• CC F.De Molfetta’s Impeachment ; For essential pre-reading to this Volume go to Volume 18-1st September 2016 Go Here;

• LCC – Perverting the Course of Justice;

• Obstruction of the Legal Processing of a Complaint;

•  LCC-Political Composition & Management Structure:

♦ The Lancashire County Council Cabinet;

♦ The Lancashire County Council Scrutiny Committee;

♦ The Lancashire County Councillors to be held publicly accountable for this deliberate obfuscation;

• The Local Government Boundary Commission(LGBC);

• Sedition;

• The Prelude to LCC Sedition;

• The Progenitors of Sedition;

• Pure Plausible Sedition.

♦ The Trial;

♦ The Information Commissioner;

♦ Seditious Deceit & Wondrous Web;

♦ Ensnarement;

♦ ‘Starvation’ of Publicity;

♦ The LCC Embarrassing Position;

~ A True Lancashire Lass ? ;

♦ The Correspondence.

Dear Reader,

Although it may seem at times we are engaged in a Sisyphean task, little by little, step by obstructed step, we continue to advance towards Truth and Justice which are achievable and inescapable  objectives.

The Truth will always out in the end and criminals will ultimately always serve their time in either jail or in the human dimension of their own self-created jail as failed and morally destitute human beings despised by their fellow man…

It is important to constantly bear several points in mind while examining and deliberating on the case the Bugler will place before you in respect of a corrupt conspiracy to pervert the course of Justice which the Bugler will now lay against the current corporate Labour/LibDem Coalition political leadership, its Cabinet, and the individual elected Members of the lead Scrutiny Committee of the Lancashire County Council.

1. Ordinarily a Complaint by a Citizen against any County Councillor involving any matter is placed by the direction of the political Leaders of the LCC(CC J-Mein(Lab) and CC B.Winlow(LibDem) before the Chief Executive Ms.J. Turton, the lead Statutory officer of the LCC, who in turn, places the Complaint before the LCC Monitoring officer-the County Secretary and Solicitor Mr. I. Young- whose joint Statutory duty it is to ensure that the Council “at all times acts lawfully and within its own rules and procedures” as set down in the council’s Statutory based Constitution.

The LCC Leaders have jointly and knowingly deliberately chosen to accept the unlawful advice of their CEO Ms.J.Turton which is that they should ignore the Complaint and that the LCC should not implement its  lawful Statutory duty.

2. It is Mr. Young’s primary duty to fully investigate any such Complaints or Allegations about the elected member(s) of the LCC and in accordance with section 5A(2) of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 to prepare a report for the consideration of the appropriate LCC scrutinising committee, who after due deliberation on the evidence (not opinion) placed before it in open council, takes whatever action it deems proportionate and necessary.

Such a report subsequently becomes hard evidence for future examination by independent governmental scrutiny.

Mr.Young the County Solicitor, an ‘officer’ of the Crown Courts, has knowingly chosen to ignore his duty and breach the Statute law, and worse, has advised his Elected members to do so.

3. Lest there be doubt-none of those involved in this chain of legal compliance have a choice in the matter. It is the Statute law. They cannot decide whether or not to implement any Statutory function. This is a Statutory legal duty laid upon all of them both individually and corporately and they must comply otherwise they are in deliberate breach of the criminal law.

4. This Statutory Complaint procedure is implemented in circumstances where it is alleged that any proposal, decision, or omission, in the course of the discharge of its functions the LCC has given rise to, or is likely to give rise to…

            a) A contravention by the LCC executive or any person on behalf of the executive of any enactment or rule of law, or

  b) Any such maladministration or injustice as is mentioned in the Local Government Act 174 , and/or, as amended   by the Localism Act 2011.

Unquestionably this Complaint with its detailed prima facie evidence fulfils this legislative criterion for the automatic implementation of this Statutory duty.

5. It is without doubt that the LCC, with its governing Constitution and its publicly elected individual Members know they have a Statutory duty to comply with the Law of the land because both corporately and individually those involved have received individual copies of this Complaint from the Bugler.

6. Should they fail in compliance then any failure both within the civil, and especially the criminal law, concerning the deliberate cover up without investigation of deliberate acts of corruption, conspiracy, and misconduct in public office by one of their fellow County Councillors brings automatic sanctions both corporate and individual including Statutory terms of individual financial penalties and imprisonment;

7. Legalistically it cannot be simpler. The LCC County Councillors are required in compliance with the applicable law to carry out their lawful duties to which they were elected, and to do so within the Law.

8. For that express purpose a LCC ‘Code of Conduct’ for all LCC Councillors is, by law(Statutory Instrument 2007 No:1159), encapsulated in the working Constitution of the LCC and applicable to all elected County Councillors.

