Wilt Portfolio

This is a long article – but read on, as it is worthwhile we humbly submit. Above all it gives a two finger salute to those who attempt to curtail freedom of speech.

It has been a little while since we turned our attention to the subject of Calleja, that Elizabeth of Leamington Spa. After her arrest last year for suspected harassment Wilt et al reflected on her character.

Wilt Portfolio

She remains a regular visitor to Regulator Watch via her T-Mobile Android driven and Safari web browser on the tiny screen of her mobile phone – she appears to believe her activity by such media is undetectable or not permanently recorded both on her device and by the Regulator Watch “sniffer” programme to monitor access to the website. No such luck Elizabeth – your every click is recorded, by us and T-Mobile.

Whereas Elizabeth was not ultimately charged with any offence and released from bail, the arrest, we think, had a definite impact on her activity – Wilt has received reports that (due to bail conditions) she did not access the websites of those companies who brought the police complaint against her, for the full period of her three month bail. She has on a couple of occasion’s accessed one company (complainant) website post release from bail.

Probably for the second time ever, Calleja was on the back foot – it was she who was under scrutiny and despite her efforts to achieve the same it was not those who she complained about but in fact her who was arrested. The police were in fact rather annoyed that this “crying wolf” Calleja was an utter menace and distraction from the real and vital crimes that police forces try to address daily. This is not a dissimilar position adopted by the former CSCI (Commission for Social Care Inspection) who, were to their credit, the first to take on the task of dismantling the Calleja/Plaskitt mythology of “victimisation.”

Plaskitt is the former Labour MP for Warwick & Leamington Spa. You can find details here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Plaskitt or upcoming http://www.jamesplaskitt.com/ – the latter is reserved and we can only assume the twat has something in mind. Perhaps photographs of dunes!?

James Plaskitt - Wikepedia

Police “forces” is used in the plural because it was not just West Mercia Police but also several other police forces that were in receipt of complaints – Calleja will and has made multiple complaints on the same “stale” issues to numerous agencies.

The list of agencies Calleja has complained to is far too numerous to mention (they run into the dozens) in her near 11 year campaign to, what she/Plaskitt term as an effort to clear her name, to attack the character of others – the classic “attack is the best defence” approach which she and idiot Plaskitt (now ex-MP) undertook in a rather underhand way.

Wilt Portfolio

Quite a number of agencies were initially taken in by this nun with a switchblade and took up her cause in the mistaken belief that Calleja, aided and abetted by former MP Plaskitt, was a victim of the big bad system. These were her high points. Some of it was captured in the CSCI Internal Review Report here: http://regulatorwatch.co.uk/2009/11/csci-internal-review-report/ and thereafter her demise was assured. Well done CSCI.

Come the general election in 2010 (when Plaskitt lost his Parliamentary seat) Calleja was on her own, most agencies had realised she was simply “vexatious“(including even the GSCC) and her reputation with the said dozens of agencies was in disarray.

After her arrest in 2010 she focused her switchblade, very nun like, on Regulator Watch which has, among other matters, reported the alternative and more truthful story of Calleja – she had begun the process by reporting her (false) woes to the press herself, aided and abetted by former MP Plaskitt in both the House of Commons and the press. She made herself public, her cause public and seriously discredited others very publicly – is it therefore a surprise that others defend themselves publicly via Regulator Watch?

Plaskitt it appears, as some describe him, been a “poodle” or “lap dog” of the woman, forever doing her bidding.  Calleja, otherwise known as Mrs Fax (given the volumes of data sent by fax to numerous bodies), became more and more isolated and considered by many agencies as suffering some kind of illness.

Why otherwise would she harass so many over so many years? Munchausen’s Syndrome was once proposed and remains a significant contender but Wilt et al have another theory, too.

The demise of Plaskitt (who lost his Parliamentary seat) was a significant loss to Calleja – the “poodle” no longer had a voice, safe within the protected confines of the lower House. He also needed to take a low profile due to his dodgy MP’s expenses, especially his £400 per month (no questions asked) food bill, among other claims on expenses. If only Wilt (and most of the world) had £400 per month for food, without receipts – world hunger would be solved, surely?

