Citizen Journalism site The Real Whitby exposes corruption and paedophilia

“Bye Bye, Jane”

• – a compelling report, by TIM HICKS FCA, explaining the long and convoluted saga of Belvedere Computers Inc., a suspended US corporation headed by Councillor Jane KENYON-MILLER and her (now) husband Councillor ‘Bill’ MILLER (along with Councillor ‘Bill’ MILLER’s son, Andrew MILLER) – a story first covered by Real Whitby in June 2012 (here).

The Belvedere Computers Inc cover up.

Following on from the recent admission – after a long, determined and despicable cover-up by Scarborough Borough Council and North Yorkshire Police – that Peter Jaconelli was a paedophile, regular readers of Real Whitby will be aware that we have consistently raised the issue of Councillor Jane Kenyon-Miller’s position as Chief Financial Officer and  Agent for Service of Process for Belvedere Computers Inc, which is  a company registered in California in 1980 no C0999400.

As part of my investigation I had previously asked North Yorkshire County Council Monitoring Officer Ms Carole Dunn why County Councillor Kenyon-Miller had not registered her interest in Belvedere Computers Inc.  The response of County Councillor Kenyon was to evade her responsibilities by lying to the Monitoring Officer, who responded to my enquiry in the following terms:

“she (County Councillor Kenyon) has had no connection with Belvedere Computers Inc since November 1980 which predates her membership of the County Council. The issue of registering an interest simply would not therefore arise.”

On the 8th of June 2012, I ran an article on Real Whitby in which I stated that:

“Conservative County Councillor Miss Kenyon, who is Chairman of the North Yorkshire Police Authority, has been routinely deceiving her electorate by withholding information about her business interests, to conceal the fact that she is an Officer of Belvedere Computers Inc., a bankrupt company in the United States”.

I was not expecting  a response from Councillor Kenyon to the article I ran on the 8th June, but it is clear from Councillor Kenyon-Miller’s reaction that I had certainly hit a nerve. Her response was to abuse her position and influence as Chair of the North Yorkshire Police Authority to try and have me arrested for harassment, using the services of a group of corrupt police officers from North Yorkshire Police:

• On the 22nd of June 2012 I received a letter by e mail from Detective Superintendent Heather Pearson in which she stated that she had evidence that I had committed a criminal offence and that I should report within one month to a police station in North Yorkshire to be arrested otherwise a warrant would be issued.

• Although there was no evidence of any offence, this threat to arrest me was cleared by the North Yorkshire Police Force Intelligence Bureau, which deals with international crimes (such as international tax fraud) other UK police forces, MI5, MI6, GCHQ, Army, Naval and Air Intelligence and other foreign police forces via Interpol.  It should never have approved this operation to arrest a journalist at the request of a person known to be involved in illegality, but nevertheless did so.

• When I duly reported to Fulford Road Police Station, York in July 2012 I was not arrested, I was interviewed under caution by two of the top detectives in North Yorkshire Police; Detective Constable Ian Murray (Retired) and Detective Constable Steve Traylor (Retired).  Both veteran detectives with thirty years’ experience each. During the interview, no evidence of any offence emerged. Mr Murray referred to Councillor Kenyon-Miller familiarly as “Jane Kenyon”, not County Councillor Kenyon or Miss Kenyon I was questioned about the article I had written making the allegations about Belvedere Computers Inc and accused of having “damaged North Yorkshire Police”. At the end of the Interview Mr Murray stated to me that a file would be sent to the CPS.

• Subsequently, in October 2013, no less a person than the Deputy Chief Constable Tim Madgwick wrote to me stating that the file had been sent to the CPS again, which was taking advice from specialist Counsel on my case.

Needless to say, despite the deployment of a full squad of detectives, CPS lawyers, Interpol and specialist counsel, no prosecution ensued, because unfortunately for Councillor Kenyon and North Yorkshire Police, exposing misconduct and crime in the press is not a criminal offence, no matter how hard you try to construe it as one.

So why did Councillor Kenyon-Miller and North Yorkshire Police respond so rapidly and aggressively over this article on Belvedere Computers Inc? To answer that case we need to take a quick digression to consider the United States tax system:

The British and American systems for dealing with defunct companies

In the British system, if a company stops submitting accounts and making annual returns, the company is fined and if the fines are not paid, enforcement proceedings will be started to recover the outstanding fines.

If it remains unpaid, legal action may be taken which could result in a County Court judgement.

Eventually, if the registrar has not received documents from a company that should have been sent to him (e.g. annual returns and accounts, mail that the registrar has sent to a company’s registered office is returned undelivered, or the Directors cannot be traced), the company will be struck off by the Registrar of Companies on the basis that it is neither carrying on business nor in operation.

