The Suffolk Hyde Affair - Doc 139 Malcolm Hewitt Alcock

CDJ/FBU/F98/60224

Mr A Wigglesworth
10 Somerleyton Road
Lowestoft
NR32 4RD

By Post only

26th April, 1999

Dear Mr Wigglesworth,

DISCIPLINE CHARGES AGAINST MR MICHAEL HYDE

Thank you for your facsimile of today’s date and the associated documentation upon which you asked me to advise. I am not entirely sure what it is you wish me to advise on. I have seen your letter of 6th March but not the reply 10th March although I see that the charge sheet has been revised.

As I understand it, Mr Seager is saying that as he is concerned, the charge is adequately particularised. I think that the facts as set out in the Particulars of the Charge are probably accepted by Mr hyde and it is difficult for him to argue that he does not know the allegation that he faces. Mr Hyde has much better points in his favour than this procedural point about a lack of time being specified in the Particulars. The question is whether the orders given were lawful or reasonable in light of the County Council’s admissions and the terms of the grievance procedure etc.

By all means underline those procedural failings, but I would not suggest that you make any great issue about it. It is highly unlikely to help Mr Hyde and is likely to take up your time and cloud the issue in this case.
No doubt you have seen my letter to DCFO smith, a copy of which as sent to Mr Hyde.

Yours sincerely

Craig Jones
For THOMPSONS