There is a considerable body of belief that Calleja “is just simply evil” – she was fully aware of the damage she did to the reputations of others and the distress that caused, but that explanation does not exclude the impressions of others who state that “Munchausen’s Syndrome” or indeed simple “Narcissism” also play a part in the makeup of this complex woman – this is the consequence of having psychiatrists, psychologists and religious people on the board of Regulator Watch.

Wikipedia

See an article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder – if reading these you are looking into a mirror, do not blame Wilt, especially if your name is Elisabeth.

Being a pure “evil” person argument is a strong contender – Calleja was intent upon doing the maximum harm to her victims. This does not of course exclude simple mental health problems. “I want this agency de-registered” (or words to that effect) or this and that person de-registered from the GSCC suggests a vengeful and disproportionate attitude especially when it carries on a decade after her perceived abuse of her by others – abuse which all evidence indicates never really took place, although she did as a foster parent suffer some mild maladministration by a local authority (Northamptonshire – see the CSCI Internal Review Report).

Such efforts at revenge never stopped her after it was conclusively determined that the CSCI/GSCC/Police/Information Commissioner could find no grounded cause of complaint – she simply regarded those agencies as complicit in her “paranoid” view that there was a conspiracy, and thus she was even more embolden.

Wilt Portfolio

“Paranoid” is one thing, “Munchausen’s Syndrome” is another – that remains a virtual certainty. However how about Calleja being a Narcissist? Well, the combined thoughts of the experts seem to agree at least on this description of the nun with a switchblade – a term coined to describe Julie Andrews of The Sound of Music acting fame who was, it is suggested, “a bit of a bully.”

This assessed Narcissist – Elizabeth – fits every description of that mirror admiring Greek mythological figure. Indeed she would surpass the fame of that classical body that ultimately became a disgrace both in life and death. She does live in infamy and a warning to mankind in terms of “selfishness”, but Calleja will leave no legacy, other than the compensations awarded to her victims. And those compensations were rather generous!

Wilt

The General Social Care Council seems to have a twin sister the “under review” Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA).

From Wilt Portfolio

The ISA http://www.isa-gov.org.uk/ is one of those Quangos currently under review and its remit and scope caused massive a massive outcry of protest and derision after it emerged that every man, woman and their respective dogs and cats would be forced to register (with attendant fee) or otherwise be criminalised.

This included moms and dads who shared the role of the school run! It was shown to be utterly daft and, more importantly, unworkable.

There was a programme set in place to gradually register certain groups (e.g. those already with a CRB check in place) before ever more widely registering virtually everyone who have contact with children (other than their own) and vulnerable adults. That programme was stopped by the present Government whist the ISA was put under review.

It was intended that the ISA would replace the current Protection of Children Act (POCA) list, List 99 (teachers barred) and the Protection of Vulnerable Adults (POVA) lists. Murderer Ian Huntley although having been investigated numerous times by police for sexual offences did not appear on any list and the police, famously, relied on the defence that the Data Protection Act prevented action to alert relevant authorities – the response was a not unreasonable public outcry.

The idea for the ISA followed the recommendations of the Bichard Inquiry looking into the events of the Soham murders of Jessica Chapman and Holly Wells (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soham_murders) by Ian Huntley.

Recently the Telegraph has revealed in this article http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8290307/Thousands-could-sue-Government-over-unlawful-child-protection-sackings.html that the ISA is proving to be a complete jerk when it comes to day to day “common sense” decisions – by giving automatic bans from working with children or adults for the most minor of indiscretions, and importantly not giving those people a right to give their side of the story.

The Telegraph gives some interesting examples of simply stupid bureaucratic examples of over and mismanagement by unaccountable quangoland pissheads.

