Widgetized Section
Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
Cornwall News
That Fearless Ballsy Website From Up North
Real Whitby
The Real Whitby Motto - Dont Feed The Moose.
“Jane Kenyon & Bill Miller”
‘In My View’ – Nigel Ward – In The Public Interest. First Published July 17th 2012
During the past three months, I have been publishing in the Real Whitby “In My View” series of articles, the objective of which has been to notify the general public of discrepancies in the public record that appear to demonstrate unequivocally that County & Borough Councillor Jane Kenyon and her life-partner Councillor Thomas William (‘Bill’) Miller have abused the public trust for approximately thirty years.
Incredibly, County & Borough Councillor Kenyon has alleged that a company called Dales Timber Limited (DTL – Reg.No. 05467739) submitted an official 288a Appointment to Company Secretary document to Companies House bearing a forged signature, while her life-partner Councillor Bill Miller was a Director of that same company. Indeed, it was he who counter-signed the document, within an inch of the allegedly forged signature. Councillor Kenyon’s allegations have now been published in the national press.
Neither Scarborough Borough Council, nor North Yorkshire County Council, nor the North Yorkshire Police, nor the North Yorkshire Police Authority, nor Councillor Kenyon herself, nor Councillor Miller, nor their party (The Conservative Party) deny the grave allegations signalled by the public record – nor have any of the above issued any comment at all. In fact, no-one has offered one single word of support for Councillor Kenyon or Councillor Miller.
Nor has anyone announced the intention to investigate the full extent of the breaches of regulations and possible crimes that the public record identifies – although they all have a legal duty to do so.
Confronted by this astonishing wall of silence concerning the gravest possible public allegations of blatant misconduct, I am continuing to expose further unrelated examples of misconduct by influential people and public officials.
So I will now hand you over to a lady of great courage and integrity – a lady in her eighties, the widow of a man of the cloth who was much respected and admired in the town, and indeed throughout his life in the clergy. The lady is herself a devout and practicing Christian, and it is her wish to come forward in the hope of putting an end to a saga of abuse of position in public office.
She lives alone and is very frightened at the prospect of retribution by the people she now accuses, even though she holds documentary evidence – her late husband’s contemporaneous diaries, letters, official papers and fraudulently converted cheques with forged signatures – that fully substantiate her story. It is also my information that a present incumbent of Whitby Town (Parish) Council and his wife are ready to corroborate her statement.
The lady is unwaveringly committed to enduring the legal process when the time comes – for which I salute her. True to her faith, she is anxious that no innocent parties need face the discomfort of being identified publicly. For that reason, she has chosen to anonymize the names of the protagonists, referring to them only as “Miss X” and “Mr Y”.
I leave her to tell her story, in her own words . . .
The Clergyman’s Widow Recalls . . .
“One day, about 25 years ago, someone had a good idea for a small seaside town. The idea was to find a venue for lonely elderly people to meet, enjoy each other’s company and have a meal together.”
“There was already a venue about 20 miles away, but it was really much too far for the elderly people to travel. So a large unused room with a kitchen and toilet facilities was set up and volunteers recruited to staff it.”
“Soon a prominent (predominant) person in the town offered to help and became involved. We’ll call her Miss X. The project was established and became very popular.”
“Later, facilities were found for young people to meet, grants were applied for and further premises developed. Miss X saw her opportunity and invited her boyfriend Mr Y, a property developer, to get involved. Before long, with his eye to business, Mr Y forged one of the cheques intended for the builder and transferred it into his own account. When this was discovered, all the details, with the original cheque, were prepared for the police but before Mr Y could be challenged all the relevant files suddenly and mysteriously disappeared from police files, and also all the project files of another person at County Hall.”
(The Clergyman’s Widow)
This, of course, leaves many questions unanswered:
- Who was “Miss X“?
- Was “Miss X“ the “prominent person in the town”, involved in the disappearance of the evidence?
