Analysis comment Exclusive

Johnson’s on his way. When’s Starmer going for much WORSE cover-up of exploitation of domestic violence victims?

Labour leader was aware of whistleblower’s explosive allegations of criminal exploitation of domestic violence victims, antisemitism and corruption against right-wing Labour MP then on his front bench and who still holds Labour whip – yet has never acted. Now ‘mainstream’ media are finally sniffing around scandal Skwawkbox broke exclusively more than a year ago

Peas in a pod: Johnson and Starmer

So, Boris Johnson is on his way. All well and good and long overdue. A deeply dishonest and despicable prime minister was finished off by his cover-up of his knowledge of then-whip Chris Pincher’s record of groping people.

So when will Keir Starmer suffer the same fate? Now that Johnson is on his way out, it may not be long – as the so-called ‘mainstream’ media are finally sniffing around Starmer’s far bigger scandal and far worse cover-up – a year and a half after Skwawkbox first exclusively broke it.

Elaina Cohen’s tribunal case against Birmingham MP Khalid Mahmood for sacking her when she blew the whistle on criminal exploitation of domestic violence victims should have brought down Starmer when the revelation first broke that Starmer had been aware of the allegations and retained Mahmood on his front bench until Mahmood himself eventually stepped down months later, supposedly over political differences.

And it absolutely should have brought Starmer down when, during the tribunal hearing, Mahmood and his legal team accepted ‘Victim A’s evidence without challenge, that one of Mahmood’s employees and alleged love interest had:

  • used a domestic violence charity she ran to blackmail domestic violence victims into shoplifting and giving her their social security benefits
  • made victims take speeding points on their licence that they did not incur
  • sadistically abused victims
  • made the chief executive of the charity suicidal by blackmailing her and taunting her
  • targeted Victim A on social media
  • revealed details of the charity’s vulnerable ‘service users’ to others
  • used her and other women from the now-defunct charity ‘for the private entertainment of important people’
  • introduced one victim to a male friend who hurt the woman, ‘but she didn’t care’
  • berated two victims for stealing the wrong jacket from a local department store
  • made victims fund meals for local Labour politicians
  • made victims ‘stalk’ Mahmood and report back on him
  • mocked Mahmood as an ‘ugly fat pig’
  • must have been in control of Mahmood for him to take no action

The tribunal heard that Mahmood sacked Elaina Cohen – he has already admitted employing an investigator to pursue her instead of investigating her allegations – rather than act.

And emails first revealed exclusively by Skwawkbox showed that Keir Starmer and his sidekick David Evans were repeatedly notified by Elaina Cohen about these situations, as well as her allegations that Mahmood took money from the Kuwaiti embassy – and of her complaints of antisemitism and bullying in the way she was treated and the conduct of Mahmood’s favoured staffer.

According to Ms Cohen, Keir Starmer did nothing, not even an email in response apart from one auto-acknowledgement – a complete failure of safeguarding. Right-winger Mahmood remained on the front bench for months afterward and has never been suspended by the party pending any investigation of the allegations. He remains a Labour MP – a stark contrast to Johnson’s belated decision to withdraw the whip from groper Chris Pincher.

And now, Skwawkbox understands that the ‘mainstream’ media are starting to circle the scandal, like sharks smelling blood in the water, trying to find out more.

Ms Cohen declined to comment, as the judgment in her case is still pending. Keir Starmer was approached long ago about his and Evans’s failure to act and did not respond.

If Johnson has to go for covering up his knowledge of groping complaints against the MP he appointed as deputy chief whip, then Starmer’s position is far more untenable after being aware of the appalling allegations made by Elaina Cohen – and even more so after Mahmood accepted a victim’s description of the abuse and exploitation into evidence, under oath in a legal process, without daring to challenge or cross-examine her.

Keir Starmer and Boris Johnson are peas in a pod. For the sake of any hope of decent politics in this country, they both need to be thrown out – and it seems the ‘MSM’ are finally waking up to it.

SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.

If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


  1. The cynic in me believes the MSM would only pick up on this story:
    1- Once we have a sentence from the Employment Tribunal
    2-Once the Conservative leadership is over, to ensue that the new Tory’s leader is in a position of calling and early General Election and win it, with possibly an increasing majority.

