Oct 062017
 

With thanks to Ross Anderson, Senior Account Manager, Jasmine Ltd.

A leading north-east legal firm has strengthened its teams of specialist solicitors in Aberdeen with three new appointments.
Mackinnons Solicitors, with offices in Aberdeen, Cults and Aboyne, has announced two promotions and one new appointment, each of whom will complement the firm’s existing legal teams.

Angus Easton, who recently completed a master’s degree in Maritime Law, has been promoted to the position of Associate within the firm’s commercial shipping team.

Mr Easton joined Mackinnons in January 2013 and his expertise covers areas of commercial practice with an emphasis on marine and business law.

Kim Harkness also assumes an Associate position working within the property and private client teams. She joined Mackinnons in 2013 and has worked primarily as an assistant to firm partner, Pat Gray.

Kate Longmuir has also joined the firm from Pinsent Masons and will be working within the corporate team advising on a range of commercial matters with emphasis on the energy and marine sectors.

Graham Jones, one of the firm’s senior partners, said:

“We are delighted to have appointed Kate to our commercial shipping team. She has considerable experience in legal matters relating to the marine and energy sectors and will be a great asset to us.

“As well as recruiting to strengthen the team, we are also very pleased to be able to promote talent from within. Angus and Kim have already made a significant contribution to the success of the firm and their promotions are well deserved.

“Each of these appointments significantly strengthens our teams of specialist solicitors as we look to build for the future and expand our existing client base.”

Established in Aberdeen in 1842, Mackinnons is recognised internationally for its long-standing expertise in fishing, shipping and marine law. The firm is also a leading provider of private client legal services with a team of experienced and specialist lawyers. 

Mackinnons offer a range of legal services including residential property, personal advice, wills and estate planning, commercial property, business and corporate matters, renewables, employment and dispute resolution in addition to its internationally renowned shipping law practice.

Its experienced teams of solicitors provide professional, pragmatic, bespoke advice for clients, whether they are multinational corporations, local businesses or individuals.

As part of Mackinnons’ 175th anniversary celebrations in 2017, the firm is raising money for The Fishermen’s Mission.

For more information about Mackinnons Solicitors and its range of legal and financial services, please visit: www.mackinnons.com

  • Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.
Jun 082017
 

With thanks to Ross Anderson, Senior Account Manager, Citrus:Mix

One of the north-east’s leading law firms will host a lunch and learn session in Aberdeen this month for those who want to find out more about employment law updates and modern practices.

Mackinnons Solicitors will hold the free event, which is open to all, at the firm’s headquarters at 14 Carden Place, Aberdeen from 12.30pm to 2pm on Thurs, June 15. For catering purposes, those wishing to attend should register with Employment Partner Nicola Gray who will cover updates in employment law and examples in the field.

Miss Gray is looking forward to the event and anticipates significant interest from the north-east business community.

She said:

“Employment law is a continually evolving field and it’s important to stay abreast of recent changes to be within the rules and legislation set out by the government.

“It is always a hot topic for most employers and I know many are keen to learn more about issues such as contracts, disciplinary, grievance and capability issues, and what not to do too.

“The lunch and learn will be useful to those who want a refresher of the field and to learn more about important updates and current practices.”

To register to attend the Employment Law and Practices Lunch and Learn, please contact Employment Partner Nicola Gray via (01224) 632464 or email: nicolagray@mackinnons.com

Mackinnons also offer bespoke legal services for residential property, personal advice, wills and estate planning, commercial property, business and corporate matters, renewables and dispute resolution.

The firm, which also has offices in Cults and Aboyne, is also well known and internationally recognised for its long-standing expertise in fishing, shipping and marine law.

The firm’s experienced team of solicitors provide professional, pragmatic, bespoke advice for clients, whether they are multinational corporations, local businesses or individuals.

As part of Mackinnons’ 175th anniversary celebrations the firm is raising money for The Fishermen’s Mission throughout 2017.

For more information about Mackinnons Solicitors and its range of legal and financial services, please visit: www.mackinnons.com

  • Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.
Mar 172017
 

With thanks to Ross Anderson, Senior Account Manager, Citrus:Mix

A leading north-east legal firm has launched a year-long fundraising drive for a charity which uniquely supports fishermen and their families as part of its 175th anniversary celebrations.
Established in Aberdeen in 1842, Mackinnons Solicitors is known for its long-standing expertise in fishing, shipping and marine law, and this year its partners and employees will raise money for The Fishermen’s Mission.

Headquartered on Carden Place in Aberdeen’s West End, Mackinnons also offer legal services for residential property, personal advice, wills and estate planning, commercial property, business and corporate matters, renewables, employment and dispute resolution.

The firm also has offices in Cults and Aboyne and its experienced team of solicitors provide professional, pragmatic, bespoke advice for clients, whether they are multinational corporations, local businesses or individuals.

Keith MacRae, senior partner at Mackinnons, said:

“We are very proud to mark the firm’s 175th anniversary and have several special events planned throughout 2017 for our clients and business contacts to enjoy.

“While it is important to acknowledge our long and successful history, we are also looking confidently to the future with a young and dynamic team which possess an impressive wealth of experience and expertise in their specialist fields.

“We have a long tradition of working with, and supporting The Fishermen’s Mission which provides emergency support and care to fishermen and to their families.

“We have always encouraged our team to participate in fundraising events, whether for one of the firm’s nominated charities or one that they personally feel passionate about and we look forward to working with The Fishermen’s Mission and raising as much as we can for them this year.”

As well as providing legal services, Mackinnons also provide consular services and assistance to Norwegian and Danish citizens and businesses in the north-east of Scotland.

Keith MacRae is the Honorary Norwegian Consul and Danish Vice Consul and Mackinnons property administrator Fiona Stevenson is the Honorary Norwegian Vice-Consul in Aberdeen.

Mr MacRae said:

“Consular work is an extra service for Norwegians and Danes in the north-east of Scotland and is something a little bit different which adds an extra dimension to what we can offer.

“The firm’s worldwide scope has increased our involvement with the offshore, shipping and commercial community over the last 30 years to the extent that the majority of our partners spend most of their time engaged in sea related or commercial legal work.

“Our Marine Law practice is the most experienced in Scotland with a team of Marine Law and Admiralty specialists who routinely deal with all aspects of marine law, providing our clients with focused, practical and commercial solutions.

“Their wealth of expertise allows us to respond swiftly and we also offer a 24/7 emergency response service for clients facing marine and offshore accidents and emergencies. This means we can arrive, advise and assist our clients immediately, when that advice and assistance is most required.

“Alongside that we have developed a very successful private client and property practice which delivers high quality legal services under the leadership of our Partner Pat Gray. We put our clients’ needs at the heart of everything we do and are proud of the longstanding connections we have with so many of those who instruct us.

“While shipping law and private client advice may seem quite different, our principles remain the same – to provide experienced and specialist services to all of our clients. This is echoed by our business law and employment teams.”

For more information about Mackinnons Solicitors and its range of legal and financial services, please visit: www.mackinnons.com

  • Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.
Dec 162016
 

By Anne Foy.

Aberdeen police have issued an appeal to the public to disclose any information they may have regarding the drugs trade in the city.

This follows an interesting year for drugs in Aberdeen, with high-profile busts combining with a general rise in drug use to form a chequered pattern for the police drugs squads.

At a meeting with Torry Community Council, Police Scotland Sergeant Garry Garrow warned of a marked increase in drug dealing in the area, and issued an appeal for Torry residents to come forward with any information they have on drug use or drug dealing within Aberdeen (in general) and Torry (in particular) [1].

The police describe this as “not a high priority issue”, but note nonetheless that Aberdeen’s drug problems are on the rise – speaking of a potential trafficking link with Liverpool.

Aberdeen Committed To Tackling Drugs:

This has been an interesting year for those working with drugs issues in Aberdeen. On the one hand, as mentioned above, we’ve seen a steady rise in drug dealing and the antisocial behaviour associated with it. On the other, measures designed to tackle the causes of drug use and provide solid support [2] to those trying to get clean have responded magnificently to the challenge.

