‘A grubby little police force’

This catchphrase, now widely shared on social media and indelibly associated with Durham Constabulary, was first coined in November 2016 as part of communication between journalist, Neil Wilby, and the force, concerning a concise, plainly expressed freedom of information request (read in full here).

The disposal of that request quickly turned very ugly after Durham made, very arguably, the worst and most offensive response in the history of the Freedom of Information Act, 2000. It was an unwarranted, unvarnished, libellous attack by a police force, against an enquiring reporter, that also contained a series of deliberate and inexcusable untruths. There had never been any communication or interaction between them prior to that request, which made a response of that deeply offensive nature all the more inexplicable and inexcusable.

Those police officers responsible, both civilian and warranted, should, on any independent view, have faced a criminal investigation or, at the very least, a disciplinary hearing. A clearer case of misconduct in public office or, in police regulations parlance, disreputable conduct, would be hard to find.

Interestingly, the senior officer with portfolio holder responsibility for information rights at that time was Deputy Chief Constable Jo Farrell, since promoted to the top rank following the sudden, inexplicable ‘retirement’ of her predecessor, the vastly overblown Mike Barton.

Their motivation, it seems, was to frustrate a journalistic investigation into yet another shoddy operation, in a lengthy cataloge in that era, by North Yorkshire Police. Durham’s part in that probe is that they had, allegedly, taken over a fraud investigation from NYP as it involved a very prominent, and influential, former police authority Chair in North Yorkshire, Jane Kenyon. Over the years, a regular object of derision in the satirical magazine, Private Eye, regarding her dubious business dealings (read more here).

The criminal ‘investigation’ also featured Thomas William Miller, a Scarborough councillor better known as Bill, who is now married to Kenyon. The victims of the alleged fraud were one Miller’s sons, Jeremy, and his daughter in law, Karen. All four had been involved in a company called Dales Timber Ltd.

In the event, disclosure was refused by Durham after a series of ludicrous, childish, unlawful posts on the What Do They Know website, upon which the request was first posted. They relied on Section 14 of the Act, saying the request was ‘vexatious’, without actually explaining why.

Following a complaint to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), the Durham decision was overturned. During the watchdog’s investigation the police force continued their smearing campaign against the journalist. Given weight to the argument that this was not about an information request but much more about pursuing a vendetta.

They eventually, and reluctantly, made partial disclosure from which it could readily be deduced that the fraud ‘investigation’ on behalf of NYP was a sham. There was simply no intention to gather probative evidence, take statements from key witnesses and/or suspects, seize evidence or apply the necessary rigour to what, on any independent view, was a very serious matter involving a high profile public figure with a history of dodgy dealing. Efforts since, via the Police and Crime Commissioner, the disgraced Julia Mulligan, a close Conservative Party associate of Jane Kenyon, to have the flawed fraud investigation re-opened, were vigorously rebuffed.

The outfall from that venomous attack by Durham is still the subject of civil proceedings that were first brought in November, 2017 against Durham, who have done everything they can to frustrate that process. A resumed hearing is listed for November 2020. The first, in December, 2019, was adjourned due to the court not allocating sufficient time for the hearing to be completed. [The court service’s over- listing of multiple back-to-back hearings, with no provision for urgent or emergency matters to be dealt with by district judges, will be the subject of a future article].

The claim has been brought by way of section 13(2) the Data Protection Act, 1998 (since superceded) following the sub-optimal disposal of a data subject access request; Durham’s Information Rights Manager, Leigh Davison, has admitted the breach and apologised in her witness statement but, at the same time, their counsel, Daniel Penman, pleads that there is ‘no cause of action’ and advises Durham to refuse to pay the nominal damages sought.

Penman, an oppressive, excessively bullish and sometimes foolish individual is, in those terms, ideally suited to this particular client. One of his bizarre claims, made during informal discussions with the district judge at the conclusion of the last hearing, designed only to humiliate his opponent, was that Mark Gosnell, a senior civil judge based in Leeds, is known as ‘Mr Justice Gosnell’. He was not then and is still not now a ‘red judge’; notwithstanding the very fine and highly regarded arbiter that His Honour undoubtedly is.