Once the company is struck off, effectively the debts owed to trade creditors, HMRC fines and fees owed to the Registrar lapse – and the Directors are free to set up another company and carry on as before.

However, the American system is very different to the British system and remarkably better.

Companies in California must have three officers and have to pay a minimum tax charge, annual return fees etc. each year.  Currently, the minimum tax charge is $800 per year. Companies that do not make their annual returns, pay their tax, submit their accounts, respond to correspondence etc. aresuspended – not struck off, as in the British system. This means that the company cannot trade or do business, thereby protecting the public from companies that are trading fraudulently. However, the fees and taxes continue to accrue to the debt of the company each year, until such time as the officers of the Company apply for the Company to be released from suspension and put back into good standing.

To be put back into good standing, the outstanding fees, taxes, fines enforcement fees, penalties etc. must be paid, and the company will be returned to good standing and allowed to trade – or, alternatively, the company can be struck off provided that the debts are paid.  In cases where this does not happen, enforcement proceedings can be issued including issuing warrants.

The strengths of the Californian system over the British system are:

• As soon as the company is suspended, it prevents individuals from trading fraudulently with a company until the debts make it bankrupt and then moving on to set up another once the previous company has been struck off – thereby protecting the public from serial fraudulent trading (known in the UK as “Long Firm Fraud”, in which companies are set up, run into bankruptcy, the assets liquidated and siphoned out of the company – leaving the creditors high and dry – and then a fresh company is set up to start all over again).

• A permanent history of the trading activities of the officers of the suspended company is maintained, so that there is always the possibility of recovering the debt and the history can be used as evidence in criminal prosecutions.

• It makes it easier for the full outstanding amounts to be recovered in time, rather than in the British system, where they disappear immediately the company is struck off.

• The costs of the investigation, interest and enforcement fees can also be charged to the tax evaders in criminal cases. Whilst this does increase the size of the debt owed, it also finances the recovery operations.

These recent cases can give an idea of the potential costs and criminal penalties that can be applied in the United States:

• https://www.ftb.ca.gov/professionals/taxnews/2009/October/Article_10.shtml
• https://www.ftb.ca.gov/professionals/taxnews/0506/0506_10.shtml
• https://www.ftb.ca.gov/professionals/taxnews/2008/0408/0408_9.shtml

Returning to Belvedere Computers inc.

According to information obtained from the US authorities under the Revenue and Taxation Code 19543 and the Public Records Act Government Code Section 6250 et seq., Belvedere Computers Inc was suspended for non-payment of taxes. Miss Jane Margaret Kenyon, Mr Thomas William Miller and Mr Andrew George William Miller (Thomas William Miller’s son) all remain officers of the company and remain responsible for its operation and service of process at the address they last gave in the United States, which was 851 Hinckley Road, Burlingame, California, although they no longer live there.

Councillor Kenyon-Miller is aware that she is registered as CFO (Chief Financial Officer) at a false address; she has made no attempt to notify the US authorities of her current address, indicating that she is unlawfully evading her responsibilities as CFO to prevent any possibility of service of process. The company has no assets so far as I can ascertain, has also not made its annual returns, submitted accounts or paid its return fees etc. etc…

Councillor Jane Kenyon and Councillor Thomas William Miller are now married and use the name Kenyon-Miller.

In order to rectify this situation and bring the company back to good standing, all the officers have to do is submit all of the outstanding tax returns, annual accounts and annual returns, pay off the amount of $93,720the Californian authorities have estimated Belvedere Computers Inc owes, and all of the fines, penalties, associated interest and the costs of the investigation. Now (ignoring the possibility of criminal prosecution under state and federal law) I cannot estimate how much these would be, but it would seem to me that it would certainly push the costs well into six figures, particularly if you take into account the legal and accounting fees to agree the liability and submit the annual returns and accounts.

I wonder if the possibility of an internet search by the US Authorities (revealing their connection to Belvedere Computers Inc and an address for service) is the reason why they do not mention their positions with Belvedere Computers Inc in their Registers of Interests, or why for many years Councillor Kenyon-Miller refused to openly declare her Interests or notify the US authorities of her correct address?  Surely not.

It is an additional cause of grave concern to me that one of the officers of Belvedere Computers Inc is Mr Andrew George William Miller; Councillor Bill Miller’s son (Jane Kenyon-Miller’s stepson) who was born on the 17th of July 1964. This means that he was a minor when he became an officer of the company – and remained a minor in November 1980 on the date Councillor Kenyon-Miller states she stopped having anything to do with Belvedere Computers Inc. It seems unjust and somewhat shameful to me that he is now registered as an officer of a bankrupt company in the US, potentially owing hundreds of thousands of dollars to the US Government, which could leave him liable to legal action over something he could not have understood the implications of as a sixteen-year-old boy, and had no control over.

