handley’s FOI response. NB THESE LETTERS MAKE NO REFERENCE TO LYING, OR THAT JOHN SATCHWELL HAD ADMITTED ANY LIES. THIS IS ESTABLISHED FACT AND TO SUGGEST OTHERWISE IS ANOTHER LIE AND ATTEMPT TO REWRITE HISTORY.
point 16 “JS’s attempted deception was undertaken for the best of reasons. He tried to avoid offending the sensitivities of certain sections of the public who it was recognised found culling distressing even when proved to be necessary.”
WHERE DO I START WITH THIS ONE!
THERE ARE NO ESTABLISHED FACTS IN THIS STATEMENT WHATSOEVER OTHER THAN JOHN SATCHWELL “ATTEMPTED DECEPTION.
THE REST OF THIS IS I AM AFRAID UTTER AND COMPLETE RUBBISH ON BEHALF OF THIS SO CALLED “INVESTIGATOR”, AND TO USE SUCH UNESTABLISHED OPINION IN A SO CALLED “INDEPENDENT REPORT” BRINGS INTO QUESTION HER INTEGRITY TO EVEN BE CONDUCTING THIS WORK ON A PROFESSIONAL BASIS.
JOHN SATCHWELL LIED FOR HIS OWN STATED REASONS- TO AVOID “ADVERSE PUBLICITY” BOTH FOR HIM AND SANDWELL COUNCIL. THEY WERE NOT “THE BEST OF REASONS” THEY WERE PURELY SELFISH ONES. HE MADE VERBAL THREATS TO MYSELF ON THE PHONE, WAS HE TRYING TO AVOID MY SENSITIVITY BEING HURT HERE FOR GOD’S SAKE?
IT HAS NOT BEEN “PROVEN TO BE NECESSARY” !!!!! QUITE THE CONTRARY BASED ON DIRECT EVIDENCE AND NOT THIS PILE OF RUBBISH WHICH IS PURE OPINON, AND BIASED ON BEHALF OF THIS PROVEN LIAR.
THE PUBLIC DESERVE THE TRUTH, NOT LIES, AND THESE ARE PATHETIC LINES WHICH DESERVE THE CONTEMPT AND RICICULE THAT WILL FOLLOW FROM THEM.
Point 17 oh she actually attempts a bit of criticism here of the council paying her £25 per hour of her time.
point 18 He has not admitted anything to me at all.
point 19 Another dressed up excuse which should not be presented in such a way by an “independent investigator.” SHE ACTUALLY SOUNDS MORE LIKE A DEFENCE LAWYER THAN A JUDGE.
I WOULD HOPE THAT HAVING READ SOME OF THE STUFF WRITTEN HERE SO FAR, THAT YOU CAN SEE WHY I WILL BE TAKING SOME OF THE COMPLAINTS MADE HERE NOT UPHELD TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT OMBUDSMAN, AND IT CAN ONLY BE HOPED THAT THEY ARE NOT AS EASILY FOOLED OR PREJUDICED BY SEPERATING THE FACTS FROM OPINION AS THIS INVESTIGATOR CLEARLY IS.
THE OTHERS
The investigator appears to have interviewed the three Sandwell Valley based officers, though there is no record of what each of them said, and no accredited statements are attributed to them. I specifically made a complaint and wanted to know which officers had lied, and how, yet this has not been properly addressed or investigated. I have therefore queried with Adrian Scarrott further points on this issue which demand a clear and frank response
Point 1 Established fact
point 2 “In 2013 whilst not being involved in the cabinet meetings they had been consulted about the culling and were aware that culling was to take place and were in agreement with it.”
Well I was told something very different. Phone call conversation of 22/7/14
Ian Carroll “…….See they usually set you blokes up as the fall guys, talking about “biodiversity” and all of this business and it just seems to be people at the top making decisions, without any consultation. I mean there are alternatives to this and I know they’ve tried egg pricking, what have you, but this is a disgusting thing to do.”
Paul Smith 22/7/14 “I really don’t know Ian, nothing’s come my way, I mean I’m certainly against anything like that, It’s not been done with anybody consulting me.”
Conversation with Chris Moore
CM “……..Well because of this complaint, my necks going to be in a noose, for being implicated with Mr Satch, (laughter), you know?
IC well all I want him to do is tell the truth and if it comes out…..
CM I know, I know, I know.. I know… well, there you go, anyway what can we do for you sir?
IC erm, well there’s one about that, er basically, the word “relocation”, I mean as you see it were those birds released last year onto Forge Mill?
CM They probably was last year
IC yeah?
CM “Erm. I don’t know whether they have this year cause I can’t see them anywhere, and as I’ve pointed out to you before I’ve had nothing at all to do with that, because I don’t work in the parks, I don’t put orders on for things, and I know nothing about it, and I told you the truth then and I’m telling you the truth now, I have nothing to do with it.”
NB SEE THE PDF FILE BELOW PAGE TWO DATED FEBRUARY 2013, 6 MONTHS BEFORE THE CULL OF GEESE AT TIPTON AND PRESUMABLY DARTMOUTH PARK ALSO. “I’ve had nothing at all to do with that, because I don’t work in the parks”
No. 29 – February 2013 oh really, the games up Arthur Daley.
Oh it gets much more juicy than this but that would be jumping ahead on blogs!
Point 3 Oh really?
Point 4 Oh really?
Point 5 Oh really? Matt Darby told me they were the geese from Victoria Park Tipton. It is not my “assumption” at all. “The pictures sent to IC were of geese being released” – SO HAS PC PRITCHARD BEEN TOLD OF THIS, AND IF SO THEN WHY DID HE TAKE NO ACTION ON THE ADMITTED ILLEGAL ACTIVITY THAT THEY NOW CLAIM DID NOT HAPPEN, YET THEY DO IN THE INVESTIGATORS REPORT. WHY DID SHE NOT ASK THEM WHERE THESE GEESE WERE FROM !
Point 6 “Whilst not necessarily being in full agreement with the pretence they understood why this had happened as culling was a highly emotive issue and did raise very strong reactions.”
Right so their “independent” apologist at this point should perhaps have clarified the following
Point 7 This information is extremely difficult to believe. The three most important jobs at Sandwell Valley, the three most senior officers knew nothing about the import of 70 wild birds into a turkey farm or the subsequent cull? WHICH SANDWELL COUNCIL OFFICER AUTHORISED THE REMOVAL OF BIRDS TO THIS LOCATION?
Point 8 “In 2014 however they made it clear to JS that IC needed to be told the truth as it was obvious the geese had not been relocated.”
Any proof of this? No truth was relayed to me except in Steve Handley’s FOI request, which I asked for myself. The truth would not have come out if it were not for this, and this is ESTABLISHED FACT.
Point 9 The deception was never admitted by any of them including John Satchwell
Point 10 “no crime was committed,”
For fucks sake, she has been told in point five by them that it had.!!!!!!!
-
Pestex’s integrity as being “highly reputable” is one of opinion, or perhaps she uses them herself? Some of it’s employees can be brought into question from the amateurish methods used in capturing the geese, lying repeatedly to the public with abysmal excuses, and also one of them spitting on the grass.
Then there are likely offences under the Animal Welfare Act such as the method used to pack in the geese, the slaughter not witnessed independently as well as the lack of integrity of the licence being used for the purpose intended. THERE HAS BEEN NO CREDIBLE INVESTIGATION INTO THIS, NOT BY NATURAL ENGLAND AND CERTAINLY NOT BY THE POLICE- WHICH HAS BEEN RECORDED.
- We have here admission that Sandwell council allowed geese which they claim when challenged about the cull were capable of spreading disease, yet they introduce them onto a farm where they are rearing turkeys. Where is the biosecurity here? Who could be confident in eating anything from this farm, or the health and safety attached to it, especially when revealed that there was no security of any council employee on the scene? Is it not the case that unsupervised non personnel of Sandwell Council can wander freely around their sites?
Point 11
Well Paul Smith stated explicitly to me in his recorded phone call conversation that he was not in favour of killing adult geese, that he had not been consulted on it and had not seen any report recommending this. The deception is not “an error”, and according to part of another recorded conversation with Chris Moore there actually was a release of The Victoria park Geese at Forge Mill on the day of August 10th 2013. More on these two characters in upcoming blogs.
Point 12
Who advised them not to speak to me, I am advised that it was John Satchwell himself from an inside source – hardly the actions of the man that the deluded investigator thinks is a pillar of society! What hold does this creature have over so many people? He certainly has none over me.
Point 13
And you can see from this exercise precisely why. To catch liars of this scale, do you honestly believe that any part of this complaint would have been upheld without evidence to back it up? What defence is it when people who lie can later claim that they were “stitched up” when they are quite candid in their manner in telling people lies that later come back to haunt them? Unlike the council and police, I cannot legally hack phones, email accounts and bug houses and intimidate people with threats of doing so, under which of course legislation was introduced by religious lying maniac of a Labour Prime minister on the back of lies concerning an illegal war?
It is the case that West Midlands Police have snooped on journalists but won’t reveal who and for what purposes; who knows to stop their own from going under?
By the way, hope you have enjoyed reading my stuff fuckers if you have, cos there ain’t nothing juicy there except on you LOL!
COMMENT
THE CLAIMS MADE BY THE OTHER COUNCIL OFFICERS ABOUT THEIR REASONS FOR LYING ARE SO LAUGHABLE THAT THEY ARE OPEN TO NOTHING BUT RIDICULE AND ALSO OUTRIGHT HOSTILITY. WHO THE HELL DO THEY THINK THEY ARE THAT THEY CAN DENY WHAT HAS HAPPENED AND THEN BLATANTLY BARE FACED LIE TO YOUR FACE, AND THEN CLAIM AFTER THEY HAVE BEEN EXPOSED AS LIARS, THAT THEY WERE ONLY DOING SO TO SPARE SENSITIVITY TO THOSE WHO DO NOT AGREE TO BIRDS BEING CULLED BY THEIR MURDEROUS LOCAL AUTHORITY TO WHICH THEY WERE PARTY?