He did not welcome the advice from a seasoned journalist/court reporter that, without a change in approach towards other parties to litigation, or journalists, he may well not make the advance in his career his undoubted promise as an advocate might warrant. An approach also in evidence at Bradford Law Courts during a hotly contested civil claim at which both journalist and barrister were present (read here) when he and his leader, the similarly bullish Olivia Checa-Dover, tried, unsuccessfully, to prevent Neil Wilby reporting on the case. Anyone reading that trial summary will understand precisely why those instructing counsel, led by Alison Walker of West Yorkshire Police no less, would have preferred the highly controversial matters aired in the resolution of that £5 million claim, including lurid details of the activities of a “bad apple” officer (read more here), to remain concealed.

A second civil claim is to be issued shortly against Durham concerning the same data subject access request: The force, via Ms Davison, maintains that all materials to which the applicant was entitled were disclosed, when it is patently obvious that such an assertion has no basis in either the facts or evidence. There is also a peripheral issue of the torn packaging in which the subject access materials were sent. Taken at its face, a minor matter of course, but one that created significant distress and alarm at the prospect that sensitive personal data, sent out by a police force, was accessible to anyone within the postal service.

At the time, Durham didn’t even have the courtesy or professionalism to respond to the email and attached photographs, evidencing the flimsy, careless and, in fact, unlawful manner in which the data was transported. But for “a grubby little police force” that type of treatment comes as standard. They utterly resent any form of scrutiny or challenge.

Ms Davison is the subject of robust criticism, over both disclosure failings and her lack of professionalism and the seeming lack of integrity of her department, from other service users such as Huddersfield businessman Stephen Bradbury who has also succeeded at the ICO in his complaint against Durham and has been forced to issue civil proceedings, grounded in Section 168 of the Data Protection Act, 2018 and Article 82 of the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR), over a grotesque breach of his privacy and misuse of personal data. Despite the ICO finding, the police have ignored all attempts to settle the claim without resort to legal action.

The case of local man Mel Dawson has reached the national newspapers (read here). Durham Constabulary has been responsible for a quite remarkable sequence of ‘disappearances’ of important data. Not least of which is all materials related to a search warrant that Mr Dawson asserts was unlawfully obtained.

Another more startling critic of the Information Rights Department, Ms Davison, the force’s Legal Services Department and Chief Constable Farrell is one of their former colleagues, Michael Trodden, who complains bitterly over disclosure failings relating to a criminal trial at which the detective was cleared by a jury (read here) and in misconduct proceedings that followed.

A third Yorkshire man, Darren Longthorne, together with his wife, Tracey, are also fiercely critical of Ms Davison, and others, following the death of the latter’s father and a botched investigation by Durham that followed. The inevitable disclosure failings by the police are at the heart of their complaints.

This is an emerging picture of sustained abuse of the Freedom of Information Act, the Data Protection Act and the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act by a law enforcement agency. A national disgrace and one upon which the statutory regulator should be taking much more robust action than the occasional slap on the wrist.

It is a near certainty folowing publication of this article that other complainants will come forward and add further weight to the “grubby little police force” strapline.

More recently, yet another decision made by the ICO has gone against Durham following a further Neil Wilby information request (read in full here). The genesis of the request was the media storm over another grotesquely failed ‘outside force’ investigation. This time concerned the alleged theft of sensitive documents relating to the review of the police actions following the Loughinisland massacre in 1994.

Durham Constabulary and the two officers who led the investigation, at the invitation of the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI), the aforementioned Barton and the civilian investigator, Darren Ellis, about whom much has been written elsewhere on this website (read more here), were absolutely slaughtered both in the High Court and the national press over their conduct – and particularly over warrants obtained unlawfully against two hugely respected Irish journalists, Trevor Birney and Barry McCaffrey. The latter two are presently involved in mediation over settlement of their claims for unlawful arrest, trespass and detention. Neither Barton nor Ellis have faced any investigation or proceedings over their ghastly conduct.

