Analysis Breaking comment Exclusive News

Exclusive: Cohen wins unfair dismissal v Mahmood. Starmer damned by confirmation of ‘protected disclosures’

‘Questions need to be asked’ about Labour cover-up of whistleblower’s allegations of criminal abuse by MP’s staffer

Whistleblower Elaina Cohen has won her unfair dismissal tribunal against Labour right-winger Khalid Mahmood – and the tribunal judgment published today confirms that she made ‘protected disclosures’ to Mahmood, Keir Starmer, David Evans and the party about the horrific abuse of vulnerable domestic violence victims by a staffer with whom Mahmood was allegedly in a relationship. For full details of the tribunal hearings, see this section.

The tribunal also found that she had suffered damage as a result of Mahmood’s treatment of her.

Ms Cohen, who is Jewish and whose complaints of antisemitism were also ignored by the party, told Skwawkbox that she was ‘over the moon’ with the judgment:

I’m relieved and over the moon that the tribunal agreed I was unfairly dismissed by Khalid Mahmood MP and suffered detriment. My lawyers are looking at the judgment in detail, but there is no doubt now that the protected disclosures were genuine and that Keir Starmer, Khalid Mahmood and West Midlands Police turned their back on victims of crime and abuse.

Questions need to be asked and in due course I will consider what else I can do to further bring justice to these women whose ordeal was ignored.

Vulnerable women, including domestic violence victims and LGBT+ people were put at risk by the party choosing to cover up my disclosures. Keir Starmer can now have no credibility as a political figure who claims to prioritise the protection of victims.

As Skwawkbox exclusively revealed, Ms Cohen repeatedly made Keir Starmer and Labour general secretary David Evans aware of the abuse Asian women suffered through a now-closed ‘charity’ supposedly set up to protect victims of domestic violence, which included blackmail, threats and coercion to commit fraud and other criminal acts. Neither took action, nor have they ever commented on the cover-up. Khalid Mahmood remained for months on Starmer’s front bench and has never been disciplined by the party or even administratively suspended pending investigation.

Keir Starmer has been enjoying photo opportunities and free junkets with Mahmood in Birmingham this week at the Commonwealth Games.

Full details of the judgment are awaited. Skwawkbox understands that Ms Cohen will be appealing the tribunal’s finding that she was not dismissed directly because of her whistleblowing.

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. That is great news!

    What is going to happen about the abused
    Asian women though? Will they now pursue
    a complaint with the police and/or GLU ?

  2. That’s odd, I can remember someone raising that subject, last week, sometime.

    ‘Wait and see!’ Was the plea.

    Well, we waited, and now we see. What’s next?

    1. SteveH29/07/2022 at 12:38 pm

      I’m waiting for the outcome of her tribunal hearing.

      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.”
      You should read the full article, it gives a summary of both sides of this case.

      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.

      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.

      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.

      Smartboy – I guess we’ll see when the tribunal publishes its findings.

      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.

      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?

      1. George – I’m struggling to see the point you are trying to make, the situation remains the same until the Tribunal publishes its findings.

      2. ‘I’m relieved over the moon that the tribunal agreed I was unfairly dismissed by Khalid Mahmood MP and suffered detriment.’

        ‘…and that Keir Starmer, Khalid Mahmood and West Midlands Police turned their back on victims of crime and abuse.’

        That seems, quite, clear, to me. I’m satisfied with that ruling.

        If you’re waiting for all the gory details – well – good luck. I hope you enjoy reading them.

        It remains to be seen, what action(s) The Labour Party will take.

      3. I see SH is off needling posters again, as he does practically every day in practically every single thread!

        What I can’t understand is why Steve Walker let’s him do so, and didn’t bar him from posting on here a long time ago. I mean it’s so blatantly obvious he’s a paid right-wing Establishment shill!

      4. Allan – I have been responding to attacks accusing me of all sorts for simply expressing that in my judgement it would be wiser to wait until the full verdict was available before I commented. Having now read the Tribunal’s verdict from end to end (71 pages) it turns out that my reluctance was justified. Have you read it yet?

    2. Nowt odd about it George.

      Just another of his shithouse methods. He’ll be back on a later thread, acting as if his shit don’t stink…

      But you knew that already.

    1. When it is published on the Employment Tribunal website. Why are you asking such silly questions?

      1. nellyskelly – Did you disagree with Jeremy or the reporting. If not what is your problem?

    1. Toffee – Have you read the Tribunal’s findings yet.
      It turns out that my decision not to jump onto a passing bandwagon was entirely justified.

      1. SteveH, passing bandwagon? Christ man, surely even ‘centrists’ can manufacture empathy?

    1. Toffee – It is gratifying to hear from you that I am occupying your thoughts.

  3. Do we know the date of the remedial hearing? It would be interesting to see the amount of compensation Ms Cohen gets.
    It is clear that her relationship with the former employer has broken down irreparably. Hence, I seriously doubt the Employment Tribunal will order Khalid Mahmood MP to employ her back.
    However, he will have to pay her redundancy calculated at 1.5 weekly pay for the number of years she has worked, I believe is a minimum of 16 years. Hence, 24 weeks pay in Statutory Redundancy. Plus a maximum of a year gross pay in compensation for unfair dismissal
    It would be interesting to see if:
    – the Labour Party will now expel Khalid Mahmood or will Starmer withdraw the Labour whip
    – or will David Evans decide that the LP will pay whatever compensation is awarded to Elaina Cohen’s.
    My guess is that compensation could be between 30-40K.
    We know that the Labour Party paid a bill on behalf of Julian Bell the former Labour leader in the London Borough of Ealing and Virendra Sharma MP in Ealing Southall.

