I think this web post is libellous.Amazingly, he then goes on to state on his own 'web log' (get with it John for goodness sake, it's 2009):
I agree with Ayoub Khan that the landrover was torched by Labour supporters in order to intimidate witnesses.
I personally believe that the car was torched by Labour supporters in an attempt to intimidate witnesses in the Election Court. To that extent I beleive (sic) that it succeeded. Neither Ayoub, nor myself have any evidence as to who torched the car, but we have a lot of experience of Birmingham Politicns (sic). To that extent we have a "reasonable suspicion", but no more than that.Again, I quote the Elections Commissioner: Mr Straker QC described this allegation as 'unpleasant and unsubstantiated.' And yet, John Hemming insists on making yet again. Note that he doesn't accuse anyone specifically (can't risk a libel case can we, John?) and note that by his own admission neither he nor Ayoub Khan have any evidence- perhaps the liberal concept of the rule of law as opposed to the rule of John Hemming's beliefs passed him by- grade F GCSE Politics.
There are now two questions. Why hasn't Nick 'do what's right' Clegg intervened? And why is John Hemming defending a man who has been described by an Elections Commissioner of making 'unpleasant', 'unsubstantiated', and 'sordid' accusations?
Post script: If you require a bit of background here is the coverage of this in the Guardian and Birmingham Post yesterday. I also posted on this further down the page.