- Who was her boyfriend, “Mr Y“?
- What happened to this couple? Did they split up – or go on to become life-partners?
- Was “Mr Y“ ever again open to suspicion of forgery?
- Who could have wielded influence at both County Hall and at the North Yorkshire Police?
The way the authorities are performing, we may never know.
16 Responses to “Jane Kenyon & Bill Miller”
Leave a Reply
Say No To Joe
Suggested Reading
Vanda Inman
July 17, 2012 at 7:28 pm
Needless to say, having met this ‘witness’ and seen the ‘evidence’ which is now safely set aside, my only comment is; how long will this ‘local authority’ charade continue, bringing our council into disrepute. Clearly it is time for the relevant Monitoring Officers to do their duty.
F L C
July 17, 2012 at 9:20 pm
High time we had ourselves a public inquiry!
Not some flim-flam charade of silence, or name-calling, as the “authorities” seem to enjoy practicing. An actual public inquiry into why it is that “Miss X” has been allowed to get away with so much for so long, and who else has benefited along the way.
Peter Hofschröer
July 18, 2012 at 10:59 am
An enquiry headed by a straight judge?
Timothy Hicks
July 18, 2012 at 9:30 am
I read the above article with great sadness. It must have een a great blow to this kind and Christian lady and her late husband to see this most commendable project to help Old Age Pensioners betrayed and destroyed by public servants, to serve their own greed. I salute her courage for speaking out.
I think it is a great shame that her religious convictions have moved her not to name the fraudsters and to prohibit Nigel from naming them himself. Unfortunately Nigel -being an honourable man- has no choice but to comply, although I understand the evidence he has collected would stand in court.
So once again, Miss X and Mr Y escape justice.
Usually this is because of unprincipled actions by corrupted or intimidated Council Monitoring Officers. On this occasion it is becasue of the principles of a very kind and courageous lady.
David Clark
July 18, 2012 at 1:13 pm
I salute the ladies courage speaking out. God bless. This,and similar things have been going on for 30/40 years,its time to ask the authorities to act,in the name of the people of Whitby and the voters of Scarborough Borough and North Yorkshire.
Linda
July 18, 2012 at 5:20 pm
I know someone who helped out at a certain project where pensioners would each pay an amount for their dinner. Everyone paid for their dinners except for a Miss x and Mr Y I’m told.
Carole Gerada
July 19, 2012 at 8:38 am
Having read further comments relating to the corruption in NYCC, I have to say that it is not only up to Nigel to post and pursue these issues. Issues like this are all over North Yorkshire in different councils. We need to remember that Scarborough Borough Council is the main council for Filey, Whitby and Scarborough (which includes Eastfield).
Elected councillors to the Borough and County are the same year after year. Why is that? When individuals ask questions of the Legal Dept of SBC, they are ignored or given a bland reply not relating to their questions.
If as many people as there appears to be are really against the current set up – then how on earth are the current councillors getting re-elected? It is not because of lack of choice, because others who have stood as candidates have not received as many votes as those now elected. So where and who are all these many people against the current system?
The result seems to be that there are less than we think. The majority of people are happy with those currently elected and there will be nothing to change this unless more people vote for change, i.e. a DIFFERENT councillor needs to be elected.
F L C
July 30, 2012 at 1:34 pm
The curious thing about the elections in Scarborough Borough is that when they take place, the ballot boxes are transported in an unsecure fashion to a counting loction. Any number of people could mess with these boxes, or even tamper with them in that time.
What really surprised me at the last round of elections was the fact that boxes were held overnight, and counted the next day.
What you need to do is ask who is looking after these ballot papers overnight? Where? How much are they being paid to “look after them”?
Something stinks in this Borough and it’s coming from St. Nicholas Street.