The public interest:  “Let justice be done even though the heavens fall”. 

The reasons Real Whitby has continually raised this issue in the public interest is because:

1. It is morally wrong and completely unacceptable for Scarborough Borough Council’s Portfolio Holder for Finance, Procurement & Legal Services, who has responsibility for collecting local authority taxes and summonsing people to court for non-payment on behalf of Scarborough Borough Council, should be a person who herself owes many thousands of pounds in unpaid local government taxes to another authority and is illegally evading service of process.
2. It is unacceptable to initiate a cover up when faced with overwhelming evidence of misconduct and crime by a Councillor. Real Whitby has continually raised this issue and as with Jimmy Savile and Peter Jaconellithere has been another cover up in which:

• An attempt was made to close down Real Whitby by the Scarborough Borough Council Legal Department – for which Councillor Kenyon-Miller is the Portfolio Holder.

• Journalists have been intimidated with threats of arrest by corrupt police officers, falsely accused of lying and committing criminal offences by the Scarborough Borough Council Legal Department.

• Journalists have been threatened with civil prosecution based on allegations that Scarborough Borough Council Legal Department and Councillor Kenyon-Miller’s solicitor were unable to substantiate.

• Complaints about Councillor Kenyon-Miller have been ignored or stonewalled by using procedural excuses, to prevent the complaint being investigated by Councillor Kenyon-Miller and the Scarborough Borough Council Legal Department.

Even now, the Chief Constable and the Police & Crime Commissioner are refusing to condemn the threats to arrest a Real Whitby journalist for commenting on and expressing opinions about North Yorkshire Police Operations and Business, because we have justifiably criticised North Yorkshire Police over its handling of the Jimmy Savile, Peter Jaconelli and Councillor Kenyon-Miller scandals.  No less a person than the Police & Crime Commissioner for North Yorkshire recently took the opportunity of publicly describing the correspondence on some of these issues she has received from Real Whitby as “disgraceful” indicating perhaps where her sympathies lie.3. It is unacceptable – and a threat to our civil liberties – for the British Police Service to become politicized, or abuse police powers of arrest to prevent legitimate press comment critical of the police. North Yorkshire Police tried to prosecute me at the request of the Chair of the Police Authority without any evidence of an offence, whilst simultaneously knowing about her part in Belvedere Computers Inc. Obviously this was deeply embarrassing to North Yorkshire Police.  However, it should nevertheless have enforced the law without fear or favour. Instead, Councillor Kenyon-Miller’s conduct was ignored and she was given special treatment to protect her from legitimate public comment on a matter of overwhelming public interest, because – like Jaconelli – she is a senior Councillor and was also at that time the Chair of the Police Authority. That was a corrupt act and an abuse of police powers for political purposes, to conceal a tax fraud on the United States Government.

4. It is morally wrong and a misuse of police funding for police and public resources to be used for the personal benefit of the Chair of the Police Authority. Under normal circumstance, an arrest operation would never have been mounted because there is no evidence of any offence or of any justification of any police action of any sort. Even if there was evidence of an offence (which there was not), it would normally have been treated as a minor issue requiring an investigation by a Uniform Branch Constable handled initially by giving advice or issuing a harassment warning notice. However, this case involved the Chair of the Police Authority, so a specialist team consisting of the Deputy Chief Constable, Detective Superintendent Heather Pearson (one of the top detectives on the force), two of the most experienced detectives in North Yorkshire Police CID and the force solicitor was deployed, because I have properly and accurately raised valid concerns about crime and misconduct by the Chair of the Police Auithority. The CID team delegated to investigate me is about the same size as that which would be deployed to investigate an armed robbery. What was the cost of that? How much did the opinion of specialist Counsel cost the taxpayer? What is the Deputy Chief Constable, the force solicitor, a Detective Superintendent and a team of CID officers doing investigating a minor harassment complaint? Don’t they have any real work to do? What a waste of police and CPS time and resources – for Councillor Kenyon-Miller’s personal benefit.

5. Councillors and Police Officers should be accountable. Yet we have never had a response to the allegations of double-dipping by Councillor Kenyon over her telephone expenses from the Police Authority, or North Yorkshire County Council. Nor have we had any response to the allegations concerning Belvedere Computers Inc. Similarly, the Chief Constable currently is refusing to release the transcript of the interview under caution or Councillor Kenyon’s witness statement, thereby preventing them from being given in evidence against her or the Police Officers concerned.

6.By not declaring Belvedere Computers Inc in her Register of Interests, Councillor Kenyon is involving Scarborough Borough Council in a deception to evade service of process and bringing disrepute on the Council and people of Scarborough.

We are none of us above the law. Real Whitby will continue to investigate misconduct by public officials, without regard to their political beliefs or any further acts of intimidation.