injustice
US refuses to say it won’t kill Assange
Wikileaks journalist remains imprisoned as US continues to pursue discredited extradition case – and refusal to give binding guarantee would result in his immediate release if UK justice system was fit for purpose
The US has refused to give a specific, binding guarantee to a UK court that it will not execute journalist and Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. Assange has been held for years in solitary confinement in Belmarsh prison while he fights the US government’s attempt to extradite him so it can imprison him for years beyond his lifespan, after Assange exposed war crimes in Iraq by the US military.
The case should have been laughed out of court three years ago, when the main US witness admitted he had been lying all along in his claim that Assange induced him to hack US systems. Instead, Assange has been submitted to what former UN Special Rapporteur on torture Nils Melzer described as sustained psychological torture – and still faces the likelihood of imprisonment for more than a century.
His recent appeal was adjourned to give the US time to affirm properly that it would not kill him if he was extradited, a sick joke when there has been longstanding evidence of US plans to murder him outside the US.
Incredibly, the High Court has refused to admit fresh evidence of CIA plots to kidnap or kill Julian Assange.
The judges say the rationale for kidnapping or killing Assange would be removed if he is extradited, and the evidence is thus not worth consideration.
Read that again. pic.twitter.com/PqwJIg4yAn— Declassified UK (@declassifiedUK) March 26, 2024
The judges even refused to admit fresh evidence of the US’s plans to assassinate Assange, instead offering the US another opportunity to have him in their hands if they would promise not to put him to death. The US.
But Assange’s wife Stella has revealed that the US has refused to say that it will not kill him and has offered only a boilerplate statement about the death penalty, while denying Assange the free speech protections it would offer to any US citizen:
The United States has issued a non-assurance in relation to the First Amendment, and a standard assurance in relation to the death penalty.
It makes no undertaking to withdraw the prosecution’s previous assertion that Julian has no First Amendment rights because he is not a U.S citizen. Instead, the US has limited itself to blatant weasel words claiming that Julian can “seek to raise” the First Amendment if extradited.
The diplomatic note does nothing to relieve our family’s extreme distress about his future – his grim expectation of spending the rest of his life in isolation in US prison for publishing award-winning journalism.
The Biden Administration must drop this dangerous prosecution before it is too late.
The US statement says the death penalty will be ‘neither sought nor imposed’, but this is non-binding and meaningless given its previous attempts to kill him. The refusal to guarantee there will be no death penalty in Assange’s specific case should mean under UK and European human rights laws that the extradition is immediately refused by the UK court and Assange should already be free. Even if the assurances had been given, the likelihood that the US’s treatment of Assange would lead to his death should be enough to quash the bid.
The fact that he is not yet free of the threat of extradition, let alone walking around in the freedom he should have, is a damning indictment of the state of UK justice and democracy.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Video: BBC forced to apologise to Webbe for ‘acid’ smear – but only does half the job
Newsnight’s bare minimum apology barely qualifies as journalism
The BBC has been forced to apologise to Leicester East independent MP Claudia Webbe – after repeating a lie for which the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has already been made to pay compensation to her.
Thursday’s Newsnight programme repeated the wholly untrue claim that Webbe had been found by a court to have threatened to throw acid at her then-fiancé’s lover – but the court found that she definitively did not make any such threat.
The smear was repeated by Newsnight hack Joe Pike on his Twitter feed – and rapidly deleted after Webbe rightly warned him it was untrue.
