Green Party statement continuation thread

[Destinysdaughter]

Thread was filling up so I've started this for further discussions

Previous thread

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3346448-Green-Party-statement

...

Well that conversation went well for Aimee, and doesn't in any way make the police look like complete fools.

Not sure if this is the thread to post this in, there are so many.

Re the Coventry Pride statement:

www.coventrypride.org.uk/2018/08/28/a-statement-from-the-trustees-of-coventry-pride/

The Trustees were made aware of criminal proceedings being taken against Mr Challenor in November 2016.

Re Stonewall's trans panel:

www.stonewall.org.uk/trans-advisory-group

Aimee is a trans equality campaigner from Coventry. She came out in 2014 aged 16 as she left school. She speaks openly about her experiences as a young transgender woman. She’s previously had articles in the Guardian and the Huffington Post, as well as other websites from around the world. She’s also a Trustee of Coventry Pride

Which means that Aimee knew.

You don't need a DBS to act as agent. You just sign a declaration.

Legally speaking you don't need to appoint an agent, if you fail to do so, you are your own agent. So Aimee technically didn't need to name David.

Where this might get really murky is on this clause on who is disqualified from standing for local election:
You have been sentenced to a term of imprisonment of three months or more (including a suspended sentence), without the option of a fine, during the five years before polling day.

Source: www.electoralcommission.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/141784/Part-1-Can-you-stand-for-election-LGEW.pdf

Check out the archive links for these:
www.thefreelibrary.com/In+the+courts-a0357547534
CASES heard at Coventry Magistrates Court on Thursday, December 12, included: David Challenor, 45, of Charterhouse Road, Lower Stoke, was found guilty of failing to provide suitable environments for two corn snakes, a bearded dragon, two cats, three dogs, a hamster, two hedgehogs and two rabbits. He was jailed for 12 weeks, suspended for 12 months, with 200 hours' unpaid work, and told to pay an PS80 victim surcharge and PS500 costs.
Coventry Telegraph 4 Feb 2014

www.thefreelibrary.com/In+the+courts.-a0358278849
CASES heard at Coventry Magistrates Court on Friday. December 20, included: Tina Challenor, of X address, was found guilty of failing to provide suitable environments for a corn snake, a bearded dragon, two cats, three dogs, a hamster, two pigmy hedgehogs and two rabbits. She was jailed for 12 weeks, suspended for 12 months.
Coventry Telegraph 11 Feb 2014.

Is this a problem? Seems they might just have dodged being disqualified by a matter of days.

Further to this, in order to stand at election you need to be nominated by a number of people in your constituency. They don't need to be party members, just anyone who lives in the relevant constituency. You need ten people to support your nomination (family members are allowed I believe). I'm not 100% sure what the legal duties/responsibilities of those nominees are - I think it is just to confirm they have enough support in the constituency rather than be 'character witnesses'. Generally speaking, I think the perference is to use party members to give credibility to the nomination, but this is only convention rather than legal requirement.

The responsibility of eligibility, I believe lies with candidate and the election agent alone in law. I can't see anything which pins a legal responsibility on a party, oddly enough. I think there is a reasonable argument to say there should be.

Is this a problem? Seems they might just have dodged being disqualified by a matter of days

5years would expire in 2019

RTB's useful info and Amalfimamma wrote: 5years would expire in 2019

Yes - agreed. It does seem like a problem that should be posed to the Green Party and AC, and then the Electoral Commissioner if there is no satisfactory answer.

I just want to say thank you to everyone on the thread for all the hard work on this.

I’ve been trying to follow it without commenting but it keeps getting lost somehow I don’t understand why. So am placemarking, my apologies.

I see they were sentence 12th and 20 December. That would be 2013. They would still be disqualified for another 7 months at the time of the election in May

Amalfimamma wrote: I see they were sentence 12th and 20 December. That would be 2013. They would still be disqualified for another 7 months at the time of the election in May

I read that differently and I may well be wrong. I read that as the people involved were found guilty in December 2013. However, the 5 years restriction runs from the sentencing and, typically, there is a gap for pre-sentencing reports before the sentencing hearing tho' it doesn't follow that it happened here.

Overall the point on the timing still stands (it seems). However, it's something that AC and the Green Party must be in a position to clarify. Surely?

arranfan

You could be right. The most pressing matter is though that Tina was lawfully barred from standing in elections. Did the greens not know about this either?

Were they disqualified?

I've read it and I'm not fully clear.

The imprisonment period is less than 3 months BUT they were also given 12 months suspended.

I'm not 100% on what the wording of the disqualification clause. If its saying that a 12 month suspended sentence alone is enough to mean you are disqualified, and those dates are correct then Tina broke election law.

As did David Challenor by virtue of being her agent.

I have been following this story with growing horror and disbelief. This young person's work advising changes to safeguarding policy has been shown to be quite significantly compromised by her ongoing, close association with her family member convicted of the most hideous crime against a child, and all the Green Party, Stonewall and the Guides/Scouts and focus on is her gender identity?

What the hell has gone wrong with the world?!

1w weeks = 3 months

Have we talked about GDPR compliance? There are potential issues here. Did Tina have a locked cabinet / secure login to which other family members had no access.

GDPR compliance and how local parties work, is frankly a disaster waiting to happen as it is. It has to be one of the most vulnerable areas for multiple breeches of the act to be commonplace.

Amalfimamma wrote: 1w weeks = 3 months

I've just been looking this up and you'd think it would be clearer whether 12 weeks = 3 months or if calendar months are used. However, I feel that 12 weeks is intended here (particularly as it was pre-2015 changes) in which case it does apply.

The nuance of this is for the Green Party to answer.

I think it depends on how they define three months. At 30 day calender months then that's 90 days or 14 weeks and 2 days. By lunar months (28 days) that's 12 weeks.

So they would have a good claim that they were going by calender months and therefore their sentence was less that 3 months.

A loophole that really needs clearing.

The exact text reads:

sentenced to a term of imprisonment of three months or more (including a suspended sentence)

So if you have a 12 month suspended sentence is that a sentence of three months or more?

It reads like it might be, but its not clear.

Whether 12 weeks is 3 months is possible totally irrelevant.

Why did DC receive bail? And why did it take three years to bring him to trial

I would very much like the answers to these questions. Surely the seriousness of the crimes would merit being remanded?

You can be sure the the Challenors will have wrapped their heads round all this years ago to work out what will play to their advantage.

I feel a magistrate could clear this up in a heartbeat .

RTB - I read that as the sentence is suspended for 12 months (i.e., if you offend again and are convicted, then this sentence of 3 months would be added on to any additional sentence arising from the later conviction). It's not a suspended sentence of 12 months duration. However, I have a very superficial memory of this from some work a very long time ago and there have been several changes since then.

See this is why I am a little cautious. Its confusing.

I think I lean towards TC being a week short of it being a legal problem, but it doesn't remove the moral and ethical question for the nature of the conviction for the Green Party.

Andy Healey again. Molly Arthurs and Lee-Ann Lawrence are the GP's LGBTQIASBFDIAFNADNFAJ co-chairs I believe. They were adamant that AC had nothing whatsoever to do with the GRA guidance which I find hard to believe.

A 12 week jail term suspended for 12 months means that if you commit any related offence within the 12 months, the suspension will be revoked ie you will automatically go to jail.

I think legally 12 weeks = 3 months. And I think that means that legally Tina Challenor should have been disqualified from standing for election.