It appears that Mark Croucher -failed publican and serial liar - has been appointed UKIP’s unofficial spokesman on legal matters.
On the British Democracy Forum he has been trying desperately to promote the idea that various data protection complaints against UKIP have been rejected by the Information Commissioners Office.
Croucher, for reasons only known to himself, has neglected to give examples of how UKIP’s leadership has failed in it’s attempts to take legal action against various past and present UKIPPERS or supporters.
In the interests of fairness - and to save Croucher any further embarrassment - here are some of UKIP‘s most recent legal blunders:
Douglas Denny’s versus Greg Lance-Watkins. Complaint made to Police.
Complaint concerned Greg Lance-Watkin’s publication of email correspondence between Douglas Denny and Jonathan Arnott. Denny claimed this was a criminal breach of the Data Protection Act.
Complaint rejected by the Police. No further action.
UKIP versus Roger Knapman, Piers Merchant, Sir Richard Body, Dr Eric Edmond, Dr David Abbott, Del Young, Tim Congdon, Bruce Lawson and Martin Haslam. Complaint made by Paul Nuttall to New Scotand Yard.
Complaint concerned a letter that had been sent to various UKIP members. In this letter they were asked to vote against the proposed changes to UKIP’s constitution. UKIP’s leadership alleged that the party database had been used unlawfully. Nuttall claimed this was a criminal breach of the Data Protection Act.
Complaint rejected by the Police following interview with Roger Knapman. No further action.
Originally the odious Nuttall had gone to New Scotland Yard and demanded to speak to the ‘political unit’. Nuttall was rather embarrassed to be told that it did not exist!
Which brings me to ……
David Bannerman versus John West and various unnamed persons.
Complaint concerned John West’s alleged harassment, defamation and abuse of David Bannerman and other NEC members. Complaint also concerned ‘all those that have been engaged in these vile, selfish and disloyal attacks on the party’.
Last year David Bannerman sent John West the following email:
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 18:52:34 +0000 From: email@example.com Subject: Re: David Bannerman email To: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
Dear Mr West,
Thank you. I believe you are referring to the confidential document supplied to NEC members only concerning a disciplinary submission against Dr Edmond ? Others have reported this document being shown around, and who by. As a breach of confidentiality can result in instant dismissal from the NEC under the Constitution, I am most grateful to you for your personal confirmation of this breach.
You are well aware of the libellous remarks you made against me, and which you have refused to apologise for ( your statement reproduced below, which was followed by other libellous remarks ). I have never claimed that you reported me to the police, though I understand you made a complaint against Stuart Gulleford and Jeffrey Titford to the Essex Police, which they have found to have no basis whatsoever. This is also referred to in your statement reproduced below.
Your constant harassment of NEC members and other party members, including myself with entirely false accusations of dishonesty, corruption and fraud, and on an almost daily basis, is totally unacceptable.
I therefore inform you that I am taking this matter directly to the Metropolitan Police´s political unit in an appointment next week, on grounds of criminal defamation and abuse, serious offences punishable under the Harassment Act 1997.
I will be asking the police at that meeting to investigate all those that have been engaged in these vile, selfish and disloyal attacks on the party. This a time when we should be preparing for essential elections next year, not being diverted by self-serving rants, and you have to question the motive. You yourself are ( currently ) a UKIP PPC and yet you regard it as acceptable to go to the Secretary General of the European Parliament to protest at my legitimate UKIP activities.
I have your e mail and this is also being supplied to the police.
I confirm I will be providing the police too with copies of all your other e mails, and with all the relevant e mails of Gregg Lance Watkins ( or is it Lance-Watkins or just Watkins ? ), amongst others. The police also have the power to require webhosts to reveal the e mail identity of contributors to such websites.
David Campbell Bannerman
Taken from GLW’s blog.
Bannerman went along to New Scotland Yard and demanded to speak to the ‘political unit’. He was told it did not exist - if only he had bothered to tell Nuttall!
Complaint rejected by Police. No further action.