9. Regardless of which Committee a Councillor may from time to time be allocated to, which may include duties on the Lancashire Combined Fire Authority, a Councillor’s personal daily conduct is inimitably and intrinsically governed by the LCC ‘Code of Conduct’ because it was to a copy of this ‘Code of Conduct’ which newly elected  Lancashire County Councillors after his/her election were required at the very beginning of their Office to append their signature in recognition of the existence of this’ Code’ with its enshrined duties.

10. It is important in laying the sequence events before the Readership of the Bugler which occurred after the Bugler first Impeached CC F.De Molfetta on the 22^nd August 2016 by the laying of charges of corruption against him that the Bugler reminds Readers that the Impeachment of CC DeMolfetta was not principally connected to the longstanding pension issue with the LFRS per se, but was to do with a collation of CC DeMolfetta’s associated corrupt activities with which he has been charged as a Lancashire County Councillor, whilst co-incidentally Chairing the Lancashire Combined Fire Authority, during which he repeatedly breached the overarching LCC ‘Code of Conduc’t which is the overriding legal Code which governs his personal conduct as a Lancashire County Councillor.

11. At this point in time there cannot exist a single named LCC Councillor below who does not know of CC F.DeMolfetta’s impeachment nor the Statutory duty which they and their ‘officers’ are duty bound to implement. Yet in spite of that published knowledge these Councillors have knowingly chosen both collectively and individually to ignore the Law; chosen not to perform their civic and publicly elected duties which requires them to ensure that their Statutory ‘officers’ carry out their Statutory duties as outlined in the 2011 Localism Act ; but have openly chosen instead to support the obstruction of that process and its applicable Acts and chosen to collectively support a cover up which obstructs the Statutory investigation of prima facie evidence presented to them of the corrupt and criminal activities of their fellow Councillor, CC F.DeMolfetta.

Those named below clearly support and condone corrupt and criminal activities at and within the LCC.

12. Finally this squalid corporate misconduct in public office should raise in the Lancashire Electorate’s mind the questions, as this May’s local elections looms, whether or not these named Councillors have sufficient personal honesty, integrity, transparency, and public accountability to be allowed to continue to represent their best interests, or indeed if  the current Labour/LibDem Coalition best serves their interests either?

To that end the Lancashire Electorate are reminded of the following and that their individual votes do matter and will count this May…

The County Council consists of 84 elected councillors.

            The Council’s current composition is:

• Labour 39

• Conservative 34

• Liberal Democrat 6

• Independent 3

• Green Party 1

• Other 1

            Labour currently form a minority administration, but only with the support of the 6 Liberal Democrats.

With the objective of naming and shaming these paragons of political virtue the Bugler appends their details below because compliance with the 2011 Localism Act Law, transparency, and public accountability are clearly the least of their political concerns.

The Lancashire County Council Cabinet consists entirely of Labour elected members:

The Lancashire County Council Scrutiny Committee is the official ‘Watchdog’ of LCC Public accountability, credibility, integrity, honesty, and transparency though you of keen crook spotting eye may well spot the odd fox in this particularly hen house for example the embarrassing Conservative Chief Whip CC O’Toole, that accomplished expenses fiddler, whose activities at the LFRS remain, for the moment, behind the stonewall of FOIA refusal. Of course as a Lamplighter, we all know what his actual function there is, to report his ‘scrutiny’ back to the Temple. No man can yet serve two masters…

Individual County Councillors are appointed by their respective Party to this lead public accountability and transparency  Scrutiny Committee which is formed by representatives of all political parties and Independents thus all Parties and Independents share equal political responsibilities for their successes and failures.

Interestingly some of the self same Councillors serve(d) on the Lancashire Combined Fire Authority so they cannot by any stretch of their vivid imaginations plead ignorance of the endemic corruption at the LFRS under their personal jurisdiction.

Now to those in position of public accountability;the accused; and the interested Agencies:

CC Yates
Conservative

Statistically therefore 69.2% of the LCC Scrutiny Committee were fully aware of the corrupt activities of CC F.DeMolfetta because they are either serving with him on the Lancashire Combined Fire Authority; or had been during the last 9 years; or on the LCC Scrutiny Committee; or in the case of CC Winlow(LidDem Leader) and other CC Leaders have regularly received hand delivered copies from the Bugler citing examples of CC DeMolfetta’s continuing corrupt activities as a Lancashire County Councillor; in this instance whilst appointed to the Lancashire Combined Fire Authority.

Last April the LGBC completed an Electoral review of Lancashire LCC, its Councillors, and its Electoral Divisions(ED).
As a consequence a considerable number of the ED boundaries have been adjusted to more reflect the electorate (so the Commission says).

Usually this is a colloquialism for what is in effect gerrymandering by the sitting government to favour itself at the next national and local elections which in the case of Lancashire have now been ‘adjusted’ by Parliamentary approved Statutory law for implementation at the May 2017 County Council Elections.

This raises several interesting points because of these changes and their consequences.

Firstly, since these boundary changes have now been approved by Parliament and thus placed on the Statute book for this coming May Election one assumes that the LCC will not hesitate to comply with the Statute Law?