The newspaper article focuses on several cases where people have accepted Police Cautions (i.e. considered minor indiscretions) as distinct from more grevious convictions handed down by a court, such as:

“Yet another mother was cautioned for child neglect after leaving her three children in the care of a seemingly responsible neighbour, a grandmother, while she took a relative to the airport. The neighbour left the children on their own for a while and the mother was barred from taking up a place on a nursing course.”

What a fucking mess. And it could lead to £millions being awarded in compensation to people for loss of earnings – because some twat at the ISA decided to ban various mums and dads from pursuing careers involving either children or vulnerable adults.

What complete fucking Dorks!

Here is another example:

“Another of the nurses, “Mrs W”, was barred for 10 years in June after accepting a caution for leaving her 11-year-old son at home on his own when she went shopping.

Her case was referred to the Nursing and Midwifery Council which found that she had no case to answer. But Mrs W was unable to work as an agency nurse and, as a single parent responsible for her son, struggled financially. She was removed from the auto-bar list in August 2010, only after the RCN took up her case.”

From Archives

Obviously those at the GSCC and ISA were conceived of the of same stupid fucking mother and father in Whitehall, under the guidance of the Labour Government.

Jesus, what have we created in the aim of public protection? This quango together with its twin (the GSCC) needs burning at the stake. What is wrong with these people – are they not human?

Wilt

Why, oh why oh why do these people insist upon prolonging these issues? Dawson, in the picture of this Community Care article: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2011/01/21/116155/basw-confirms-launch-of-own-college-of-social-work.htm is looking decidedly rough and dishevelled – perhaps he just got out of bed or something. Mind you his predecessor looked always rather dandy even when utterly pissed, which was most of the time.

I cannot fathom what BASW are trying to achieve, other than they have a deep feeling of vengeance after having been spurned as the natural voice of social work – of course there is nothing natural about BASW which is why they play second fiddle.

Wilt

I must say I am rather bemused by all this, and a little sad for Hague and Ffion – was there really a need for this?

See here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11156963

Even here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/sep/01/william-hague-denies-gay-rumours

And here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/william-hague/7975823/William-Hagues-special-advisor-resigns-over-untrue-allegations.html

Plus of course: http://order-order.com/2010/09/01/myers-quits/

All this is very silly and sad.

Who gives a shit if he is gay or not, which he probably is not – of course the real story is about appointments of advisers on the payroll who might have been appointed as a gay lover. Again, we suspect not.

Apparently, and Guido (http://order-order.com/) has been reporting it for days, there have been rumours circulating the internet that Hague and Myers have something unsavoury in their relations. Now this kind of scandal mongering is without any real merit and probably comes down to the likes of the News of the World or its readers, or possibly the Sun -otherwise the tabloid gutter press.

Now I know Wilt et al go on about Elizabeth Calleja, but at least their observations are based on recorded facts, evidenced documents (more yet to come) and opinions of reasonable thinking persons. This kind of smearing is however unforgivable.

How comes Myers resigns and Calleja remains a foster parent – I am fucking bemused and her solicitors will really need to explain this to Salty Dog.

Fucking incredible.

Wilt

The GSCC have had another bashing from the Care Standards Tribunal (CST) in this case: http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/Judgments/j1092/ND%20Final%20Approved%20draft%20_3_.pdf

This is very similar to an earlier case where, in Wilt’s opinion, the GSCC are using the suspension procedure used by the Preliminary Proceedings Committee (PPC) to cover for delays in their investigation teams. Although the CST have not expressed in that way it is fairly obvious what message they are sending to the GSCC – get your act together.

Community Care reported on the outcome of the GSCC final hearing of its Conduct Committee here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/2010/08/12/115083/Cocaine-user-allowed-to-remain-on-social-care-register.htm although they appear not have linked it to the CST finding (link above). Community Care appear not to report on CST hearings, or at least not routinely – here at Regulator Watch (http://regulatorwatch.co.uk/) we do.

In essence the CST finding that issuing a suspension whilst investigations were made, in this case, was perverse is supported by the GSCC Conduct Committee who issued the Registrant with a two year admonishment – a low level disposal.