Your report is libellous. There was no threat or violence. It was a deliberate lie. Denied a Jury. There was an appeal. Appeal Judge said person was an "unsatisfactory witness" who "told lies". I’m told I must give you an opportunity to review and remove your @BBCNewsnight report
— Claudia Webbe MP (@ClaudiaWebbe) April 19, 2024
But the BBC’s ‘journalism’ only goes so far. While Newsnight apologised for its ‘inaccuracy’, it did not bother to find out or report that Webbe’s supposed ‘victim’ was found by the court to have lied repeatedly – or that the Metropolitan Police withheld evidence that would have helped Webbe’s defence:
The BBC’s web page for Thursday’s programme now says it’s been ‘edited for legal reasons’:
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Greenstein takes police to court this week for return of seized electronics
Jewish anti-Zionist arrested by police in ‘fishing expedition’ in December still not charged, but computer and hard drive still not handed back to him
Tony Greenstein
Left-wing Jewish activist Tony Greenstein is taking the police to court this week in a bid to secure the return of a computer, hard drive and other electronics seized by anti-terror police last December when they raided his home and arrested him for a single tweet commenting on Israel’s genocide in Gaza.
Four months later, Greenstein has still not been charged with any offence.
Greenstein, a well-known anti-Zionist prominent in the fight for Palestinian freedom and human rights, explained:
Just before Xmas I was arrested under the Terrorism Act 2000 in a dawn raid on my flat. My ‘offence’ was not planning a terrorist act but the tweet below which it was suspected was supporting Hamas. In 2021 the political wing of Hamas was proscribed.
After nearly 4 months I have still not been charged and I am under ‘investigation’.
The Police removed my computers, mobile and just about any electronic device they could find.
At the two interviews I had, and contrary to legal advice I gave full answers to their questions, I was questioned solely about the tweet below, two posts on my blog and a speech on Youtube.
This is clearly and obviously a case of the Police using ‘Terrorism’ as a means of suppressing free speech in support of the Palestinians in Gaza undergoing genocide. The Police could, if they so wished, charge Cameron and Sunak with aiding and abetting the commission of war crimes under the International Criminal Court Act 2001 ss.52/53.
However as we know the Police are increasingly acting as the enforcement agency for the government in their desire to suppress Palestinian activism.
The theft of my computers has had an enormous effect on e.g. my ability to comply with my statutory duty to keep accounts for the charity of which I’m a trustee, the Brighton Trust and many other effects. I have had to purchase new computers to continue to e.g. publish my blog and undertake necessary work not least having access to the medical records of my son who is autistic.
Although many files were saved on the cloud there are others which I can’t access.
I have no idea whether or not the Police will eventually charge me but one thing is clear. They do not need my computers to charge me as my views are all in the public domain and accessible on The Internet.
What the Police are engaged in is an intelligence gathering exercise, a fishing expedition.
My solicitor advises me that the action I have brought to force the Police to return my property is almost unheard of. I do not have great hopes that in a case such as this the Magistrates will defy the Police and do what is just and equitable. Nonetheless I believe that I should make the attempt. If unsuccessful I will take it to appeal as what the Police are doing is stringing out their ‘investigation’ and in the meanwhile punishing me even if I am not prosecuted.
It would be of enormous help, since this is a highly political case, for there to be a full public gallery and maybe a demonstration outside the courts.
At a time when the Police are even arresting the ‘wrong sort of rabbi’ for ‘inciting antisemitism’ (burning an Israeli flag – thus equating Jews with Israel) we must resist what is the road to a police state.
If you are free this Thursday 2 pm you I invite you to attend the court. I cannot guarantee it will even be heard, as last time it was adjourned but your presence might also be of help in that regard.
So if you live in the Brighton area and aren’t otherwise engaged please come.
Greenstein’s case has been listed for 2pm on Thurs 18 April at Brighton Magistrates’ Court. Supporters able to attend should get there early:
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Breaking Biden says US may drop Assange case
A genuine indication of sense from US president – or more mind games?
US president Joe Biden has said that the US is ‘considering’ abandoning the country’s attempt to extradite persecuted Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, in response to a request from the Australian government. Assange has been held in Belmarsh prison for years while his legal team attempts to fight a case that should have been thrown out when the main US witness admitted he had been lying when he said that Assange arranged the hacking of US systems.
Last month, the High Court kept Assange in prison when it ruled that the US could have more time to provide assurances that it would not impose a death penalty on the Australian journalist, even though it admitted that the US was attacking his right to free speech in a way it would not do to one of its own citizens.