Secondly, given that this will be the case one wonders why the LCC has such difficulty in complying with the Statute law when it comes to the small matter of the impeachment of CC F.DeMolfetta which has, up until now also involved the LCC’s, CEO Ms. J. Turton and in particular its Statutory ‘Monitoring’ officer Mr. I. Young (County Solicitor-officer of the Courts) who are both required to carry out their specific Statutory duties in compliance with the Statute Law which involves instituting the legal procedures with respect to CC F.DeMolfetta corrupt activities?
N.B. Interestingly the LCC Media department refused to supply a picture of Mr. Young.

Thirdly, a direct consequence of these ED ‘adjustments’ is that the Bugler, located in a ‘safe’ Conservative seat, and who was meant to be represented by the current LCC Conservative Leader CC Geoff Driver (who as ever promised the earth to the Lancashire Fire Service Veterans, the Wives, and Beneficiaries and delivered absolutely nothing), now finds himself represented by
CC Carl Crompton(Labour)who will have to prove himself at the forthcoming May, County Council election.
CC Crompton is an interesting leading Labour politician both within Lancashire and Preston City though he first started his ab initio  political life as a trade union representative with the  UCATT (Now Unite) at British Aerospace in Preston before, as they say in the fullness of time,  being elected to the Preston Borough Council where  later point he was to serve as the town’s Guild Mayor.

Currently he is a Preston City Councillor and for the present, as we note, a Lancashire County  Councillor since 2009 who not only sits on the Lancashire Combined Fire Authority and has done so during the continuing LCFA pension ‘hardship route’ debacle but who also sits on the leading LCC Scrutiny Committee whose duty it seems is Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?(Who will guard the guardians ?)

As a career politician CC Crompton draws his 3 public purses of recompense from these Local Authorities.

During his long time on the LCFA CC Crompton, like his associates, has regularly received direct communication from the Bugler, on behalf of not only himself, but those who he represents, concerning the LCFA’s pension debacle and its rampant corrupt practices.

It is to CC Crompton’s credit that he has always acknowledged these communications, and thus has current knowledge, but to his discredit that he has failed to raise this issue publicly since his appointment in 2009 or to attempt to contact those suffering the oppression of the LCFA pension ‘Hardship Route’ of which he cannot be unaware?

Surely a good ‘grass roots’ socialist would do that?

We must assume the CC Crompton is a good socialist because he informs us so in his latest electoral missive in which under the Labour banner headline he informs us that his is a “Strong Voice in tough times”… encouraging us all thus… “Any local issues? Get in touch” …which is all rather strange and embarrassing since he has been aware of and sitting on the LCFA’s pension debacle for the last 7 years.

So much for his “Strong Voice” during which for the last 7 years of thundering silence the LCFA Public Minutes fail to record a single occasion on which CC Crompton has raised his ‘Voice’ in support of the FSVs et al who one must assume would be his natural kindred ‘socialist’ voters who he would wish to represent and champion, particularly with an eye to next May’s electoral vote…surely even he should know that one should always look before throwing a brick out of a glass house?

But, whether he likes it or not,  with these Boundary changes he has now ‘inherited’ direct representation of the Bugler and ‘leader’ of those opposed to the LCFA pension ‘hardship route’. Representation which will surely include his duty to publicly speak for his FSV’s their Widows, and their Beneficiaries for whom we know he is directly responsible on the Lancashire Combined Fire Authority.

Given this great political prospect the public challenge for CC Crompton  and his “Strong Voice” will be to see, now that he has direct responsibility for us all, whether or not he will step up to the mark and rise to this great political opportunity and publicly demonstrate his true ‘socialism’ to us all?

In addition there is the also the great political opportunity concerning the troubling matter of the Statute law and the impeachment of his Labour colleague CC F.DeMolfetta on which he has remained characteristically silent.

Nevertheless, one assumes, in spite of his natural recalcitrance he will be eager to publicly demonstrate his care for his Fire Service ‘voters’ and that he will also wish to publicly demonstrate  that not only is he a law abiding Lancashire County Councillor but that all of his colleagues of whatever political persuasion, or none, will also wish to join with him in demonstrating that they also are good law abiding LCC Councillors by individually and collectively complying with the Statute Law and implementing this LCC Constitutional procedure against CC F.DeMolfetta?

Or, are we as mere voting Citizens, to understand and accept that this particular socialist and his LCC Labour/LidDem Ccoalition only remain silent when a fellow socialist i.e. CC DeMofetta, stands charged with bare faced corruption and the misapplication of public funds?

Should we also take this to mean  that the current Labour/LibDem Coalition condones, nay encourages corruption, by its County Councillors?

If we are to believe in CC Crompton’s triumphantly self proclaimed socialist and political ‘ethics’ then the least we must expect is that he will publicly within the LCC Scrutiny Committee attempt to persuade his Labour Leader CC Mein and the Leader of the LibDems CC Winlow and their party colleagues to comply with the Statue Law in respect of the impeachment of CC DeMolfetta.

