Dominic Cummings has been questioned by a former top prosecutor to give evidence about his movements through the coronavirus lockdown, as in May the Prime Minister’s chief aide drove from London to Durham despite having COVID 19 symptoms.
And it was said that Dominic Cummings might have broken lockdown rules, following the revelations of his journey, and a separate 60 mile round trip to a local beauty spot, but Dominic Cummings explained the excursions by stating that he and his wife Mary were self-isolating at his family’s farm in Co Durham because they were worried about childcare for their four-year-old son.
Dominic Cummings then claimed a trip to Barnard Castle was to test his eyesight. However, eyewitnesses maintain they saw him in Houghall Woods in Co Durham on the morning of Sunday, April 19, but Dominic Cummings maintained he was in London that day.
However, former Chief Prosecutor Nazir Afzal’s legal team have written to Dominic Cummings and his wife, Mary, asking for data about their movements on key dates in March and April.
Nazir Afzal stated that all they’re asking, on behalf of the law-abiding public, is that Dominic Cummings, who’s continually talked about the importance of data, provides the data that will evidence his whereabouts and confirm he was telling the whole truth.
He further stated that they’d written to his wife Mary because she had yet to give an account of her whereabouts, which has become increasingly relevant as witnesses give their accounts, and that the public deserved the truth and nothing else.
Mike Schwarz, an associate at Hodge, Jones and Allen solicitors, said in a letter to Dominic Cummings, that their letter was provoked by testimony from additional witnesses, that put him in Durham on the morning of 19 April 2020, and indicated that he had returned there a second time.
And that appears to be inconsistent with his statement that he gave in the Downing Street Rose Garden on 25 May 2020, when he announced that in the last few days, there had been numerous media reports that he had returned to Durham after 13 April and that all those narratives were incorrect.
Dominic Cummings further referred to a particular report that he returned there on 19 April, and that data on his phone could confirm that this was untrue and that local CCTV footage if it existed, would further confirm that he was telling the truth and that he was in London on that day, and that he wasn’t in Durham.
The letter that Dominic Cummings got asks him to make available particular data in his possession at the time, and available from independent recording devices, capable of establishing his story.
The legal team also want location history data from all mobile phones used on particular dates and location history data from vehicles the couple travelled in.
The letter says that as an accomplished prosecutor, Mr Afzal is very mindful of the national security, privacy and other matters that might relate to specific data and information saved on Dominic Cummings mobile phone or other devices.
And that the request have been thoroughly limited to location data for the dates and times at which Dominic Cummings was acting in a personal rather than professional capacity, and in relation to which he and his wife Mary have previously expressed their readiness to disclose vital details to the public.
They did not ask for Dominic Cummings to provide or approve the disclosure of any data or information that was not immediately related to his whereabouts – Downing Street refused to comment.
Durham Constabulary made it clear that they would not be taking any further action against Dominic Cummings and that by placing himself at his father’s premises he did not breach the regulations.
And the Prime Minister said that he believed that Dominic Cummings acted reasonably and that he considered the subject closed, and Dominic Cummings stated that he thought that in all circumstances he acted rationally and constitutionally, weighing the safety of his family and the extreme position of No 10 and the public interest in effective government to which he could contribute.
However, it’s a fairly simple matter, all he has to do is present the evidence to demonstrate that he wasn’t lying because if he doesn’t then people out there are going to think they can smell a rat.
But divert, dispute, redirect and lie – it’s the Tory way, and Dominic Cummings shouldn’t be allowed to get away with it because of who he is, even by the authorities, and it’s about time the right thing was done, and that he’s properly held to account.
We the public elected them into Parliament in the first place, therefore we have every right to ask challenging questions, and they shouldn’t be given the right to refuse to acknowledge them because they’re answerable to us, the public.
Did Dominic Cummings think about what would have happened if he’d broken down in his vehicle or got a flat tyre? Especially knowing he had symptoms of coronavirus, driving those miles, anything could have occurred.
What would have happened if he’d been involved in a car collision? And if anything would have happened, he would have had to have breakdown recovery out, or if he’d been involved in a car crash, paramedics would have been in close contact.
I bet he never thought of that? And I don’t know why no one has put that to him for questioning, and we know it didn’t happen, but what if it had? He didn’t think of that when he went on his travels, and I wonder what he would say to get out of that one?