Before his imprisonment, Assange was effectively kept captive for years in the Ecuadorian embassy when the UK refused to stop trying to extradite him to Sweden, which Assange’s supporters feared was an indirect route to handing him to the US, despite Sweden dropping discredited rape allegations. The US has pursued Assange in vengeance for Wikileaks exposing war crimes by US military.
Last month, the US leaked hints that it might accept a ‘plea deal’ and drop the extradition in return for Assange accepting a lesser conviction – still an outright attack on journalistic freedom and the public’s right to know what their governments are doing. Biden’s latest comment may be more mind games and those who support Assange and the importance of press freedom to a functioning democracy should not let up on their pressure until the case is formally dropped and Assange is free, as he should have been all along.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Breaking: complaints assessor rules CPS must give Webbe compensation for ‘acid’ slur
CPS and media fake news led to death threats, hate speech, depression and isolation toward wronged Black MP – which she has described as ‘a slow death’ – after a prosecution she has linked to former DPP Keir Starmer
Claudia Webbe, left
The Independent Assessor of Complaints (IAC), responsible for investigating the conduct of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), has ruled that the CPS must give Leicester East MP Claudia Webb compensation for the CPS’s false reporting of a court’s findings in relation to Ms Webbe – fake news that put her life in danger and led to a flood of hate speech toward her.
The CPS falsely told the media that the appeal court had said it ‘could not be sure’ that Ms Webbe had made an acid threat to another woman, when in fact the court had said it was sure that she had not made such a threat. Only Skwawkbox reported the court’s real findings, along with the repeated lies of her accuser and the Met Police’s withholding of exonerating evidence from the first trial.
Webbe had to complain to the CPS three times before it eventually fully corrected its fake claim.
Ms Webbe said:
The CPS falsely and unnecessarily reported that ‘I threatened to throw acid’, when it knew this was never part of the charge against me and further that any inference to ‘acid’ was dismissed at appeal. The CPS continued to run with this false narrative as part of their press release, even after the appeal court confirmed it had never happened. The actions of the CPS have contributed to me receiving constant death threats, silent calls, vile online social media abuse. I have been told that I am the MP that has received the most of such threats and abuse and particularly online.
The finding of the Independent Assessor of Complaints that the CPS had published false information about me is welcome and I hope it will put an end to this foul smear about me. The claim was one of a series of lies, exposed in the appeal, told about me by my accuser in a case where the Metropolitan Police also eventually admitted withholding a large amount of evidence that was in my favour.
The IAC ruled that it is ‘clear’ that I ‘suffered an injustice’, that the CPS statement ‘was both incorrect and reputationally damaging’ and that it ‘had an adverse effect on [my] health and wellbeing’. This is accurate as far as it goes but barely conveys the impact.
No amount of compensation can address what I have been through, but the offer of just £100 when the IAC acknowledged the seriousness of the suffering this caused me is derisory and the explanation by the CPS that their choice of wording was ‘in good faith’ is astonishing.
It has not escaped my attention that the CPS was formerly run by Keir Starmer. The damage done to me politically and professionally is enormous and the CPS continued to run its false reporting about me for a considerable length of time after the court case. I believe this was done to cause me maximum hurt and harm and, as I told the IAC, has inflicted on me perpetual anxiety, stress and poor health that has felt like a slow death. I believe the actions of the CPS were political, because I am on the left, and their actions were motivated by racism and sexism.
This is yet another example of the difficulty that Black people face in obtaining justice in a system stacked against them.