Failing that, that CC Crompton will use his “Strong Voice” to move a motion of censure against his own Coalition Leadership and have it formally recorded in the  public minutes so that at least the voting Public particularly in his Electoral Division can see that he has the political courage and conviction of his “Strong Voice” whilst personally attempting to comply with the Statute law even though he may have the long term cynical intention of his own legal self protection? 

The Bugler will of course be happy to publish any open correspondence and action that CC Crompton engages in, in the LCC Scrutiny Committee forum, because at this point we must assume as a political pillar of local politics he will wish to demonstrate that above all else, in representing us, he is both personally and politically law abiding, will he not?

Next while the LCC and its Coalition leadership is assiduously digging itself deeper into a bog of unlawful misconduct with its individual and collective failure to implement the Statute Law and its Constitution in respect of CC. F. DeMolfetta  it might wish to consider that not only is its failure to act a corrupt act of itself,  but it may wish to consider that it is opening itself up to the individual and collective charge that it is also being seditious, which is Constitutionally an even graver matter.

Sedition is a subversive activity, both covert and  overt conduct  which uses the written or the spoken word  to encourage insurrection against the established lawful order of a particular Constitution, in this case the LCC Constitution, actions which often include incitement and /or ‘advice’ to resist a particular tenet of that Constitution which has been established by Parliament; which has authorised its entry into the Statute Book;and which ironically is a Constitutional ‘model’ which was voted on in Council and adopted for use by the very LCC which refuses to implement its provisions!

The Bugler will illustrate a prime example, in addition to the charges of corruption laid against CC F.DeMolfetta of his initial authorisation of sedition involving Mr.R.Warren(LFRS);Ms. J.Tuton-CEO-LCC; and Mr.I.Young-County Solicitor-LCC followed by the approval of this collective sedition by his LCC Political leadership namely CC J. Mein-Labour Leader in joint conspiracy with the CC Winlow the LibDem Leader.

As they will find the law is the law and it applies to every Citizen equally…

Shortly we must expect the usual synthetic outrage and blind panic response from the LCC which will of course include the usual reference to ‘defamation’ etc, etc. Perhaps the Bugler ought to re-write their mantra for them?

But perhaps an apt statement from President Abe Lincoln better fits this LCC debacle…

“It denounces, as public enemies, all who questions its methods or throws light upon its crimes.”

It is grotesque when the rule of law is not only violated but is to be seen to be publicly violated by the LCC publicly abandoning its own Constitution and Policies which it voted to implement then one must conclude that Democracy within Lancashire has failed and its integrity is substantially damaged with the local Electorate.

By early August 2016 the Bugler concluded that sufficient time had elapsed during which County Councillor F.DeMolfetta had held the role of Chairman of the Lancashire Combined Fire Authority coupled with a series of comprehensively documented examples(which is not an exhaustive list) of his corruption practices which included the approval of the imposition of the “Hardship Route”on all LFRS pensioners; the approval of racism; the approval of false mileage claims; the approval of breaches of the Equality Act 2010 in LFRS appointments; the deliberate obstruction of the FOIA, the Data Protection Acts, and the Information Commissioner; the deliberate deceitful obstruction of the Pensions Ombudsman and the misappropriation and misapplication of LCFA financial resources to support the ‘pay off’ of at least 3 LFRS corrupt employees.

All of which were approved by him and at his recommendation by the Lancashire Combined Fire Authority under his chairmanship.

In carefully seizing this initiative the Bugler was as ever mindful of the corrupt relationship between CC DeMolfetta and clerk Warren(LFRS) and its corrupting effect on other decent serving staff at the LFRS.

The Bugler was intrigued to see how this might well play out in the final analyses of their unholy alliance.

This we must remember is a case of ‘we must hang together’ or we will ‘surely hang alone’ such is their perverted interdependence.

The only question was not whether clerk Warren would panic, because he has a track record for that, but the speed

of his reaction and the predictably devious mechanisms he would attempt to employ to retain control of this unwelcome development which effectively removed him entirely from all control of DeMolfetta but which these new Statutory proceedings as a consequence exposed him and DeMolfetta’s cosy corruption to another higher level public political forum for scrutiny beyond both their control.

It should be remembered that clerk Warren is not driven by the higher motives of loyalty to his superior CC F.DeMolfetta, about whom he cares nothing, but by the self-preservation of his current employment and ironically his LFRS pension about which we must assume he knows little or nothing except the final pay off…

The only question which remains is who will the ‘Lamplighters’ sacrifice, a gauche DeMolfetta, or a vain glorious failure, a devious clerk called Warren, or both ?

Thus following careful research and a comprehensive review of CC F.DeMolfetta’s ‘performance‘ set against the LCC ‘Code of Conduct’ for elected Members(of which he is a signatory) it was concluded that sufficient prima facie hard evidence had been amassed which, following legal advice, it was decided to lodge a formal Complaint against CC F.DeMolfetta.

