‘Leader’ happy to take selfies with MP who accepted victim’s statement of abuse by staffer without challenge, as Starmer continues to turn ‘blind eye’ to abuse of domestic violence victims
Two days ago, Skwawkbox contrasted Keir Starmer’s claim to be a champion of domestic violence victims with the fact that whistleblower Elaina Cohen had repeatedly told him that then-front bench MP Khalid Mahmood was covering up abuse of domestic violence victims by one of Mahmood’s staff, with whom Mahmood was also said to be having a relationship.
Starmer did nothing: Mahmood remained on the front bench until it suited him to leave and he has never been disciplined by the party, nor even suspended pending investigation. The employee remains on his staff.
In May, Skwawkbox was almost the only media organisation to cover the fact that, at the tribunal case brought against him by Cohen, Mahmood and his legal team accepted – without challenge – the sworn statement of ‘Victim A’, one of the women abused through a now-defunct ‘charity’, that she and others had suffered sadism, threats, exploitation and blackmail to coerce them into fraud and criminality and into acting as entertainment for the rich and powerful.
Despite that undisputed evidence Starmer, along with party general secretary David Evans, still took no action.
And today, Mahmood has proudly tweeted pictures of himself and a grinning Starmer at a Commonwealth Games photo opportunity:
During the hearing, Mahmood told the tribunal that he had personally informed Keir Starmer of Cohen’s allegations – and Cohen emailed Starmer, Evans and the party repeatedly about the situation and about antisemitism she suffered as an employee of the MP.
Yesterday, Keir Starmer sacked MP Sam Tarry from the front bench for expressing an opinion in an interview that Labour should be supporting striking workers. Yet he took no action against Mahmood or to protect domestic violence victims or to prevent or discipline the antisemitism Cohen described.
Skwawkbox view:
In the US, they have a saying that ‘It’s ok if you’re a Republican’ to describe the ‘free passes’ given to right-wing politicians for their many misdeeds. It seems that in Keir Starmer’s eyes, it’s ‘ok if you’re a Labour right-winger’, even if vulnerable women are at risk.
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.
keef doesn’t do vulnerable women, OR hungry kids, OR striking workers, OR opposition to THE most corrupt government in all history. .
So, keef – what DO you do?
…and, still, as far as I know, he hasn’t spoken to Apsana Begum.
Reply to Toffee
Can’t speak for Starmer of course but it appears to me that he is making it his life’s work to destroy the Labour party and rebuild it as a Socialist free, Zionist party of nodding dogs fully supportive of apartheid and repressive regime.
If a person supports apartheid and all the human rights abuses that go with it , it is unrealistic to suppose that they would care about vulnerable women , hungry children or workers rights.
Furthermore Starmers Labour in failing to oppose to the most corrupt government in history makes it in effect a wing of that government. We have plenty of evidence to show that there are no depths to which Starmers Labour will not sink in order to support a government whose cruelty and corruption is unsurpassed. The real opposition consists of Independents SNP PC Lib Dems and the Ulster parties excluding the DUP. Starmers Labour is Tory in all but name.
Keef does Trilateral Commission stuff!
There seems to be a total lack of self-awareness. Or is he, simply being provocative, deliberately?
A former DPP’S way, of showing us all ‘the finger’.
Do you think the establishment would have appointed a genuinely left-wing lawyer as DPP? That sort of thing doesn’t happen in the UK.
Compromised?
How deep does the rot go?
I’m waiting for the outcome of her tribunal hearing.
As if everyone on here is waiting for your opinion!?
What an arrogant arsehole you are!
PW _ I am simply pointing out that there is much more to this case than meets the eye and ill informed partisan speculations aren’t helpful.
As The judge said
“Bringing the tribunal to a conclusion today, employment judge Timothy Adkin said the decision could be over a month away as he was anxious to ensure it “communicates exactly what we want it to”. He described the hearing as a “complicated case” as he set a provisional date for a potential remedy hearing, if required, on September 29. Judge Adkin told the court they would hear from him in due course.”
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/sacked-ex-lover-asked-mp-24058390
You should read the full article, it gives a summary of both sides of this case.