The only people that these charlatans were protecting were themselves. The only people that these liars care about are themselves. They do not care about wildlife, they care only for the commercial success of the Sandwell Valley farms, which keeps them in a job. May it ROT with them. Build houses on the lot.
I am told in the reply from Adrian Scarrott, that for his part in the deceit and verbal threats, John Satchwell will be subject to any action which Adrian Scarrott sees appropriate, but that he cannot tell me what that might be. THIS IS UTTER BOLLOCKS, AND MEANS “NO ACTION” WILL BE TAKEN AT ALL. THE OFICER CODE OF CONDUCT IS NOTHING MORE THAN A FARCE, AND SHORT OF BUGGERING THE MAYOR NON CONSENTUALLY IN THE FORGE MILL BARN, IT IS DIFFICULT TO SEE IT EVER BEING INVOKED.
Though the decision on Satchwell is revealed, the other three valley liars appear to not be censured, despite clearly being proven to have spread the deception.
HOW CAN THIS BE THE CASE?
MATT DARBY SENIOR COUNTRYSIDE RANGER
Of all those involved in this deception, Matt “double hands” Darby appears to be the most dishonest of them all.
I’VE DECIDED FOR THE TIME BEING NOT TO PUT UP THE SCREENSHOT, THOUGH I DO HAVE SEVERAL.
BOY HOW THESE THINGS DO ESCALATE JUST OVER THE CULLING OF SOME GEESE WHEN PEOPLE DON’T TELL THE TRUTH! STILL FOLLOWING HOW TO DO A PROPER INVESTIGATION MRS “INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATOR”?
DARBY IS A SERIAL LIAR. Perhaps it was the big green duck what told him to do it, Son of Sam style.
“I wish I could LIE RIGHT, up the the sky but I can’t……”
Matt Darby has very close associations with Sandwell Valley, the bike trails group and the bike hire shop.
It has also come to my attention from a user of the Sandwell valley , who feeds the birds and whom I believe has deafness issues and could be termed to be “a vulnerable adult”, that Matt Darby and some other rangers in Sandwell Valley chose one day to target him by trying to “wind him up for a reaction” in Dartmouth Park, by saying “That’s a £75 fine for feeding the birds!”. They all apparently thought it hysterical that this well meaning man be ridiculed and incited into snapping back at them, and this was the reaction that they were clearly looking for.
This I am afraid is how they obviously get their kicks during the day, which if looking at their Sandwell Valley facebook page is anything to go by, they are constantly whining like old women Dot Cotton style about having to pick up litter from all the visitors that they are now getting at the Sandwell Valley, due to , er, their council putting in so many clutter of crap attractions to pack in the people, to the detriment of the wildlife environment.
It is interesting to note their complaints about identifiable McDonalds litter being left behind, (when there is virtually none in the picture they are sticking up), yet they use the same McDonalds to ferry back burgers from the said establishment on All Saints Way West Bromwich using their council vehicles. I have witnessed this myself.
I have many times been contacted by members of the public and also by staff including Matt Darby to rescue injured birds, largely injured as a result of not being able to manage cannabis and drunken scum anglers on their pools from being entangled in fishing tackle. This despite the so called “partnership working” LOL between the local police and Sandwell council. I was told by PC Lou Carter, another FACEBOOK FRIEND of Darby’s that there was a “gentleman’s agreement” in place allowing anglers to park on swan pool, despite the angling code of conduct for Sandwell stating something different. Oh well….
But on getting back to “double hands Darby”, it is rumoured that with the retirement of Chris Moore this year, Matt Darby will be taking over the reigns as Manager of the Sandwell Valley. Well is this really the type of character cut out for this post, when it is quite evident and it has been revealed that he is one of Sandwell council’s dishonest employees? Who will be carrying out the interview process, presumably as “senior parks manager” John Satchwell will be in the room. Is it this that Matt fears if whistleblowing on his current boss?
With one hand the thumbs up, and with the other a one fingered salute from his own facebook page. Perhaps this is the true mark of the man captured in character and not act, and one that reveals a dual character splitting between the public face and the grim private façade.
ON YER BIKE?
OF COURSE, HE COULD BLOW A WHISTLE AND ADMIT THAT HE WAS TELLING THE TRUTH AFTER ALL WHEN HE STATED THAT HE SAW THE GEESE FROM VICTORIA PARK BEING RELEASED IN 2013 AT FORGE MILL LAKE , (and even still I believe that this happened), BUT CHOSE NOT TO DO SO, LIED TO HIS COPPER “FRIEND” AND THEREFORE HAS SINCE CONSPIRED TO LIE IN ANOTHER WAY. HE HAS STILL THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO MY QUESTIONS, THOUGH WHO COULD POSSIBLY KNOW IF THEY WERE TRUTHFUL?
THUNDERPANTS SHOULD GO!