In their response to the information request, again very precisely drafted, Durham claimed that they held no information and that under the Police Act, 1996 the request should be transferred to Durham. It was a response so ludicrous that it might have been written by a 12 year old – and was nothing more than a peurile, vacuous ruse to avoid disclosing more damaging material, particularly internal and external emails, to journalist they dislike intensely. If Ms Davison didn’t write it herself (the response was sent anonymously in breach of Code of Ethics and Authorised Professional Practice), then it went out under her departmental direction and control.

The force even refused to fulfil their obligations under FOIA and, more particularly, the College of Police’s Authorised Professional Practice, regarding the request made for an internal review of the decision not to disclose anything.

Durham has also now revealed that four other requests were received on similar subject matter and they got away without making any disclosure to those applicants.

It took the ICO seven months to reach their decision but, for them, they were scathing in their criticism of Durham and directed that the request did have to be dealt with by them and all materials prior to the investigation commencing should fall for disclosure. Some, but not all, of the disclosure has now been made and, as expected, almost the entire artifice was designed to protect one man: the thoroughly disgraced Darren Ellis.

PSNI do not escape censure either as they repeatedly, and unlawfully, intervened in the request, apparently on behalf of Durham, attempting to take it over and then refusing disclosure by way of a section 31 exemption. One is entitled to muse over the calibre, and integrity, of employees of that force engaged in their disclosure unit and, of course, the unseen hands directing them from above.

The battle over the Loughinisland disclosure continues, however, as once again, it is clear that not all the materials known to be in existence at Durham have been disclosed. A matter that is, once again, destined for both the ICO and the civil courts.

In the meantime, the public are entitled to seriously question the hundreds of thousand of pounds, and countless officer hours, squandered by Durham Constabulary (and, in two of the cases, NYP and PSNI) to simply conceal materials that will further damage their reputation as “a grubby little police force”. It is a matter so serious that it should warrant a mandatory referral of the conduct of those officers involved, from the past and present chief constables downwards, to the Independent Office for Police Conduct.

The immediate past chief constable, Mike Barton, now faces an uncomfortable few weeks as the real reason for his hasty exit from the top job has been exposed by an insider. A follow-up to this article will be published during w/c 28th September, 2020, wherein those revelations will be expanded upon.

It is not a pretty picture for either Barton or his boss, the late Ron Hogg, whom, it seems, concocted the ‘spend more time in my greenhouse’ story that the local and regional media swallowed whole. Within days a national newspaper had revealed that Barton had taken on a lucrative role with a Canadian IT company (read more here). This, in addition, to continuing to pick up the pieces from his force’s failed enterprise in Northern Ireland. Both a long way from his garden in Blackpool.

Barton received a CBE on the day he required. In all truth, one is entitled to ask how he had the brass neck to accept it.

The police force press offices at Durham and PSNI, the interim Police and Crime Commissioner for Durham have all been approached for a statement.

Page last updated: Thursday 3rd September, 2020 at 1300 hours

Photo Credits:

Corrections: Please let me know if there is a mistake in this article. I will endeavour to correct it as soon as possible.

Right of reply: If you are mentioned in this article and disagree with it, please let me have your comments. Provided your response is not defamatory it will be added to the article.

© Neil Wilby 2015-2020. Unauthorised use, or reproduction, of the material contained in this article, without permission from the author, is strictly prohibited. Extracts from, and links to, the article (or blog) may be used, provided that credit is given to Neil Wilby, with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Key witness in police funded civil action is a proven liar

KENYON_MADGWICK

In a sensational and very recent development it can now be proved that the central witness in North Yorkshire Police‘s High Court pursuit of two journalists over harassment claims is a liar.

And not just a little white lie, either. There is at least one whopper that could land Jane Kenyon-Miller in a criminal court.

Documents seen by me as part of extensive enquiries into the background of a police investigation, codenamed Operation Hyson, show that she made a false statement in an earlier and directly connected police probe, Operation Rome. Both these operations sought to silence critics of the force who were seeking to expose police corruption.