Claudia Webbe has faced horrific racist abuse and smears because of the CPS’s misleading statements – and received no support from Keir Starmer’s Labour. The IAC ruling puts the record straight, but the level of compensation and the claim that this was an error in good faith are an insult to all Black people and to women in particular – and prolongs the injustice and racism she suffered when the court found she had been accused by a serial white liar yet did not completely overturn the initial travesty of a verdict for a phone call that her accuser made to her and not the other way round.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Assange: justice denied again as court declines to admit new evidence of US murder plots
Wikileaks founder will remain in Belmarsh prison while judges seek further meaningless ‘assurances’ from US
The High Court has this morning again denied justice to persecuted Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. Despite admitting that the US is denying Assange’s rights to free speech and is pursuing him in a way that it would not pursue one of its own citizens, judges have decided to keep Assange in Belmarsh prison while it asks for further ‘assurances’ that the US will not kill him – even though there has been longstanding evidence of US plans to murder him outside the US.
Shamefully, the court has also declined to admit fresh evidence of US plots to assassinate him, claiming that the evidence is irrelevant because the US’s incentive to murder Assange would not apply if it had him in custody, as Declassified UK has pointed out:
Incredibly, the High Court has refused to admit fresh evidence of CIA plots to kidnap or kill Julian Assange.
The judges say the rationale for kidnapping or killing Assange would be removed if he is extradited, and the evidence is thus not worth consideration.
Read that again. pic.twitter.com/PqwJIg4yAn— Declassified UK (@declassifiedUK) March 26, 2024
The extradition case should have been laughed out of court three years ago, when the main US witness admitted he had been lying all along in his claim that Assange induced him to hack US systems. Instead, Assange has been submitted to what former UN Special Rapporteur on torture Nils Melzer described as sustained psychological torture – and still faces the likelihood of imprisonment for more than a century in US retaliation for Wikileaks exposing its war crimes in Iraq and as a deterrent to other journalists who might expose its crimes in future.
Shame on the UK and its travesty of justice and democracy. Free Julian Assange. Protect real journalism.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Government ordered Google to disclose names of users who watched videos
US attempts to trample privacy
US federal authorities ordered Google to provide names, addresses, phone numbers and details of other videos watched, of all users that viewed particular YouTube videos, according to Forbes magazine – and to provide the IP addresses of anyone who watched them without being logged in.
The government said it wanted the details to investigate a suspected crime committed by the publisher of the videos – but did not demonstrate any suspicion that those watching the videos had committed or colluded in any crime, telling the company only that the records would be ‘relevant and material’ to its investigation. Tens of thousands of accounts are believed to have been involved.
A US court granted the order but asked Google not to publicise it. In a separate incident, government agencies asked Google for a list of all accounts that watched eight livestreamed videos. It’s not known whether Google acceded to the orders.
Google told Forbes that it has ‘rigorous’ processes to protect user privacy, but the discovery of the government moves raised concerns about governments being able to access private information just because it claims ‘relevance’ and does not demonstrate any reasonable grounds to suspect that an individual has committed any crime. It is not known whether the UK or other governments have made similar attempts to access Google user records.
In 2021, Google admitted running ‘experiments’ that hid some websites from search results, raising questions about the risk of political or commercial interference in search results. In January of this year, the company paid five billion US dollars to settle a lawsuit over its collection of user data through its Chrome browser even when users activated its ‘incognito’ mode.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Exclusive: whistleblower accuses Labour W Mids PCC of refusing to act on abuse allegations
No response from Simon Foster’s press office to Elaina Cohen’s allegations – also covered up by Keir Starmer
A former MP’s staffer who blew the whistle on alleged abuse of Muslim domestic violence victims has accused West Midlands Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) Simon Foster of ‘refus[ing] to investigate’ the failure of the force’s then-Chief Constable to act on evidence of the abuse – and that Foster and the current Chief Constable ‘disregarding’ further allegations, from a separate source, about the same alleged perpetrator.
Elaina Cohen, who used to work for Birmingham MP Khalid Mahmood and took him successfully to an industrial tribunal for unfair dismissal when she lost her job after making protected disclosures about the abuse, first made the allegations against Foster during submissions to the tribunal, which Skwawkbox attended on behalf of its readers. Evidence given under oath to the tribunal by one of the victims of the ‘sadistic’ abuse, threats and blackmail she suffered was not disputed by Mahmood or his legal team.
