Dydd Llun 1af Tachwedd Pintxos a Gwleidyddiaeth

Cynhelir y digwyddiad Pintxos a Gwleidyddiaeth nesaf ar nos Lun 1 Tachwedd yn One69 Bar & Kitchen, Treganna. Bydd Sally Anne Burris yn rhoi cyflwyniad ar faterion cydraddoldeb yng Nghymru ac yn benodol y rhywiaeth a welwn o fewn rhengoedd Llywodraeth Cymru.

Mae Sally yn ymgyrchydd enwog sy’n defnyddio’r arf allweddol o ddata i gefnogi ei safbwyntiau.

Gwrthod Erlyniad Gwleidyddol

Mae’n bosib ichi glywed bod yr helfa wrachod barhaus ohonof wedi methu eto. Efallai y bydd yn syndod ichi ddarganfod mai’r wythnos diwethaf oedd yr ail dro i achos a ddygwyd gan Heddlu De Cymru gael ei daflu allan. Yr achlysur olaf oedd yn 2011, pan gyfaddefodd heddwas o Dde Cymru o dan lw i “fireinio tystiolaeth.” Rhwng 2016 a 2020, roeddwn hefyd yn destun 3 ymchwiliad troseddol, gyda 2 ohonynt yn gwbl ddi-sail ac yn fy nghanfod yn ddieuog. Yn y 3ydd achos, tynnwyd y gŵyn yn ôl ar ôl i sawl pennawd ymddangos gan y BBC, sef holl fwriad y gŵyn wrth gwrs.

Y llysoedd yw ein hamddiffyniad olaf yn awr, gan fod y system wleidyddol wedi ei chyfaddawdu’n llwyr, yn fy marn i.

Yn y llys ar 21 Hydref, diwygiodd yr erlyniad eu cyhuddiad yn ystod y gwrandawiad. Roeddent wedi dwyn y cyhuddiad anghywir yn fy erbyn, heb unrhyw dystiolaeth o gwbl i’w gefnogi. Dim ond datganiad gan un heddwas yn y llys oedd yn cefnogi’r cyhuddiad newydd. Ni fu achwynydd cyhoeddus. Dim ond y diwrnod cyn yr achos yr anfonwyd datganiadau gan swyddogion heddlu eraill ataf. Methodd Gwasanaeth Erlyn y Goron â datgelu’r holl dystiolaeth yr oeddent am eu defnyddio. Cwynodd un aelod o’r cyhoedd amdanaf yn cerdded ar y stryd wythnosau cyn y drosedd honedig ac nid oedd hyn yn gysylltiedig â’r cyhuddiad. Yn eironig, roedden nhw wedi bod ar y stryd honno hefyd, ond roedd hynny’n iawn! Ar y diwrnod, nid oedd unrhyw dystion ar gael i ymddangos yn y llys ac felly gwrthodwyd yr achos.

Cynrychiolais fy hun yn y llys, oherwydd roeddwn i’n gwybod bod yr erlyniad yn ffwlbri llwyr. Nid oeddwn am wastraffu arian ar gyfreithiwr y gallwn ei ddefnyddio mewn ffyrdd eraill.

Wrth imi adael y llys, fe wnaeth y barnwr fy ngwahodd i aros a gwrando ar yr hyn oedd ganddo i’w ddweud wrth yr erlyniad. Arhosais i wrando a disgrifiwyd yr ymgais i fy erlyn yn warthus, heb fawr o siawns o unrhyw lwyddiant. Dehonglais hyn fel y Barnwr Harmes yn dweud na ddylid bod wedi dwyn yr erlyniad yn y lle cyntaf, ac yn sicr nid yn y modd y gwnaethpwyd hynny.

Nid oedd yr hyn a ddigwyddodd yn y llys yn wleidyddol o gwbl. Roedd y llys troseddol yn chwa o awyr iach ar ôl fy mhrofiad gyda phwyllgorau amheus yn y Senedd a Chyngor Caerdydd. Defnyddiodd y barnwr y broses briodol a’r gyfraith. Mae’n amlwg i mi fod Heddlu De Cymru ynghyd â Gwasanaeth Erlyn y Goron, wedi ymddwyn yn wleidyddol, ac mae hynny’n destun pryder mawr.

Dyma’r dolenni ar gyfer y gwleidyddion hynny na chawsant eu herlyn yn ystod y Cyfnod Clo:

Derbyniais sawl neges o gefnogaeth gan y cyhoedd ac aelodau Propel. Rydw i a Ceri yn gwerthfawrogi pob un ohonynt. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Gweler isod fy natganiad amddiffyn a gyflwynais i’r llys.