Reply to Steve H
I am unclear about how the outcome of Ms Cohen’s employment tribunal case is relevant. The Tribunal may or may not find that employment law was broken but what is so important about this case is the abuse of vulnerable women that it exposed.
The evidence regarding Mahmood covering up for their abuser whose actions – blackmail, coercion, procuring prostitution and various other abuses -amounted to criminal offences was not disputed i.e. it was accepted by the parties and the Tribunal panel as accurate and truthful.
In light of this acceptance it would have been appropriate to invoke the disciplinary procedure against Mahmood and suspend him until the procedure had been completed.
It seems this did not happen because, as he testified, Mahmood had informed Starmer and Evans about the various abuses and they took no action whatsoever which makes them complicit in the cover up.
Being involved in this way Starmer and Evans couldn’t risk taking action against Mahmood and still can’t . This in my opinion explains the photos of Starmer and Mahmood happily posing together.
Smartboy – All of which remains unproven. The verdict along with the Judge’s summation will clarify much of what did or didn’t go on and the veracity of the various accusations.
Andy – Where is your credible alternative? The last time ‘the left’ threw money behind an alternative the results weren’t quite what they hoped for.
Reply to Steve H
You are wrong about this Steve H. The issues relating to the abuse were not in dispute and consequently were accepted as a factual by the Employment Tribunal.
The Employment Tribunals remit is to determine whether or not the employers actions were those of a “reasonable employer” and if not, to determine whether or not this resulted in employment legislation being breached.
The employment judge ( formerly known as the Tribunal Chairperson)will not sum up – this is not the High Court – it is a fairly informal tribunal.
Therefore as I stated previously outcome of the Tribunal hearing is irrelevant.
All concerned – the Complainant, the Respondent and the three Tribunal have accepted as fact the evidence of one of the abused women ( Witness A) so it would have been proper in my opinion for the party to take action against an MP who did not covered up her abuse. As I also said previously this did not happen because Starmer and Evans according to Mahmoods sworn evidence were also involved in the cover up. They are all as bad as each other and none of them are fit to hold office in my opinion
Smartboy – Are you sure that is was actually happened or is that just your interpretation. Hopefully all will be made clear when we read the tribunal’s narrative verdict.
Reply to Steve H
It was as reported by Swawkbox at the time. I have no reason to doubt Steve W’s honesty. Have you? Also if Steve was mistaken I assume Mahmood would have pointed it out to him and Steve would have issued an apology and a retraction but again Mahmood has accepted that the details about Witness A’s evidence provided to the Tribunal at a Public hearing and as reported by Skwawkbox as accurate.
Smartboy – I know, I read it too. It is your interpretation of why it was accepted into evidence ‘without challenge’ and the significance that you attach to it that I am questioning. Hopefully the Judge will cover these matters when he gives his findings.
SteveH
I honestly don’t think anyone in the PLP could be worse than Starmer.
Reeves? OMOV is still in place, Reeves won’t get in.
Starmer is really unusual, a complete weirdo tbh – his lack of conscience about having lied his way to the leadership is odd , even for a politician. Tbh, I can’t imagine anyone else will even try to pull a similar stunt, as it’s the behaviour of a dark minded rogue and most people like to sleep at night, knowing they’ve told the truth.
What does Starmer believe in? What is Starmerism? After nearly two and half years as leader, can you cite one defining policy? Who are his supporters? It seems a few of the guardian cif, twitter #FBPE crowd remain loyal. This despite him embracing Brexit, ruling out rejoining the SM or customs union while wrapping himself in the Union Jack like some poundshop Farage wannabe, turning Labour into neoliberal BNP-lite.
No Steve H the evidence of Witness A given in a written statement about the abuse she suffered was not challenged .Had it been challenged or disputed she would have had to appear before the Tribunal, give her evidence under oath and then she would have been subject to cross examination by the Respondents legal representative. She was not called because her written statement was accepted as accurate by the Tribunal panel, the complainant and the Respondent – that’s how Tribunal proceedings work.
Smartboy – I guess we’ll see when the tribunal publishes its findings.
Reply to Steve H
And no precautionary suspension in the meantime?
