Posts
The following is a comment made by one of our loyal readers.
We think it deserves a higher profile.
"Well, having read the accounts in the papers, not only is it a sad and sorry account of Liverpool politics it is a sad and sorry account of the slanted reporting of the Liverpool/Oldham Echo.
The Post Article covers mainly the facts of the case and the reaction of other local politicians.
It states that Hurst has instructed his legal team to launch an appeal against the conviction etc.
Whereas our Lib Dem a*se licking Echo, passes quickly over the guilty verdict and reprehensible actions and then gives over half of their coverage to presenting Hurst as the victim.
They even put up a photgraph captioned “STRAIN Cllr Hurst says he will appeal”.
They cite the “horrendous strain” he has endured (since getting caught methinks).
But incredibly, well not for the Echo, I suppose, we then have almost half of the article quoting Bradley, his local party leader, personal friend and fellow firefighter.
Bradley tells us, “anyone who knows Steve (Hurst) from work, life or politics knows he is a really decent guy who does not deserve this.”
I would assume the Walton’s know him, given that the real victims of this will know him from work life and politics also.
I don’t think they will share that view.
Then they further quote Bradley: “There is a concerted smear campaign against him which has been a waste of public money.”
(Well he knows all about wasting public money.)
What the hell is the fool talking about?
Is he accusing the Walton’s of launching a smear campaign against Hurst?
Who has used public money to carry this out?
The only public money involved is related to the court prosecution in which he was found guilty.
Is it the police or the courts and the judge that have carried out the campaign?
Perhaps so, since Bradley continues: “You have to start questioning the judicial system, considering he was found guilty on circumstantial evidence.”
Very serious accusations Mr Bradley.
I hope you have more than circumstantial evidence to back them up.
So what was the evidence against Hurst that left the sentencing Judge in believing, beyond all doubt, in his guilt?
He had copies of the smear leaflet, he admitted this, claimed he was collecting them to take back to Lib Dem HQ.
He was identified by one of the people in whose letterbox he posted it, wearing his baseball cap and dark glasses, (in the evening).
It spoke of being a scab firefighter, he is also a firefighter.
It mentioned the Lee Park golf club, of which he is a member.
It spoke of leaving council meetings early, he is a councillor.
His constituency is Wavertree, what was he doing out leafleting alone miles away in BelleVale in the evening?
How many other constituencies did he go out alone in order to leaflet?
Well let’s look at the character witnesses...
Storey, already disgraced and forced to resign following the standards board investigation over the Henshaw affair, but brought straight back in by Bradley to a senior position to the disgust of many.
And Bradley himself.
The man awaiting findings from the standards board also as to whether he is fit for public office or has broken the code of standards of behaviour for Councillors.
A man who was exposed as a liar in the Daily Post claiming he never had a secret meeting with the person he allowed to be the fall-guy over Mathew Street.
Claimed he had not had communications nor sent texts trying to set up the meeting he never had, until presented with copies of the emails/texts.
And finally admitting that he did send them and that a meeting took place.
In his, not a dry eye in the house, speech to council he informed them that he had lodged a grievance with the Press Complaints Commission.
Another lie - it appears since it was later confirmed that no such complaint had been received. Well,you only need go back through these pages for any more.
So this is the man who is standing up in court asking us all to believe in the honesty, integrity and decency of Cllr Hurst.
Not worth a carrot!!
One other interesting point.
Going back to the waste of public money issue.
I suspect the real strain for Hurst is losing the additional £13,300 he got for serving on the Executive Board and the worry that if he had to resign his seat as a councillor that he would also lose the additional £9,900 for that.
All of which is of course on top of his fire fighter salary.
In court his wife tearfully spoke about their plans to emigrate to Australia on his retirement.
Well for one thing, what the hell is he doing running Liverpool and making decisions about it’s future when the first chance he gets he is off to live on the other side of the world.
It is bad timing really.
If this had been a good while ago, he could have been sent there for free courtesy of her Majesty.
So let’s keep an eye out for Bradley’s campaign to change the Justice system.
He may need to do this pretty soon.
They have got away with so much that they are now shocked that they are not actually above the law and just cannot accept being exposed and found out.
Despicable."
7 comments:
Three cheers for that reader Good Show !
It, is sad indeed that Liberpools fine Liberal Democrats habe been forced into skulking around in disguise delivering leaflets.
This would never have happened if Twigger still had the keys to the franking machine.
Let us not forget that this case was brought at the decision of the Crown Prosecution Service and not any political opponent even if it was put in motion by a political complaint. Indeed, it was the TUSP who made the complaint because Hurst was masquerading as them. Something tells me that they have no reason to try to smear a particular councillor. Left unchallenged though, Hurst was effectively sullying not only the Waltons but the TUSP as well and therefore another person living in the Walton's close-knit community.
Bradley believes this to be a smear campaign? Funny how he did not say this in court. Did he perhaps think that the judge would not look too kindly on that? Not respecting the decision of a court of law, though not uncommon and given the appeals process, tends to be the last argument of the common criminal.
So once the Lib Dems finally accept the primacy of the court on issues of law and given the actual verdict, will the Lib Dems now say where the leaflet was printed? Will they say who else was involved? Of course, if they ever accept the court's decision they will have to answer such questions. If they don't accept it, it shows them up for the renegade mob they are. Here's to not holding my breath.
Does that mean we can expect to see Hurst and Bradley take up an appeal then ?? Would they/could they have the bottle ??? Cant wait to find out!
Well then why are we still waiting for the Standards Board findings, on the complaint from Jason.
Is the reports decision (to be expected) appeal being cobbled together, with the Hurst appeal. Where is the Chief Executive is he hiding, who will pay their legal fees. Questions, questions come on some one let us know!!!
Also the anticipated Capital of Culture £60m loss tag, with the current financial markets crisis, don't be suprised if we discover it will be £100m. Colin is probably, sitting in his 'executive loo' scouring the Guardian Professional Jobs supplement.
Well then why are we still waiting for the Standards Board findings, on the complaint from Jason.
Is the reports decision (to be expected) appeal being cobbled together, with the Hurst appeal. Where is the Chief Executive is he hiding, who will pay their legal fees. Questions, questions come on some one let us know!!!
Also the anticipated Capital of Culture £60m loss tag, with the current financial markets crisis, don't be suprised if we discover it will be £100m. Colin is probably, sitting in his 'executive loo' scouring the Guardian Professionals jobs supplement.
Maybe the standards board are just as corrupt?
What other reason is there for this delay?
They are all as bad as each other and we have to just accept that?
Post a Comment