And in an email today to Wolverhampton South East MP Pat McFadden, a Keir Starmer front-bencher, seen by Skwawkbox, Cohen wrote that:
Evidence already in the public domain shows Simon Foster has steadfastly refused to investigate why former West Midlands Chief Constable Thompson abandoned multiple victims when presented with evidenced abuse perpetrated by a Labour member working in a parliamentary office of a Labour MP.
An email from [Tory West Midlands Mayor] Andy Street states when he has the authority of a PCC he will seek justice for these women…
…an opposition party councillor has made representation to Simon Foster and Chief Constable Guildford with further allegations about the same perpetrator and was also disregarded.
I believe this information questions Simon Foster’s suitability to be a candidate.
Skwawkbox contacted Mr Foster’s press office for contact this morning, but received only an automated acknowledgement in reply.
Labour leader Keir Starmer and his general secretary David Evans also covered up the abuse, taking no action despite repeated warnings and appeals from Ms Cohen. They also did not act on Ms Cohen’s complaints of the antisemitism she suffered – or on complaints from Muslim women councillors in Birmingham about bullying, misogyny and threats at the hands of local party right-wingers.
Despite this appalling record, Starmer has continued to boast that he will be a ‘champion’ for victims of domestic abuse. Simon Foster has also promised to act to protect women:
Foster, who is standing for re-election, has just won a legal battle to prevent his PCC role being absorbed by Tory metro mayor Andy Street, but Elaina Cohen told Skwawkbox of her dissatisfaction with both Foster and his party boss:
I remain disappointed that Sir Keir Starmer refuses to acknowledge or act upon my protected disclosures and whilst I would support an independent office of a PCC I would question political appointments based on my own experience. In my opinion the cover-up of criminal abuse of vulnerable women is just as abhorrent as racism as a candidate issue.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Skwawkbox is in Dublin to cover Ogle vs Unite discrimination tribunal
Irish union legend claiming discrimination by Graham-run union after return from cancer treatment. Skwawkbox will report from Irish Workplace Relations Commission
From Tuesday, the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) in Dublin will hear the discrimination case brought by Irish union legend Brendan Ogle against Sharon Graham’s Unite, for abuse Ogle – who supported Howard Beckett during the 2021 Unite general secretary election – says he suffered at the hands of the union management after his return from a successful battle against life-threatening cancer.
Ogle, who is also separately suing Graham, her ally Tony Woodhouse and the union for defamation, has alleged that he was abused by the union after his return from treatment for cancer – and after he made ‘protected disclosures’ to the union about its failures to adhere to covid protocols during the pandemic.
Graham and her representatives have been accused of ‘disgusting’ behaviour toward Ogle – and anger in Ireland at the situation became so great that an entire sector branch threatened to disaffiliate entirely from Unite, the well-known ‘Right2Water’ campaign said it will no longer work with Unite, Unite’s Community section in Ireland condemned the ‘injustice inflicted’ on him and members picketed general secretary Sharon Graham’s long-delayed visit to Dublin.
Skwawkbox is in Dublin to cover the proceedings, including Tuesday’s session where Graham’s predecessor as general secretary, Jeremy Corbyn ally Len McCluskey, is expected to take the stand to testify. Graham herself has been subpoenaed by Ogle’s legal team to give evidence, despite allegedly trying to get out of appearing.
Graham is using one of the world’s most profitable law firms to defend the defamation suit – and also, as Skwawkbox revealed, in the tribunal case. Her tenure as Unite boss has been marked by a string of other allegations – which neither she nor the union has denied – including alleged destruction of evidence against her husband in misogyny and bullying complaints. She is currently being sued, along with an ally and the union, by Irish union legend Brendan Ogle for defamation.
