Yesterday I had an email from Brookes, what a treat! I just had to share it with you and I have added some comments:
Mr. Jim Harrison
9th June 2010
You were asked not to photograph me and your blog clearly shows you are in breach of this request.
As it happens, I have not photographed him since he asked me not to. Which is just a coincidence really, since I notice he has never complied with the very many similar requests that have been made to him.
Your blog is in breach of harassment laws. The police have asked me to write to you to give you a fair the chance to remove all the content that relates to me. if you ignore this letter they can then assist me with enforcing the relevant harassment acts.
Oh really? Check again.
Your continued behaviour is a great cause of concern to me. I request you refrain from blogging about me. providing photographs to other groups, forums or any form of media. I request all defamatory content is removed today.
There is nothing defamatory on my blog. Brookes needs to grow up and learn to distinguish between what is defamatory (i.e. untrue) and merely criticism of the his conduct in office.
Mr Harrison it appears you are not a man of your word, I find this most disappointing. I acknowledged your request a few months ago to call you Jim and noted your promise not to post any further nasty things about me if I did the same. According to my blog records I have never posted anything nasty about you.
We get really delusional here, Brookes's has made frequent derogatory and defamatory comments about me. Does he suffer from amnesia?
Do you really think your behaviour is acceptable as a former army man, town councillor and mayor? I don't think so. For the record I did not sue any church. any publication of my employment issues relating to the church is a breach of a COT3 agreement enforceable by the courts.
So why continually talk about it? Brookes continually brags about some legal victory he had, although the details seem to change every time he tells the story. As it happens, it is precisely because I am an ex-Mayor that I feel I have to speak out against Brookes's appalling behaviour in our town.
The police did not charge me for posting the two small images in the notice board possible sent to me by your friends? and there was no criminal damage caused.
There was no need for the case to go to court because Brookes accepted cautions (i.e. plead GUILTY) on two counts, one of which was criminal damage. These are now on Brookes' record along with his other criminal conviction(s?). It is typical of how deluded Brookes is that he thinks he can pull the wool over people's eyes like this.
I trust you will take note all this harassment and bullying has now gone too far. I believe the police now agree as you can see I am now being correctly advised and they will take action if you ignore this letter.
I think I know which side of the law I stand on! It's not me who gets arrested in the High St and ejected from public events by the police time after time after time.
Yours sincerely
Martin Brookes
Ha ha! I'm sure that's not what Robert meant.
ReplyDeleteRob Uppingham sounds like he may be slightly younger than most people who may be reading this particular blog, and I believe the younger generation use the word "sh*t" in the same way they would use the word "stuff".
I think someone has a little obsession with martin brookes :)
ReplyDeleteMr Brookes has been a victim all his life.
ReplyDeleteAdmitted to being bullied by his own father, hence being sent to a school for unruly boys back then.
Bullied by the Father of a church where he was a verger, where he subsequently sued the church.
Now living in Rutland and determined to present the same traits.
Victim...suing..claims he is bullied, yet bullies under the guise of several user ID's.
I particularly am fond of his invisible "members of the public" who always choose to speak through him rather than go through proper complaints procedures.
Are these his alter egos? Hahahaaaa