As Mrs Kenyon-Miller’s statement was made pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule R27.2, Criminal Justice Act 1967 and under a declaration that states ‘I shall be liable to prosecution if I wilfully state in it anything which I know to be false, or do not believe to be true’, this leaves the police with a serious problem. Do they apply the law without fear or favour, or bow to her influence as former Chair of North Yorkshire Police Authority and friend of the Deputy Chief Constable, Tim Madgwick (pictured above with Jane Kenyon as she was then known).

That particular lie concerns Mrs Kenyon-Miller’s association with troubled American company, Belvedere Computers Inc. She remains listed as the Chief Financial Officer and Agent for Service: A matter of indisputable fact that she has consistently tried to conceal.

Screen Shot 2016-03-02 at 20.00.27

In her CJA statement, given to Operation Rome detectives in 2012, she stated that Belvedere was wound up in 1983. The truth is that the company’s two officers left a trail of creditors and unpaid staff behind them when they returned to the UK. The company is still listed as suspended – not wound up – and there are ongoing Federal and State tax liabilities accruing. It was unpaid taxes that led to the suspension of the company by the California Franchise Tax Board (see graphic above).

The Chief Executive Officer of Belvedere Computers Inc is Thomas William Miller, the long-term life partner and recent husband of Jane Kenyon-Miller.

Mrs Kenyon-Miller has also claimed in another statement that she resigned as Secretary from Belvedere in 1980. Below is an image of a microfiche of the last company document ever filed with the California Secretary of State. It shows her still holding two official postions with the computer company.

Screen Shot 2016-03-02 at 20.11.42

Belvedere is not the only failed company with which the Kenyon-Millers have been associated. In 2009, Pickering based Dales Timber Ltd crashed owing over £200,000. Bill Miller was sole Director and Jane Kenyon was Company Secretary. A police investigation followed this latest failure, but no charges were brought. The victims of the alleged fraud, which include one of Mr Miller’s sons, remain bitterly disappointed in how the matter was dealt with by the police. I have interviewed Jeremy Miller and his wife, Karen, at length regarding this. I have also spoken to Bill Miller’s ex-wife, Pamela.

Since then, other lines of enquiry have been opened up and two other crucial witnesses have come forward to also give witness statements and provide contemporaneous documents. New light can now be shone onto these failed ventures and the emerging picture is one that does not show the best side of North Yorkshire Police. There appears to have been a sustained cover-up designed to shield Bill Miller and Jane Kenyon from any form of sanction.

The police cannot claim that they haven’t been provided with the necessary clues: A more detailed analysis of the chequered life and business times of Bill Miller, and the former Jane Kenyon, can be absorbed from this outstanding piece of forensic journalism posted on the Real Whitby website as long ago as 2012 (click here).

Returning to the Jane Kenyon-led harassment claims, Operation Hyson is the codename for the civil court action being financed from police funds. It is estimated that the final cost of Hyson may be in excess of £500,000. Mrs Kenyon-Miller’s personal benefit, in free legal fees, would in that case be in excess of £50,000. Her friend, DCC Madgwick is also claiming to have been harassed by journalists and is receiving a similar amount of free legal fees.

It is a well grounded belief that Mrs Kenyon-Miller, a Borough and County Councillor for many years, was the driving force behind Operation Rome. A spectacular and embarrassing failure for North Yorkshire Police which, they say, cost the taxpayer a sum close to £410,000. More than the money spent on the second stage of the murder hunt for the killer of Claudia Lawrence (read more here). Operation Hyson was started immediately after Rome collapsed, seemingly on the same money no object principle.

Given her business background, and chequered family history, it is almost beyond incredible that Jane Kenyon held the legal and financial portfolios at Scarborough Borough Council until recently.

Other official documents that I have seen confirm that Mr Miller is currently the subject of at least one Department of Work and Pensions fraud investigation with a hearing planned within the next few months: A matter about which his wife, Mrs Kenyon-Miller, claims to have no knowledge.

The civil court case is on-going so further comment regarding its merits or likely outcome is not possible at this time.

Comment has been sought from Police and Crime Commissioner Julia Mulligan, who has authorised the legal funding of Mrs Kenyon-Miller’s civil harassment claim, and the Chief Constable, David Jones, who is a co-claimant in the civil action and fellow recipient of free legal fees. Both (pictured below) claim to be committed to embedding the Code of Ethics into their police force.