She has been exposed using proxies to order the cancellation of showings of the film ‘Oh Jeremy Corbyn/The Big Lie’, which exposes the political abuse of antisemitism accusations against left-wingers in the Labour party, and discussion of Asa Winstanley’s forensic book Weaponising Antisemitism: How the Israel Lobby Brought Down Jeremy Corbyn. Proxies were similarly despatched to try, unsuccessfully, to cancel a Unite ‘fringe’ event at Labour’s conference earlier this month in support of Palestinians.
Ogle’s barrister told the Workplace Relations Commission adjudicator last November that she expected the union would be required to ‘produce’ Sharon Graham to testify, along with a string of current and former senior Unite officials and employees.
If you would like to help cover Skwawkbox’s costs of attending this week’s session, which is expected to be the first of two or three at the WRC before the case is adjudicated, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thank you for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
Starmer ‘didn’t know’ re sub-postmasters, ‘wasn’t involved’ on Savile. What DID he do as DPP?
Analysis: CPS prosecuted at least 27 people – and as many as 38 – running post offices during Horizon scandal – it strains credibility to claim he knew nothing
Labour has claimed that none of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) prosecutions of innocent sub-postmasters went ‘to [Keir Starmer’s] desk. Starmer himself has now told reporters that he knew nothing about any of the cases:
I wasn’t aware of any of them. I think there was a small number within a 20-year window, that’s all I know. I don’t even now – I think the CPS are helping with inquiries – how many of those may or may not have involved Horizon.
There were at least twenty-seven and as many as thirty eight cases.
One such case that definitely happened under Starmer’s tenure as CPS head was the prosecution of Seema Misra, who was jailed for fifteen months in 2010 – on her son’s tenth birthday – for fraud that she never committed. She was pregnant when she was prosecuted and jailed – and her conviction was only quashed in 2021. The prosecution did not disclose to the court that the Post Office knew the Horizon system was faulty and had at least forty examples of the system causing shortfalls at Post Office branches.
When the scandal of serial rapist Jimmy Savile broke and Starmer was attacked for not prosecuting him, Keir Starmer did not personally deny he had been involved in the decision not to prosecute Savile, instead allowing mouthpieces – including Tory MPs – to say he was not aware of it, insisting that we believe that he ran the CPS and was never asked for his view on whether to prosecute the offender who was, at the time, Britain’s highest-profile entertainer.
Starmer boasted of his role in prosecuting former government minister Chris Huhne and promised the US he would ‘do everything’ to secure the extradition of autistic hacker Gary McKinnon – yet supposedly was not consulted by his subordinates about Savile.
The CPS claimed it had destroyed all records relating to the decision not to prosecute Savile. The CPS also claimed that it had destroyed all records relating to prosecution of Seema Misra.
We are asked to believe that Starmer was not involved in the Savile decision, was not involved in or consulted on any CPS Post Office cases – was not even aware of their existence – despite them taking place while he ran the CPS and despite revelations, a year before the Misra case, in the press about the known, widespread issues with the Horizon system causing false ‘shortfalls’ in Post Office branches.
As Labour leader, Starmer has covered up a whistleblower’s allegations of ‘sadistic’ and ‘criminal’ exploitation of vulnerable domestic violence victims by a Labour staffer who was the lover of the MP she was working for. That MP, Khalid Mahmood, did not dispute a victim’s sworn evidence in whistleblower Elaina Cohen’s successful tribunal for wrongful dismissal – and confirmed under oath that Starmer and Labour general secretary David Evans were fully and repeatedly aware of the allegations.
Starmer also sheltered at least two alleged sex pests in his Shadow Cabinet and re-admitted racist and sex harasser MP Neil Coyle back into the parliamentary party, as well as Mike Gapes, the right-wing former MP who defended fellow right-winger Ian McKenzie after McKenzie tweeted about the rape and beheading of Thornberry herself, and former MPs who defended him. He is a creature of the Establishment and sides with it every time.
What the hell was he doing while he was boss of the CPS if he didn’t know about the highest profile cases and wasn’t consulted on the widest miscarriage of justice in British legal history? This site does not believe it is credible.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.