Marooned in Maywick Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 ^^^ That was close to my interpretation. Ye olde 'not proven' verdict. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustMe Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 The Shetland times says., After deliberating for 80 minutes, the nine councillors present dismissed the complaint having decided to accept the panel’s recommendation that there was insufficient evidence. Does this not imply he is guilty but there was just not enough evidence? No it does not!. It says that there is not enough evidence to decide either way. Perhaps new evidence will be found but at the moment the finding of the panel cannot be used to establish that either party is guilty of whatever they might be guilty of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Para Handy Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 Just the bog standard government inquiry then. Spread the blame evenly or find no one guiltyKeep your eyes open for this years honours list. I wonder who will get his knighthood. For coming up with the required result Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 From the report on the Shetland Times sitehttp://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/2009/10/14/clark-poised-for-return-to-work-as-councillors-throw-out-wills-complaint Mr Clark saidI found it bizarre that such an aborted phone call has actually led to such an extended process. There wasn’t a conversation, I tried to get hold of Dr Wills and just got a bad line; I asked for him a couple of times and when I couldn’t get through I hung up.†I wonder if the police have investigated the phone records to find out the length of the call? A long or short call duration would seem to strongly indicate the truth, although I suppose a middling time would leave it undecided....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonners Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 Basically impossible to know which of them is telling the truth, and which one is telling the fib. Stating the bleeding obvious, I know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tirvaluk Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 Jonathans a big boy, he shouldn't have got the police involved, just gone round and kicked in Clarks teeth Would have saved us all a lot of money, and some squad ideas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 From the report on the Shetland Times sitehttp://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/2009/10/14/clark-poised-for-return-to-work-as-councillors-throw-out-wills-complaint Mr Clark saidThere wasn’t a conversation, I tried to get hold of Dr Wills and just got a bad line; I asked for him a couple of times and when I couldn’t get through I hung up.†This is not the first time recently that a ''bad line'' has caused confusion http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/mediamonkeyblog/2009/sep/30/sun-peter-mandelson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinner72 Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 There is only one fact in the whole saga, and that is that the council has made a decision on the matter. Therefore, as an elected member, irrespective of his personal views and issues, Cllr Wills must back this decision. Not doing so (again) simply proves again that he is unsuitable for his position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keedle Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 I dont usually get involved in politics but I think time will tell on either side . As the saying goes dig a hole deep enough !!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claudias Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 There is only one fact in the whole saga, and that is that the council has made a decision on the matter. Therefore, as an elected member, irrespective of his personal views and issues, Cllr Wills must back this decision. Not doing so (again) simply proves again that he is unsuitable for his position. There is only one fact in the whole saga and that is that the electorate chose Dr.Wills to represent them on the council.Therefore,having chosen him they must back his decisions.Not doing so simply proves that some people should be given guidance on how to vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostrider Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 Wills, IMHO , is a journalist first and foremost, and as such is not used to not getting the last word. Either you agree with him, or you'll never hear the end of it. Remember his somewhat inglorious departure from the Times, and the shenanigans that erupted now and again later on. 30 years ago, in his Radio Shetland days, again IMHO, he was quite happy to chew on any bone that came his way. As he was then he could have been a good councillor. However in his old age he appears to have become something of a one trick pony, remember his last foray as a councillor in the early '90s, and short after the Braer. As I recall it he rarely missed a chance to go on about exclusion zones, tanker monitoring, an emergency tug etc, yet contributed very little on any other subject. This time around he seems to have got tunnel vision as regards procedure. I will concede someone keeping a wadder ee gyaan that things are done more or less by the book, and calling folk on it when it appears they haven't is no bad thing. Too often in the past, council shenanigans have come off looking rather dubious in the eyes of the public. However, there's a time to rattle cages, and a time to let something go, let the dust settle and get on with other things for the greater good, like now. Jonathan, FFS, you gave it your best shot, but the police won't touch it, the independent investigator you agreed to, could pull nothing out of it that would stick. You lose, Clark wins, flogging dead horses is vastly over-rated, let it go, and wait till next time. And if Clark is half as bad as you would appear to want the public to believe he is, you shouldn't have long to wait either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustMe Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 I have an idea for Jonathan Wills should he be reading this. Resign from the council as a protest then stand again in the by election that follows (assuming that there is one under the new system). That way he could maintain that he had the backing of the voters to continue with his complaint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohanofNess Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 In the immortal words of Vic Reeves "you wouldn't let it lie" Wills should give it up, nothing more can come of it and Clark although not out of a job has enough doubt hanging around him after this that he'll have to behave impeccably for the remainder of his time at the SIC or get drummed out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caeser Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 I guess that if unless Dr Wills and his cronies can come up with a new tack to get the Dave Clarke Five sacked then I foresee more trouble and more public humiliation for Shetland ahead. They do not appear to have any scruples in that regard. I really cannot see him being beat. Picture the scene in the chamber, with Dr Wills dropping cheap shots at the CE about his love life etc when the debate is going against him. Who is the bully................... I also note his comments are now being checked out by the SIC legal team. I guess it is too early to resign but given he has previous in that regard anything is possible. What a carry on - you really could not make it up. Plenty of material for the bill, however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jz Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 "Public comment 20. Councillors should not raise matters relating to the conduct or capability of employees in public. Employees must accord to councillors the respect and courtesy due to them in their various roles. There are provisions in the Code of Conduct for Employees about speaking in public and employees should observe them." Taken from the http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2002/04/14492/2560#c the code of conduct for councillors. Then have a look at http://www.shetland-news.co.uk/2009/October/letters/I%20am%20not%20a%20liar.htm Dr Wills may have some additional concerns. However, I do not believe he is a liar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.