Chief-Constable-Dave-Jones-and-Commissioner-Julia-Mulligan-380x254

A North Yorkshire Police spokesperson provided this response on behalf of the two police chiefs: “Due to ongoing legal proceedings it is not appropriate for them to make comment at this time”.

A follow-up question has been put to the force that does not impact on the civil court case: ‘Is it the policy of NYP to prosecute offenders who make deliberately false CJA statements in criminal investigations?’

This is their response: ‘It would be inappropriate for North Yorkshire Police to comment’.

A further clarification has been sought on the basis that they did not understand the question. The question regarding CJA statements was then passed to the Chief Constable’s office on 4th March, 2016.

A more detailed background piece I wrote last year on Jane Kenyon-Miller, a person whom I met when I was Managing Director of the Scarborough Evening News, can be found here.

This page last updated: Friday 4th March, 2016 at 2125

_____________________________________________________________

© Neil Wilby 2015-2016. Unauthorised use or reproduction of the material contained in this article, without permission from the author, is strictly prohibited. Extracts from and links to the article (or blog) may be used, provided that credit is given to Neil Wilby, with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Former Police Authority Chair in fresh Alderman storm

CH068-£400K-Shooting-Party

To many in the picturesque coastal towns of Scarborough and Whitby, and an even larger number across the broader acres of North Yorkshire, the very thought that Jane Margaret Kenyon could be worthy of a special civic honour would be anathema.

Miss Kenyon endured a chequered history during her political career as a councillor in Scarborough; whilst in her seat on North Yorkshire County Council; and in her role as Chair of North Yorkshire Police Authority (NYPA). She was also a failed Parliamentary candidate, having stood for Huddersfield West as a Conservative nominee in 1991.

As Chair of NYPA, she was in post when the force failed to net the country’s most notorious sex abuser, Jimmy Savile and it is inconceivable that she was one of the very few people in the area who were not aware, however obliquely, of the serial sex offending of Council colleague, and former Mayor of Scarborough, Peter Jaconelli. Indeed, it has been recently revealed that Jaconelli was actually charged with sexually abusing a Spanish waiter during his mayoral year. The case was later mysteriously dropped.

Miss Kenyon was also in the NYPA hot seat during the Grahame Maxwell and Adam Briggs scandals that brought national media attention of the worst kind to North Yorkshire Police.

It was also Jane Kenyon who abused her role as Chair in attempting to have journalist Tim Hicks arrested, on entirely spurious claims of criminal harassment, which resulted in a lengthy post-interview state of hiatus but no arrest, no disclosure of any offence committed, or any further action by the police except a senior detective telling Hicks his articles were ‘damaging the reputation of North Yorkshire Police‘.

It was a spiteful, vindictive act by Miss Kenyon (whom police officers referred to throughout the Hicks interview as ‘Jane’) designed only to intimidate a reporter trying to do his job exposing misconduct in public authorities. What has now belatedly emerged is that Miss Kenyon lied in her witness statement as part of those police enquiries (read more here)

Calls for Miss Kenyon to resign as Chair of the Police Authority stretch as far back as 2005 when, unsurprisingly in the light of what was to follow, financial irregularities were uncovered by auditors in the accounts management of the police. A full York Evening Press report can be read here. It is a a damning indictment of her stewardship at NYPA.

There was a further, widely reported call for Kenyon to resign in 2007: This time the scandal centred on the waste of hundreds of thousands of pounds for 27 luxury cars, for which the senior police officers using them had not received appropriate training. (Scarborough News coverage here ). Another sorry tale of financial mismanagement.

There was, in between times, the Chief Constable Della Cannings profligacy scandal, particularly when the cost of a shower next to her office cost £28,000. Phil Willis, Liberal Democrat MP for Harrogate and Knaresborough at the time, accused her of turning the local police into “a laughing stock”, while the Yorkshire Post revealed further details of Cannings’ extravagant and self-glorifying behaviour, including a HQ sculpture garden and a building to be named in her honour. Not to mention her cock-a-doodle-do telephone ringtone, and the poor-taste joke about her ‘vibrator’. All this, again, on Kenyon’s watch at the Police Authority. The fact that Ms Canningswas a regular vistor to Miss Kenyon’s home between Scarborough and Whitby would, of course, be entirely unconnected. They are both pictured below.

