Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg wades into Exhibit B debate.

Having successfully campaigned against the showing by the Barbican Arts Centre, of Brett Baileys Exhibit B, otherwise known as the Human Zoo, with the full support of over a million people, the inevitable whitelash has begun.

Deputy Prime Minster Nick Clegg weighed into the debate today. Speaking on Nick Ferrari’s breakfast show on LBC. He spoke out against ‘censorship’ and suggested that the exhibition was too similar to that of ‘educational anti racist, Jewish holocaust exhibitions.’

There is a world of difference between the two. The fact is such exhibitions as referred to by Clegg, are supported by the Jewish communities who are rightly consulted, whose support is critical to such efforts. Part of the black condition here in the UK is that we as a people, were offered no such opportunity to engage nor are we afforded anywhere near the same level of respect.

It is deeply ironic that, we the supposed beneficiaries of this show have become further marginalised by the imposition of a Barbican and Bailey constructed, white definition of what constitutes ‘ anti racist art’. A definition that is being imposed upon us.

T his exhibition could be compared to the Aparthied era, whit  Krok brothers, Gold Reef City Casino where they opened "The Apartheid Museum."

We are told we don’t understand the art, we are told we should be pleased, we are told that this will help the fight against racism.

Let me make this absolutely clear, it is for the victims of racism to decide what constitutes anti racism, not white arts institutions or a Deputy Prime Minister who leads an all white Parliamentary Liberal Democratic Party.

Can you imagine the outcry if, let’s say a German artist, was to put on art exhibition that placed Jewish people in a tableaux of gas ovens, as a means of raising issues about the objectification, dehumanisation and oppression of Jewish people?

Truth is this idea wouldn’t get past the drawing board. The very idea would be deemed entirely unacceptable and rightly so.

Exhibit B closure: The whitelash begins.

The on going campaign by the Barbican and section of the press to smear our campaign as ‘extremist’ is laughable in one sense, however becomes more insidious upon closer examination.

When one begins to closely examine the nature of the Barbican response to our compliant, one begins to understand how the Barbican got itself into this unholy mess in the first place.

First, the mere suggestion that a virtually all white liberal arts institution could have made a mistake, on an issue of race has been treated as a complete heresy.

That they should then embark on a determined campaign to suggest that our opposition of this show was ‘ extreme’, exemplifies the latent racism that lurks beneath their seemingly liberal veneer.

Extremists.

Our demonstration attended by 600 people was noisy, dynamic and peaceful. This is irrefutable and is proven by the simple facts that there was not single complaint, not a single arrest, without anyone being injured and without any damage to property.  Yet Barbican continues to insist that the protest was’ extreme’ in nature. 

These are the facts that our white dominated media seemed determined to ignore. Over the last few days we have seen the press bend over backwards to ignore the facts and fall in line with the Barbicans well-worn racist trope.

Yet talk to the police and you get a different story. No arrests, no criminal complaints, no damage to property, no incidents to report.

The Barbican, in using the word ‘extreme’ choosing these precise words, very carefully and deliberately, has sought to brand the campaigners as ‘extremists’

I think is worth of noting this attempt to move legitimate black protest into the realm of dangerous extremism.

White Privilege.

We are, of course aware, as black people, that white psychology and perception of black people, determines that for some, any group of black people, whatever they may or may not be doing, will always likely to be seen as potentially dangerous and violent.

However, there were signs, from the beginning, that we were becoming victims of the Barbican’s own worst fears and imaginings. When we first met the Barbican board, in an effort to reach some consensus and understanding, outside the boardroom sat their Head of Security. Ask yourself why would they do that?

The answer is easily understood if you’re a conscious black person. Our daily reality for us we are routinely and constantly viewed by some whites including liberals as pathological, mad, bad or dangerous.

Call Security, Black People Are Coming!