Smartboy – Perhaps this, like the apparent lack of police action, may turn out to be an indication of the varsity of the complaint. We’ll see when the tribunal’s findings are published.
Steve H
Do you know there has been no police action? The matter may be currently under police investigation for all we know.
In the meantime an MP who covered up the criminal abuse of vulnerable women still has the whip and full party membership.
In my opinion this has the potential to develop into a massive scandal as bad as anything the Tories did. It could do serious damage to Starmers Labour when it eventually becomes widely known ( which it will, probably just before the next GE is called) but of course the party leadership being wooden tops haven’t the wit to see that
Smartboy – Do you know there has been no police action?
No, I don’t know for certain which is why I was careful to write ” like the apparent lack of police action”
“In the meantime an MP who covered up the criminal abuse of vulnerable women still has the whip and full party membership.”
To the best of my knowledge nobody has even been charged let alone found guilty of anything yet, do you know different.?
“In my opinion this has the potential to develop into a massive scandal
Those who have had the opportunity to actually see and access the evidence (including the police?) don’t appear to agree with you.
It could do serious damage to Starmer’s Labour when it eventually becomes widely known (which it will, probably just before the next GE is called)
Really, are you expecting a General Election in the next few weeks?
reply to Steve H
You know as well as I do about how these things work. So far information about Mahmood’s cover up of abuse and his sworn statement that Starmer and Evans were informed about it but did nothing has not had much publicity. It will be held back by the MSM and the BBC ( who will probably do a Panorama on it) until a time when it can do most damage – that will be before the next election. If there isn’t a police investigation at the moment be sure that once it hits the front pages.
Smartboy = On the contrary, there has been extensive reporting on this.
The Tribunal hearing and the blue, sorry new, management’s lack of people skills are two separate things about two different alleged failings. Separate and distinct. They both reflect badly on the Commissioner-in-Chief mind you.
Labour ‘could face bankruptcy’ as unions revolt after shadow minister sacked for picketing – Telegraph
This should be the unions’ aim; in order to make Starmer’s position untenable.
For as soon as Starmer can get big money corporate backers he’ll likely cut the union links anyway – a long held stated aim of Mandelson : “hard left factions attached to trade unions have got to go”. Such donors are likely to emerge if they get anywhere near power and certain if they win power and are handing out juicy private sector contracts, as Wes Streeting has hinted at re. the private sectors involvement with the NHS.
If Starmer is going to discriminate and selectively punish, by singling out left-wingers for harsher treatment and encourage CLPs to trigger/deselect, then the unions should make clear they aren’t going to sit back.
We simply don’t need two parties preaching precisely the same messages on austerity/growth and hostility to unions and collective action; turning elections into superficial contests about perceived managerial competence.
If Reeves wants to be a better Tory she should cross the floor and as for Starmer, he should never have become a Labour MP in the first place.
Andy – Oops – See my response above.
See my response…
Me me me me me me me me me me me me.
Just fuck RIGHT off will ya!
Toffee – Do you have anger management issues? .😠
Evidently.
You’ll find it’s brought on about your narcissism – long with the rest of your self- indulgent foibles you demonstrate on an ad nauseam basis, you prick.
Go and molest your goats, you perturbing little oddball.
Toffee – Oh come on, is that really the best you can manage? 🥱
Fact is, Sir K the charlatan needs to be seen with (and imply support from) Khalid Mahmood MP. Starmer’s reversal of Corbyn and Conference’s extra-ordinary statement of support to the peoples of Pakistan and Kashmir over the invasion by Modi’s India is loosing Labour support. Mohmood is Pakistan born and, therrefore, a supporter of Kashmir. Keir Starmer’s loyalty to the Establishment, status quo and Klaus Schwab, founder and fuhrer of the World Economic Forum, is causing him two conflictual problems. First he has to be true to his gang/class/ideology and supupport hard-right Modi even in his imperialist invasion of Kashmir, but, secondly, try not to let his ideological action harm Labour’s support from asian voters and members.