A project within Aberdeen Sheriff Court, which aims to identify the reasons behind an offender’s drug use and eliminate them had its first anniversary last month, and has been hailed as ‘pioneering’ [3]. The project will be expanded next year, and already has several new cases on its books. Law enforcement has been similarly hot on the issue, with hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of drugs seized in Aberdeen raids over the last few years.

However, authorities are concerned that a strong and coherent trafficking ring are at work, pumping drugs into the city through insidious routes, possibly stemming from Liverpool or thereabouts. Getting more information on drug-related activity seen by the public could help the police to shut down these routes – hence the appeal.

Aberdeen Drug Busts:

Aberdeen’s law enforcement services have a strong track record in beating drug problems. In 2016 alone, they seized hundreds of thousands of pounds [4] worth of Class A drugs in a series of raids, building upon the general success of Operation Maple (Aberdeen Police’s anti-drugs operation) in the past [5].

They also helped to bring to fruition the biggest drugs bust ever to take place in British history.

Back in April last year, authorities from Aberdeen helped to bring a vessel in the North Sea suspected of carrying drugs into Aberdeen harbour. Upon a deep and intense search of the vessel, she was found to be transporting £500 million worth of cocaine [6] – roughly the same amount in a single bust that is found in an average year’s worth of drug seizures. Impressive stuff.

Liverpool – Aberdeen Drugs Route:

However, the scale and expense of the drugs recovered in the raids does tend to indicate that there is a sustained effort to get drugs into Aberdeen, and a reasonably steady, reasonably heavy flow running down the trafficking routes. Past successes perhaps indicates that relevant information may well lead to a successful raid, which could make a meaningful difference to the problem.

It is thought that drugs may be coming into the city on a route from Liverpool. Merseyside currently has a drug-related crime rate higher than anywhere else in the UK, a reasonably recent development (crime rates had, until about 2014, been falling in Merseyside). Anyone who knows anything about this, or who has any kind of information regarding drug dealing in Aberdeen or the surrounding area, is asked to contact the police.

All information will be treated with discretion, and kept in the utmost confidence.

Sources:

[1] Evening Express, “Police Issue Appeal To Crack Down On Drug Dealing After Rise In Aberdeen Community” , Nov 2016

[2] Detox.net, “Withdrawal: Standing By Them Through It All”, Jul 2016

[3] Scottish Legal News, “Justice Secretary visits Aberdeen problem solving court”, Dec 2016

[4] BBC News, “Seven charged over £100,000 of drugs in Aberdeen”, Apr 2016

[5] Police Scotland, “Operation Maple: £2m worth of drugs seized, Aberdeen”, Apr 2014

[6] Aileen Clarke, Christopher Sleight, “How the UK’s biggest drugs bust was made”, BBC News, Jul 2016

Images courtesy of Pixabay. Copyright owner: Sammisreachers – used under creative commons licence. 

  • Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.
Sep 232016
 

Aberdeen Voice can reveal that Fiona Manclark, former Facebook Page Administrator for Northfield Animal Haven made an accusation of cannabis use at the farm by the owner, and claims drink and other drug use by others took place there too. Cannabis might be a means to alleviate symptoms of serious illness – but is someone using it regularly able to safely look after 170+ animals on a working farm and animal sanctuary?

In the second article in a series concerning NAH, Suzanne Kelly explains her doubts, and looks at other claims made in Manclark’s remarkable letter to the court, written in response to Suzanne Kelly’s legal action to stop Manclark’s defamation of her. By Suzanne Kelly

cannabis-400832_1280After a drawn out court procedure, defamation action I instigated against Fiona Manclark resulted in my being awarded £10,000 plus costs.
Manclark had run out of road with regard to my lawsuit which sought damages and an apology for her defamation of me which spanned Twitter, Facebook and email. She had applied for legal aid and was denied (the process took months).

Legal aid is normally denied where the applicant either has sufficient funds to cover their costs or where the applicant does not have sound grounds for bringing or defending legal action.

Despite Fiona Manclark having numerous opportunities to issue an apology and remove the various social media slurs without having to pay any damages, she chose to contest the legal action. It took months before the offensive comments were deleted. Eventually her legal firm announced to the courts it would no longer be defending Manclark; no reason was supplied.

When a hearing was scheduled in mid August, Manclark chose not to appear or send a legal representative: she did however send the court a most remarkable letter. Two members of Aberdeen Voice attended the sheriff court to look at the letter, and a shorthand transcription was made of it. All Ms Manclark needed to do was to put forward her side of the argument to the court as the defendant in the defamation action. She went much, much farther.

“…if there is money for drugs, she should not be asking the public for handouts”

Manclark’s letter openly accuses Kelly Cable of using cannabis, and of permitting others living on the farm to drink, use cannabis and ‘to be addicted’ to prescription drugs.

Manclark talks about first meeting the owner of Northfield, Kelly Cable. Manclark visited the farm to buy a pet rabbit – as an aside, reputable animal charities do not breed or sell animals; Cable managed to bridge the gap between rescue, breeding for sale, and running a commercial farm all from the same premises; an ethical dilemma and one unique in the rescue sector in Scotland as far as I can determine.

Aberdeen Voice has asked NAH about selling pets. In response, Northfield Animal Haven owner Kelly Cable told Aberdeen Voice:

“We do not breed or sell rabbits we rehome them and accept a donation of the persons choosing. The only connection with that is that Ms Manclark rehomed a rabbit from us then sold it.

“….since Sept last year Ms Manclark has had nothing to do with Northfield Animal Haven.”

After Manclark and Cable talked, Manclark and her children visited the farm. The children ‘helped build up the farm’ and ‘put in fence posts’ (presumably they were properly supervised, given personal protective clothing, and a safety briefing).

It was then Manclark alleges Cable:

“also smoked cannabis, but that was for medical reasons.”

This would certainly be consistent with a diagnosis of Fibromyalgia – one of an astonishing number of debilitating conditions a variety of sources, including Cable herself, claim she suffers from.

Kelly Cable responded:

“You state that a letter from Ms Manclark declares all of this but I had a private message conversation with ms Manclark from a few days ago where she states I was never mentioned in any letter…”

Fibromyalgia and cannabis:

Fibromyalgia is a serious illness – one with totally unpredictable symptoms and widely ranging levels of pain. Cannabis and cannabis/hemp oil derivatives seem to alleviate pain in some cases.

Some forms of cannabis oil (which do not contain the intoxicant thc) are legal in the UK; at present cannabis is still considered illegal. This is a situation that needs addressing, but in the context of NAH, allegedly, a Fibromyalgia sufferer is running a farm and using cannabis while caring for 170 animals.

Kelly Cable had this to say:

“My personal health is of no business to anyone but what I will say is just because your disabled doesnt mean you give up and lie in bed all day. I am on prescribed medication from my doctor so I cannot give you an answer as to whether cannabis is a useful treatment for my health as its not prescribed.”

NAH also seeks donations from the public because there is not enough money to support the rescues; sometimes it says animals may have to be put to sleep if funds aren’t donated. (NB the commercial arm of the farm sells animals at market all the while).

In this resect Northfield and Cable are again in an unprecedented situation in the animal welfare sector. A report has been made to the police and other relevant authorities, and other witnesses agree with Manclark’s assertion.

A fibromyalgia sufferer would in all likelihood find properly caring for 170 animals at a sanctuary/commercial farm even a more formidable task than a healthy adult would, yet it is claimed Kelly Cable runs the farm with little or even no help at times.

One occasion when her father helped resulted – by Kelly Cable’s own admission – in 17 horses being cut while they were to be transported from one field to another. Eric Cable was also injured in this incident. Inexplicably, Kelly Cable chose to link Aberdeen Voice to this worrying event– clearly with no foundation in reason or fact. In a rambling rant concerning a variety of allegations, Kelly Cable wrote:

“… I arranged alternative grazing for the animals here some of which should not even been attempted to load and moved and what happens my Dad who is 73 gets knocked over and trampled by horses that are so scared, so now I have 17 terrified horses all with cuts etc from trying to be loaded and they are now stressed and very anxious.

“I would suggest that anyone who has shared the articles from the Aberdeen voice or anyone who has jumped on the bandwagon and spouted this crap had better remove all information as Monday morning even if I have to sell my car to do it I will be going after everyone who has done damage to this sanctuary.