It was clear from that point on, we were being regarded as a potentially ‘violent mob’. Brett Bailey himself describes us as such, in an interview published prior to the shows launch. He stated that the protest constituted nothing more than a ‘baying mob’. This racist trope, from an artist who we are told, is on our side and working in our best interest.

The sight of additional security whenever we met and at the public consultation organized by Nitro Theatre on behalf and in support of the Barbican was surrounded by security and this theme would become increasingly evident with our every interaction with the Barbican.

Conclusion.

Both the Barbican and Bailey are popularly considered, progressive liberal, good decent white folks. Yet they are intent on deploying in their defence, that most of popular and well worn of racist stereotypes, the ‘violent, unruly, baying black mob’.

This approach will further damage Barbican reputation and anyone associated with it, among London’s Black and genuine anti racist, communities.

We are set to begin a fresh campaign targeting the Barbican for its failure to tackle institutionalized racism and address its racism in the most diverse city, on the planet.

In the meantime in the words of US hi hop revolutionaries, Public Enemy, ‘Don’t believe the hype’.

Chinua Achebe talking about a white author writing about Africa said,

"...you cannot compromise my humanity in order that you explore your own ambiguity. I cannot accept that. My humanity is not to be debated, nor is it to be used simply to illustrate European problems.”

Human Zoo Campaign Leaflets

Call to Action to Boycott the Barbican Human Zoo Displaying Africans in Cages. 

    

Lee Jasper responds to black arts group Nitro’s support for the Human Zoo exhibition.

There is a raging debate about the forthcoming art installation Exhibit B, produced by South African artist, Brett Bailey due to launch at the Barbican on the 23^rd September.

The show has attracted much criticism from a wide range of organisations, backed by an online petition representing a huge consensus of organisations, trade unions, campaigning groups, anti racists and a wide range of black arts groups and performers. I wont reaherse our issues again here as you can read more about the detail of our objections in a previous article I wrote.

Viewed as controversial, the exhibition more appropriately labeled the ‘Human Zoo’, features black actors in various settings, including Africans in cages and chained in bondage. 

This artwork installation is said to reflect the universal themes of bondage, oppression and power, seeking to make a statement about the legacies of colonialism reflected in contemporary racism.

Controversial indeed and, already there is an emerging and growing consensus that this misguided show should not go ahead. A campaign has been formed and you can join us here.

It’s notable that very few black organisations or individuals have sought to defend the show, thus far. Poet and author, Lemn Sissay has voiced his support for the show. Those in support remain far and few between, however today we read the fulsome support for this misguided exhibition from a serious black arts organization, Nitro Music Theatre.

On their blog, Director Felix Cross defends Brett Baileys work stating’

“ Exhibition B is an astonishing, moving, serious and thoughtful work that forces-us-the audience-to consider both historic and contemporary injustice to African peoples”.

Mr. Cross goes onto say that Nitro were “ highly sensitive to the potential controversial subject matter” but were reassured after they met Brett and visited the exhibition in Edinburgh.

He acknowledged the widespread anger that has erupted since the show was advertised as coming to London ‘ describing it as "very understandable” and the fact that the online petition, calling for a boycott, signed by almost 20,000 people, is attracting serious and substantial support. 

All well and good you may say, after all they’re entitled to their opinion.

What I’m not clear about is what is Nitro’s relationship with both Bailey and the Barbican? I ask this question because on their blog there is an actors casting advert specifically for the exhibition.

This begs the serious question have Nitro been paid for this work or as a result of their partnership with the Barbican?  If turns out Nitro are being paid, then Mr. Cross’s statement will lack any real credibility, unless supported by other credible black arts organisations.

In addition to the above, I am forced to ask if Nitro has, in the past, supported black artists, whose work’s has been seen as equally controversial?  Given their express support of Brett Bailey’s work, I would expect to see radical black artists, whose work challenges racism and attracts similar level of controversy, featured in their portfolio of works.

Another important question, prompted by Nitro’s statement, is why they have waited so long to make their position clear?