Nigel Ward
July 19, 2012 at 11:15 pm
Finally, a word from the Gazette. The Town (Parish) Council asks the wrong questions and WRL gives the non-answers. Comments, please!
http://www.whitbygazette.co.uk/news/business/town-council-seeks-answers-from-regatta-1-4755995
jean marshall
July 29, 2012 at 4:10 pm
what channce does any one stand getting to the bottom of all these dirty dealings when the police ,scarborough borough councill and half the councilors of this town are corrupt and only out for their own ends .with anything like the ms kenyon fiasco every one just closes ranks and puts up a big wall of silence if any one can get to the bottom of all this good luck i am behind nigel ward 100% but i fear he wont get the answers he wants and regarding whitby regatta ltd its a disgrace to all the people who have raised money and given their time over the years
Peter Hofschröer
July 30, 2012 at 7:11 pm
I think we can all work out the answers for ourselves. The only questions left to answer are:
1) How long this farce will be allowed to continue
2) How long the perpetrators of this fraud will get in jail
Daryl Smiler
July 31, 2012 at 6:34 am
Its very sad really. Nigel makes some very good points. Unfortunately these just seem to encourage an ever increasing number of rabid followers some of whom have obviously, rightly or wrongly, fallen foul of authority at some time and who now just line up to make wild and inaccurate accusations that everyone working for a public authority is either corrupt or stupid.
What starts as a credible argument is totally destroyed. It all weakens the case!
Daryl Smiler
July 31, 2012 at 7:21 am
FLC
The Ballot boxes are sealed at finishing time then transported by the presiding officer from the polling station to the count location. They are thus transported securely. Unless of course you think all the Presiding Officers are corrupt! What nonsense!
Carole Gerada
July 31, 2012 at 8:38 am
From Carole Gerada to Daryl Smiler
Who are you? Do you work for the council? What qualifies you to make a statement: “Unfortunately these just seem to encourage an ever increasing number of rabid followers some of whom have obviously, rightly or wrongly, fallen foul of authority at some time and who now just line up to make wild and inaccurate accusations that everyone working for a public authority is either corrupt or stupid.”
Do you have access to resident criminal records? Do you know who I am? Have we ever met?
I have never broken the law in any country I have lived or worked in. Yes, I am a foreigner – born in Africa – so that may change your view of me as it does all the Eastfield Parish Councillors (10 of them) who I share my role with. There is written and verbal evidence of clear racial hatred against me by Cllrs Simpson and Elliott. Cllrs Parsons, Zegstroo, Vickers, Jackson, John and Tracey White hate me, too. The reason? I ask questions of financial accountability in public meetings. Answers are never given and there is evident breach of Councillors Code of Conduct due to not declaring interests in organisations who receive grant funding from Eastfield Parish Council. I have published this information because, I, too, am a Christian and am accountable for what I say and refuse to make statements anonymously because I have the courage of my convictions.
Furthermore, NYCC, SBC, EPC, the YLCA, NYLCA, NY Police are all part of the same system. If Parish Councils are found to be corrupt – that is one less member to pay YLCA and NYLCA annual membership fees, etc. So they have a financial interest. If the NYCC and SBC expose corrupt Parish Councils – they will then be investigated themselves for not ensuring Codes of Conduct were upheld! Not disclosing interests is, according to the Code of Conduct, a criminal offence. That is just a statement which means absolutely nothing. No councillor will ever be brought to charges on this one. The PCC will be elected in November 2012 (part of the political closed rank groups). Members of the PCC Panel are – you got it, mostly career politicians. Cllr Brian Simpson is one of the Panel of 10 people. He is a known racist but still got voted on. What does that say for North Yorkshire? The people in power support their own.
I will continue as a Parish councillor as long as residents want me to represent them. I do not work for the Council – I work voluntarily on behalf of residents.
