16th March 2016
“Social commentator” Mo Ansar is in the news again.
In particular, there is an article in the current issue of Private Eye about a complaint he was seeking to make to Twitter about journalists who have displeased him.
(For background to Ansar, see this dossier by Jeremy Duns, which details Ansar’s threats made against journalists and bloggers, including me. You should certainly read this dossier if you have come across this post with no idea who Ansar is.)
On social media, Ansar has long made a great deal of his legal experiences, and he often refers to his exploits in courts. In this respect, I exposed his claims as to being a “lawyer” in May 2014.
In light of the recent news, however, Ansar’s record in court is worth looking at carefully, especially something which hitherto has been buried away.
The something is in the appeal judgment of 14 July 2006 here.
Two paragraphs in this judgment bear close reading, paragraphs 12.5 and 14. These paragraphs in turn quote an original Employment Tribunal decision of 12 April 2005.
The interesting part of paragraph 12.5 reads:
“…in evidence to the Tribunal [Ansar] confirmed … that he had lied in his letter for the purposes of suitably influencing Mr Dowrick to stop the cases being unwound”.
And in paragraph 14:
“…his dishonest letter seeking help from Mr Dowrick in relation to the HIF sales”.
These two passages mean:
a. Ansar has “confirmed” (or admitted) he is a liar;
b. Ansar’s confirmation (admission) of dishonesty was contained in evidence placed by him before a tribunal in formal legal proceedings; and
c. the legal tribunal (in accepting this evidence) found that Ansar was a liar.
I have asked Ansar about these passages, but have not yet had a response.