In effect an informal impeachment, which laid out the principle charges(though by no means an exhaustive list) of his corrupt Misconduct in Public Office on his Watch as a Lancashire County Councillor all of which culminated in a formal letter dated Monday 22^nd August 2016 from the Bugler to the Coalition Leaders of the LCC.

The Bugler ought to remind its Readers, or those new Readers coming late to the Great Hunt, who exactly clerk Warren of the LFRS is.

Clerk Warren is employed by the LFRS. He is not employed by the LCC nor does he have a necessity to interact with the employees or politicians at the LLC except in so far that he is the LFRS Firefighters Pension Scheme ‘manager’ which he is neither qualified or practiced in the management of as he  regularly demonstrates.

Clerk Warren arrived at the LFRS under mysterious Lamplighter circumstances from Network Rail NorthWest in April 2002. Anecdotal evidence suggests that whilst employed there that he set back industrial relations so far that it was a career case of push or jump. Self-evidently he jumped. Like the appointment of the recent addition to the LCFA as Clerk to the Fire Authority solicitor Nolan, clerk Warren’s ‘arrival’ remains shrouded in mystery. Not for him, or for that matter Nolan, the tedious public advertising of the vacancy; the application procedures; the short listing; the competitive interview etc etc; all required under employment law contained in the Equality Act 2010, just straight in. But we will return to Nolan’s appointment later he has raised the opportunity for us to do so.

Warren, as the Bugler regularly illustrates with full supporting evidence, is an accomplished mendacious Machiavellian character with overtones of narcissism who is not only a corrupt local authority clerk but contaminates all those he manipulates and comes in daily contact with in his work.

If he cannot corrupt he threatens and bullies as his email records confirm and currently in his censorship of a free press he has let it be known that anyone who accesses the Morning Bugler at LFRS SHQ will be dismissed for Gross Misconduct.

It has been said at LFRS SHQ in Fire Service street talk that he is recognised there as a congenital liar and someone who has done more to harm the reputation of the LFRS than any other single employee in its brief history.

In this respect CC F.D.Moletta was, and is, simply part of a long line of classical role model dupes at the LFRS who became grist and casualties of Warren’s manipulative mill.

He simply enjoys the malicious misuse of power.

Next on his ‘wolf’ list is Turton, Young, and the Coalition Leaders at County Hall.

Little do they know the type of ‘creature of the night’ that they are dealing with, but they will pay the price and learn…

We should all reflect on the loss of employment(but not the emoluments and pensions) of Hamilton, Gardiner, and Harold at the LFRS when clerk Warren had used them all up.

It is an established and transparent part of his modus operandii that clerk Warren regularly throws his dupes ‘to the wolves’ but only after engaging his whinging Uria Heap ritual of washing of his hands to demonstrate to his Lamplighter leaders that he did all in his dubious powers to save them from themselves and Justice.

The only question which remains to be seen is what the Lamplighters decision will be in the case of DeMolfetta?

Though it must be said that anyone who lacks the savoir faire to the 33^rd degree he so evidently does surely must be an inherent liability and an unsuitable candidate for any political party at the forthcoming May election on the basis of what corrupt folly is he going to approve next?

The LFRS/LCC Web database supports the time line and movement of correspondence, some unpublished, which followed the delivery of the Bugler’s letter of Impeachment of CC.F.DeMolfetta on Monday 22^nd August 2016.

Time Line-The rare Truth of local politics is always a fascinating read…

@ 10:20hrs this letter was delivered to the named LCC Coalition Leaders and  to CC F.DeMolfetta. Go Here.

@ 12:50hrs, as predicted, a copy of the letter was promptly forwarded by CC F.DeMolfetta to ‘Bob’ at the LFRS. CC F.DeMolfetta always reacts in panic because clearly he cannot think for himself, or perhaps in charity he does not understand the big words.

Nevertheless, in well exercised panic, he seeks out the guaranteed lifeline where he knows he can always acquire immediate support from a fellow Freemason when he finds himself ‘in distress’. He knows that ‘Bob’, in effect his ‘controller’, though he does not seem to know this, will always find him an arm’s length fudge, a plausibly deniable solution.

@ 14:49hrs, as predicted, clerk Warren who was not on the original circulation list of the Complaint immediately decides to protect himself from the these new Statutory proceedings which will expose him and DeMolfetta’s cosy corruption to scrutiny in another higher level public political forum within which his ‘control’ becomes very difficult.

He does so under the guise of helping an equally corrupt CC F.DeMolfetta though he does not say so in his rushed unsolicited email  a triumph of spin, mendacity, and edited half-truths which he sends to the named Coalition Leaders (though in his panic he misspells the Deputy Leader of the

Lancashire Labour Party CC.D. Burrow(sic), copying his ‘rescue’ package to CC F.DeMolfetta, whilst blind copying it to Young the County Solicitor with whom he has previously and complicitly discussed its intended contents and circulation in the time lapse between 10:20hrs and 14:49hrs. Go Here.

