Thursday, 19 October 2006 

To: The Bishop of St. David’s 

Cc: Eversheds
D T Roderick
HEFCW
Mark Williams MP 

Re: Your Conduct and Complaint against the University of Wales Lampeter

Following claims made to my MP and the information submitted to you by D T Roderick. I am now please to say that D T Roderick has failed to substantiate his false claims of

Plagiarism - There was no plagiarism the only evidence is that the assignment is free of plagiarism.

The assignment has been doctored by the lecturer in question Zed Zorichak.

Two expert witnesses – He does not have any nor doe she have a copy of alleged and highly irregular second marking.

Report by former head of IT Dept Tony Corner – There is no report

That the University complied with its own student complaints procedures – He has submitted documents that prove that did not happen and has failed to supply any evidence in support of other false claims made on this issue.

His claim that he has acted appropriately and with dignity - He has been slammed by the Information Commissioner twice for failing to comply with both the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Freedom of Information Act 2000. He has been reminded of his duty and obligations to students.

There is clear evidence that Prof David Austin fabricated a note dated November 2003 to conceal the fact he failed to comply with procedures.

There is clear evidence that the Student complaints Procedure as a course of public justice has been obstructed and perverted.

In short D T Roderick has been caught out as the serial liar he really is to make my complaint go away.

Speaking of liars I will now raise issues concerning you. 

You have deliberately obstructed the resolution of my complaint since the 8th December 2003 for no other reason that the concealment of the gross misconduct of staff and the failure of the University to comply with procedures.

You have wilfully and deliberately mislead and lied to me as to your intentions in this to conceal your own misconduct and that of the University in this matter.

You have instructed solicitors contrary to the requirements of the Company Act 1985 as amended 2004 using public money as your own personal chattel to conceal your personal liability for your own wrongdoing as Visitor.

You have refused any form of independent inquiry to conceal your own misconduct and that of others.

You have shown the most blatant unfair and unjust bias against me in order to conceal my allegations against you and the University. This includes the exclusion of anything from me post 8th December 2003 while allowing the University to submit evidence dated May 2006. 

You have deliberately deprived my of my rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 and my common law right to natural justice to conceal your own misconduct and that of others.

Following from the above you have deliberately excluded an overwhelming weight of evidence in support of my complaint and the discovery of serious misconduct.

You have exceeded your authority and jurisdiction as Visitor by unlawfully over ruling a decision by the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education and the Higher Education Act 2004.

You have deliberately obstructed and perverted a course of public justice to conceal your own wrong doing and that of the University.

I am waiting for a request under the Freedom of Information Act from both the University and HEFCW, and the outcome of yet another complaint to the Information Commissioner. When I have that information I will take action against you according to procedures for a Judicial Revue in the High Court of your conduct in this matter including the unlawful receipt of legal expenses.