Dymuniadau gorau,

Neil

Defence Statement of Neil John McEvoy

Date of Trial: 21.10.2021

Case number: 622100259919

URN: 62EN026852

Cardiff Magistrates Court

I Neil John McEvoy of 210 St Fagans Road, Fairwater, Cardiff, CF53EW will say as follows:

1. The charge before the court in Exhibit 1 initiated by the Chief Constable of the South Wales Police dated 8^th September 2021 differs from the original fixed penalty notice in Exhibit 2, issued the day of the count for the Welsh Parliamentary Elections on 7^th May 2021, though the ACRO reference number is the same. I would like it which charge I am answering please.
2. No evidence has been provided to me to support the allegation relating to Heol Carnau on 15.02.2021 .I have not been provided with any witness statement. There is no allegation to which I can respond.
3. No statement has been provided to me alleging that I was in the Sanctuary on 15.02.2021. I cannot respond to that allegation, if indeed that is the allegation, which is not before the court on 21.10.21 to my knowledge.
4. I have not been provided with any evidence of the material which it is alleged I circulated. I would like to see the material it is alleged I circulated so I can respond to it. I was delivering information leaflets at the time as part my role as a Member of the Senedd, not election leaflets. The Election period had not then come into effect.
5. I requested disclosure of documentation with my plea, but I have been not been sent what I requested. As a result, I have not been able to take legal advice on the evidence used to summons me to court on 21.10.21. I do wish to take such advice, when provided with the said material.
6. As Russia Today reported (see Exhibit 3: screen grab of broadcast with the police tweet ), during the same weekend of Friday 12^th February 2021 to Sunday 14^th February the South Wales Police were distributing leaflets door to door in the South Wales Region. This was verified on Twitter, as reported. I submit the Russia Today link to evidence the Chief Constable’s own staff undertaking the same activity for which he wishes to prosecute me. The link to the news broadcast is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vy0fUWiIaw
7. At the time of the alleged offence I was a member of the Welsh Parliament. I will rely upon executing my public duties as a public servant as a reasonable excuse to leave my home at the time. I rely upon the same parts of legislation relied upon by the South Wales Police in correspondence to me outlined in the YouTube video of the police visiting my office https://www.itv.com/news/wales/2020-05-13/first-minister-defends-vaughan-gething-over-chip-row , namely Alert Level 4, the Health Protection Corona Virus Restrictions 5 Wales Regulations, 2020, paragraph 1 of schedule 4; paragraph 1(2)a. Relying upon private companies, or the postal system would not have been operationally effective, or reasonable practical alternative. The South Wales Police used the above clause to justify officers delivering crime prevention leaflets by hand. It is therefore ridiculous for them to seek to criminally prosecute a politician carrying out the same physical activity with gloves and socially distanced. All leaflets which went out were also sterile. The police visiting my office can be viewed here: https://youtu.be/B0SUZvWBmZY
8. I took the pandemic very seriously and was the first politician to close a political office in Wales. I took pro-active steps to protect my staff and the public, before any official decision to do so. I also stopped distribution of my 2020 Senedd report in March 2020. I was the first politician in Wales to press on the record for widespread testing, which at the time we were told we did not need. I acted responsibly throughout.
9. During December, January and February, other politicians were leaving there homes for various activities.
10. Rhiannon Passmore was found to have travelled 80 miles to England to stay with her lover, as was reported in the Daily Mail. The link is here : https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9277869/Welsh-Labour-politician-defends-taking-Zoom-meeting-lovers-1m-home-ENGLAND.htm and the hard copy is in Exhibit 4. Ms Passmore, a Labour MS was not prosecuted.
11. The Welsh Minister Lee Water was also caught out travelling between his two homes during lockdown (see Exhibit 5) . The link of the report is here: https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/member-senedd-lee-waters-lockdown-19787193 Lee Waters, the Labour MS was not prosecuted.
12. Three politicians in December 2020 took part in a booze up in the Senedd, contrary to the regulations in force at the time. See link: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-55720106  (see Exhibit 6). Alun Davies the Labour MS was not prosecuted. Neither were the Conservative MSs Darran Miller or  Paul Davies. I am happy to say the staff member serving the drinks was ultimately not prosecuted either, though it was on the cards for far too long that she alone was to be prosecuted.
13. In May 2020 the Labour Health Minister sat for a prolonged period eating chips with his family in the neighbouring county to where he lives. The regulations at the time did not allow this, but were changed some days later. The link is available here: https://www.itv.com/news/wales/2020-05-13/first-minister-defends-vaughan-gething-over-chip-row (see Exhibit 7)
14. The First Minister Mark Drakeford could also be seen out on occasions without being socially distanced. His reasonable excuse for leaning home was to do his job. That is what I did in lockdown: my job as an elected representative.
15. I feel that the complaint made about me was politically motivation. The police have not provided the name of the complainant, so confirming that is more difficult at the moment. I ask that as is my right, I know who has accused me of breaching the law. I request to see the statement given by that person in relation to me.
16. I further feel that the prosecution by the Chief Constable and Regulatory Services is politically motivated. The authorities are seeking to apply the law selectively and differently in my case to that of other is being applied differently to me. This contrary to my human rights, as defined in the ECHR
17. I ask for a directions hearing on the 21.10.21. I wish to call the Chief Constable as a witness and the Head of Regulatory Services in order to discuss the differentiation in how they applied lockdown rules.
18. I ask for full disclosure of all documentation relating to my prosecution from the South Wales Police and Regulatory Services.
19. I ask for full disclosure of all documentation from the South Wales Police and Regulatory Services relating to the non-prosecution of Vaughan Gething MS, Alun Davies MS, Paul Davies MS, Darran Millar MS, Lee Waters MS and Rhiannon Passmore MS.
20. I am alleging a misapplication if the law, an abuse of process and an unfair trial.
21. Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights gives me the right to know in detail the nature and cause of the accusation against me. Twenty hours before a court appearance and I am still not aware of the detail of offence for which I am before the court and I do not know who is my accuser.
22. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.’

Signed: Neil McEvoy