“I am also going to the national press and quite a few revelations will be disclosed to the press which can be backed up by various websites….”

Precisely how the horses were scared, who else was helping, whether the horses’ legs bandaged for shipping (as would be good practice) is unknown; NAH has been asked to explain.

Kelly Cable rsponded:

” I have already explained what happened there, if one horse gets spooked it will set off others in the fields, beside them, and in stables but if we had managed to raise funds for hay we wouldnt have had to move them but as our reputation was in tatters this did not happen so we had no choice but to move them a couple of miles away to grazing.”

The NFU Scotland was asked to comment on potential issues of cannabis use on a farm; the request was something of a first for them. They commented:

“Farmers, crofters and their staff are no different from other sectors of society and existing laws around the misuse of drugs would apply. That said, farming is a hazardous occupation and as an industry our record on health and safety is poor. 

“If we are to cut the number of deaths and serious injuries in farming, then anything that impairs someone’s judgement when working with equipment or dealing with animals or potentially places themselves and others at risk must be avoided at all costs.”

Let’s say for argument’s sake there is nothing at all wrong in terms of safety and risk with having THC in the bloodstream and being seriously ill while looking after 170 animals.

Let’s assume that a person with a number of debilitating medical conditions, who allegedly smokes cannabis, and her father were perfectly capable of transporting 17 horses. How then did Eric Cable get trampled, and how did 17 animals suffer cuts in the incident?

Is it somehow Aberdeen Voice’s or my fault considering Kelly Cable leads directly from describing the injuries to AV? One last bit of food for thought:

Northfield is also offering animal assisted therapy: would you be comfortable utilising their service?

Fiona Manclark’s letter continues to say that after the revelations regarding drug use, she decided to cut ties with Northfield, not wanting her children around drugs, and saying:

“…if there is money for drugs, she should not be asking the public for handouts…”

Manclark appears not to have shared her concerns with police or animal welfare organisations that Aberdeen Voice is aware of; we will publish her response to the question when it is received. It is as if her concern was limited to her own children and not other visitors or donors.

Dismissing Manclark’s claims, Kelly Cable said:

“Claims regarding cannabis first came about in ms [Suzanne] kellys nativity story last year and now ms manclark has used them as defence in a defamation case, as ms kelly had won I think that question has already been answered but it has been discussed with the police on the 3 seperate occasions I have had these claims made against me.”

Illness:

What was the relevance of Manclark’s illness to the court? Did it prevent her making an apology, prevent her submitting evidence to back up the hacking claim?

Evidence of the illness was asked for as part of the legal process. No evidence was supplied because in Manclark’s words:

“The reason I have no legal representation any more is that I was requested to get a report from the doctor regarding my health, …..I really didn’t want this dragging on any longer than necessary as this has been a contributing factor to my state of mind.”

For someone who did not want the action dragging on, she did her best to prolong it.

The power to end the legal action always rested with Fiona Manclark. She chose to seek legal aid when a simple apology and deletion of offending posts – without having to pay any damages – was still possible.

“So sue me” were her words on the matter early on, and later repeated to my lawyer. Apparently she only phoned his office to issue that challenge because she was having medical issues. However, only towards the conclusion of the defamation action is there a reference to illness. More can be found in a previous Aberdeen Voice article. 

Manclark’s slurs against me were seen by thousands. She remained defiant that she was telling the truth about me and had evidence – it never materialised. Her slurs have quite possibly stopped people coming to me with stories that I might have otherwise been able to research this past year. The longer her remarks remained visible on the internet, the more time they had to seep in and damage my reputation.

If I am somewhat unsympathetic to the idea that her undocumented illness claim should have been considered by the court, I hope that is understandable. The court’s position is ultimately the last word on the question of illness. It sided with me.

That Mystery Hacker:

Fiona Manclark says in her letter that she agreed to be a Facebook administrator for NAH on the back of the first visit to buy the rabbit.

She wrote:

“I agreed, and she gave me all her passwords and I gave her mine. (I do understand it was a stupid thing to do)”

Kelly Cable has since posted on Facebook that she had never had Manclark’s passwords. Aberdeen Voice has asked each of them to clarify this anomaly.

Kelly Cable told Aberdeen Voice:

“Ms manclark and her family helped out with the haven and Ms Manclark was made admin on my page, I gave my passwords so that she may access anything she needed, why would I need hers. I have emails confirming that I myself was removed as admin and the page was hacked and resulted in my original page being deleted.”

Around the time the legal action against Manclark started, a dialogue appeared on the Northfield site concerning an alleged hacking attack. The conversation involves Cable and Manclark – and at one point they named me as the possible hacker.

Manclark:  “My own fb was hacked too tho, so maybe it’s someone with a grudge against me. Which again makes me think of Suzanne. She was spitting feathers over me calling her an alkie”

Cable:  “Yeah very true. I have told the police about the hacking as well maybe they can find out who hacked it and have them done xx”

Hacking is considered a serious crime. If there had been a police report or investigation, it certainly did not result in any contact with me or Aberdeen Voice.

On the other hand, as reported in the first article in this series, Manclark refused to help me get the police to investigate the hacking crime.

If the police had investigated the hack, then I would have accepted there was a bona fide attack and stopped my lawsuit. I would also have expected the victim of a hack to remove material posted by a hacker; this took ages – during which time the hacker (so we are led to believe) posted refusals to retract, claimed they had evidence to back up the slurs, and told me to sue.

We are looking for a pro-NAH hacker with the ability to hack Fiona Manclark’s twitter, facebook and email over a period of six months, who had a particular desire to attack me. Anyone with any suspicions as to the identity of such a skilled hacker should please contact the police and/or Aberdeen Voice.

Amnesia?

Manclark initially told my solicitor she had no idea who I was; and yet she had an exchange with Cable concerning hacking, which mentions me.

On 13 October 2015 as part of an exchange about ‘hacking’ with Kelly Cable Manclark posted:

“Yes because I don’t want that bitch getting off with anything. And I was getting private mails from her until I blocked her. Still waiting to hear from her solicitor too J J J “

The two women had mentioned me by name by now, but perhaps it is some other person who they accuse of hacking them who had threatened legal action Manclark is referring to? Ms Manclark is at liberty to explain who else could be under discussion if not me. Perhaps amnesia is another illness Ms Manclark has, for on 20 November, she wrote to my lawyer to say she’d never heard of me:

“Message Received: Nov 20 2015, 02:04 PM
“Subject: Suzanne Kelly

“To whom.ot may concern, 

“I have just received a letter saying that I have been slanderous towards your client. I do not know your client and I have never heard of the voice.

“My social media was hacked, and due to a disagreement with Kelly Cable, I had only been admin of the page for 2 weeks. I had never posted as admin on the page. My hacking was reported, and I closed down both Facebook and Twitter as people were getting spam mail. I have since reopened other accounts.

“I have been in touch with Kelly Cable to ask if she knows of your client, and apparently the police have been contacted due to a dispute between your client and her. I have again reiterated to Kelly Cable that I do not want her to contact me again. 

“Again, I do not know your client, and I certainly would not get into a slanging match online for everyone to see. 

“I have absolutely nothing to do with Northfield Animal Haven, and haven’t for a long time, and I do not wish to be associated with them in anyway.”

Perhaps having to clarify how she knew me in October but didn’t know me in November was one of those things that made her uncomfortable with appearing in front of the court.

Truth and Consequences

I started this investigation after Aberdeen Voice published an innocuous press release with my byline calling for standards for animal rescues. I had heard of Northfield Animal Haven and its split personality when it comes to rescuing Animal A while selling Animal B at market, and its sans souci attitude about the future of the sold animal.

Kelly Cable responded:

“I have explained quite a few times now as to how we work here. Yes we have a flock of 26 ewes in size by no means a commercial flock we also occasionally buy a couple of bull calves and raise them. This is our income and also goes towards feed for the rescue animals. No rescue animals are ever bred from or sent to slaughter.

