John Cross disciplinary: the saga continues
Writing about web page http://www.geocities.com/johncrossisinnocent/case2.html
The second part of the 'case for defence' in the John Cross disciplinary case is now online and I have to say that although Simon Lucas has said that we have only seen one side of the story, from what I have seen of his side of the story there still appears to be no case to answer. The defence, on the other hand, point out several very important factors which bear repeating:
- The first two allegations against John Cross concern anonymously submitted questions which, even if they did constitute an allegation (which seems unlikely), cannot and should not be used as evidence against him. And, in addition, their use as evidence constitutes a slur on Benny Spooner, the former Chair of Council, who permitted the second one to be asked.
- The allegation concerning the statement at the AGM concerns minutes which have not been approved and are open to interpretations other than the official line being peddled by the Union hierarchy in this case. This is also a slight against Benny Spooner as any breaches of the Staff-Student Protocol are the duty of the Chair of Council to rectify as they take place.
- It sets a very worrying precedent for someone's vote at a meeting on any issue to be used as the basis for later action against them and makes a mockery of any professions of a Democratic Union by our officers.
If you feel strongly about this, sign the petition and/or come to the public meeting in R1.13 at 6:15pm next Tuesday. Also consider coming to Union Council next Thursday at 7pm in S0.21.