So please, Daryl Smiler, come and meet me first before you accuse me of breaking the law. I have 10 fellow Parish Councillors accusing me of all sorts without proof. This was evidenced when a Tribunal overturned SBC decision that I breached 1 of the Codes of Conduct in November 2011 for disrespecting Cllrs Elliott and Parsons. The Tribunal decision stated that SBC Standards Committee had no grounds for such a decision as there was no proof or evidence. They stated further that by me asking questions of financial accountability of fellow councillors with personal interests was in the interest of the public and part of my role as a councillor. I have still heard nothing back from SBC because ‘this has never happened to them before’ Quoted by Gill Wilkinson, i.e. no one has won a tribunal case against them as an individual resident (me) against their fully qualified legal team. The then Monitoring officer, Ian Anderson, went on sick leave, resigned and is working elsewhere. Coincidence? I have no idea. The new Monitoring Officer, Lisa Dixon, refuses to speak to me in case it colours her judgement of me!
Why don’t they want to speak to me or at least publish an apology for their attempt to smear my reputation? Because Cllr Brian Simpson is on the Standards Committee!
So please do not think that the powers that be do not stick together to maintain their power and financial benefits. The minute one of them is exposed – the whole lot feel threatened. Only those with independent consciences, i.e. do not answer to a political leader (as I am not a member of any political party) will have the courage to tell the truth. I do fear repercussions, but I was elected and cannot let residents down who believed in me and my mandate, which is to represent them and not the council. I am bullied on a regular basis, cyber bullying by Cllrs Elliott and Evans; verbal and public bullying by Cllrs Jackson, Vickers, John and Tracey White, Simpson, Evans, Parsons, Elliott and Zegstroo. There is only one other Eastfield Parish Councillor with some integrity – Cllr Christine Cooper. However, she, like me, is always outvoted when it comes to funding organisations run by Cllrs Parsons and Elliott. A clear conflict of interest not declared. Of course, nothing will be done about it, we all know that.
Unless the current political elected councillors are voted off in May 2013 at the County elections, there will remain no change. I fear it will add fuel to their ‘protection from the law’ and they will exacerbate their personal gain from their positions because we live in a democracy and residents voted for them.
If you wish to meet with me, Daryl Smiler, I would be more than happy to do so. Perhaps then you will apologise and retract what you have written on this site because it is based on ignorance and not fact.
Kind regards, Carole Gerada
Craig Natress
July 31, 2012 at 11:48 am
Quote Daryl Smiler
This would be very sad if it were true. There are very many hard working councilors and employees of our local council, they make up the majority.
If Real Whitby has ever made such a statement could you direct us to it please ?
Richard Ineson
August 17, 2012 at 2:31 pm
Jane Kenyon, as Chair of the North Yorkshire Police Authority, Chair of the North Yorkshire Police Authority Management Board, North Yorkshire County Councillor, Scarborough Borough Councillor, and Portfolio holder for Finance, Procurement and Legal (SBC) must be ware that everything that she does will always be under scrutiny.
The conduct of anyone in her position should like Caesar’s wife, be above suspicion,
“Meos tam suspicion quam crimine iudicio carere opertere” ,
“My wife must be as free from suspicion of a crime as she is from the crime itself”.
Her actions, at all times, should be informed by reflection upon how that conduct might be portrayed by The Press, or, in a court of law, and what inferences a jury might draw from that portrayal.
Furthermore, the associates of public figures must also be persons of unblemished character and again, must not be even suspected of wrongdoing.
There is an increasing acceptance of immoral and unethical conduct as being normal, but it is not normal and it is not acceptable, especially in anyone who is in office as a representative of the people.
If the trust and confidence of the community is to be regained by the North Yorkshire Police Force, and maintained by the North Yorkshire County Council, and the Scarborough Borough Council and if the credibility of the Conservative Party is to be preserved, then, the correct course of action is for Miss Kenyon to resign from all of her public offices.
Her failure to refute the various allegations which have been made about her, has inevitably turned public opinion against her, it is now time for her to make a decision as to her future, prevarication will serve neither her interests, nor those of the public bodies on which she serves, nor the people whom she represents.