“Yes my sign says all farm animals so therefore if we take in a farm animal then it is a rescue, not an animal that has been purchased then claimed to be rescued. The animals that are here all live together interact with each other but you also get the welfare benefits of grazing these animals together, ie worms, ticks, flys etc these counteract with the other animals.

“With having farm animals we are regulated by animal health and seerad because we have rescue animals here they also have to be included in the forms for vet medicines, feed, nitrogen deposits on the ground.”

After a bit of research I published an article, and was soon inundated with emails suggesting further areas for investigation about the farm and the Cables.

I discovered Kelly has a conviction for benefit fraud. I discovered how she eventually got out of repaying a £5,000 loan, at one point claiming her signature was a forgery (a forensic handwriting expert soon put paid to the claim).

I soon found myself the target of abuse in varying forms from the Cables and their administrator Fiona Manclark across social media. A year long battle to get Manclark to apologise and remove her damaging remarks also resulted in my being awarded £10,000 plus costs – an expense wholly within Manclark’s power to have avoided.

Manclark and Cable claim they were hacked. Their discussions also mention me as being the potential hacker – all very odd, as Manclark informed my lawyer she had only heard of me when he wrote to her, which was after I sent her one personal message asking her to remove the remarks. If you believe her, then it must have been the hacker who responded to my request across twitter, facebook and email and who said ‘so sue me’.

I take Fibromyalgia very seriously, and I am involved in a recognised SCIO which buys cannabis oil for peole with documented medical evidence of serious illness such as Fibro – as long as they are an adult in financial hardship who has done their own research and has made the decision to use legal CBD oil in conjunction with their medical practitioner.

No one of the three people in this SCIO take any money; in fact it is costing me money to run, but it is an important service and I am happy to offer it.

In the next article I will explain why it is important for everyone to be free from abusive lies, and how defending my reputation is particularly important concerning investigative journalism – Would people be coming to me with leads? Would publishers buy my work? Would readers believe me?

Fiona Manclark tried to stop me. Using legal means, I have now stopped her.

But the real concern here is for the welfare of animals – 170 animals seems a huge amount for a woman who, according to a number of posts including at least one by Manclark, is doing it on her own. Kelly Cable often says she is in dire need of funds, sometimes hinting that animals may be put to sleep if she doesn’t’ get money.

By several accounts, there are funds enough for cannabis. Assuming she has Fibro and is able to manage her large menagerie, she must be nearly super human.

I’ve worked on farms. I know how long it takes to look after – properly feeding, exercising, grooming, cleaning stalls for even a dozen horses can be. I do not see how anyone with a serious illness can safely, effectively look after such a huge number of animals. By her own words, there has been an accident with 17 horses and her father.

The welfare of the animals is paramount – but protecting the consumer from fraudulent appeals for money is important too. This is why I am researching and writing about Northfield Animal Haven, and now that my law suit – the only legal action taking place between NAH, Cable, Manclark and I is concluded, I am delighted to pick up where my legal action against Manclark made me stop.

In her defence, Kelly Cable states:

“Many children and adults have visited our place before the flooding and they could interact with all animals, learn about their welfare, learn about how to raise them free ranged instead of caged or locked in sheds. At the end of the day everything here is about the animals and educating people along the way, with animals like sheep or cows that isnt a normal everday animal to meet and interact with

“We stick to numbers on both the farm and the rescue and that way if fundraising doesnt raise the funds or preferably the goods like hay, straw, feed etc, we know with our numbers every animal will be fed and cared for. No donations will ever be used for running costs like electric, phone, wages, etc.

“Between the animals care and care of the ground, and their housing is all that donations are used for and always will be.

“there is no fraud or illegal conduct taken place at Northfield Animal Haven.”

If doubts remain about the truth of my claims, I hope my next two and final articles (unless further information comes to light) on NAH will convince readers beyond any doubt.

Footnote: Aberdeen Voice is grateful to Kelly Cable for her timely response to issues raised in this article. Fiona Manclark was also contacted and invited to comment. We still await her response.

  • Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.

[Aberdeen Voice accepts and welcomes contributions from all sides/angles pertaining to any issue. Views and opinions expressed in any article are entirely those of the writer/contributor, and inclusion in our publication does not constitute support or endorsement of these by Aberdeen Voice as an organisation or any of its team members.]

Sep 202016
 

One of my more volatile investigations published in Aberdeen Voice concerns Northfield Animal Haven. One of its former Facebook page administrators, Fiona Manclark, persistently posted defamatory comments about me across social media sites – and later claimed a hacker had got into her Twitter, Facebook and email accounts and made the remarks, not her.

Refusing to delete these comments – that I was an ‘alkie’ and a liar’ – and failing to submit any evidence to back these slanderous claims, Fiona Manclark dared me on several occasions to sue her. So eventually I did. And by default, I’ve prevailed. I won’t get the requested apology as it was a default situation. But the court has awarded damages to me.

Don’t feel too sorry for her: she was given numerous chances to delete the material and to apologise, all of which she refused to do over the months – but the upshot is she is to pay me £10,000 plus costs (currently being determined).

Here’s how things built up, what happened, and in a series of articles, I will lay bare the story behind the legal action, expose more concerns about NAH, and share my thoughts at having to stop writing about NAH or Manclark while the legal action was live. By Suzanne Kelly.

Northfield Sheep to mart fb screenshotFiona Manclark was an administrator for Northfield Animal Haven’s Facebook page. I was investigating NAH; this came about after a relatively innocuous article, ‘Reputable Animal Charities Initiative’ was published in early June 2015,

The piece stemmed from a press release; the Press & Journal ran the same story.

It was merely a call for standards in the animal rescue/welfare sector – a charity sector in which more than a few scams take place.

By this time, I had heard distant rumblings about Northfield Animal Haven and the family operating it.

The response to the article from Fiona Manclark’s email was this:

“I find it disgusting and absolutely shocking at how biased this paper is. I seen the remarks that your so called journalist made on one of the animal sanctuary sites, and it was disgusting. The woman that runs the sanctuary that is so very obviously being spoken about here, works very hard and does it all herself.

“Your (so called) journalist was invited up on more than one occasion. But she never turned up at all. So how she has the audacity to speak about sanctuaries this way, without knowing the facts is not only slander, but is very very poor journalism. I can only assume that she couldn’t find the time to leave the brewdog beer for long enough.

“I really really hope that some of the sanctuaries get together and sue this paper.”

The AV Editor, acting as Moderator wrote:

“[This comment is being published in full, in spite of obvious and valid reasons why some content contravenes publication criteria, as it has been published in full on a public facebook page. Therefore it appears futile to edit – Moderator]”

I had been asking Northfield (NAH) questions by this point – but they had NOT been mentioned in the article.

It was Fiona’s bringing NAH into the context of the article that sparked off a small flood of people making contact with me.

People with past dealings with NAH or its owner Kelly Cable and/or her father Eric shared concerns about animal welfare, how funds are managed, what goes on at the farm, Cable’s past conviction for benefit fraud, and other allegations. Almost all of the concerns came from people who were fearful of the Cables discovering the source’s identity.

Considering that Eric Cable chose to mention an AK47 on a Facebook post concerning my articles, I fully understand the fear that some of my sources have.

People chose to come to me with their evidence and anecdotes; if they had been convinced by the repetitive assertions I was a liar and an alcoholic, they well might have gone to other writers instead, or not come forward at all. Manclark/the alleged hacker – if unchallenged — would have damaged my reputation personally and professionally; this will be touched on in a future piece. I asked Manclark numerous times to take down her derogatory remarks. She – or this alleged hacker – refused.

What were some of the issues I found? Northfield Animal Haven claimed to ‘rescue all farm animals’ – it had for instance a sign showing a variety of farm animals, which declared it rescued all farm animals. In reality, while one arm of this family business purports to rescue farm animals; the other arm sells farm animals at market.

Some animal lovers were horrified when they discovered they were supporting a person who was involved in rescue but who was also involved in sending animals to market – which more often than not can mean sending them to slaughter.

Kelly Cable responded along the lines that ‘everyone’ knows that she also operates a ‘working farm’ and it is not her concern what happens to animals she sells (more on these issues in further articles in this series).