The public debate has been increasing in intensity since the petition was launched, what took Nitro so long to make a public statement? 

Given Nitro’s admission of the controversial nature of Brett’s work, did they then consult with other black organisations in a genuine attempt to asses their views prior to fully endorsing the artist?  Whilst claiming to work hard fighting to ensure that ‘missing voices, producing and sharing the artistic representation of the Black experience across the diaspora, They appear to completely 'miss the voice' of their family right here in the UK. 

I agree with the proposal from Mr. Cross, suggesting further discussion in the general issue of encouraging more black artistic voices; this should be explored further with Nitro. 

I do wonder though, why Nitro has not sought specific discussions, on this matter with any of the many sister black organisations that oppose this show, in a genuine effort to fully explore our concerns?

It strikes me that Nitro’s statement could be construed as being ‘too little, to late’. They should be given the opportunity to fully explain their position for sure, disappointingly however their statement falls woefully short of providing a credible explanation for their support for this dreadful exhibition.

Contact.

‪‪Twitter @boycotthumanzoo

Hashtag: #boycottthehumanzoo

FB; ‪http://facebook.com/boycotthumanzoo 

Website; boycotthumanzoouk.com

Forthcoming actions:

1. JOIN THE LOBBY OF THE CITY OF LONDON –CORPORATION TO CALL FOR BARBICAN TO WITHDRAW RACIST 'EXHIBIT B - HUMAN ZOO'

Thursday 11^th September at 12:00

The Great Hall Guildhall in London, United Kingdom

2. JOIN US TO HAND IN MASS PETITION OF BARBICAN SAT 13 SEPT 1.00PM   

The Barbican Exhibition Centre London EC2Y 8DS

3. Share this information attend the actions.

UKIP, the Metropolitan Police Service and high corruption .

I apologise for the font confusion here. Ive tried to correct but for some reason Im unable too so Ive taken the decision to publish as is, until I can sort this out,

Over the past year or so, I have found myself in the rather strange position of supporting a woman, originally a staunch Tory, who the defected to UKIP and has subsequently returned to the Tory party fold.  

For me, a black, socialist activist, usually to be found defending poor people, facing institutional racism and gross injustice, this was very strange territory indeed.

In the course our discussions it became apparent to me that the woman who sat before me, appeared to be the victim of a concerted, organised smear campaign designed to completely discredited her, led by leading members of UKIP.

What makes this case so compelling is their appears to be strong prime facie evidence, of the existence of a small cell of UKIP supporters, certainly based within the Metropolitan Police Service, maybe within the Crown Prosecution Service .

I can’t say for certain what’s going on, but my long experience and professional instinct, tells me that there is something rotten at the core of this peculiar and often bizarre story.

An uncommon friendship.

Jasna Badzak is a former press officer for UKIP. She started work for Nigel Farage and Gerard Batten MEP in November 2010 and around a year ago; she was convicted of defrauding UKIP of some two thousand five hundred pounds in October 2013.  Around a year ago Jasna rang me seeking support for what she claimed, was a miscarriage of justice. I was intrigued and decided to meet Jasna.  

I must confess, on one level I was definitely interested in anything that might expose UKIP, a party infested with racists. On the other hand, I was simply curious as to what an ex Ukipper and former, now returned to the fold true blue Tory, could possibly want to see me, of all people, about?

We met on a lovely spring day over coffee.  Jasna, arrived, a tall woman with definite sense of fashion. We chatted and she told me a little of her background. She had fled former Yugoslavia as a refugee some 20 years ago. Her family includes Nazi holocaust victims.

She had reached out to me in desperation, hoping that I may be able to see the injustice she had suffered and help her in some way.  The stress she was suffering was clearly etched in her face but what struck me was her determination and obvious strength of character.  She intrigued me.

Jasna began to tell me her story and what I heard amazed me.  As an experienced campaigner, in my time I’ve heard some outlandish conspiracy theories and what I heard that day, would shock me to the core.