The Bugler does, however, understand his  desperation to become the most excellent of spin doctors, who like the  millers daughter in Rumpelstiltskin will be expected to spin straw into  gold.

By any stretch of the imagination clerk Warren’s unsolicited actions, a person who is not even an employee of the LCC, has by his extraordinary intervention raised a host of questions which, as the correspondence is chronologically published, the answers will become self-evident.

Was, for example, solicitor Nolan the Clerk to the Fire Authority part of a triumvirate who composed this hasty email because the phraseology used hints at 3 authors rather than one?

However, the Bugler is grateful to clerk Warren for raising his series of edited half truths in this hasty imaginative email. Half truths which he thinks will serve his purpose but will only serve to reopen his own Pandoro’s Box which holds an over whelming collection of professional corruption.

He really should try to do better but then a panic attack which threatens his very employment, his pension, indeed his personal freedom, has clearly leant wings to an ever fruitful imagination but ‘spin’ which must not be allowed to pass unchallenged providing as it does an opportunity for the Bugler to publish the actual truth.

Clerk Warren raises the matter of the 4 day County Court trial  which in spite of the Bugler encouraging him to be patient he persists in repeatedly raising only to receive the same answer which is that he needs a little forbearance before claiming a ‘victory’ for the LFRS which he will find in the final analysis is all rather ‘fanciful’ and pyrrhic.

He conveniently forgets his actions whilst present at the 4 day trial and needs reminding what his criminality was. He it was who, with the prior approval of CC F.DeMolfetta engaged in pre-planned criminality at court in complicity with his LFRS/LCC colleagues( both present and retired)  by engaging in a rampant series of orchestrated Contempts of Court the purpose of which was to successfully pervert the course of justice and perpetrate a miscarriage of justice.
When the time is ripe and the full evidence is finally collated due process of the Truth will follow including an Appeal of a Miscarriage of Justice before the Lord Chief Justice and the Attorney General  based on the court ‘performance’ of a racist Circuit Court Judge Butler who repeatedly misdirected himself in law in court where he also signally

failed to take the appropriate action to deal rigorously  with six Court lodged hand written statements(including 2 Court Officials) placed before him of the publicly observed impropriety and criminality of Warren; the former LFRS solicitor Mr. Harold; the current head of LCC Pensions Mrs.D.Lister; and the former LFRS pension officer Ms.J.Drinkall MBE.

It seems that the Judiciary are more than capable of undermining the ‘rule of law’ without any help from the Public.

This Court room Criminality included clerk Warren’s Perjury under Oath; the suborning of his own principal Witness under Oath; and the Contempt of Court by the LFRS/LCC persons present misusing banned electronic devices to communicate with each other and ultimately with Ms. J.Drinkall MBE by gesticulation whilst she was under Oath and examination in the Witness Box by the Litigant-in-Person.

The Bugler has repeatedly encouraged clerk Warren et al to be patient reminding all those involved that there is no Statute of Limitations for such criminality.

In respect of the Information Commissioner, apparently  who  had declared the Bugler ‘vexatious’, clerk Warren fails to mention in his ‘spin’ that he was brought to heel in the matter of his 6 year stonewalling refusal to release Fire Service Veterans(FSVs) Personal Record Files(PRF) which so frustrated the Commissioner that he ordered 3 of his inspectors to visit LFRS SHQ, where after inspecting the PRFs, clerk Warren was ordered under pain of Contempt of Court proceeding to immediately release all requested PRFs.

He learned about Statutory duty from this failed exercise.

One must ask why clerk Warren felt it necessary to take the high risk action he did?

The simple answer was, just like now, that he was desperate to cover up his criminal activities recorded in these PRFs in which he, authorised by CC DeMolfetta,  amended pension record files to disenfranchise legitimate pension claims by injured FSVs.

In returning to clerk Warren’s written act of sedition, another high risk action, it is reasonable conjecture that in the time lapse between 10:20hrs and his email of 14:49hrs, that he conspired with his fellow Lamplighters Young and Nolan to complicitly determine a course of seditious action which had the intent and purpose of misleading the LCC into ignoring and thus breaching its Statutory duty.

To achieve this purpose CEO Turton, who would advise the Coalition leaders, would have to be privately briefed or ‘spun’ an unlawful legal position in which she would be convinced that it was perfectly in order for the LCC to ignore the Statute Law and its Statutory duty in respect of the DeMolfetta Complaint.

It follows,(and there surely will be records of this) that when the Coalition Leaders received the Bugler’s letter of Complaint they sought legal advice from CEO Turton who surely must have sought legal advice from Young because Turton is not a lawyer.