As documented in a previous Aberdeen Voice article, Kelly Cable responded:

“all of our supporters are aware of what we do with our sheep”

When questioned in detail about whether or not the sold animals are killed she replied:

“I don’t send them [sheep] for slaughter the people who buy them after me probably do but I don’t personally so what I stated was fact….”

Northfield was, shall we say, creative with fundraising. Using photos of Shetland ponies and emaciated cows, NAH claimed to need funds for urgent rescue and launched online fundraising appeals. When these images were put into Google search by Aberdeen Voice and other concerned parties, it emerged either the ponies depicted were happily homed and had no connection to Northfield – or in the case of the cows – were in… America.

Cable claimed to be rescuing them:

“They dumped them in a shed I’ve been feeding them since Friday”

“Thank you if I can raise about a £1000 at least that will get them here food for a few weeks and vet care”

The truth was just a bit different back in 2011 when Lycospca (based in Lycoming County, USA) wrote about the same animals:

“Thank goodness someone saw these poor animals and called us to check up on them. The owner had grain in the barn and they were ordered to get a round bale.”

If the casual observer had read Kelly’s messages about the cows, they’d have believed she had just seen them, and that they had little time in which to raise funds. As for the shetland ponies, owners of two of these were less than pleased to find their photos had been used for NAH fundraising without their permission.

There will be further analysis and revelations in the next articles.

Manclark’s comments – a timeline:

If Fiona Manclark had been hacked, the hack went on for six months. She would also appear not to have taken down any of the offensive comments the alleged hacker made over the months until late December when my legal action against her attempted smear on me was in progress.

The alleged hacker managed to get her Facebook, Twitter and email accounts and use them to communicate with people including her friends – none of which picked up on the claim Manclark made that she didn’t know me or AV, or that they weren’t speaking to Manclark but to a hacker.

Date Poster/Author Social Media/publication Comment
02/06/15 Fiona Manclark (? hacker?) Aberdeen Voice – comments on article ‘Reputable Animal Charities Initiative’ – nb this story came as a press release and was also published by the Press & Journal. I find it disgusting and absolutely shocking at how biased this paper is. I seen the remarks that your so called journalist made on one of the animal sanctuary sites, and it was disgusting. The woman that runs the sanctuary that is so very obviously being spoken about here, works very hard and does it all herself. Your (so called) journalist was invited up on more than one occasion. But she never turned up at all. So how she has the audacity to speak about sanctuaries this way, without knowing the facts is not only slander, but is very very poor journalism. I can only assume that she couldn’t find the time to leave the brewdog beer for long enough.
I really really hope that some of the sanctuaries get together and sue this paper.** [This comment is being published in full, in spite of obvious and valid reasons why some content contravenes publication criteria, as it has been published in full on a public facebook page. Therefore it appears futile to edit – Moderator]
18/08/15 Suzanne Kelly Twitter Mummyalfi (Manclark’s Twitter account name) Further to my earlier tweet, I consider calling me a liar and an alcoholic to be libel. Remove your posts, apologise
04/09/15 Fiona Manclark (? hacker?) Twitter SueKelly10 (Suzanne Kelly’s Twitter account name) So sue me. You are a liar and you are an alkie, so no, I will not apologise for telling people the truth.
05/09/15 (approx) Fiona Manclark (? hacker?) Facebook, Northfield Animal Haven home page (Posting as Northfield Animal Haven) Fiona here. Suzanne Kelly who “writes” for the voice. She’s Sue Kelly on Twitter and is the biggest cretin I have ever come across. She is a liar, a keyboard warrior and an alkie. Dangerous combination. And for the record, it’s me (Fiona) that is saying all of this. Not on behalf of Northfield Animal Haven, or Kelly, just on what I’ve had to witness from this thing.
08/09/15 Fiona Manclark (? hacker?) Aberdeen Voice – comments on article ‘Animal Shelter Operator Is A Smooth Operator Suzanne, please do take me to court. Your reputation means everything to you?
You haven’t even been to visit Kelly even though you have been invited many times.
And you have been seen coming out (or should I say falling out) of brewdog on many occasions. So until you remove your rubbish about Kelly, I will not be removing my truths about you.
08/09/15 Fiona Manclark (? hacker?) Aberdeen Voice – comments on article ‘Animal Shelter Operator Is A Smooth Operator I can’t wait to hear from your solicitor. You have been seen on many occasions falling out of brewdog, so that’s not libel, that’s the truth.
19/12/15 Fiona Manclark (? hacker?) Facebook, Suzanne Kelly’s home page (Fiona or the alleged hacker) sees a comment from a man she knows on my page and comments:
“… please tell me you don’t know this ahem person”
22/12/15 (approx Fiona Manclark (? hacker?) Voice message left for my solicitor Fiona Manclark (? hacker?) tells us to ‘go ahead and sue’ – Manclark later admits to making this call, but claims she was ill/stressed at the time.

 

Aberdeen Voice has also seen Facebook discussions between Ms Manclark and others in which Manclark mentions the threat of legal action from me, and complains I sent her a profusion of private messages.

The truth is that I sent one message to her, asking her to remove offensive comments; an Aberdeen Voice editor was on copy of the message. Fiona Manclark (or this mysterious hacker) replied refusing to retract the comments. None of the people in these discussions suspected that they were communicating with a hacker; none question Manclark’s assertion to the court that she’d only heard of me/Aberdeen Voice after hearing from my lawyer.

When someone is hacked, there is every chance that their email/social media provider will at the very least send a message of concern – login from an unusual site, unusual activity on the account, etc.

When items sent or posted from a hacker haven’t been deleted, then a hacking victim would see them in their outbox, on their home page, in their twitter feed, etc. – and know something was amiss, delete them and report a suspected hack. None of this seems to fit the pattern we are asked by Manclark to believe.

The hack allegedly went on from June through December – apparently without Manclark realising it was taking place. Sometimes the alleged hacker was able to respond very quickly (see Aberdeen Voice comments for instance).

Ms Manclark recently claimed to the court that she gave all of her passwords to Kelly Cable at Northfield Animal Haven: if there were a hack, and if the police had been asked to investigate by Manclark, I wonder where the trail would have led – to some mysterious hacker, or a computer closer to home?

Then again, should we take Manclark’s word there was a hacker over this period of time using three of her accounts?

Was there a mysterious hacker with a vendetta against me with regard to Northfield that took place for months – or was this all the work of Fiona Manclark?

Fiona Manclark refused my lawyer’s first request to remove the posts from social media and apologise publically for them. When she refused, we started the legal action against her. After months of waiting to see if she would get legal aid to fight the case, legal aid was denied, and a court date was set.

Manclark wrote a letter to the court rather than appearing before it in August. In her letter she sticks to the claim she had been hacked. She claims it was reported to the police, but she never supplied evidence to back this up such as a police incident number.

She refused to help me have the police investigate the hacking claim. I was a third party victim of the hack she claims to have suffered.

The police could have investigated it – only if Manclark had been willing to co-operate. My lawyer wanted her to go to the police with me to report it, and she refused on the grounds ‘she didn’t know me’. Well, the person using her accounts certainly knew me well enough – to respond by blocking me.

It would appear from the legal decision in my favour the courts might have at the very least had their doubts as to her claims.

Manclark had quite a bit to say in her written submission to the court, which Aberdeen Voice editors have now seen. This will be the subject of the next article.

It is my understanding now that the court’s decision is absolute. It is time for Ms Manclark – or the mysterious hacker – to think about making restitution to me. My thoughts on the defamation, the legal process, and Ms Manclark’s arguments (such as they are) will be one of the articles in this series.

  • Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.
Apr 082016
 

Old Susannah aka Suzanne Kelly ponders her betters this week, and tugs her forelock in the general direction of the wealthy who have shaped the society we have today.

DictionaryIt actually has been a dynamic and vibrant week in the Deen. With huge regrets I missed Granite, the National Theatre of Scotland’s multimedia all-star cast production that sold out three nights last week.

The night I had tickets for the driving rain drove me indoors (asthma you know). Everyone who saw it loved it.

Cast members came from the city as well, with Dame Ann Begg doing a turn, and Aberdeen Voice’s Fred Wilkinson was involved too.