A criminal conspiracy.

Jasna believed she was the victim of a possible criminal conspiracy to set her up, orchestrated she suspected by Gerard Batten MEP in an alliance with officers within the Metropolitan Police Service, aided by the Crown Prosecution Service. But before she could tell me more I had to ask the really obvious question; how come you didn’t know that UKIP was a racist party?

Gerad Batten MEP 

She told me that when she joined UKIP, she assumed the accusations of racism, were just the overblown claims of a hostile press. However as the months passed she became increasingly concerned. Once she had read the draft of Gerard Battens UKIPs Charter for Muslim Understanding, Dismantling Multiculturalism, a rancid and deeply disturbing document, that amongst other things, required all Muslims to be required to sign a code of conduct. At that point she was left in no doubt about the core beliefs of UKIP and the awful truth dawned on her. 

From then on, she knew precisely what Gerard Batten was all about and she was rightly, appalled and disgusted.

Confronted with claims of racism Farage did nothing 

Naively, she began to complain bitterly to Nigel Farage, whom she assumed would share her disgust about Batten’s obvious racism. She told me that although Farage was both frustrated and apparently sympathetic, in the end, Farage did nothing.  

Jasna confided that Farage had eventually told her, that nothing could be done as he and Batten shared ‘mutually destructive information about each other’, that ultimately meant that Gerard Batten couldn’t be touched.

That would certainly explain why Farage, a politically savvy operator, has long tolerated Batten. Good sense and political expediency suggests he should have been sacked, representing as he does, a distinct and dangerous electoral liability. I suspect that Farage failed to act because he fundamentally shares Battens deeply offensive views.

As a social justice campaigner, I’ve been around long enough to know, that sometimes such claims, can be claims the product of mental health conditions such as deep delusion or depression, paranoia or conspiracy theory fanatics.

Nevertheless, I listened intently to her story and though I was very skeptical of her claims and not entirely sympathetic, given her politics, nevertheless she struck a chord with me.

What I concluded was here was a deeply damaged, credible and sincere woman, whose life has been utterly destroyed, the victim of what appeared to be false and malicious accusation and a concerted smear campaign. Her character, her demeanor and steely determination to prove her innocence and expose UKIP racism and corruption impressed me. I knew what she was taking on in seeking to challenge her perceived injustice.

Going up against UKIP, Farage, Batten and the police, was very brave thing to do. Putting aside my own political prejudice, I decided I should explore her claims further.

What she told me that day blew me away. Transcending party politics, we connected on a human level, as two people who shared a commitment to challenging injustice. Jasna experience in Yugoslavia cemented her hatred of racism and fascism. She knew first hand the dangers of allowing racism and fascism to take root. I did however had to let a wry smile slip, when she told me of her previous role on Boris Johnsons 2008 Mayoral campaign.

Despite my obvious reservations, what was absolutely crystal clear to me was there were several unexplained facts, which gave some credibility to her claims.  Whilst at that stage I did not agree with some of her conclusions, I had to agree that something’s just didn’t add up.

Here I must apologies in advance of the length of this article. It’s a complex story and necessarily needs some detailed explaining, but bear with me dear reader, it’ll be worth it. 

First, it’s important to understand the sequence of events that preceded and then led up to Jasna’s eventual arrest.

Background.

Jasna started work for UKIP in November 2010 after defecting from the Tories. By the spring of 2011 Jasna discovered, what she describes as the ‘racist and fascist underbelly’ of UKIP. She says that UKIP was producing material she believed, constituted a criminal offense i.e. incitement to racial hatred. She was aware that Gerard Batten was meeting with European extreme right wing racists. She was also concerned at what she described as ‘ monumental EU expenses fraud’ taking place within UKIP.

Here in the UK, she became increasingly aware of Battens association with the now, all but defunct, English Defence League and British National Party. 

With the evidence mounting Jasna, was so concerned that she made a number of official complaints to the Met, citing what she believed were a range of potentially serious criminal offences.

