Eileen Schofield's miraculous premonition

When the Employment Tribunal hearing was suspended on 14 June 2011, I was cross examining Karen Stark about the document Stirling University fraudulently sent to the ET. My previous post describes the story that Karen invented to deny that it was created fraudulently in an attempt to fool the tribunal into thinking that my allegations against Kathy McCabe were investigated, and that Eileen Schofield's decision not to uphold my grievance was based on evidence, and not simply a response to me whistleblowing to the Principal, Christine Hallett.

The story she gave under oath makes no sense, and she will have to face some very difficult questions when the hearing resumes.

The fraudulent document also states how each allegation was investigated. For this particular allegation, it states that Eileen Schofield referred to a former colleague's email that he sent in response to a question he was asked by Karen Stark about an entirely different matter that had nothing to do with any allegations. So why on earth would she refer to an email that doesn't contain any reference to the allegation? He wasn't asked anything about this allegation when Karen contacted him for the investigation. It's almost as though Mrs Schofield had a miraculous premonition that he would contact the university three weeks later with new evidence about this allegation.

Karen told the tribunal that Schofield did not review her decision for this allegation when they received the new information. Karen said that she just mistakenly typed the wrong decision, and that she also mistakenly typed the wrong facts on which the decision was based. Already that is impossible. But will she dare to tell the tribunal that she also mistakenly typed that they referred to that email; an email that had no bearing on the allegation, but which came from the person whose information she mistakenly typed, and which altered the decision that she mistakenly typed? Surely not! And then there's something else she'll have to explain which I'll keep to myself for the moment.

She has already had to admit to the tribunal that a whole bunch of my allegations were simply not investigated. It will soon become clear that none of them were investigated.

Interestingly, Karen Stark is taking full responsibility for this document, saying that Schofield took no part in its creation. They must have agreed that if anyone has to go to jail for perverting the course of justice, Karen is to be the sacrificial lamb.

Stirling University should have considered the consequences of committing fraud more seriously before creating that document. They are making complete fools of themselves.