Elly Rothnie helped bring us this production; she works at the National Theatre of Scotland, although in a perfect, honest, meritocracy would by now be helping to run things in a brand new Peacock Visual Arts Centre in Union Terrace Gardens.

For the many people out there who’ve forgotten what really happened – well, we don’t really do know what happened.

One day Scottish Enterprise (headed for years by Sir Ian Wood) was helping Peacock’s plans. The next day, Scottish Enterprise decided that Sir Ian Wood’s dream of a subterranean car park in the gardens, run by acquaintances of Sir Ian Wood in a private company was a better idea, with Sir Ian Wood deciding what would be built in the gardens (common good land, lest we forget).

Perhaps it’s just that I never had any formal investigative journalism training, but I’ve always had the oddest feeling that there was some kind of connection between Scottish Enterprise’s change of heart and Sir Ian. Clearly there wasn’t though – or the Press & Journal would have written about it.

Moving swiftly along, the big event coming this week is BrewDog’s colossal Annual General Meeting on Saturday. This will be my fourth (I think), and it’s going to see 6,000 people coming to the AECC for fun, froth and frolics. And of course business.

Is it possible that Aberdeen can attract people even without a granite web and before the beautiful Marischal Square complex is built? Seems so. I’ve been to the new bar, and love its menu, feeling and of course bottle shop, but I’m still more at home in the original, first-ever BrewDog bar opposite Marischal College. The Beermuda Triangle will be teaming with international beer fans this weekend; and I can’t wait.

Outside the geography of the Beermuda Triangle you’ll find Under The Hammer on North Silver Street. I’ve been in a few group shows there with Neal Bothwell over the past few years (thanks Keith Byres); Neale’s got a solo show on at present; catch it if you can.

Aside from this Aberdonian excitement, it’s been hard to find any interesting news stories this week to write about. That nice Mr Donald Trump wants women to be punished for having abortions. Then he said he wants them punished if abortion was illegal. Next he didn’t want the women tarred and feathered, but the doctors instead.

Iain Duncan Smith is REALLY REALLY SORRY

Now, he thinks no one should be punished (this may or may not have happened after a journalist asked if any of his past squeezes ever had one).

It’s exactly this sensitive, well thought through take on today’s issues that we want in a world leader. I’m sure every woman feels like I do that we’re better off having some big, strong, handsome, intelligent man telling us what we should or shouldn’t do with our own bodies. I really can’t tell you how grateful I am to Mr Trump for this.

A Guardian article is for some reason critical of The Donald, but then again, it was written by some no doubt hysterical woman

Elsewhere Iain Duncan Smith is REALLY REALLY SORRY that he’d made all those laws he rolled out. I personally thought he was just trying to get the lazy skivers out of their hospital beds and into some kind of profitable (if not well paying) work.

In an interview with Private Eye’s Ian Hislop, Smith is on the verge of tears as he slices an onion – sorry – as he thinks about a suffering mum. No doubt he’ll be devoting himself to helping people today who he penalised yesterday. It might be too late for some people, but IDS is sorry, and that’s all that matters.

Leaving behind the tedious problems of the disabled and the poor, the news this week also had some story about money laundering in Panama. What’s wrong with laundering money? I put a fiver in the wash the other week in my jeans pocket, and it came out smelling like orchid and lavender.

Panama is an interesting small Central American country known for hats and a canal. It’s motto is “For the Benefit of the World”. That’s awfully nice of them.

The country had some previous tax haven problems, sad to say.

Result! Panama was removed:

“… from the Organization of Economic Development’s gray-list of tax havens by signing various double taxation treaties with other nations.” 

That’s turned out well then.

With a little hard work, and the right relatives, you too can have an offshore bank account or two. If not, and you find yourself queuing at the job centre or being hauled up for a disability benefits review, take heart.

At least other people are doing very well indeed, and Iain Duncan Smith is sorry and feels your pain.

Sure, no one’s paying tax anymore (well, no one important or rich anyway), and the NHS and benefits are at breaking point. Still, it’s good economic news because we’re attracting business to the UK. Mind you, we’re doing that by letting multinationals based here pay no tax. But don’t worry. It’s all going to be just fine.

Did you miss David Cameron’s stirring speech on tax evasion? Never fear, for here it is.

I’m sure this moving oration won’t require any explanation, but just in case you don’t quite follow Mr Cameron when he talks of the vast chasm of difference between the words ‘avoidance’ and ‘evasion’, here are some definitions.

Tax Avoidance: (Modern English Conservative Speak) – not paying all the tax you should pay by avoiding tax.

Legal

Tax Evasion: (Modern English Conservative Speak) – not paying all the tax you should pay by evading tax.

Illegal

Treating people like children is not my intention, but it’s important that we all understand the clear difference between avoidance and evasion. I’d not want you think I was being evasive in avoiding this point, so here are some vastly differing definitions.

To Avoid: (English Verb) –

Merriam-Webster has this to say about the word avoid:

“to get or keep away from (as a responsibility) through cleverness or trickery <trying to avoid writing thank-you notes for the gifts he didn’t like>.

“Synonyms escape, dodge, duck, elude, eschew, evade, finesse, get around, scape, shake, shirk, shuffle (out of), shun, weasel (out of)

“Related Words miss; avert, deflect, divert, obviate, parry, prevent, ward (off); ban, bar, debar, eliminate, except, exclude, preclude, rule out; bypass, circumvent, skirt; foil, fox, frustrate, outfox, outsmart, outwit, overreach, thwart”
– http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/avoid

So clearly, avoiding tax is fine.

To Evade: (English Verb) –

Merriam-Webster says of the word evade :

“to get or keep away from (as a responsibility) through cleverness or trickery <people who use every loophole in the law to evade paying taxes>.

“Synonyms avoid, dodge, duck, elude, eschew, escape, finesse, get around, scape, shake, shirk, shuffle (out of), shun, weasel (out of)

“Related Words miss; avert, deflect, divert, obviate, parry, prevent, ward (off); ban, bar, debar, eliminate, except, exclude, preclude, rule out; bypass, circumvent, skirt; foil, fox, frustrate, outfox, outsmart, outwit, overreach, thwart”
– http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/evade

  • Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.

[Aberdeen Voice accepts and welcomes contributions from all sides/angles pertaining to any issue. Views and opinions expressed in any article are entirely those of the writer/contributor, and inclusion in our publication does not constitute support or endorsement of these by Aberdeen Voice as an organisation or any of its team members.]

Sep 042015
 

George Pullar of USAN by Suzanne KellyWith thanks to Suzanne Kelly.

The Pullar family, operators of USAN and it’s subsidiary the Scottish Wild Salmon Company, recently entered guilty pleas on nine charges of salmon conservation legislation breaches and USAN now has a criminal record.

Salmon and other fish are confronted in Montrose with a vast system of huge ‘leader’ nets that direct fish straight into the bag nets until eventually they are hauled onto a boat, and as they panic and suffer, are clubbed to death.

It is a hard thing to witness. But there are other casualties in those nets that suffer and die.

Jenny Green of the Hunt Saboteurs Association shared her observations:

“Coastal salmon netting season ended at midnight on the 31st of August. All equipment had to be out of the water by then. The Scottish government is banning coastal salmon netting after this season, because salmon numbers are at their worst for 40 years. This is an excellent result for us in terms of our Seal Defence Campaign because if there are no nets in the water, Usan can’t claim to need to shoot seals to protect the salmon in those nets.

“The recent court case saw Usan plead guilty to breaking netting regulations in previous seasons and they were charged with 9 offences, and fined £7000.

“Usan had their leader nets in the water after the 6pm Friday night weekend close time (known as keep-ins) – the rule is in place for salmon conservation purposes.

“Usan, now guilty of 9 counts of breaching salmon conservation legislation will not be netting again for many years. Indeed, when they do apply to start up netting again, it’s going to be very difficult because in order to get netting permission they’ll have to prove salmon sustainability…. And you can’t count wild fish.

“So it looks like they are not going to be salmon netters for a very long time. However, during the protracted court case, which lasted all summer, Usan continued to miss weekend close times. In court it was said by the judge that Usan will not be prosecuted by the Crown for 2015 illegal keep-ins. Apparently, as netting is stopping after this season, it’s said to be an obsolete point.

“I find this ridiculous. To me it’s like saying it’s ok to burgle a shop because it’s going out of business anyway. Seal Guardian Campaign operatives submitted 34 videos of illegal keep-ins over the last 5 months to Blair Wilkie, wildlife crime officer for the Angus region. She could choose to prosecute, but apparently she has chosen not to.

“The wild salmon are not the only casualties of netting operations. My pictures show some of the birds drowned in these leader nets, including an adult puffin and a guillemot. I took the pictures with an underwater/submarine ROV. These protected sea birds drowned in a net that was sunk at Scurdieness, adjacent to the protected sea bird haven of the Montrose basin.

“How such a death trap was allowed to be sunk in a site of special scientific interest, adjacent to an internally important and protected sea bird haven for decades is a question the council and SNH both say isn’t in their remit. This net drowned hundreds of protected sea birds. Both were asked why Usan were allowed to put a net here unchallenged, and both said it was down to the other organisation.”

Some 34 instances Usan nets fishing out of hours, constituting wildlife crime, were brought to the attention of wildlife officer Blair Wilkie – no action seems to have been taken to bring cases whatsoever. She could push to prosecute these crimes, but isn’t doing so. Aberdeen Voice asked for an explanation, and was directed to Police Scotland media relations.

A Police Scotland spokeswoman said,

“Police Scotland can confirm that information has been received in relation to concerns regarding salmon netting in the Montrose area and enquiries into the matter are ongoing. Police Scotland is committed to the investigation of wildlife crime and reports of criminality are taken very seriously. Wildlife crime is any act that is made illegal in Scotland under legislation with regard to certain birds, animals, aquatic life and plants including their habitats, both on land and in water.

“Such crimes cause significant harm to the species targeted by the criminals, as well as the communities who rely on wildlife for employment and tourism.

“All reports of wildlife crime will be investigated by Police Scotland and appropriate action will be taken. Extensive investigations into these matters can often be challenging and complex, requiring a multi-agency approach, with input and assistance from specialists within partner agencies, including the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service.

“Our aim is to reduce wildlife crime and we ask the public to report any concerns or suspicious activity to Police Scotland on 101. In an emergency contact 999.”

More information on wildlife crime can be found on the Police Scotland website at http://www.scotland.police.uk/whats-happening/campaigns/2015/wildlife-crime”

John Robins of Animal Concern commented:

“Usan should be prosecuted for their repeated blatant breaches of wildlife conservation law. They profited from the fish they caught illegally and if they are not prosecuted it is proof that crime pays. It is all the more sinister when you realise that Usan Director, George Pullar, is a Government Advisor on wildlife conservation law. Has this helped him evade prosecution?

“Wildlife crime can be difficult to detect and prosecute so it is all the more galling to see such well documented crimes go unpunished. Hunt Saboteur operatives put themselves at great risk to collect this evidence. They deserve their day in court.”

  • Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.
Jul 242015
 

The Scottish Government plans to appoint a teacher/ educator/ nurse to oversee every child born. The intent is ‘Getting it right for every child;’ the scheme is commonly known as the ‘Named Person’ scheme. Aberdeen Voice asked the agency responsible for the roll-out of the Named Persons scheme to answer some of the many questions surrounding this controversial scheme. Here are the questions and replies, as well as a few further questions. By Suzanne Kelly

Scottish ParliamentThe controversial ‘Named Person’ scheme is the subject of heated debate and discussion online and offline. The named person will follow a child from birth to age 18, looking at any records they wish concerning the child and its family, such as health, education, police; anything.

The intention may be a good one, to ensure that no child is abused. A number of questions were put to the government, and after a few weeks their spokesperson responded as follows:

Q1.  How do you square this scheme with the opinion of the Law Society, which warns that the move could be illegal under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR), which protects a parent’s “private and family life”.

Reply: 

“The legislation was recently the subject of a challenge in court, heard in November and December 2014. The challenges to the legislation were rejected in their entirety by the Court. The Court found that Part 4 (Named Persons) of the Act does not contravene the ECHR, EU law or the Data Protection Act (DPA).”

Q2.  Do you intend to compel children to answer questions?

Reply:

No. As we have said before, there is no obligation for a parent, child or young person to engage with the Named Person. The legislation brings no new powers for teachers, or any other professionals.”

[At present there are strict laws governing who can access personal data; it is far from clear whether that protection will apply to Named Persons who want to look at files. While the answer says children will not be compelled to answer, it was presented in court that they will indeed be made to answer questions with QC Aiden O’Neil telling the court there is no provision for opt-out http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-30935806 . Anyone who doesn’t want to answer questions, or any family that doesn’t want to participate should be made aware of the answer the government supplied here that says the scheme is not compulsory.]

Q3.  Will children be forewarned before they are questioned?  This apparently did not happen in at least one case.  In Aberdeen, a teenage girl was called out of her class and questioned by someone at first introduced as being a nurse.  She was unprepared and uncomfortable.

 Reply:

The Scottish Government cannot comment on individual cases.”

[The question was whether or not a person would be forewarned they are to be questioned. This was not answered.]

Q4.  The girl was asked questions about her period among other things. Is this sort of questioning what is being rolled out? Please send me a list of questions which children will be asked to answer.

Reply:

“The Scottish Government cannot comment on individual cases. There is no list of questions.”

[If there are no set questions that can be published, then how can a child or a family possibly know what questions and what subjects are covered under this scheme? The absence of set questions leaves this sensitive questioning of a child open-ended, and can be seen as a carte blanche open to abuse.]

Q5.  A concerned parent wanted to know what had transpired and been written up as notes after their child was interviewed.   The local authority planned to charge £10 per page of documentation supplied – and also was arguing that neither parent or child was really entitled to see any reports created by a named person.

Reply:

“The Scottish Government cannot comment on individual cases.

“The cost of requesting information held about you (known as a Subject Access Requests) is regulated by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). Parents are entitled to access information about their child by making a SAR if the child is unable to act on their own behalf or has given their consent. Further information can be found here: https://ico.org.uk/media/for-organisations/documents/1065/subject-access-code-of-practice.pdf

[The costings provided in the document supplied seem very precise. They also seem very low. The scheme will cost central government absolutely nothing. It will cost ‘other bodies, individuals and businesses’ less than £700,000 from now through 2019, and will cost the NHS. The bad news is that these costs which are nothing short of eye-watering will fall on local governments. In 2014-15, local authorities are estimated (rather precisely) to have to spend £78,782,982 on the scheme (I wonder what happens if that rises to £78,782,990?). The figures then shoot up further, costing £107,765,588 the following year, and similar sums going forward. Will we see local authorities hiring squads of child watchers? It certainly looks like a possibility, as Page 47 refers to hiring administrators.]

Q6.  What powers does the named person have over the child?

Reply:

The Named Person builds on the professional responsibilities of those individuals who are identified as Named Persons (such as Health Visitors, Primary Head Teachers and Guidance or Pastoral Care Teachers), and will form part of their day-to-day work. The Act does not introduce any powers over a child for the Named Person role.”

[Some teachers are less than keen to have any further work piled on them. I have also heard from parents of children with special needs who are currently in litigation concerning bruising and possible use of restraints on their children – the very people who are involved in the legal action would have been likely to also be the ‘Named Person.’ This is worryingly going to cause clashes and in such a case it is hard to see how allowing a Named Person access to records about the child’s bruising and police information which could influence legal action is in the child’s best interests.]

Q7.  What forms of records – school, medical, police, other – would a named person be allowed to look at?

Reply:

There are no powers in the Act plans to routinely gather and share information, or records. If there is a concern about wellbeing then relevant public bodies will share information proportionately and if relevant to addressing a concern. The child or young person will know what is being shared, for what reason and with whom and their views will be taken into account.”

[This is somewhat reassuring – but how the scheme will be overseen and what checks and balances exist is unclear.]

Q8.  How much is your scheme estimated to cost at the national level, and how much at the local authority levels for Edinburgh, Inverness, Glasgow and Aberdeen?