FWIW in April Khalid Mahmood resigned very publicly from Starmer’s shadow cabinet, (probably because of Starmer’s Kashmir u-turn), citing a new and unpleasant culture taking over the Labour party and making it less able to champion its people and issues. (wiki: “On 13 April 2021,[18] Mahmood resigned from the shadow frontbench, saying that his party had been taken over by “a London-based bourgeoisie, with the support of brigades of woke social media warriors”.[19] He later spoke to Spiked about his decision.[20])”)
A massive ego like that of the perpetually thirsty Sir Keir must find it very difficult to be pleasant to a plain-speaking detractor like Khalid Mahmood MP.
Enemy’s enemy your friend? I’ll pass on that one where Mahmood’s concerned.
The invasion of Kashmir is practically a Blueprint Opperation of the Terrorist Invasion and Collonialist Occupation of Palestine, how will BlueKeef explain his support for the one, but not the other!?
He complained to Spiked about a London based bourgeoisie? With a straight fucking face. When did he join the Party? I am not sure which one is taking the piss.
Wobbly – As I understand it he has been a member of the Labour Party since his youth but for obvious reasons resigned his membership during his tenure as DPP.
Wobbly, it was Khalid Mahmood who, when he resigtned from SAtarmer’s front bench, gave the interview to Spiked. It’s well worth a quick read. . You see, it’s the Commissioner (trilateral)-in-Chief that he’s angry with and blames for removing Labour from its role and purpose. AS Mahmood said in the interview, “Having been in the Labour Party for almost 40 years, I have put great energy into trying to get the party back to focusing on its working-class heritage. Workers are the people we need to support. Whether they work stacking shelves, in warehouses, driving taxis or buses, in factories, are skilled, semi-skilled or have no skills at all – those are the people we have to help. Labour has been moving away from that, which is predominantly why the Red Wall has crumbled and why people are not associating with us. Instead of supporting working people, Labour is re-examining the very identity battles that we went through in the 1970s. “
Mahmood may be unpleasant in many ways and right wing in some too, but he ‘loved’ Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of Labour and despised his successor’s actions in support of the Indian invasion of his mother country. Me too. Jeremy\s championing of Kashmir made me very proud to be Labour.
Steve H Starmers a plant and was never active in politics in the East Surrey constituency and has suprised many members in Surrey who had never heard of him or his family.I spent many years in Surrey and held all positions in the CLP and worked closley with different branches around Surrey and S.London.He was never active in politics although I know of fellow labour councillor who went to the private snobs boys school in Reigate.with him. other than being a loner and bullied
Seems like private schools and posh boys is the only interest our little lad from oxted in Surrey had…!You can continue to repeat what youve read mr H or aceppt that the weirdos is a plant “and has gone loco in the bunker and bankruptcy awaits you and electoral oblivion.
Joseph – So you keep telling us. 🥱
If as you claim he was a bullied loner at school then hasn’t he done well for himself, quite an admirable achievement. I was under the impression that you arrived on the political scene in Reigate quite some time after Keir had left the area.
The Question is, WILL Big Bucks Defeat The Law? BlueKeef and his Legal Mafioso are there, in that judge’s office finetooth combing and loopholing that case, shredding vital evidence and redacting 99% of it!
Satirically speaking of course, for ‘those’ challenged with an inability of understanding that.
PS. Satirically Speaking but with absolutely no surprises.
I see you are getting your excuses in early.
No, just clarifying for ‘those’ with deficits.
Steve H they didnt know of the Starmer family even in the 1980s when this sixty years old would have been in his early twenties and nobody in Surrey had heard of the Starmer labour family in Rock solid Tory East Surrey or in the labour branch of oxted…Sorry Steve H hall davidh centrist dad the truth of the little inbred starmer is clearly that he was only labour when he was instructed to infiltrate,and destroy.Cant have been many wallys or pratts like you that were fooled by him can there ?
Joseph – He left the area when he was 19.
I am sorry, but Labour members are supporting financially Starmer’s crooked gang. I see no option but for Labour Branches to cut themselves off from this mob and create a “True Labour” where those with Tory policies are banned from joining. Invite left wing Labour MPs and create a new Opposition.
Otherwise members are condoning such behaviour and policies.
In an ideal world Andy, in an ideal world.