In March 2011 she formally complained to the Met, that the Charter of Muslim Understanding and Dismantling Multiculturalism taken in concert with Battens association with extreme racist and fascist’s organisation, constituted a clear incitement to racial hatred.  

As UKIP press officer, Jasna claims that, over time, her day-to-day work experience proved beyond any doubt that UKIP was both a ‘racist and proto fascist party’. In May that year she provided the police solid evidence that backed up her UKIP EU expenses fraud allegations. 

That same month she reported another leading member of UKIP for possession of child pornographic images. 

All of her complaints were being handled by a Metropolitan Police Officer, one Detective Sargent Shaun Reardon. Despite repeated requests for updates on what was happening to her complaints she had no response from Reardon.

Annabelle Fuller 

Finally in July 2011 she then provides a devastating witness statement that alleges that UKIP Annabelle Fuller, Nigel Farage’s personal press officer, knowingly made false allegations of sexual attack in relation to Tory MP Andrew Bridgen.






Violent intimidation.

It was then that Jasna and her family then begin to suffer direct violent intimidation. From October 2011 to November 2012 she intermittently endures a series of visits to her home, by random groups of strangers, who threatened her and her son. 

She believes that this was organised harassment by EDL supporters with whom Batten was meeting seeking an EDL/UKIP alliance.

She reported this intimidation to the Met and was surprised to find out that yet again these complaints were being refereed to a Detective Sargent Shaun Reardon, the very same officer who had failed to investigate her initial complaints of UKIP racism and EU fraud.

Worried about escalating violent intimidation and seeking to cope with her own failing health, Jasna then seeks a restraining order court injunction against Batten in Feb 2012.

Met officer supports UKIP.

Here’s where the begins to get interesting, MPS Detective James Galvin turns up at court, embraces Gerard Batten proceeds to tell the court that the MPS has no record of any allegations against Batten nor were there any current, active police investigation into him. 

That was a lie and, as the MPS has now admitted Galvin, had no authority to represent the Met or attend court. Her case was eventually dismissed as a result.

Gerard Batten, then formally wrote to the MPS on October 5^th 2012 reporting his fraud allegations against Jasna. He actually wrote his allegation on UKIP letterhead, which must constitute and attempt to politically influence the investigation. 

The Met having failed to investigate any of Jasna serious previous allegations, then acted immediately upon receipt of Battens complaints. 

Jasna was subsequently arrested on 29^th November 2011, when surprise, surprise, Detectives Constable James Galvin and Detective Sargent Shaun Reardon both, attended her home. They wanted to arrest her there and then, but she Jasna was so ill, it was decided to take her to hospital instead.

The Met formally denies the existence of two serving police officers misleading the Prime Minister David Cameron.

Subsequent to her eventual arrest and charging, Jasna wrote to the Met Commissioner Bernard Hogan Howe asking, why her many complaints to the MPS had not been investigated? This she pointed out, was in total contrast to the Mets swift and immediate response to Battens complaint.

This lead to another key question, why had DC Galvin had turned up at the injunction hearing, defending Batten?  

The answer, when it came, was as shocking as it was unexpected. The Mets Department of Professional Standards informed her that the Metropolitan Police Service employed no such named police officers. Shocked and alarmed she persisted and again she was told again that no such officers were employed by the Met.

She then wrote to the Independent Police Compliant Commission who after some time, wrote back, confirming, that after discussions with the Met, they too  confirmed that no such officers existed.

Jasna at this stage was completely frustrated and wrote to Mayor of London, Boris Johnson and Prime Minister David Cameron. Both men wrote to the Met and both were told, in writing, that no such officers worked for the Met.

Prime Minister was mislead. 

The fact is the Prime Minister, the Mayor of London and the IPCC, were mislead and possibly willfully mislead, by the Met DPS about the existence of these two officers. 

This begs they very important questions as to precise circumstances that led to two of the most senior Tory politicians in the land were provided with inaccurate and misleading information?

                                                                               I then looked at the evidence against Jasna and came to conclusion that the prosecution evidence seemed incredibly flimsy. The only evidence offered was a bank statement, which Jasna is alleged to tampered with, she denied this allegation and points to the timing noted on her on line bank statement that indicated that both statements offered in evidence were printed off within one second of each other.  

Evidence produced in court proved that Jasna logged on to her bank account at exactly 8:11:02 and her bank statement was printed 8:11:03 as recorded on her computer and accepted by the police. Did she really amend her own bank statement in one second?  Unlikely to say the least.

Jasna has consistently contended that she was the victim of malicious counter complaint by Batten as a result of whistle blowing about UKIP’s racism and EU expenses abuse. Further she told me that the EU always paid late and they never knew from one month to the next, when they would get paid.  Batten and UKIP at that time were in the eye of a media storm focusing on the racism of their candidates. As a result UKIP were in utter disarray and an administrative shambles.

She points to this culture of incompetence and confusion by way of explanation. In short, this was an administrative error and as soon she realised she offered to pay the full amount back. This was rejected in favour of prosecution. In addition and hampering her ability to defend herself, in the months prior and after her arrest, Jasna was recovering from major heart surgery.

Then at the trail, the very same officers who she had previously been told, did not work for the Met, DC James Galvin and DS Shaun Reardon appeared in the Court and testified against the Jasna.

Under cross examination the officers said they had no idea why Jasna, the PM, the Mayor and the IPCC had received written confirmation that they were not serving police officers. 

They produced their warrant cards and the Judge simply dismissed the matter.  

0n the 7th October 2013 she was given a 1-year suspended jail sentence for 2 years and 4 months, plus an unsupervised curfew order. For a woman with no previous convictions this sentence seems excessively harsh. 

That same day as the verdict was announced, Gawain Towler, UKIP Chief Press Officers feeds inaccurate stories to Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail to further destroy Jasna now battered credibility.

In January 2014 Jasna Badzak then receives a written witness statement from UKIP insider, stating that Batten had been openly boasting, of stitching up Jasna Badzak for fraud in order to destroy her credibility, as well as reporting that Gawain was heard boasting about the coverage the story received.

He is reported to have said he was pleased at the reception the article received, particularly as he had actually written said article in September 2012, almost a year prior to Jasna’s conviction.

The Met finally takes action against suspected officers with links to UKIP.

During the spring of 2014 I start raising questions and highlighting the details of this case. I conducted a long radio interview with Jasna and started tweeting my concerns and my general support for her. Then in March 2014 Jasna is suddenly contacted by Superintendent David R Manning from Charing Cross police station who indicates that they are intending to now act on Jasna earlier complaints, that pre dated Battens fraud allegation and were now reopening a total of five separate UKIP investigations.

The following month both Jasna and I attend Charing Cross Police Station where we are told that the Met now plans to open a formal police investigation in conspiracy to pervert the course of Justice against DC James Galvin, DS Shaun Reardon.

Subsequently we have found out that DC James Galvin appears to be a member of UKIP and has attended a UKIP rally.  His name, along with his wife, also appears a leaked BNP list.

At this meeting we gave the MPS additional evidence in relation to a Detective Inspector Fleming and another officer, DC Tony Holden. We had strong witness evidence that both contacted prominent journalists threatening them with arrest if they published any negative stories about UKIP. This group of officers is now being investigated on suspicion of the harassment of journalists and possibly perverting the Course of Justice.

Met police harassment continues despite their assurances.

Then in June 2014, Jasna while at the cardiologist and attached to an ECG, Jasna receives series of emails DS Christopher Page sent to Badzak’s lawyer Atkins ordering her to surrender herself by 10 July 2014 to Charring Cross Police station to answer ‘very serious allegations’. This date also happened to be Jasna’s son’s 16^th birthday adding to the family’s harassment and distress.

Later she receives a telephone call from the DS Christopher Page again demanding she come in for interview under caution for the ‘twitter harassment of Gerard Batten’. 

Jasna is then called to a meeting with the Mets, Department of Professional Standards with Inspector Fran Polllard and DS Helen Thomas. Superintendent Manning was relived and replaced by these two officers. We are told later that Manning had been moved after Bernard Hogan-Howe received direct orders from MOPAC and Boris Johnson to get to the bottom of this case.

Jasna and Atkins attend police interview under caution with DS Christopher Page.  

DS Page full of himself reads MIRANDA to Badzak and then hands over to Graham Atkins A4 page note containing following statement:

 “Jasna Badzak has been harassing Gerard Batten with false newspaper stories, tweets that he stole £51k with help of Police in January, 09 May 2014 article in Sunday Times saying perverting the course of Justice, tweets about Islamophobia, lies about Batten attending 1^st Counter Jihad Conference in Brussels in 2007 and talking to Lee Jasper.”

Jasna solicitor Graham Atkins stunned at the nature of the accusation asks for disclosure. Page refuses saying that is only disclosure he will get. Page asks Jasna about background to Batten’s complaint.  Refusing to be intimidated Jasna states for the record

‘UKIP is criminal fascist organization.  I stand 100 % behind that and under Article 10 of European Convention of Human Rights incorporated in British law as Human Rights Act 1998 I have a right to freedom of speech and there is nothing you can do about that.  You can also not order me to keep quiet or not to tweet.  I know you would like to silence me completely, to muzzle me but you can’t despite your telephone threat not to tweet’. 

Page then lies, saying that he never ordered Jasna not to tweet about Batten. Fortunately Jasna recorded his telephone call and tells a stunned Page that she has irrefutable evidence that he did order her not to tweet about Batten or talk to me. Page is immediately subject to an investigation

Conclusion.

In summary, I suspect that there may have been an active conspiracy involving members of UKIP, Metropolitan Police Service, possibly the judiciary to falsely criminalise and character assassinate Jasna Badzak. If true this would represent the most serious threat to the very basis of our democracy.

Should it be that UKIP members or sympathisers, in statutory agencies are conspiring together to criminalise, harass and intimidate people UKIP disagree with, then this would require the most urgent intervention from the Home Secretary and the Prime Minister.

Along with the Plebgate revelations of deep systemic corruption within the MPS, this case raises the most profound concerns about the nature and accountability of the Metropolitan Police Service. If Police Officer’s are engaged in targeting moderate political activists from both the left and right, then that has to be an issue of acute concern for us all. 

With evidence of the Met spying on families campaigning for justice such as the Stephen Lawrence, Sukedv Reel or Rolan Adams families to name just a few, the Plebgate incident, undercover officers having sexual relations, fathering children in the line of duty alongside rampant institutional racism and the routine abuse of stop and search powers, such allegations if proven, would be so serious as to require the resignation of the Commissioner and Deputy Mayor Stephen Greenhalgh.

We will await the outcome of the Mets internal disciplinary investigations. Such investigations have no real credibility with police investigating themselves and we believe there is strong and compelling case for IPCC to conduct an independent investigation into these matters.

The Met and the Mayor and the really need to answer the serious questions raised by this incredible tale. Whatever our personal politics, I think we can all agree, this case raises fundamental questions and there is a strong and compelling case to answer.

NB.

Nikki Sinclaire, a former UKIP MEP who left the EFD fascist group in the EU Parliament because she disagreed with sitting with fascists and has been very vocal critic of UKIP was arrested in January 2012 and charged 23 July 2014, as soon as she changed lawyer to Graham Atkins.  

We believe that arresting officer in this case Officer DC Paul Griffiths may be a member of UKIP.

Support @JasnaBadzak facing political persecution attend court on 26th Nov 9.30am West London Magistrates Tollgarth Road, Hammersmith #justice4jasna #UKIP