Hanton, Jonathan
to me
Mon, 28 Aug, 14:01 (17 hours ago)
OFFICIAL
Good afternoon Glen
Apologies for the delay.
At the meeting of CASA’s Board last week, my recommendation that your complaint be investigated despite you being aware of the subject matter for more than 12 months before you raised the issue with the ICC was accepted. The Board also agreed that given you have raised concerns about my conduct that any review be undertaken by an external investigator.
In terms of the information that will be provided to that external investigator, I will be providing the two written accounts of the CASA staff referenced in your email of 29 July 2023 and this description of your complaint:
FOI 1 states that Mr Buckley “went to push FOI 2 with an open hand” however was warned by FOI 1, and “backed off. This statement by CASA FOI 1 clearly indicates that no contact was made, and therefore FOI 2 was not “shoved” as FOI 1 claims.
FOI 2 claims that Mr Buckley in fact “approached me, and shoved me in the chest”
It is this statement by FOI 2 that I am claiming is false and misleading.
In support of my allegation that FOI Two has made a false and misleading statement (because):.
· FOI One's observations are different from FOI Two's observations, with FOI 2 claiming that I advanced toward him and shoved him, although FOI 1s statement contradicts that.
· No statement was ever made regarding stalking or assault to Police that attended in response to a complaint of possible “trespassing” by me being in the foyer of the CASA building. That was the complaint made to the police, no allegations of stalking or assault were ever made.
· The alleged incident happened directly under a security camera, and my understanding is that CASA accessed that footage, and no evidence of physical assault was on that recording.
· CASA FOI Two was encouraged to document the assault with police by his Employer, and he did not follow that guidance.
The external investigator will be engaged to establish whether on the balance of probabilities the account provided was false and misleading as you have alleged. To ensure any review is undertaken at arm’s length from the ICC, I do not propose providing the engaged investigator any further information or comment than that set out above and I will not be involved in any further enquiries they may elect to make.
Thanks
Jonathan