The advice and entrapment from Young (a court officer and the LCC Monitoring officer responsible for DeMolfetta’s conduct) was that it was all perfectly in order to ignore the Complaint and its inherent Statutory duty.

It also follows, and is crystal clear in the confirming correspondence which is now published, that CEO Turton accepted without question this deliberately misleading and unlawful advice and passed it on not only to the Coalition Leaders but the elected Members on the Scrutiny Committee.

Thus making them individually complicit in an unlawful act.

A more mature and experienced CEO in these circumstances would be expected to exercise thoughtful caution but CEO Turton, without having the gumption to realise the situation she found herself in and without the nous to carefully checked it out ‘bought’ this seditious advice and passed it publicly on.

As a consequence of failing to do her homework she abysmally failed her primary duty of protecting the LCC which is to ensure that it always acts within the law and as a consequence she failed to advise the Leadership that they did have a Statutory duty in the DeMofetta case and that they must initiate due process.

By her failure she has placed the LCC Coalition Leadership and the LCC Scrutiny Committee in the publicly embarrassing position of currently being in contravention of its Statutory duty and the Statute Law.

There seems to be little honour among these crooked Lamplighters but Young now finds himself, as a solicitor; an officer of the Court; and the Statutory LCC Monitoring officer where he has not only lied publicly in correspondence with the Bugler but he has in complicity with clerk Warren,  and possibly solicitor Nolan, deliberately fed an unlawful  headline falsehood to CEO Turton who gullibly and without thinking bought their entire story hook line and sinker.

One of the questions which CEO Turton must publicly called to account on  is whether or not she sought out Young’s legal opinion on the due process to be adopted with respect to CCDeMolfetta and whether in fact, if she accepted what Young told her as truthful she then acted unlawfully which was to advise the Coalition Leaders and the LCC Scrutiny Committee just to ignore the Statutory law and their individual Statutory duty.

Clearly  both CEO Turton and solicitor Young  both have serious questions to answer in what they knew, when they new it and what jointly they decided to do about the Bugler Complaint against CC.F.DeMolfetta.

What a wondrous web they all wove…

Thus the objective of this written sedition which was to encourage the LCC to contravene the Statutory Law was achieved.

At this embarrassing point we must return to the successful author of the LCC’s misfortune clerk Warren and his fanciful missive which he knew to be seditious.

Regularly the Bugler provides human examples where clerk Warren contaminates and ensnares with his corruption those unfortunates with whom he becomes involved.

In this missive, he provides another classical example of such an ensnarement. Though in all probability the victim Young does not quite realise it or its consequences, yet.

The ensnarement is contained in clerk Warren’s first paragraph… “Ian Young has knowledge of some of the history”.

This is a prime example of how he manipulates a situation at arm’s length for his own career protection whilst ensuring that, in this case, Young who is already deeply

Young is to be the next hapless victim…what a fool.

Now we read from clerk Warren that Young, he says, was fully aware of the LFRS debacle though resisting as ever that the Truth might escape his lips he writes “some” which is completely the opposite to that which Young has stated !

Young ought to ask himself who needs ‘friends’ like this?

Should evidence of Young’s mendacity cloaked in amnesia be required how better than this ‘officer of the court’ be condemned by his own hand. Go Here.

Although clerk Warren is a quite a cunning chappie he can always be relied upon to amusingly ‘over gild the lily’ of his mendacity when  ‘spinning’ his headlines to gullible Coalition Leaders with their equally gullible CEO.

He hopes indeed, he states, that it is his intention to starve the ‘Bugler’ of publicity whilst ignoring the very existence of ‘The Morning Bugler’ which is paid for and supported both overtly and covertly by those opposed to the rampant corruption which exists within the LFRS under ‘control’ of the likes of clerk Warren and DeMolfetta.

One wonders about his censorship of a ‘free press’ The Morning Bugler at the LFRS SHQ and his threat to sack anyone who accesses TMB at work.

Does this mean in the crazy world he inhabits that he is likely to sack himself?

This is all rather bizarre because using a rather nifty little tool called an IP Locator and its companion a Gelocation Finder the Bugler can certainly confirm that he is a regular avid reader, though he does move around a little!

All of this is just symptomatic of how threatened and increasingly isolated he feels surrounded by enemies and spies as he sees it who are all eager to pay him back and do him down. Indeed he is right because if you sow the wind you will reap the whirlwind…

Frankly, and depressingly, the ‘Bugler’ has more LFRS inspired publicity than it can handle with a readership(not hits) averaging 2000 per week.

But be advised TMB will get to the Great ‘Nelson’ Butler story because it will be worth waiting for and perhaps clerk Warren will not need to sack himself because someone will do it for him…

Finally still smarting from his rough handling by the Information Commissioner clerk Warren rightly cautions the Coalition Leaders to… “just acknowledge unless a breach of statutory duty would be involved.”, and  indeed it is.

 In the event the Coalition Leaders have chosen to ignore this great pearl of actual wisdom of clerk Warren’s ‘experience’ a peril which places the LCC in contravention of the Statute Law.