_46251345_jane   della-main

It is also in my own certain knowledge, following a lengthy interchange with Dr Judith Heeley, who was then Treasurer for both West Yorkshire Police Authority (WYPA) and the NYPA, prior to her retirement, that certain cross-Authority ‘deals’ and staffing arrangements were not at all to the advantage of NYPA, yet had been signed off by Kenyon.

Interestingly, shortly after election as Police & Crime Commissioner, Julia Mulligan ended some, if not all, of those financial arrangements.

As a County and Borough councillor, Kenyon has featured in the national press over a number of scandals, which include the infamous ‘double-dipping’ farrago where elected North Yorkshire representatives were shamelessly drawing allowances for exactly the same item from two different public purses. Her association as Chief Financial Officer with Belvedere Computers Inc in the United States, where a trail of debt and unpaid employees was left in its wake along with the whiff of a ‘long firm fraud’, and the similarly ill-starred Dales Timber Ltd which left creditors nursing £250,000 of debt headaches, do not chime well with Kenyon’s role in charge of oversight of a police force, or her legal and financial portfolio responsibilities as a councillor. Neither do failure to register interests appropriately, as a public official, as required under the Localism Act 2011.

Brought up in Huddersfield, and a graduate of the exclusive, fee-paying Wakefield Girls High School, the charismatic Kenyon holds a special interest to the author of this piece. Not least because her father, Sir Bernard Kenyon, was Clerk of the former West Riding County Council based in Wakefield. He was a formidable figure in the area, but fell from grace through his improper association with the famously corrupt architect, John Poulson. The modernistic palace named ‘Manasseh’ that Poulson built on the edge of his home village, Carleton on the outskirts of Pontefract, was actually directly opposite my first ever home, ‘West Haugh’, after fleeing my parents’ nest.

Jane Kenyon and I actually met at a charity function in the Royal Hotel during my time as managing director of the now defunct Scarborough Evening News. She was charm and grace personified.

Her marriage in January 2014, after a long term adulterous relationship, to another Scarborough councillor noted for financial chicanery, Thomas William Miller, does leave the independent observer with the view that scandal is never far from Jane Kenyon’s door. Or, as she is sometimes now known: Jane Kenyon-Miller. The corporate and financial dealings of Bill Miller (as he is more commonly known), over a very long period, don’t bear too much scrutiny – but it serves no useful purpose to rehearse them here. It is not ‘Nine Dollar Bill’ that is being lined up for an ill-deserved civic honour.

Which brings the reader, neatly, to the thrust of this piece: Jane Kenyon was given the considerable honour of becoming a Honorary Alderman of the Borough of Scarborough at a specially convened meeting on 23rd October, 2015, despite some vigorous objections raised by me, and others more local to the Borough. In the course of my interchange with the Council’s press officer, Gabrielle Jandzio, on this subject, it has become clear that I was deliberately misled by none other than the Council’s Legal Services Manager, Lisa Dixon, and her subordinate, David Kitson, who set out to falsely misrepresent the contents of correspondence concerning a previous complaint made against Mrs Dixon to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).

This is the same Lisa Dixon who tried to prevent local journalists Nigel Ward, and the aforementioned Tim Hicks, uncovering a series of embarrassing stories about her and Scarborough Council by threatening to have their website closed down. The website is still functioning normally, today, when I checked. Indeed, this is one of the more interesting pieces I found concerning Jane Kenyon (click here).

The Real Whitby material on Scarborough Council’s frequent misdemeanours is also, as far as I can see, replicated on the more recent North Yorks Enquirer website. There has been no challenge by Mrs Dixon to the content of that website, thus far.

The SRA are now aware that a complaint will be lodged over this issue once my enquiries into the matter are complete and, it has emerged, that there is already a previous complaint against Mrs Dixon on file. Although this was misrecorded by the SRA, as a complaint against Scarborough Borough Council, rather than Mrs Dixon. A matter, presently, the subject of an appeal by the complainant.