It would also be easier for us the voting public to anihilate the bastard Neo-Labour Parasite Party TORIES, if the remaining 10/15 UK Labour Party MPs and the Unions would pull the plug on the bastards, so that we can VOTE THEM OUT!
Taking their seats, at whatever cost, is the only thing that we have left to do at this time. We will suffer, many of us who are vulnerable will die, but we will clear Parliament of one half of ITS’ Elitist Establishment One Party State.
The dilemma many on the left face is when it comes to whether to support ‘good’ left-wing Labour MPs.
Look at ‘the Squad’ in the US. Supporters found when push comes to shove and put under pressure (by the party leadership), they’ll vote for things they swore they’d oppose. A Labour govt would be propped up in confidence votes by the SCG. This, however right-wing or warmongering it is. They are part of the problem and too few in number to be part of the solution.
Besides, expressing support for or even campaigning for ‘good’ SCG Labour MP will just be taken by the right as support for them. The opposition to Blairite Labour has to be total and overwhelming, for some that involves boycotting the polls until they go.
Would the members of the SCG have been elected as MPs if they hadn’t stood on a Labour platform?
As much as I have ZERO faith in The British Voting System, not until they fix ONE stranger ALONE in their own private car, from 33+K Poling Stations across the UK, taking 33+K Ballot Boxes full of our votes, for a 5/10/30 minute ride, untraced, untracked, completely off the radar to the Counting Centre.
And the TOTAL GE Monopoly by one Company CIVICA has over everything GE, including owning Shaws who supplies EVERYTHING Polling Station: Signs, Ballot Papers, Booths, Pencils, Ballot Boxes, Security Seals, etc, EVERYTHING.
No Doubt they even have The Electorate Commission deep in their change pocket.
All that said, to waste a vote, even if it is potentially futile to vote, is not the answer, we can’t unseat the bastards without voting or at least attempting to vote.
As far as I am concerned this is my plan of Action and how I will Campaign and Vote:
Enemy 1: Sabotaging Globalist Neoliberal Neo-Labour Parasite Party TORIES!
Enemy 2: Globalist Neoliberal Conservative Party TORIES!
Enemy 3: Any other Flavour of Globalist Neoliberal TORY.
This is a battle of Globalist Neoliberalism VS The PEOPLE.
VOTE IN: ANYONE who is NOT Globalist Neoliberal and who Stands and Speaks FOR The PEOPLE and NOT FOR Themselves OR Their Elitist Establishment Masters.
SteveH
Surely you should pose that question to Starmer, given how he won the leadership. Even Gordon Brown is getting pissed off with his flip-flopping; today, criticising his backtracking over Pledge 8: HoL abolition.
And to answer, Yes they would win…
The ‘platform’ was fine in 2017 wasn’t it, so the very idea Labour had to veer right to win is warped Mandelsonian logic – a guy who seems forever stuck in a time loop fighting militant battles in the 1980s. It’s not the 1990s and Clintonian third-wayism is a busted flush.
If you look at actual by-election results, not just those who opt-in to do phone polls, there is zero enthusiasm for Starmer’s Labour. Apathy will win the next election.
Truss vs Starmer is like choosing which dogshit to tread in, as someone so aptly put it on Twitter.
Even Blairite ultra Tom Harris is criticising Starmer’s lack of policies & purpose, in his column at the Telegraph.
Presumably when the intel agencies(?) asked their boy from the CPS to get involved with the Labour party (he only became an MP in 2015), and then run for leader – with the aim of steering the party rightwards – the role didn’t come with an instruction manual. Hence why he’s been flailing around like a fish out of water ever since. No wonder Paul Mason is a big fan.
Yes, sadly it’s my opinion our country probably is that bent. We haven’t got a real democracy and it’s depressing.
The basis for saying this is Oliver Eagleton piece titled : Keir Starmer is a Long-Time Servant of the British Security State
https://novaramedia.com/2021/03/02/keir-starmer-is-a-long-time-servant-of-the-british-security-state/
No one could read through that and not come to the same conclusion.
I agree Andy – I remember the McKinnon case where
most people who understood McKinnons autism felt
very concerned as to his fate. I also remember Teresa
May countermanding the extradition order and being
impressed by her humanity.