So what was the miraculous change that caused the GSCC at one time to suspend the social worker and then issue an admonishment? Might it be they fucked up again at the PPC?

This social worker was represented (at the CST) by the Celtic Knot law firm based in Birmingham http://www.celticknot.org.uk/ and Allan Norman has a blog here: http://www.communitycare.co.uk/cgi-bin/mt/mt-search.cgi?tag=Allan%20Norman&blog_id=276

And tweets here: http://twitter.com/CelticKnotTweet

We still think he needs a ‘proper’ hair cut – only joking!

Allan Norman and a former student Registrant was not so lucky in this CST appeal: http://www.carestandardstribunal.gov.uk/Judgments/j1091/sass2%20decision.pdf

This is the first time it seems that a former Registrant has complained that the GSCC did not go through the conduct process and arrive at the process – the man must be on something!

This is a most mind boggling and stupid case to bring before the CST. The arguments for bringing it presented by Norman were very carefully constructed and eloquent but nonetheless, in Wilt’s opinion, utter fucking folly.

This is a must read case – I laughed so much I fell of my chair.

Wilt

Again thanks to Guido, this is an absolute classic: http://order-order.com/2010/08/02/monday-morning-cartoon-5/

The woman, Jacqui Smith, does not have the first fucking clue. I cannot believe this woman has the lack of understanding why she is hated by the public (especially in her former constituency) at large and the audacity to put herself forward as a deputy/vice-chairman of the BBC – is she fucking stupid? Obviously she is!

What a total twat.

Wilt

Some People just do not get it, do they? Two young women torture a poor girl, break her nose and afflict burns to her body for – wait for it- allegedly sleeping with a former boyfriend. A woman scorned, huh? Scorn two and you are fucked by the fairer sex – mmmmmmm.

See the Telegraph article here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/7917772/Women-jailed-for-torturing-friend.html

What is wrong with these people? Absolute twats!

Wilt

Some people continue to believe they are above the law, including Mrs C. See here: http://order-order.com/2010/07/30/lord-chief-justices-rules-mps-to-be-treated-as-common-criminals/

And here: http://order-order.com/2010/07/30/in-the-courts/

These three MPs and single Lord are going to end up in Court and the evidence tested as to the charges of fraud.

Unless of course they make some further appeal and win it – who is paying for these Court cases? I suspect it is the taxpaying public.

The Telegraph states:

“The four men are now expected to take their case to the Supreme Court for a further appeal, meaning any trials, which had been expected to start at Southwark Crown Court in London in November, might now be delayed until next year.”

The BBC report here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10814765 and the Telegraph here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/7918481/Former-MPs-charged-with-abusing-expenses-will-face-criminal-trials.html

What absolute twats.

Wilt

It is a month since Mrs C was arrested – not much changes however; she still stalks and continues her favourite activity, complaining. People really should read this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberstalking

Therein one will find a good description of the disgusted of Leamington Spa.

Here is another useful site: http://www.bullyonline.org/related/stalking.htm

And this one: http://www.flayme.com/stalker/

Let’s look at Mrs C stalking activity, and this is typical:

On 28^th July she was surfing via her T-Mobile phone at 00:14 am (Wilt was in bed), then 07:40 am – she really should get her 8 hours of sleep as it is unhealthy not to do so. Then at 12:38 pm and 16:25 pm – she also found time to access the Cloud Network again, but it appears in London this time. Mrs C is on walkabout. Does she know her every click on Regulator Watch is monitored – yes. Can she help herself by not accessing Regulator Watch – no.

What is her obsession, exactly? Well of course we already know the answer to that question – its Munchausen Syndrome. She should look it up – really, together with reference to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberstalking. Either that or it is mad cow disease, or as some argue, pure evilness. Wilt is coming around to that thinking himself but reserves judgement.