Reply:

“Information on the costs of implementing the Getting it Right for Every Child Programme of which Named Person forms a part, are contained within the Financial Memorandum of the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014, available here: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/S4_Bills/Children%20and%20Young%20People%20(Scotland)%20Bill/b27s4-introd-en.pdf

“The Scottish Government does not hold information relating to the cost for individual local authorities.”

Q9.  There are cases where children with special needs have returned home from specialist schools with injuries and legal action is being taken by parents. If the named person is also someone who might potentially be involved in abuse, what safeguards would be created to remove the named person from overseeing that child? What safeguards would ensure that such a person is banned from looking at medical, police or other records which could interfere with any legal action being taken by parents?

Reply:

The workforce regulation will not change as a result of the Named Person. Anyone undertaking the Named Person role, such as Health Visitors and Head Teachers, will have already undergone a process of checks and vetting through the Protecting Vulnerable Groups (PVG) scheme which checks their suitability to work with children.

“The Named Person will be accountable within the management structure already in place for their primary role. They will also be accountable to their professional registration body as is currently the case. Parents and children will be able to hold professionals accountable through the complaints processes in place within agencies.”

[This may be reassuring to some, but as the news attests, there are educators and doctors who have been found guilty of abusing children, all of whom had been passed as suitable to work with young people.]

Q10.  How does the government plan to manage and record instances of named persons accessing a child’s records?  If the Data Protection Act 1998 is to be upheld, how does the scheme plan to manage doing so?

Reply:

“Part 10 of the draft statutory guidance (available here: http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0046/00469613.pdf) outlines how the information sharing requirements of the Act should be met in a manner that is consistent with the Data Protection Act and the ECHR.”

My conclusions:

People have come out in support of the scheme. However, ‘Getting it right for every child’ seems to mean treating all children and families in precisely the same way under this new system. With data protection rights being breached with alarming frequency, coupled with no set questions and therefore no clear guidance about what it is appropriate to ask, will there be abuses under the plan?

The Act reads in part: “The Children and Young People (Scotland) Bill is founded on the key principles of early intervention and prevention…” Who is going to decide what ‘intervention’ is required? Who is going to be deciding that some future abuse or problem should be ‘prevented’, and how would this happen? Removal of the child from the family?

It is not so long ago that the shameful Orkney ‘satanic abuse’ scandal saw children being taken away from their families on the trumped-up charge of ‘satanic abuse’, questioned until exhausted under questionable circumstances, and when they begged to be allowed to go back to their families, their wishes went unheeded. Some of those forcibly removed children, taken for their own safety allegedly, wound up being abused when in care.

Some of these children sued the state for their lost childhood.

The state needs to clean up its own sorry systems before deciding it has the right to intervene and prevent. In the words of one of the Orkney children:

“We kept telling them that we had not been abused, but they wouldn’t listen,” she said. “The interview techniques used were designed to break us down.

“To take a child away from her mother at the age of eight is unforgivable. We were part of a normal, happy family and suddenly we were shattered.”  http://www.scotsman.com/news/scotland/top-stories/orkney-abuse-scandal-victim-to-sue-for-lost-youth-1-1139542

The state assumed it knew better than the families and the children then; it is assuming it knows better than the families and children now.

This is a contentious subject; there have seen some heated exchanges online; some people are assuming objections to this scheme must necessarily be motivated by anti-SNP sentiment. This leap of logic must not be allowed to overshadow the facts of what the government wants to implement. Objectors to the scheme include doctors, families, human rights groups and more.

For those concerned about the increasing encroachment by government on the rights of the individual, this scheme seems Orwellian. Indeed, we are going to teach children from the time they can talk that they are answerable to the State, not that the State should and must be answerable to them.

  •  Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.
Jul 232015
 

On Friday 10 July people gathered outside the London Danish Embassy. Denmark, a member state of the European Union, is meant to protect cetaceans. This legal obligation means nothing to the nation. It protects the Faroe Islands, where scores of dolphins and whales are driven to shore each year to be butchered alive.

The resulting bloodbath greatly pleases the islanders, who see it as a rite of passage. It rightly reviles the rest of the civilised world. What is Denmark playing at? Who were these protestors? Suzanne Kelly joined the protest to report and support.

protestors_at_the_Danish_EmbasWhy this protest?

The Faroe Islanders had just engaged in another ‘grind’ – the driving of whales and dolphins to the shores to be horribly killed.

The tiny island nation relies on Denmark for protection.

The Faroese are outwith the EU, but rely on this EU nation to uphold its grizzly tradition.

Last year Sea Shepherd personnel were arrested by Denmark while trying to stop this slaughter.

The Danish government has bizarrely claimed jurisdiction, and a trial – in Denmark to uphold Faroese tradition – keeps getting postponed. The Danes refuse to return Sea Shepherd’s vessel until the trial, which rather conveniently suits their and the Faroese needs.

The Faroe Islands have also just imposed a new draconian yet unworkable law aimed clearly at stopping Sea Shepherd from protecting marine life. Anyone – including tourists – is subject to arrest and up to two years imprisonment (perhaps in a Danish cell?) if they do not immediately report any cetaceans they see.

CEO of Sea Shepherd Global and Operation Sleppid Grindini Campaign Leader, Captain Alex Cornelissen, said:

“There is something truly sinister about a law that aims to silence those who fight to protect life, while protecting those engage in this blood-thirsty practice. It is this exactly this ominous state of affairs in the Faroe Islands that requires Sea Shepherd’s presence in the region.”

How anyone is meant to prove or disprove who did or didn’t see a pod of whales is anyone’s guess.

It is worth noting the resulting meat from this entire bloodbath is largely inedible. This is blood sport for the sake of blood. The toxins in the meat and fat are such that pregnant women should not go near it, and that those who would willingly eat such a product are meant to eat no more than 4kg per year. Each animal taken then dies horribly without even the excuse the food is needed.

Who came and why they came:

Debbie said

“I am here because of what is going on in the Faroe Islands at the moment. It is inexcusable. They say it is a rite of passage for teenage boys, but it is an outdated blood sport.”

Aga and Kerry were two of the protestors taking a stand against the senseless slaughter. They said:

“It’s the 21st century, and there is no place in Europe for such a barbaric mass dolphin slaughter.”

“Whales and dolphins are very sentient beings and it is so cruel and barbaric what they are doing. They say do it for food; they don’t I think they do it for fun.  The mercury levels in the whales and dolphins are so high that they shouldn’t be eating it.” 

We talk about the toxicity and about the new law. Kerry tells me:

“I don’t see how they can implement it; you can just say you didn’t see any cetaceans? ‘What cetaceans? Where?’ but it is ridiculous.”

Sally from Eastbourne said

“It’s disgusting the way they cover up what is going on in the Faroe Islands and sadly young children take part in this. It is so sad for future generations. I don’t think anybody should be involved in this. I am really worried for the future for young people who can do this; they smile because the adults say it is OK.”

Sally’s quite right about the indoctrination of this and any similar abuse carried out on animals. Psychologically the result is to destroy empathy with living creatures and this is utilised by military forces that still to this day torture animals under the guise of ‘medical trauma training’ for military medical personnel.

danish_embassy_protestors_lineSuch training could well take place at hospitals (particularly in high crime areas), but the goal of making people immune to the suffering of animals is clearly a common goal shared by the Faroese and the military forces who want to discourage any form of empathy.

The protest was peaceful, as opposed to the Faroese cetacean torture and killing. How much longer can Denmark continue its self-contradictory behaviour in light of the negative press it receives, diplomatic pressure, and the heightened awareness and disgust the public throughout the world feels?

It is either an EU partner and as one opposed to cetacean slaughter, or it is the protector of an outmoded, unnecessary, cruel form of animal torture.

If Oscar Wilde said that a fox hunt is ‘the unspeakable in pursuit of the inedible’, then what would he make of The Faroe Islands grind?

  • Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.

[Aberdeen Voice accepts and welcomes contributions from all sides/angles pertaining to any issue. Views and opinions expressed in any article are entirely those of the writer/contributor, and inclusion in our publication does not constitute support or endorsement of these by Aberdeen Voice as an organisation or any of its team members.]