  2. Have these allegations of criminal activity been reported to the police and if so what was their response and if not why not.

    1. Where was the email reply from keef/fat Dave to the complainant, suggesting she go to the plod with these accusations?

      Oh, hang on…🙄

      1. Toffee – Thanks for letting us all know that you don’t know the answer to my question.

      2. Gobshite – Thanks for letting us all know that you’ve absolved keef and fat Dave of their duty of care to the complainant.

        …But we already knew.

    2. “Have these allegations of criminal activity been reported to the police”.
      The police do not need an individual to report an alleged crime to them for them to initiate an investigation.
      If they, themselves, see evidence that a crime may have been committed they will (should) investigate.
      That these allegations were accepted unchallenged in a court of law should be sufficient grounds for the police to follow them up with an investigation.
      So, a more appropriate question would be “Have the police followed up the evidence presented in the court and, if so, why have no charges been brought (yet)?”

      1. Goldbach, probably the same reason Starmer failed to prosecute Savile when he had the opportunity. It’s a Big Club, and we ain’t in it.

      2. Oh, goldbach… How’s the wee fella gonna understand all that?

      3. goldbach – BUT it still doesn’t answer my question why haven’t these very serious accusations of criminal activity been reported to the police.
        Do you know whether the police and/or the court have already taken a look at the evidence that was presented at the tribunal and have already come to a conclusion about its credibility and veracity?
        I guess we’ll find out when the tribunal publishes its findings.

      4. Isn’t your question “Do you know whether the police and/or the court have already taken a look at the evidence that was presented at the tribunal and have already come to a conclusion about its credibility and veracity?” simply a rephrasing of my question “Have the police followed up the evidence presented in the court and, if so, why have no charges been brought (yet)?” ? – albeit with an implication created by the italicisation.

      5. goldbach – We will find out when the tribunal publishes its findings after they have examined all the evidence in detail.
        I may be proved wrong but I’m guessing that the reason they didn’t report these accusations of serious criminality to the police and the reason there hasn’t been any police response to the evidence presented to the court will boil down to the same thing.

      6. goldbach, my educated guess is that the Police is waiting for the outcome of the Employment Tribunal. To win a criminal case you need (in most cases) to submit proof beyond reasonable grounds of the guilt.
        Hence, if the complainant proves the case in a Criminal Court it ties up the Employment Tribunal as the facts would count as proven.
        Therefore, in this case it is sensible for the Police to wait for the outcome of the case before the Employment Tribunal.
        In the same way, it is sensible for the complainant to approach the Employment Tribunal first as the burden of proof is lower. Should she lost the case before a Criminal Court it could be use against her in the Employment Tribunal. Hence, answering SteveH questions as to why the matter hasn’t been taken to the Police for investigation.

  3. -Once the Conservative leadership is over, to ensue that the new Tory’s leader is in a position of calling and early General Election and win it, with possibly an increasing majority.

    Beat me to it. Murdoch will want to give the new toerag pm a bedding-in more than he wants smarmer rimming him.

    Keefs’ might have to find out the hard way all too late.

    But he made his bed unequivocally, so fuck him.

    1. Even in defeat, Starmer will walk away with a grin on his face into the arms of his post-election patrons.

      Millions later, everyone will say, oh so that’s what his leadership was all about, he was serving ‘those’ people.

  4. “Old sins cast long shadows” as Johnson found out and which I hope Starmer will find out before too long.

    1. New Tory leader is a big problem for Starm. Bojo was universally reviled as dishonest and incompetent and a blustering disaster at PMQs but a new leader will have a clean sheet. For Starm with all the charisma of a cold turd this will be a problem if the new PM has any sort of personality.

      1. Yep.

        The Centrists suffered something akin to Trump derangement syndrome(TDS) having Johnson as PM. Guardianistas would vent day and night, and it seemed quite bizarre considering Labour were often voting with the govt.

        They hated Johnson with a passion that was hard to understand for those truly on the left. For the left is only interested in policy and can see little difference between the Blairite centrists and Johnson’s agenda.

