Just in case you missed them, the final two comments to appear on the thread beneath my Guardian Cif article of February 26th were these:
andrewgilligan: "If, as they claim, there is 'no evidence' for the Standard's 'unsubstantiated' claims, Ken and Jasper should sue. Claims don't have to be criminal to be defamatory, if they're wrong. The problem is that the evidence for our claims is copious, and Ken knows it."
Posted at 14.56 on February 27th. Followed by:
GLASpokesperson: "The advice of the GLA's Monitoring Officer is that the Evening Standard has made allegations which if supported by evidence could amount to criminal offences. What is missing is the evidence. The fact that the Evening Standard have not used the word corruption does not mean that they have not alleged criminal activities have taken place. 'Misconduct in public office' which Andrew Gilligan said was all that they had alleged in a recent article is a criminal offence that carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.'Lining his friends pockets with your money and protecting them as they, shall we say, lose it' could involve criminal activity depending on the facts and the evidence. Similarly an allegation that involves being instrumental in 'siphoning off' public money for improper purposes, could amount to criminal activity.
We could go on. The GLA Monitoring Officer has analysed the allegations that have been made, has identified all those that in her view could amount to criminal activities and has provided that analysis to the Metropolitan Police.
The GLA Monitoring Officer has specified why in her view she thinks the allegations made could amount to criminal investigations. The Police have not received any evidence in support of those allegations as far as we are aware. They are conducting enquiries into the activities of a number of organisations funded by the LDA and they have made it clear to the GLA Monitoring Officer that it is too early to rule anyone in or out of their enquiries.
The Evening Standard should now put up the evidence in support of these allegations so that the police can conclude their investigations or they should concede that their reporting has been a deliberate attempt to mislead and sensationalise."
Posted at 17.34 on February 27th. And, yes, it really was a GLA Spokesperson. This has been a public service announcement.
Comments