      1. nellyskelly – It’s a known fact that you would have already known if you took the trouble to keep yourself better informed.

      2. It is absolutely, it’s also a known fact that your Neo-Labour TORY Party are the guilty Party and will have to pay out handsomely!
        Oh dear! I may have just crushed your scrotum, and your “heart” was in there!

      3. Thanks for the info SteveH, pity it would be after Labour Conference.
        I wonder if the compensation awarded to Eliana Khan would be paid by Khalid Mahmood MP or by the tax payers?
        Four years ago Mahmood settle a case out of Court for an undisclosed figure with Eliana Cohen that signed a non disclosure agreement. Good on Cohen that this time the trick didn’t work.

        However, the undisclosed figure was paid by insurance paid with public money, see link above. I wonder if the six figure offer was going to be paid by the insurance company too. Perhaps Skwawkbox can did into it?
        If this is the case clearly the insurance company new that Mahmood was going to lose the case at the Employment Tribunal and its reverberations were most likely going to damage Starmer.

  4. I wonder if certain members of the shadow cabinet were expecting something like this, and are placing themselves as a result?

  5. Do we know the date of the remedial hearing?

    I’m fraud not. But I think we’ve heard enough from the remedial 😏

  6. It would be interesting to see if:
    – the Labour Party will now expel Khalid Mahmood or will Starmer withdraw the Labour whip
    – or will David Evans decide that the LP will pay whatever compensation is awarded to Elaina Cohen’s.

    More chance of the wee fella posting something sensible than either of them happening.

    Keef withdraws the whip on Mahmood after being found to have been briefed will only further demonstrate his de piffle-esque propensity to blame others for his own shortcomings.

    And I very much doubt they’ve got the funds to pay Cohen’s compen.

      1. Keef doesn’t need it.

        Keef claims for his scran off the taxpayer…While ordering his party to abstain on allowing kids a meal at school.

        Twat makes ian dummkppf-schmitt look philanthropic.

    1. Toffe, I have found out that MPs have legal insurance paid with tax payers money. So most likely the insurance will pay the compensation to Cohen.

      1. Ah, but the taxpayer can’t pay the moral consequences for them, Maria.

        That’s if the party understand, there are moral consequences to pay. We’re, still, waiting for them to address The Forde Inquiry Report.

        The Labour Party has been a morality-free organisation for – about- two-and-a-half years, now.

  7. The Tribunal report is here

    Sqwawkbox is to be congratulated for the journalistic contribution (acknowledged on p31) but, having taken the time to read the report in full (ok, I skipped the legal precedents pp.36-44), I think the characterisation of the trial and the verdict here misleading. In spite of the ‘both sides’ conclusion being roundly castigated in these parts in relation to Forde, in this instance to see Cohen as victim, Mahmood as perpetrator, and Starmer as a continuing source of all evil in the world, is to ignore the findings of the tribunal. Read it yourself and make up your own mind.

  8. Have tried to read the tribunal findings
    .. OMG ..

    Sorry but I have had to give up .. so
    congratulations Tim White.

    I hope Ms Cohen manages to tackle the
    abuse suffered by the women –
    is all I will say.

    1. HFM – You obviously didn’t get as far as this section of the document

      “Conclusion of Police investigation
      69. On 9 March 2020 DCI Pearson and DS Simpson of the West Midlands Police
      Constabulary had a meeting with the Claimant at Perry Barr. They explained
      that the investigation (Operation Aureus) was complete and there was no
      criminal investigation to progress. Four out of five alleged victims had
      withdrawn and the fifth alleged victim was refusing to engage.

  9. Not sure what point you are making
    SteveH but the situation of the women
    who withdrew their complaints in 2020
    is COMPLETELY different from
    how it was then.

    However Ms Cohen does know and
    is determined to right the wrongs to

    Maybe she will have to wait till
    September – but better late than

    1. HFM – I’m not trying to make any point, all I’ve done is report word for word what was in the Tribunal’s findings. You should make the effort to read the whole document and draw your own conclusions.

  10. I have drawn my own conclusions – every problem Cohen
    brought to Starmer was a ignored :

    First -that women had been abused. Starmer brushed this
    aside and made no attempt to tackle this. The women
    would not give evidence – hardly a new thing in the face
    of the prospect of facing up to males who abuse them. If Starmer had made an effort to understand these cases
    – maybe the women would have had the courage to
    proceed with their evidence.

    Second – concerning anti-semitism where Cohens
    accusation of anti-semitism was ignored. This
    contrasted with his position in respected of Long-Bailey
    where with the same evidence within two minutes
    he accused her of antisemitism and chucked her out
    of the shadow cabinet ..

    Now both cannot be right .. and that is the point –
    he is inconsistent. I dont have to go through the
    logic surely?

    The case of the abused women is still not sorted –
    but may be now for Cohen is determined to help

    1. HFM – Perhaps you missed my earlier post on a different page.

      RLB was actually sacked for refusing to take down a post when she was instructed to do so by her boss.

      After examining all the evidence in great detail the Tribunal rejected Cohen’s claims of anti-Semitism.

      The Employment Tribunal’s findings couldn’t be any clearer, here is the direct quote
      “395. The Claimant has not established that the decision to dismiss related to her race, religion or belief.”

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: