Witness Intimidation plus Ex Employer Lying

[Calamity1]

Does anyone know why the Judge appears not to have acknowledged any of the harassment and intimidation?

 

I have provided proof of everything and it's really thrown me.

 

C

[IdaInFife]

Is it relevant to your case?

 

What are you claiming ?

[Calamity1]

My ex-employers discriminated against me and certain other individuals. They then physically assaulted me and were arrested and charged.

 

They withheld my wages, said they would make sure I never got another job again and were going to 'get me'.

 

So, I started my own business. Which they then sent false and malicious emails about, so it closed, as well as making me more ill.

 

Then, they did a lot of other things to try and get me to drop the ET case, including criminal acts and threatening my witnesses, so one by one, they dropped out, as they were rightly too scared to give evidence. This is all being investigated by the police btw.

 

I have provided proof from the police that they lied, by saying they didn't attack me and proof from various authorities about the intimidation of myself and witnesses.

 

I would say it was related, because if my witnesses had not been too scared to give evidence, it would be an open and shut case.

 

C

[ericsbrother]

Sorry to hear of your problems. The tibunal is limited in what it can decide upon and you will have to use other legal menas to address all the other points. If your ex-employer is prosecuted successfully then the gates will be wide open for you to sue them for defamation and recover monies for your lost business. i hope that the police take all the other matters seriously and that any charges reflect the full range of your complaints.

As for their solicitors, they take the money and dont have to take the consquences. They will always claim that they only do what they are told to do by their client. Utter tosh but in legal circles it is accepted as being true otherwise 50% of lawyers would be gaoled in every case heard.

[becky2585]

Sorry to hear of your problems. The tibunal is limited in what it can decide upon and you will have to use other legal menas to address all the other points. If your ex-employer is prosecuted successfully then the gates will be wide open for you to sue them for defamation and recover monies for your lost business. i hope that the police take all the other matters seriously and that any charges reflect the full range of your complaints.

As for their solicitors, they take the money and dont have to take the consquences. They will always claim that they only do what they are told to do by their client. Utter tosh but in legal circles it is accepted as being true otherwise 50% of lawyers would be gaoled in every case heard.

 

Actually a Solicitors primary duty is to the Court, not the client, so what you're saying is not accurate. A solicitor legally has to stop acting for a client if they are asked to mislead the Court.

 

And think about it - if there are solicitors on both sides, logic dictates that one of them has to lose so the win rate for any lawyer could easily be 50%...

[Calamity1]

Their solicitor has lied too. I won't go into it, but they did. I'm also fairly certain that they know, especially as I have forwarded all the evidence, that they know their clients are lying.

 

In fact, when one respondent was heard saying something threatening about me in the court room, one of their solicitors claimed it couldn't be used against the respondents to illustrate threats against me, as it would not only implicate the solicitor, but when that didn't work, the solicitor then claimed that the threatening comment had been made to them and so came under client / solicitor privilege.

 

This has got to be one of the weirdest court cases ever. Even the judge said so.

[Calamity1]

During my cross examination of me, all the respondents plus their 'witnesses' have been present.

 

Am I allowed to ask that when I start to question each of the respondents and 'witnesses' am I allowed to ask that prior to questioning, that those I am not questioning are outside of the room. I ask this because they have made up their statements and I believe, if they do not hear each other's answers to my questions, I can prove that they fabricated their statements and evidence.

 

C

[becky2585]

During my cross examination of me, all the respondents plus their 'witnesses' have been present.

 

Am I allowed to ask that when I start to question each of the respondents and 'witnesses' am I allowed to ask that prior to questioning, that those I am not questioning are outside of the room. I ask this because they have made up their statements and I believe, if they do not hear each other's answers to my questions, I can prove that they fabricated their statements and evidence.

 

C

 

I don't think so, no. It's a public hearing, so anyone can be present.

[Calamity1]

Thank you for replying becky2585.... and poo! C

[Calamity1]

Just a general question, as I have had conflicting answers and found ET 'helpline' not very helpful...