I was disgusted by Alan Johnson – as I recollect he
was very angry that the extradition had not proceeded ..
and spoke against it. I did not know of Starmer then –
but from what I know of him now am not surprised.
Another vulnerable person who has suffered where
he has worked with the Tory establishment – is
Shamina Begum who was ABDUCTED*** to Syria
and was abandoned with her new born baby in a
camp – where the baby died.
*** Yes that is correct – and can be checked for she
was under 16 and had not got her parents consent.
All of The “West” has NO deadmocracy, there can be no deadmocracy when our Governments are Bombing, Supporting Boombing or Manufacturing said Bombs to drop on innocent Civilians world wide, in our names, without our say so!
MSM Propaganda is the tool of the divisive Globalist Neoliberals Sheeple will fight tooth and nail to support War and Hate and not even know why!
If The PEOPLE are to survive mental slavery we need to act fast and act hard!
A COMPLETE Boycott of ALL MSM, MSSM, MSP and MS Internet.
And a NEED over WANT Revolution. Instead of NEEDING what you WANT start WANTING what you NEED.
Do you NEED the latest smatest phone? No! You WANT the latest smatest phone! Send it to ROOM 101!
Do you NEED that spy on your side board, Alexa? No you, for some grazy reason WANT Alexa, take it out smash it to Powder, send it to ROOM 101.
Ask yourself:
Do I NEED?
Answer…..
What do I NEED? Answer……
Why do I NEED?
Answer……
Eliminate everything that you can do without, by quitting their over priced, plastic cheap tat. We’ll soon hit their pockets and only that will bring the drastic change we need.
The only trouble is that we need the spark that will keep us going, The PEOPLE have become easily fatigued for many reasons and need the driving power of someone as inspirational as Corbyn. That will come, there are many more.
Surely his advisers would have been cautioning against this.
A hostage to fortune now.
Mind you, you’d have expected Starmer’s advisers to have raised a word of caution too.
Couple of points – sorry but Starmer did NOT
go to a “private school” but a “grammar school”.
Otherwise – I would criticise him for everything else
– incompetence; lying; deliberate deception; career-
before principles ..
Being a nerdy techie – I must argue this point
– that In the days when most sat the 11+ we chose
which grammar school (or schools?) we wanted to
attend. Some were straight “grammar schools” and
some “direct grant” and we had a choice – we
chose Grammar (the nearest?) – but all were free.
When Comprehensive schools became popular
some Direct Grant school decided to “opt out”
of the State system.
My second point – Starmer is not prime minister
material – and never was. When we saw Audrey
confront Starmer – I was reminded of when the
pensioner approached Gordon Brown. She
harangued him and was a bit incomprehensible
– after responding to her face he afterwards
complained to his staff that she was racist.
Unfortunately this was picked up and broadcast
– and Brown went to her house and apologised.
How very very different from our current leader!
Starmer has been shielded from voters but he clearly has zero people skills – essential for a politician. Even Johnson for all his faults, had such skills. Three incidents highlight Starmer’s lack off those skills : the pub landlord who was physically restrained on his own premises by Starmer’s hefty minders https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGuLJvY9ApE#t=1m24s ; the young climate activist at conference he ignored so arrogantly. And most recently Audrey.
If he makes it into a GE campaign, and I hope he doesn’t btw, but if he does, he’ll probably be like Theresa May in 2017; speaking to select, vetted audiences at obscure venues eg. air hangars and on farms, surrounded by minders. Conference was a heavily staged managed affair in a similar fashion. When Audrey confronted him, he looked both horrified and frightened in equal measure, like a rabbit caught in the headlights. He always looks like a troubled man, harbouring dark secrets …carrying the weight of the lies he’s told no doubt, to get where he is.
As for Brown, he was uniquely ill-equipped to be PM, though he can feel a little hard done by. Sky News left that mic on him and kept recording, then released it to all broadcasters in 2010’s election campaign. Do you think they’d have done that to David Cameron? The answer is surely no. We may never know if he was set up precisely with that intention, but it wouldn’t be surprising if they didn’t remove the mic and kept recording deliberately.