Several freedom of information requests were made to the Council concerning the process leading to the nomination of Jane Kenyon for Alderman status. Unsurprisingly, the Council failed to respond within the statutory twenty working day period with the information and it soon become clear that significant tranches of material had been deliberately withheld by Mr Kitson, who signed off the disposal letter. A review of that decision requested in September has failed to draw any response whatsoever and the matter is now with the Information Commissioner’s office for determination. Both regulatory and civil action is contemplated over Kitson’s conduct of these matters: His disposition in flagrantly circumventing the law of the land does not sit well with his status as a solicitor, and more crucially, an Officer of the Court

Having recently faced the ignominy of obliterating Peter Jaconelli (who would have been prosecuted for multiple child sex offences were he still alive) from the honours boards in the Town Hall at Scarborough, it is difficult to gauge the rationale for the Council bringing down another firestorm of criticism upon itself.

However, in a sensational twist to the Kenyon tale, another seriously damaging allegation has had further light shed upon it. New and probative evidence has been passed to me, anonymously, concerning an alleged fraudulent benefit fraud claim made by Bill Miller. This was the subject of an article in Private Eye magazine in May 2014 and followed an attempt by Scarborough Council to smear Nigel Ward. This backfired spectacularly when Ward was able to hand the Department of Work & Pensions (DWP) investigator a copy of the able-bodied Miller’s 1996 ‘disability claim’ which had been leaked to him from the Town Hall. Now, there is an audio recording in which a leading Borough and County Councillor, David Jeffels, is heard, very clearly, to discuss a fraudulent claim by a local Councillor which, allegedly, was settled at a tribunal by payment of a sum, thought to be £25,000, by the alleged benefits cheat. Incredibly, if all this is true, and can be linked to the Private Eye story on Miller (and by default Kenyon) it would leave Council lawyer Mrs Dixon scratching her head: She is already supposed to have investigated this matter – and presumably filed it in the ‘nothing to see here’ box. It also puts the Council in another tight spot and, potentially, facing the eradication of another name from the Alderman honours board.

I have also very recently seen documents that confirm that Bill Miller is, in fact, under investigation by the DWP and there is a hearing scheduled for early Summer 2016.

In this regard, it is worth noting that her local electorate in the Mayfield ward turfed Kenyon off the Council at the last election, in May 2015. Not inconceivably, as a result of all the negative publicity she had visited upon the town over her scandalous conduct. It is reported that she left the election count in tears, after the result was announced. She is also reportedly furious with the Real Whitby and North Yorkshire Enquirer journalists for exposing scandal after scandal about her, as if they had no right whatsoever to do so

Following the blanking out of Jaconelli’s name there were 26 Honorary Aldermen remaining on the board in the Town Hall at Scarborough. It now seems certain, as more and more allegations surface about Jane Kenyon, that sometime in the coming months there will be another blank space after the rubbing out of another disgraced civic figure.

Another interesting, and high profile, past nomination was that of Cllr Eileen Bosomworth (whom I have also met). She was the Leader of the Council during the nationally notorious £56 million High Point Rendel scandal, but despite the strong stench of corruption and lawlessness around the whole affair, and only serving fourteen years rather than the requisite sixteen, less than two years later Mrs Bosomworth was conferred with the honour of Alderman.

Just as strange as the 2013 decision by North Yorkshire County Council to make Jane Kenyon an Alderman of the County. But, of course, at that time knowledge of her misdemeanours was not no widespread – and the efforts to silence her critics not quite so frantic. Or, as well funded via the public purse.

Mrs Kenyon-Miller was not available for comment prior to publication of this article. I am presently trying to track down Bill Miller: last seen emerging from his Mercedes motor car  (Reg no TWM 1) parked on double yellow lines outside Scarborough Town Hall. He appeared remarkably sprightly for a man reputedly disabled for the past twenty years.

image

Follow me on Twitter: @Neil_Wilby

Page last updated on Monday 29th February, 2016 at 1415hrs

________________________________________________________________