 

I read that there was a precedent set in 2009 relating to use of Skype like services used to interview witnesses. I am asking for this and just wondered if anyone had heard of others using it and whether it was difficult, or easy to get this permission. (There is a very good reason why it is very difficult for the witness to get to the court room.)

 

Also, my witnesses, with good reason, are very scared and an essential witness, does not want to be in same room as our ex-employer. Again, very good reason for not wanting to be in same room. To be honest, I wish there was a way I could not be in same room, as I am constantly intimidated and scared.

 

Is there any way that this witness would be allowed to sit in another room and be videolinked to court room?

 

I know this may sound over the top, but I don't want to go in to full details of the case, but I know that if this was in a criminal court, these provisions are usually made available to victims/witnesses.

 

C

[becky2585]

Unless they were disabled and couldn't physically get there, it's unlikely such a request would be granted, I believe.

[Calamity1]

They're in another country, back where they live, over 12 hours flying time.

 

If necessary, they will fly over here to give evidence, but, obviously expensive and I will have to find the money somehow.

 

I read that if someone far away abroad, so not just over the channel, then it can be considered. But I can't find enough information on this.

[becky2585]

They're in another country, back where they live, over 12 hours flying time.

 

If necessary, they will fly over here to give evidence, but, obviously expensive and I will have to find the money somehow.

 

I read that if someone far away abroad, so not just over the channel, then it can be considered. But I can't find enough information on this.

 

Arguably that's another good reason.

 

Ill see if I can find anything for you.

[Calamity1]

Thank you becky2585. It's why it took me so long to find them, as they were on a road trip heading home.

 

But, without me prompting at all, this person told me everything they remember and volunteered a statement, as they believe what happened to us was disgusting.

 

It will strengthen my case so much. Their statement, plus all the other evidence I have, from the authorities etc. will mean there can be no doubt left that these events occurred as I have said they did.

 

I'm hoping that explaining how crucially important this witness is and the fact that I have made 'extremely serious allegations' (judge's words) that they will see that, in order for justice to prevail, this witness should be allowed to speak.

 

After being on the stand and being made to feel like I was some kind of nutty criminal, I now have some hope, as in the last week, all the evidence I promised the court, has been forwarded to me.

 

I just want to prove I'm telling the truth and try and bring this nightmare to an end.

 

Thank you again

[becky2585]

Having had a brief look, it appears as though its only been permitted and published once, in the Reading ET in 2012. That was also for a witness who was abroad. Unfortunately it's an unreported case, so can't be used as a precedent. The other problem is that the Tribunal did not have wi fi (and many don't in my experience). So they had to hire a local hotel to conduct the hearing.

 

Anyway the ET rules should help you here. Rule 15 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 provides that “A hearing may be conducted (in whole or in part) by use of electronic communications provided that the Employment Judge or Tribunal conducting the hearing considers it just and equitable to do so”.

 

I can't find anything else, unfortunately,

[Calamity1]

Thank you for that becky2585. That was super quick!

 

The Judge said he really wanted a witness, but he understood why I had difficulty in finding them and then having them come forward.

 

I'm hoping now, that he will see how hard I have tried to get him an important witness and allow this.

 

Plus, I have already considered the wi-fi access and not only am I willing to pay for it, but I already have portable wi-fi access and am happy to provide this, plus laptop and camera and microphone, plus speakers.

 

I have tried to cover as many angles as I can think of, as I really want to prove I'm telling the truth (obviously).

 

Fingers crossed!

 

C

[Calamity1]

Hi,

 

Quick question. My psychiatrist wrote to the ET and said that although I am mentally competent, I am suffering from depression and due to adverse side effects to medication, my Bipolar condition is currently untreated. He asked that I be given at least six weeks for new medication to work and side effects to wear off. He said that he is concerned that going through the cross examination process now, is likely to cause me harm, mentally and physically.

 

Today, the ET said that because I am mentally competent, although depressed and unwell, I must continue with the hearing tomorrow and the rest of this week.