Meanwhile access to Regulator Watch remains high in relation to searches and access about Mrs C – the press and government agencies just love it. We have however needed to block a firm of solicitors in London and their IT support service. They had a little too much interest and strayed into a friends website post the arrest and bail of Mrs C. That of course amounts to stalking and consequently harassment – ooooooeeeeeerrrrrrr!

We understand Mr Plod is being advised. We are further advised that Leamington Spa has a brand new combined Court, police station and cells – very convenient we think, and good economics.

The more she lurks and stalks, the more google uprate Regulator Watch as the primary Blog on social care – carry on Mrs C, you are good for business.

Wilt

The GSCC continue to operate as ‘normal’ pending the transfer in March 2012 to the to be renamed Health Professionals Council http://www.hpc-uk.org/ – or one should say the proposed move in 2012. Many in the Community Care Blog Care Space http://www.communitycare.co.uk/carespace/forums/gscc-to-be-scrapped-health-professionals-8085.aspx#32964 have mixed feelings about it.

The GSCC gives advice on the implications of the recent announcement of their demise here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/Home/ and click on big red “i” icon. In short business as usual – mmmmm.

Meanwhile the GSCC has published a number of recent outcomes from their Conduct Committee. This is a very odd one: http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/435BAC0D-2BA8-493F-B815-9DD47CB9FFBC/0/NOTICEOFDECISIONHIBBERTS.pdf

Essentially the GSCC dropped the case after it was unable to convince a local authority manager to give evidence and to proceed without it would amount to hearsay. Now you would think the GSCC would have realised this before taking it to Committee.

The GSCC are in a difficult position because they cannot force either a registrant or witness to attend – they have no teeth in effect. Not helpful. And of course they have no powers over employers and the code of conduct relating to them is not worth the paper they are written on – it’s just a wish list in effect.

Whoever drew up this legislation and the employers codes needs a jolly good lesson in ‘how not to make a balls-up.’

Other recent concluded hearings include this one: http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/AA176AF6-7A81-4CB7-8BD5-12FE7E710EA0/0/NOTICEOFDECISIONSIMPSON.pdf

Note the offending behaviour relates to 2008 – either this was part of the backlog or the GSCC were not previously aware of it. The naughty boy was looking at pornography on his employer’s computer.

He was suspended for two years.

Another: http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/30BF47BA-8D5E-4B6B-8329-DCE583C46253/0/NOTICEOFDECISIONMAHABIR.pdf resulted in a one year suspension. This did go back to issues between 2004 – 2008 and the GSCC were made aware of his drink-drive conviction of December 2004 (after he was first registered by the GSCC) in, and I find it odd how they term it, “around 19^th November 2008;” either it was or it was not the 19^th November 2008 – what’s with this “around” business?

So exactly what were the GSCC doing between (“around)” the 19^th November 2008 and 21st July 2010?  Not a lot it would seem. The registrant had asked that his GSCC hearing be postponed as he claimed it would prejudice his Employment Tribunal, which it appears is still pending.

And the disposal by way of a one year suspension, is that proportionate especially as he did eventually cough up the details to the GSCC, albeit four years later? Wilt thinks no – far more appropriate would have been an admonishment.

However, the registrant only has himself to blame as he was not in attendance to defend himself or give evidence. With the GSCC that, as a friend would say, is like a turkey voting for an early Christmas.

Each case is worth a read – click on the links above.

The GSCC have published their latest up-coming hearings here: http://www.gscc.org.uk/Conduct/Conduct_hearings/Upcoming_hearings/

Among some interesting ones are:

http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/DC31BFE1-A33D-4596-A2C9-F4925B29C6D8/0/SummaryJanjua.pdf

AND:

http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/134F01BD-EEF2-4797-92BD-3F07B424BDA3/0/SummaryNia.pdf

AND

http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/F6D734C8-77A7-4D4D-B828-54CA474507A7/0/SummaryHenderson.pdf

Why does the GSCC need to get involved in this matter http://www.gscc.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/B002178D-48C2-4B2F-ADF0-D1309F474498/0/SummaryNyabunze.pdf one is left to wonder?

Wilt