POTTY TRAINING - Using a potty is something we all take for granted, but not so for one member of the public who was to be treated like the Jews during World War Two. No expense was spared to degrade Nelson Kruschandl. If there were still gas chambers Wealden would have paid the ship this chap out to the concentration camps for extermination. Why? Because he stood up to be counted after the Bushy Wood demolition and during other proposed actions by Wealden's Stormtroopers.
The fact he beat this Council at appeals and threatened citizens arrests sealed his fate with a masonic stitch up, that once again, could come back to bite this Council on their rear end.
We have no information on this officer at the moment. We would though caution all civil servant staff at Wealden District Council to be very careful not to fall foul of the pitfalls that some of your number were prone to in years gone by - such as the antics of Ian Kay.
They will come back to haunt you. Be good and enjoy a long and prosperous career in Town Planning. Please do so without accepting any bribes from developers or doing any favours for your bosses in the hope of gaining promotion by towing a party line that is potholed with criminal malfeasances.
This website serves as an archive of all the mistakes that your Council have made in the past. Unfortunately, they are manifold and some quite recent - but we hope that by making this information available we are providing a public service in the hope of restraining officials from entertaining any stray from the straight and narrow.
Ever been caught with your trousers down
EMPLOYMENT RIGHTS ACT 1996 & PUBLIC INTEREST DISCLOSURE ACT 1998
You may be aware of the tenets of the Employment Rights Act 1996 as amended by the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (Whistleblowing) in respect of victimisation if as a result of reporting any matter to your Council as per “Part IVA Protected disclosures:”
Victorio Scarpa, David Whibley, Julian Black, Daniel Goodwin, Christine Arnold
Christine Nuttall, David Phillips, Douglas Moss, Ian Kay, Charles Lant
CO CONSPIRATORS - THE DIRTY DOZEN
The officers pictured above worked with Ian Kay on several cases, including the Bushy Wood demolition from where this website takes its name. Suspected war criminal, Tony Blair, was the prime minister for much of the time during which WAG frauds were committed. Douglas Moss, a senior planning officer also involved in the mix is not shown here, but is known to still be working for WDC, despite his perjury and assisting David Phillips to commit perjury in the High Court, with reference to an Affidavit sworn by David Phillips in an attempt to get another WAG member struck down for costs and more. That makes Mr Moss and Mr Phillips co-conspirators in the falsification of evidence. Hence, they were involved in a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. It remains to be seen who else in Wealden Council's offices were involved in this matter?
The objective in gaining costs awards is to blight the land and in some cases, bankrupt the land owner to be able to scoop it up at bargain basement prices and transfer ownership at an undervalue, typically to a well connected neighbour as a favour.
PROCEEDS OF CRIME - Council officers who tow the party line are not only highly paid civil servants, but also stand to benefit from their involvement with underhanded dealings in planning consents in other geographical regions where there may be a "you scratch my back, and we'll scratch yours" arrangement. On the other hand, it could be that insider knowledge can be used legitimately to obtain consents for houses in the country such as this nice little retreat in an out of the way location, that might be termed green belt to the man in the street. If a council officer is paid cash for favours or receives 'in-kind' inducements for what amounts to fraudulent or even insider dealing and they are convicted, their assets could be seized by way of proceeds of crime. Is it worth it? Yes, power corrupts. It always will and those in positions of power will sometimes be tempted - because they know that others in their ring of power will protect them when the brown stuff hits the fan.
MISFEASANCE & MALFEASANCE
When an officer of the courts omits to include evidence that he knows is relevant to a hearing, that is termed misfeasance in public office. Where an officer then tries to cover up his or her misfeasance (as did Ian Kay in the Stream Farm matter), that becomes malfeasance. The difference is that misfeasance is a civil wrong, whereas malfeasance is a criminal offence. The leading case precedent on malfeasance is: R. v Bowden 1995 Court of Appeal (98 1 WLR).
Vicarage Lane, Hailsham,
East Sussex, BN27 2AX T: 01323 443322
LINKS & REFERENCE
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.