        But it all makes sense if you grasp the fact the centrists believe in nothing politically, they’re an ideological void, so personality politics is all they have, and boy, did they hate Johnson personally.

  5. I forgot to mention that last night the fat stoned gerbil lookalike known as thornberry was on TV again, getting aerated about de piffles lack of action over a series of sexual assaults

    She said had it been keef been told about pincher on his own party, then keef would’ve done something about the sexual assaults – because he used to prosecute sexual assault cases…

    ..Ahem, ermmm….Emily, are you absolutely certain about that, dear?

    I can think of one massively high-profile serial sexual offender keef didn’t 😙🎶

    And I can also think of two other tories he failed to prosecute 😙🎶

  6. All I want to see are BlueKeef’s excuses for not pissing off when BoJoke pissed off. A man of his word and years of slippery slimy loopholing and finetooth combing! BlueKeef is an Utterly Vile TORY specimen!

    1. nellyskelly – You might have a point if there was any reason for him to resign. Come back and ask the same question next week.

      1. nellyskelly – Don’t be ridiculous, Keir said he would resign if he was fined and we won’t know the answer to that until next week.

      2. Yes and you point is?
        My question is will he be “man” of his word and “piss off if Johnson pisses off”, or will he worm his slimy ass out of it as he does everything else?
        Johnson has pissed off, BlueKeef is guilty of exactly the same crime as Johnson, when he is fined will he be a “man” of his word and piss off, or slime his way out of it! Mind you Sayanim Central has probably fixed that for him already!

      3. You might have a point if there was any reason for him to resign.

        Hmmm let’s see…

        Lost seats.

        Lost deposits on two others

        Lost councils

        Seats held with majorities slashed

        …All against THE WORST THE MOST CORRUPT government in history.

        Failure to have defeated government on a single occasion.

        Investigated for not declaring financial interests outside of parliament

        Ditto for beergate

        Not an exhaustive list…more tp eventually follow.

      4. Both Keir and Angela have been cleared of breaking Covid rules

      5. Yet more bullshit and evasion from a supposed labour member.

        Unless of course, you think that losing seats, deposits and councils, while failing to make substantial gains from THE worst, most corrupt government in history is a plus point?

        Not something a normal person with an interest in politics would beat their chest about.

      6. The economy, food prices, health insecurity, low wages , high rents, fragile seats and remainers. Partygate didn’t cause his fall.

  7. Starmer : Johnson must go completely not cling on for a few more months … Britain needs a fresh start..

    Under interim leader Dominic Raab?

    How is that a fresh start? Is Raab Starmer’s tag team partner or something?

    Quite frankly, what difference does it make and why would Labour risk looking silly losing a VONC?

    1. Reply to Andy
      Raab is a complete wooden top. During the Brexit negotiations when he was Sec of State for exiting the EU it transpired that he did not know that Dover was the main port used for the import/ export of goods between the UK and the EU. Bad yes, but thats the Tories for you and in any case he would be a definite improvement on Johnson the liar

  8. As Starmer was leaving the conference, Sky’s Beth Rigby asked what he would do if he was found to have broken the law but is not fined – and Starmer replied that the penalty for a breach is a fine, making it clear that as far as he’s concerned, no fine means no breach means no resignation:
    I read some where Starmer would only go if Johnson went, Johnson’s is on his way, the only thing to clear up is whether he was fined, if he was and in the absence of any comment from Starmer, it must be presumed he was, then he must go.

    1. Harry Law……You may have already deduced Mr Starmer loves to break a pledge and a promise. Do not expect him to keep his word.

    1. Lovely read gb, thanks!
      FYI: even Reuters is admitting how Boris Johnson’s strong pro-Ukrainianism is (in major part) down to his promotion of British weapon sales (here ). He lies at so many levels – and Sir Keir will be more of the same and an even worse anti-democrat.


    Durham Police have announced that

    1. Reply to Steve H
      I’m sure the Tories are delighted. Boris Johnson is going, a new Tory leader will take over and we are still stuck with Starmer . With Johnson gone and Starmer as Labour leader we have no chance of winning the next election. Starmer is the Tory’s greatest asset

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: