Yuku free message boards

Dear Fred,

I welcome the statement you made but as a party not connected to this issue at all, like almost everyone else here, I do have one or two questions to ask concerning your statement seeing as Graham, and now yourself via your statement made, chose to bring this into open debate?

You stated Fred:

“The verbal and physical exchanges involving Dave Wightman and Graham Elliott that followed the AGM in April were considered in detail by the Committee at the scheduled Committee Meeting on Wed 10 May 2006. Dave Wightman and Graham Elliott were given the same opportunity to present their case. Dave did so in person and produced two statements supporting his account of events. Graham had a pre-arranged holiday and agreed with me in advance of the meeting that he was happy to have his account submitted in writing. Two statements supporting his account of events were also presented to the meeting.”

Firstly I would like to ask what item in the constitution, or rules of the club, covers the apparent offence that was committed apparently “following” the AGM in April?

From my understanding of club committee procedure it is normal practise, if leave is granted for accused parties deemed to have broken club rules to present their cases in person, that “all accused” be given equal opportunity to do this. In the case involving Mr Elliott and Mr Wightman, Mr Elliott was unable to do this due to a pre-arranged holiday. Did the committee “not” consider it proper procedure to adjourn any such disciplinary hearing until “both” parties were able to do this in person? And in the case of Mr Elliott, was he advised by the chairman of any club disciplinary committee of his rights and that it “might” jeopardise his case if he elected to have his case submitted in writing and “NOT” heard in person as it appears Mr Wightman’s case was?

What exactly does it say in either the club constitution or rules of the club concerning “appeals”? From my understanding of correct committee procedure the rules, not just yours, is very clear about the procedure concerning appeals. So when you said;

“As a result of approaches from several Committee members and other members through June, the issue of the penalties imposed on Graham Elliott and Dave Wightman was added to the agenda for the most recent Committee Meeting, which took place on Wed 19 July. After a vigorous and at times heated debate, a vote was taken and the proposal to review the penalties was defeated. It was therefore not possible to allow Graham Elliott to present his appeal in person, which was his intention.”

Again from my understanding of committee procedure, if an “appeal” against disciplinary action taken previously by a committee or disciplinary committee made up from members within that committee, that “appeal” should be heard separately outside a normal committee meetings agenda. An “appeal” is just that, an appeal. So making decisions in committee prior to the presentation of an appeal where original punishments meated out are simply ratified is a nonsense surely? All membership committees “should” have an appeals system in place whereby members have a right of appeal if disciplinary action is taken against them thus depriving them of their rights. Does the club “have” an appeals system in place? Because if it does, and it should in my opinion, do Mr Elliott and Mr Wightman know that they are entitled to have council present at any appeal heard to represent them?

Regards,

Lee.