Would you speak out if you knew Her Majesty Revenue and Customs had misused thousands of pounds of public funds to charge you with being an extremist for heckling the British National Party at a peaceful protest in Burnley? Would you refuse to drop your case with the Civil Service Commissioners if you were warned by HMRC you would be sacked if you did not? If your wondering why I did then perhaps when you've read these internal letters, reports, and e-mails you’ll understand.
Showing posts with label joan moyle mark barker. Show all posts
Showing posts with label joan moyle mark barker. Show all posts
Friday, June 10, 2011
Letter from Joan Moyle, HMRC Conduct and Discipline team, warning me all cards are on the table, including dismissal, after being found guilty by HMRC of holding ‘extreme political views’ for heckling the Neo Nazi British National Party (BNP) at a peaceful protest outside of work. I am the first Civil Servant ever to be charge and found guilty by HMRC (or any government department) of holding extreme political views for heckling the BNP. Given that the BNP are a vile Neo Nazi party, who have sought to remove all non-whites and Jews, from the Civil Service and country as a whole, I find it quite an honour to be the first Civil Servant to be found guilty and sacked by HMRC for heckling them. Whayyyyy
Friday, June 4, 2010
HMRC Manager claims Mark Barker PCS was aggressive towards her in Andi Ali BNP case.
This case gets more bizarre by the minute. This is part of a witness statement by Joan Moyle, a very senior manger within Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs who claims Mark Barker was aggressive towards her. (Mark Barker being the union official who represented (sic) me when I was charged by HMRC of being an extremist for heckling the BNP at a peaceful protest in Burnley). I wonder if this was the reason the PCS stopped representing me - think about it!
It's also worth noting that none of the witnesses statements given to me by HMRC were signed by the person HMRC claimed wrote them. This is suggestive. It suggest that the witnesses would not sign them because they knew what was in the statements were false and were worried about being convicted of perjury. It would also explain why HMRC offered me a lot of money not to refer this matter to court. More about this in due course.
It's also worth noting that none of the witnesses statements given to me by HMRC were signed by the person HMRC claimed wrote them. This is suggestive. It suggest that the witnesses would not sign them because they knew what was in the statements were false and were worried about being convicted of perjury. It would also explain why HMRC offered me a lot of money not to refer this matter to court. More about this in due course.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
-
-
This is an internal e-mail which proofs that I submitted complaints against Tony Smith and other members of staff prior to their complaints ...