Regardless of all this and the correspondence which follows the inescapable fact remains in respect of the CC DeMolfetta Complaint that a Statutory duty with due process still has to be implemented by the LCC and because Young the LCC Statutory Monitoring officer responsible for the conduct of all Lancashire County Council Councillors is entirely compromised this Statutory duty is best undertaken by an independent member of the Civil Service under Ministerial direction.

The following pre-action correspondence confirms that both Leaders knew what the substance of a proposed meeting would be about namely CCF.DeMolfetta’s corruption in public office yet both chose not to take the slightest action.

The Lancashire voting Public must correctly assume that both they and their respective Parties condone and approve criminal corruption in their administration and should surely vote to remove both these Leaders and their Parties from office in the May 2017 elections. Go Here.

And now to the greatest embarrassment of  all…

One hundred years ago this month a True Lancashire Lass called  Edith Rigby was locked up for fighting for greater Rights for Women. Here is a letter she wrote from behind bars in 1907. Go Here.

With a feather(2nd-L) in her cap!

This courageous Lancashire Lass could hardly contemplate that one century later her ‘Torch of Democracy’ would be handed over to County Councillor Jennifer Mein Labour Leader of a Lancashire County Council who would, without the slight compunction or embarrassment, disown all that Ms.Edith Rigby had fought for.

Not only would she betray the Suffragette Movement and the continuing movement for Women’s Rights who brought Jennifer Mein her political power at such a heavy price in indignities, aye indeed death, but that she would ignore the laws of this Realm whilst condoning and covering up blatant corruption by a Labour County Councillor under her jurisdiction.

Which Loyal and Prideful Lancastrian can in all conscience vote for a Labour Leader and a Labour Party which is no longer true to its roots,  itself, or its values? Indeed one of the disabled FSV~JH is directly related to Edith…

County Councillor Jennifer Mein should hang her head in shame and resign because she has failed the greatest test of all, loyalty. Loyalty to the Women’s Movement and its integrity and her birth right.

She will never wear the laurel wreath of the title ‘A True Lancashire Lass’ because she has not earned the right to it…

But this Lancashire Lass did as she was being arrested at the Parliamentary Gates bound for Holloway Jail…

Anticipating that the Labour/LibDem Coalition would adopt a policy of stonewalling on the DeMolfetta issue at County Hall,  which of course runs completely contrary to the LCC Constitution where ad nauseam they inform the voting Public how trustworthy they are and that not only would they be honest and transparent in Council but that their expectation was that they can always be held Publicly accountable.

This as we shall see is of course just so much tripe in practice.

All that this stonewalling does is to confirm in the Electorate’s mind, what they already believe of this Coalition, that in a cover up the Leadership are willing to countenance blatant corruption in a Labour County Councillor who might be called upon in a split vote to lend his corrupt vote to the Coalition.

It seems that the Labour and LibDem party sets a very low price on their grubby grasp of political power.

1. On the 8^th September 2016 prompting their great aspirations the Bugler sent the following letter , Go Here.

2. On the 14th September 2016 a deeply panicked clerk Warren trying to curry favour with those at the LCC who do not know his modus operandii sent the Bugler an amusing unsolicited letter of monumental asinine fatuity wrapped up in an ideology of narcissistic stupidity in to attempt to claw back his loss of ‘control’ of events which, as the days pass, will deepen into a career catastrophe the like of which he has already experienced at RailNetwork, namely the sack. Go Here;

In his diatribe, his personal loss of control of the situation is palpable and amusing and was dealt with in the Bugler in that vein. Go Here.

3. On the 15th September 2016 it became time to lay out the charges against Young set against his complicity with a corrupt DeMolfetta, Go Here.

4. On the 21st November 2016 it was time to remind CEO Turton what her Statutory duties were and remain  Go Here.

5. On the 23rd December 2016 the Bugler responds to a rather uncouth and irate  CEO Turton who was clearly forced to respond. The only question is by whom?

It is worth reminding the Electorate who suffer tough economic times and have to take the poorer cuts of meat , or none, and have to turn down or indeed use nothing to heat their home that the Bugler was in error in this letter when writing  that Turton receives a salary obscenely in excess of the Prime Minister – £184K.

In point of fact Turton receives over £200k per year which includes a £9000 travel allowance and all the usual pension perks for someone who is basically a clerk with no academic qualification indeed little qualifications of any notable description at all  who believes this salary allows her as a public servant to adopt a snarling and sneering tone as a self evidently thoroughly unpleasant vulgar person in dealing with those of the Electorate she deems to be beneath her contempt.

But as usual she fails to acknowledge, respond, or answer the simple question?

Is she and Young going to do their Statutory Duty?

Go Here.

Later De Molfetta raised a spurious complaint against Turton, bought her silence, and off she went with her 30 pieces of silver, jingling into the sunset…