Saturday, 22 December 2012

Martin Banned!!! ‘Pornogate’ Councillor Disqualified From Public Office

Residents of Oakham breathed a sigh of relief when a High Court Judge disqualifed Oakham Town Councillor Martin Brookes from holding public office either in Oakham or anywhere else after disgusting the town in an incident known locally as ‘Pornogate’.

The story as it appeared in the Rutland Mercury
Standards for England, the body responsible for maintaining standards in public office, took Cllr Brookes before a Tribunal after a string of complaints against him by fellow councillors, staff and members of the public.  The Tribunal found that Cllr Brookes had been guilty of a large number of breaches of the Code of Conduct, calling one councilllor an ‘arsehole’, another an ‘old bag’ and ‘vilifying’ the Clerks on numerous occasions.  He also subjected a female member of the public he had never met to a tirade of homophobic abuse.

However, the worst incident by far was when Brookes, who is a keen amateur photographer, broke open the Council’s main noticeboard in the High Street and filled it with anal fetish material which promptly led to Brookes’s arrest and cautioning and subsequent downfall at the Standards Tribunal.

Mobile phone video of the incident sent to Laughing Stocks by a member of the public confirms reports widely circulating in the town that the images showed a naked man with a carrot engaging in what can only be described as cruelty to vegetables!

Mystery surrounds the identity of the model in the photographs, but the images taken by a member of the public clearly show one of the pictures was captioned “This is my ex-husband, I shouldn’t really show it round – he’s got the one of me”.

Stills from a video of the noticeboard.  The full horror of the scene has had to be deliberately blurred out by us!

In his final adjudication Presiding Judge David Laverick said of Cllr Brookes: “There is no indication that the Respondent has shown any sign of understanding the standards set by the Code of Conduct despite his agreeing to follow the provisions of that Code. The Tribunal can see no alternative to disqualifying him from being a member of the Town Council, and any other local authority. The Tribunal has decided that the period of disqualification should be two years. That period will allow the particular Town Council to move to a more normal way of operating and will also allow the Respondent time to reflect on the standards which are expected of those in Public Life."
As well as the Pornogate incident, Brookes has also gained notoriety for a series of other bizarre doings.  His crazy antics have included:

-         Sending a press release to all UK national media organisations saying his ex was ‘crap’
-         Proclaiming himself ‘God’s gift to men’
-         Saying that he would never shoplift in Oakham because the up-market shops have nothing he wants
-         Claiming that if women get cancer it is their own fault

It has been reported that ex- Cllr Brookes is trying to appeal against Judge Laverick's opinion that he is "unfit for public office".  We don't fancy his chances much!

Saturday, 15 December 2012

The Fool in the Cherry Picker – Or Just Trespassing?

More Streets And Suburbia (S.A.S.) Gossip from your Rutland Roving Reporters!

The Fool in the Cherry Picker – Or Just Trespassing?

You know - if somebody purported to be a local journalist or photographer and walked uninvited around my business premises with a camera around his neck, and a suspicious smile on his face, I’d probably ask him to leave.  But then again the same person may well be a little frightening because of his attitude, general appearance and the way he speaks to me, so as a frail person I might just cower behind the counter and let him wander, especially when he has a bouncer with him.  Not that his protective person is that conspicuous, by design, so I might not see him or her, (lurking in the background), whichever the case may be.  But that’s just meek and mild me I suppose.

Anyway the photos on his recent Internet publication are somewhat confusing.  Some pictures show an unfinished roof on a small building in a back yard (picture taken from altitude with telephoto lens) which seems to please him and yet another picture shows another roof, with rather expensive roof tiles I might add, on a particularly nice period building.  For some reason he dislikes these tiles so we must assume he is an aesthetics critic or a building know-it-all. He does appear to have a fetish with roofs'. How odd.  Perhaps it remands him of his own 'topper' and has a grievance with his barber.

We then came to wonder how he got these pictures.  Was it from a cherry picker hired for the occasion or did he, as is the suspicion, wander around uninvited into a building and then disappear up to somebody’s bedroom at the top of the house to look for a photo opportunity?  He has to be the worst kind of paparazzi who uses deception to secure entry and then hides in the ‘clouds’ like some US surveillance drone who then monitors the enemy below.  How much does it cost to hire a cherry picker these days – me thinks this is not the case as he always claims he has no money to eat let alone hire a cherry picker.  How on earth does he cover the cost of phone calls and new equipment?  Amazing what you can afford on benefits these days isn’t it.  

Questions, questions.  Something this local l...y dislikes intensely.

On the same day the pompous ass has the gall to claim that somebody, other than he, is guilty of “...malicious communications...” Now that is rich coming from him.  I suppose he is now a legal expert because he’s been getting away with the same thing for years.  Not to mention the other offences he has committed with impunity over the past ten years – and counting.

We are also treated to a history lesson of other instances in people’s pasts that he has mined from the Internet.  Wouldn’t it be a travesty if we found something in his past that he didn’t want airing in public?

Okay all you budding Arthur Scargill’s, let’s get digging.

Oh nearly forgot - Merry Christmas. Ho Ho Ho.


Saturday, 20 October 2012

From Malice to Malarkey

This is your ‘Rutland Roving Reporter’ back again with more salacious gossip from the ‘Streets And Suburbia.’ (Known in certain circles as ‘S.A.S.’).

At the risk of being perceived as a plagiarist I have to bring to your attention an article from our county’s most balanced publication, ‘The Rutland Times’ (18/10/12; page 3 – certain names have been withheld to protect the innocent) in which it mentions a disturbance at a recent meeting of Oakham Town Council’s Parks and Planning Committee.  The paper reports that an un-named person was removed by “officers” after refusing to leave the meeting.  This was due to the person’s strong objections to a decision being made at the meeting. The meeting had to be adjourned because of the apparent outrageous actions from the individual who gave the chairman no option but to ask for the intervention of the police and halt the proceedings.   

Now, you may think that that could be the prerogative of an individual in a democracy (freedom of speech and all that malarkey) but after further investigation it appears that this is not the first time certain ‘individuals’ have disrupted meetings at the Town Council and at that ‘other place’ down the road.  At a recent meeting at that ‘other place’ it seems that there were unwarranted interventions by individuals who thought that they were the only people who needed to be heard. Even as they held up badly written signs, (that looked as though they had been done by a two year old), they still persisted to show little or no respect for the rule of law and not an iota of respect for people elected to act on their behalf in local governance.  My apologies for the reference to two year olds, after all they could have done far better.  

Ignorance is the word that springs to mind and it would appear that their actions on that evening left three council members no alternative but to leave halfway through the meeting out of embarrassment and disgust at the antics and comments from the individuals concerned. Their names don’t appear to be on any minutes or any reference made as yet, except in anecdotal evidence, but I guess we know who they are. And we wouldn’t want to write anything we couldn’t support without proof, unlike false reports often blogged by he who shall not be named.

Could it be that the same people are committing these near felonious acts at strategic venues or is there a band of professional disruptors doing the rounds in Rutland at every opportunity?  This reporter has no evidence that there has been disruption at meetings in the villages around our county town, or even at meetings in that other town down the road, so we can only assume that they have difficulty with transport, funds for taxis or even no transport of their own that would enable them to travel the country at will.  Mind you it seems not to hinder one particular individual who pops up just about everywhere and even eats out at expensive notable ‘posh’ Tory backed restaurants south of Bedford.  They say the nachos and roast pork are particularly good but better with apple sauce – if you can get it before the waitress decides you look a bit too shifty and dishevelled to eat there. 

The problem of the kind of disruption mentioned above is becoming prolific from what our team of researchers has discovered with the culprits being identifiable for being of a dishevelled and unkempt appearance.  I would suggest that the organisers of the demonstrations around the country on Saturday 20th in protest against austerity measures in the UK be very aware of people described as ‘unkempt and dishevelled’ with one of them carrying a camera and the other a broom. It might be that they will attempt to hijack the demo and turn it into a farce.  They’re good at that. 

It could however be a problem solved if the suggestion from the letter’s page (18/10/12; p.8) of the Rutland Times is to be taken up by RCC.  The suggestion from the writer is to move the council offices from Catmose to Ashwell and sell the current offices as a “...swish hotel” by a “responsible private company.”  That would be a good idea because the disruptive element would have to travel at night (the broom would come in handy if it is a tandem) and without any visible means of support or transport they would be stuck in Oakham with only one target for their indignation and ill temper. 

Finally there is the a suggestion that the individual who is being disruptive has the talent for suggesting that anybody who does something for charity is fair game for his attention, in the most despicable way.  Let’s not forget of course that the only charitable action he has ever been involved in is when he bought himself a train ticket from London to Rutland some 9 years ago.  Apparently the main reason he is here is because that’s all he had left from the handout from a church in London who needed to pay him off before he administered his own brand of coup de grace based on bluff, elasticity of the truth and fear. What a shame he didn’t have a few more ‘quid’ in ‘compo’ then he could have gone all the way to that phallic heaven he admires so much – Hoy!

For the next instalment of 'SAS' tune in again soon to Laughing Stocks, I have a sneaking suspicion it might be sooner rather than later.

Tuesday, 9 October 2012

Train Your Underdog

It’s no use constantly complaining about your underdog, you just haven’t got him trained right!  

For only £71( which is just one week’s dole money!) let Barbara Woodhouse show you how to tame your errant beast by getting your underdog trained.  Includes answers to the following typical underdog problems:

My underdog just won’t stop whining!

My underdog shows no interest in the pussy next door, is there something wrong with him?

My underdog has bad breath!

My underdog keeps shitting on his own doorstep!

My underdog is always begging me for food!

My underdog is addicted to porn!
My underdog can't tell the difference between shopping and shoplifting!

My underdog disrupts public meetings!

Wednesday, 3 October 2012

The Betrayal of Helen Pender

In a hysterically funny piece, Rutland & Melton Parliamentary Candidate Helen Pender accuses her 'underdog' of biting her, calls him a 'hypocrite' and accuses him of cyberstalking and posting malicious comments against her.

"A series of destructive and dangerous posts have been left on web sites connected to Martin Brookes... Last night another dangerous and destructive posting was made on the web.  Martin Brookes pretending, I now believe, to be upset, sent me a text at 11.30 pm asking [me] to call him.  I walked up to Oakham police station [and] we went back to his computer and looked up the email we had sent earlier in the day.  It had been undeliverable and was not sent.  I wrote out the name of the email and password for Martin to access the email address we had sent the missive from.  I cannot now access that email address and suspect the password has been changed.  I did try to change the password but was unable to.

I am now beginning to wonder whether Martin Brookes has been complicit in this war of cyber stalking I have suffered, usually on his websites, since 2009.

I sent Martin Brookes the following email earlier today after he had rewritten history on his own blog.  Frankly the sense of betrayal one feels at his behaviour does hurt, but I intend to find out precisely who has been making such malicious and damaging posts in my name.  I hope Martin Brookes has betrayed me for the last time.

Accused by Helen of "cyberstalking" & "malicious postings"

Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 13:17:59
From: Helen Pender
Subject: Your malicious postings.
To: Martin Brookes

You Martin were with me when that email address was set up and have now changed the password to that email address so that I cannot even access it.  You were a party to an attempt to get the person we suspected of placing malicious postings on the internet in our name to stop and that was the point of that email.  If the person replied then you would be able to check the IP address and that is why you wanted to check that email address at your home last night. - or so you said.  What we saw was that the email was not delivered and came back as undeliverable, I can only assume that you resent it since then.  I now note that you have changed the email address of sxxxxxx@xxxxxxx and now suspect that it is you who has been posting these malicious comments.  Talk about a hypocrite - you were a party to the email sent yesterday, you checked it on your computer at home yesterday after you rang me at 11.30 in the evening when you claimed to be so upset.  I am now beginning to wonder whether it is you who has deliberately posted all the rubbish in my name.

I had never seen the comment I saw on your own website last night.  The only email I sent to you today was from this account and I have never used that account before or since.  I tried to get in today to change the password, just in case you intended to misuse that email address, for which I gave you the password and it seems you have changed the details so that I can no longer change the password.  So, in effect it is now your email address.


Pe[r]haps I should stop feeling sorry for people and stop trying to champion the underdog.  Why is it that those whom you try to help so often bite you?  By championing the underdog you seem to get viciously bitten and injured.  Lesson learnt perhaps."

"Viciously bitten"

Legal Disclaimer

Reposted entirely using materials put in the public domain by the author, so sod off!  Think before you post!

Sunday, 30 September 2012

The Ratland Rant


We are pleased to report there was a happy ending to this when the Bank Of Ireland kindly put her out of her misery and repossessed her house!  We hope she is very happy in her new home.  Wherever that is.

Legal Disclaimer

Reposted entirely using materials put in the public domain by the author, so sod off!  Think before you post!

Monday, 17 September 2012

Roving Report No 2

The OLS team received the following contribution:

Hello ‘Stocks,’ as promised from your last post we’ll keep them coming.  Round 2 of contributions from ‘The Rutland Roving Reporter’ who has come across even more misunderstandings by a local blogger:  
From ‘A Load of Bollards’ to a ‘Load of Bullocks.’  It seems our erstwhile Rutland self styled saviour has done it again.  Well, perhaps it was to be expected after all he has been somewhat quiet of late.  Probably because of the threat of further prosecution, which previously the CPS decided not to pursue on that occasion on the grounds that the evidence needed to be more accurate in its presentation.   Not guilty he maintained – well I’ll leave that your own judgement.
His recent attack on someone, and something, that he knows absolutely nothing about (driving and keeping quiet) has left the egg squarely, or rather ‘mushily,’ on his face yet again.  He has a well known propensity for miss-quoting the law by maintaining that it is wrong, on this occasion, to accept the punishment. It was of course within the law to do so.  If anyone should know what it is like to ‘not accept punishment or responsibility’ then surely it is he. Has he ever accepted either punishment or responsibility?
Yes, he criticised someone for actually admitting they’d done wrong and who took their punishment in a very brave way.  The person in question went to classes about road safety, (shock, horror they were caught speeding along with millions of others) and went back to basics to learn how to put it right.  Not having ever attended these classes I can only surmise that they are quite humiliating and as a punishment it is far better than trawling first time offenders through the courts and all the expense that that entails. 
I admit to being no expert but hey, a brave person if you ask me.  And to put it in the public domain like they did serves as a reminder to us all that it is so easy to transgress. But of course our ‘erstwhile’ local blogger has never transgressed. Or has he? Perhaps a little research into his past might prove fruitful. 
Another example of this blogger meddling into areas of no concern to him was the attempt to cover his tracks when he made an accusation regarding the attendance of a local photographer doing his job at a charity function recently.  A reliable source tells me that he attended the function having claimed no expenses or gratuities at all.  I believe that is charity isn’t it? Well done that man, you should hold your head up high and we’ll endeavour to get a medal struck you.
The blogger always makes a feeble attempt to ‘covers his tracks’ by saying it was somebody else’s fault that he got the ‘duff’ information he posts for all to see.  Not to mention the fact that he usually says it came from a ‘member of the public.’  How many people actually speak to him?  There can’t be that many otherwise he would have some support locally, which doesn’t seem to be the case.  Who would want to engage in conversation with him anyway!  (Bad breath I believe, even at a distance)
So, to finalise this latest short report on our local ..... let’s examine the truth shall we?
A person who, like millions of others, makes a mistake in life and pays for it by volunteering for some instruction into how they went wrong.  Admirable of them to do so, I think.  The person involved honestly exposes themselves to ridicule and condemnation from  somebody who doesn’t even drive or hold a license and won’t get a job to contribute to society and perhaps better themselves.  The blogger has no shame or remorse for his wrong doings because he is himself lacking in many areas.
He made up a story about a charity event that he thinks is something of shindig for spongers.  What he neglects to see is that they have the right to do this in our democratic society.  He tries to imply that St Georges Barracks is behind it and then has the audacity to say it wasn’t his fault he got it all wrong but some mythical being in the ether that is sending these messages to him by telepathy or better still by some message system that gets him to emergency incidents, fire, police or ambulance as they happen, no matter where in the county.  He must be telegraphic, or have somebody on the inside.  Mmmmmm.
That’s it for ‘Stocks’ I’ll be back soon when our transgressor transgresses again, which won’t be long I bet.