 

While I was being cross examined, two weeks ago, I kept breaking down and threw up twice, partly because the people who attacked me, kept walking into the claimants' room and partly because they are sat right next to me and constantly attempt to intimidate me. The judge said I was not fit to continue and sent me home.

 

In the past two weeks, I have had two Gp emergency appointments, two emergency psych appointments, one planned psych appointment and a hospital admission, plus extremely painful side effects from meds, which I then had to stop taking.

 

Tomorrow, I was supposed to see Gp, have an emergency home visit from a psychiatric care in community team and telephone advice from solicitor. I have had to cancel these, as I can't afford for the ET to throw my claim out.

 

Tomorrow morning, I have to attend Gp surgery to pick up emergency new prescription, to try and treat depression and bipolar symptoms. It is very likely that on top of depression and symptoms of dissociation and self harming, that I will experience side effects, including pain and confusion from the meds.

 

I am confused as to how the ET can believe that I am fit to attend court and be cross examined tomorrow. I also have no-one to accompany me, as everyone believed (consultant, legal advisor, gp) that I was unfit to attend.

 

Is this normal? Is this fair? Is there anything I can do? Also, I am currently under even more stress as police are currently investigating various criminal activities directed at me and possible witness intimidation.

 

I actually don't know how I'm going to get through tomorrow and have been advised to A & E, but can't risk having my case thrown out because of not turning up.

 

Any advice?

[Emmzzi]

Calamity, I don;t know the answers. But is it possible that putting it off, and having the worry for longer, could be worse? I tend to think getting it over ewith either way is a good thing.

 

Your GP will be there the day after, as will the police. They can wait.

[Calamity1]

Emmzzi, There is that, but it is extremely hard to answer questions and ask questions when I can't think straight and am in pain.

 

There are a few other complications as well, but I was just hoping for a few weeks to stop being so ill and for last of evidence and witness statements to come through.

 

I now have witnesses & have provided police reports of assault and copies of malicious communications, but this doesn't appear to have been acknowledged by either the ET, or respondents' solicitor. I find it confusing. Also, after repeated requests to see original documents, I still haven't seen them... and I know they're faked.

 

Just hard trying to operate when not at full capacity.

[Calamity1]

Emmzzi, Thank you for replying btw.

[Emmzzi]

if the documents haven't been acknowledged you can always give the court a ring to check.

 

I am so sorry you are feeling this way. Do take care of yourself! Hopefully someone with better advice on illness and court will be along in a bit.

[Calamity1]

Thank you Emmzzi.

 

I read, and was told, even by the Judge, that I wasn't allowed to continue if unwell. I have to leave the room to throw up, basically.

 

The Judge sent me home because he said if I was unwell then if I don't like decision, it gives me grounds for appeal.

 

So I'm a bit surprised by order to attend, as I am more unwell this week, than when in court a couple of weeks ago.

 

I will just have to keep leaving the room to throw up and have regular breaks is all. I'm also concerned I'll embarrass myself, as when the pain becomes too much, I collapse onto the floor and have trouble trying not to groan because of the pain. I don't really like anyone to see that. Especially not the respondents.

[Emmzzi]

how long has this process been going on? do you need to watch for the case beng thrown out as it is unlikely to conclude in a reasonable time frame? or is it just a few months?

[Calamity1]

I originally submitted the ET1 in Jan 2012.

 

The respondents didn't reply. So in May 2012, the ET resubmitted my ET1 to the respondents, who then claimed they had not received the first ET1. I know from previous incidents that the respondents ignore legal letters from solicitors of ex-employees, because they expect people to give up and go away.

 

I had pre-hearing and CMD in Aug 2012 I think. Maybe September. I then had first day of hearing in Mid-Jan 2013 I believe. I was there a week. Sent home. Too ill for one day two weeks ago and now this is continuation of hearing. So I haven't had lots of adjournments, or anything.

 

The Psychiatrist asked if the court could delay the rest of the hearing by six weeks, as I am so ill at the moment. The ET refused.

[Calamity1]

What is considered a reasonable time frame usually?