Open Letter to Julia Mulligan – PCC for N Yorks

Open Letter to Julia Mulligan – PCC for N Yorks

Open Letter to Julia Mulligan – PCC for North Yorkshire

by guest author Neil Wilby, in response to the outcome of the court hearing of Tuesday 26th July 2016. (Court report available here).


Dear Julia,

We have met twice over the past two years and conducted discussions
amicably on topics connected with your role as Police and Crime
Commissioner for North Yorkshire and the City of York.

Particularly, related to the oversight of the Chief Constable that
forms one of the three core strands of responsibility of a Police
Commissioner. The other two being, of course, firstly, setting a budget
and, secondly, agreeing a Policing Plan with the force.

I write to you in connection with the recently concluded Operation
Hyson, and its predecessor investigation, Operation Rome, which engages
two of those key strands, oversight and budget, and remind you that the
ground upon which you persistently stonewalled any previous questions –
‘it may prejudice an on-going legal case’ – has now fallen away.

The following public interest questions, therefore, are now put to
you in open letter and you are most cordially invited to respond in the
same manner.

  1. When you were elected in November 2012, were you made aware by the
    Chief Constable of the attempts by North Yorkshire Police to silence two
    citizen journalists via criminal prosecution by way of Operation Rome?
  1. Did you know that one of the two journalists, Nigel Ward, was not
    contacted by police, even once, during a two-year investigation into the
    allegations of harassment?
  1. Will you please publish the Operation Rome investigation report
    (suitably redacted to protect personal information) in the interests of
    openness and transparency?
  1. Who was the driving force within NYP for those failed prosecution attempts?
  1. Was that same officer the lead for converting an inept and,
    ultimately, failed criminal investigation into a publicly-funded civil
    court claim?
  1. Did you ever read the pleadings in the civil court case and satisfy
    yourself that the inclusion of Nigel Ward in the claim was merited on
    the evidence?
  1. I have asked you repeatedly if you had read the papers but you
    claimed it would prejudice the case if you answered ‘yes’ or ‘no’. Do
    you stand by that as a credible rationale, bearing in mind this was a
    civil court claim heard before a single (very senior) judge?
  1. Eight claimants, including CC Jones, DCC Madgwick, C/Supt (now ACC)
    Winward, held Mr Ward in the claim until only one month before the trial
    despite having no evidence, whatsoever, against him. Will you be
    holding CC Jones to account over this conduct and, particularly, the
    grotesque waste of public money as once costs issues are resolved –
    either between the parties or by the court – it is very likely to mean a
    further significant drain on police funds?
  1. Whilst the matter of costs is also still extant in the case of the
    ninth claimant, your long term political ally Jane Kenyon-Miller, these
    are likely to be very substantial – and another scandalous waste of
    public money. Will you also be holding the Chief Constable (or Acting
    Chief Constable as the case may be) to account over the decision to take
    the matter to a final hearing on 26th July, 2016 (from which I reported), against the judge’s specific advice at an earlier hearing on 7th July, 2016 (at which I was also present) for both parties to seek a compromised settlement?
  1. Will you be holding the Chief Constable to account over the fact that he was funding no less than seven
    lawyers, including a QC, to be present at the final hearing (albeit two
    of those were trainee solicitors) representing Jane Kenyon-Miller, a
    member of the public, in what was, after all, an uncomplicated County
    Court claim between two members of the public?
  1. Please explain your rationale for continuing to sanction the Acting
    Chief Constable’s public funding of Mrs Kenyon-Miller, an independently
    wealthy individual, in her claim against Mr Ward, a penniless pensioner,
    after the other eight Operation Hyson claimants (including the Acting
    Chief Constable himself) had, belatedly, discontinued their claims?
  1. Please also explain your rationale for sanctioning the spending by
    A/CC Madgwick of what may well be around £20,000 of public money on a
    failed, largely misconceived application hearing held on 7th
    July, 2016 at which (i) permission was sought to access emails and text
    messages of Mr Ward and myself (ii) criminalise myself and Mr Ward over
    alleged contempt of court?
  1. Will you be holding Acting Chief Constable Madgwick fully to
    account over the false evidence he gave in his witness statement in the
    civil claim – and the manner in which he conducted himself when publicly
    challenged over some of it?
  1. Will you be holding your own employee, Temporary Force Solicitor
    Jane Wintermeyer, similarly to account over why significant parts of her
    witness evidence concerning Mr Ward were palpably false, the rest of it
    concerning Mr Ward of little apparent evidential value?
  1. Finally, will you be holding the Chief Constable to account over the
    smears he caused to be published against Mr Ward in local and regional
    newspapers suggesting that he – in concert with the two other defendants
    – persistently harassed ALL nine of the claimants in a most unpleasant
    manner? The finding of the court is that he has not harassed ANY of the

I look forward to your response.

Kind regards

Neil Wilby

from Blogger

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *