London Banter - View Single Post

[email protected] · February 12th 09, 11:50 PM posted to uk.transport.london

In article , (Andrew
Heenan) wrote:

"Ian Jelf" wrote :
What's the point of apologising only after being ordered to do so? I
would consider such an apology to be insincere if I received one.
Indeed but what else is there to do or where else is there to go
with this matter?

He should have been charged with the offence he committed.
If he wasn't a councillor, he almost certainly would have been.

If I was the ambulance man, I'd demand the union took out a private
prosecution. Once these eejits are allowed to get away with it,
they start to think 'councillor' means 'I own this town' - not the
theoretical 'I serve this town'

I suggest you read the Standards Board report of the case, especially the
Ethical Standards Officers' conclusions. You will see that it was accepted
that I did not realise that the ambulance was on an emergency call when I
stopped it.

Many of the more lurid and not necessarily accurate descriptions of my
actions related to the period after the patient had been successfully
treated when the ambulance was definitely not on an emergency call and was
on its way off the green. The most ridiculous claim was that I locked the
gate in front of the ambulance. I never did any such thing.

--
Colin Rosenstiel