UKIP Chairman Ben ‘Rogue Builder’ Walker appears to be in a strange and inexplicable state of denial about his criminal convictions.
A UKIP admirer (and boy does she admire him!) who appears on X (Twitter) as @Tammy8762535565, posted recently her passionate belief that Ben is some kind on patriotic superhero:
There was a lot of support for this view, largely from UKIP supporters of a certain age and gender, but one dissident stepped up, posting that, “He conned two pensioners of money and has a criminal conviction for it”.
This infuriated Tammy: “No he didn’t it was a matter of building regulations. It was fines not a criminal conviction. So please get your facts right”.
And Walker himself weighed in right behind her: “Not that old fake news nonsense. You really do have to wonder about some people”.
Ought to know better
But, if Walker is disputing that he has criminal convictions, he really ought to know better. In fact, he does know better.
As a matter of settled fact, Ben Walker has FIVE criminal convictions. They do involve building regulations and not conning anyone out of their money, but they are criminal convictions, nevertheless, and were reported as such in 2019 in the local Bristol newspaper, which described him as a ‘rogue builder’ who had been ‘spared prison’ and ‘convicted of five charges’.
“Rogue builder spared prison after dangerous work on home”
A rogue builder has been fined more than £11,000 after he ignored a string of building regulations during a house expansion in Yate, Ben Walker, who trades under the name of Monkeyfist Construction, promised a Yate family he would complete an extension before Christmas 2017.
But the owners grew concerned after the 40-year-old of Ferndene Road, Bradley Stoke made barely any progress given the amount of money exchanged from them to Walker…
It was discovered no application had been made for the work. And officers found a number of serious failures were made with the construction design and build.
These required significant remedial work to ensure the stability and weather resistance of the building, a court hearing was told. The case was heard at Bristol Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday, January 16.
Walker was found guilty in his absence and was convicted of five charges, receiving a £2,000 fine for each. He was also ordered to pay the council’s costs of £1,519.18 and a victim surcharge of £170, bringing the combined total to £11,689.18.
Poor, gullible Tammy
Note the key word ‘convicted’. Now, this is significant because Tammy seems to be saying that as he was only fined, this did not amount to conviction, the suggestion being that you only have a conviction if you are actually jailed.
It’s nonsense, of course, as virtually the whole world knows. But it would appear that Walker may have been whispering in poor, gullible Tammy’s ear, because this bizarre interpretation of the matter was offered by Walker himself, when he was sacked as a magistrate last year.
Searchlight’s questions
He had been appointed to the bench as JP in 2023, but immediately Searchlight and others asked how someone with criminal convictions could sit as a magistrate. The matter was duly investigated and a statement issued by the Lord Chancellor and the Lady Chief Justice.
It turned out that when Walker applied to the Ministry of Justice to be a JP, he had not seen fit to declare his convictions. They said:
“Mr Walker did not declare that he had been convicted of five offences in either the application form or at interview, despite being asked whether there was anything in his private life which could damage his credibility as magistrate if it became known to the public…
“He did not think that the matter for which he was fined amounted to a conviction, therefore, did not need to declare it.”
Walker was immediately sacked as a magistrate.
STATEMENT FROM THE JUDICIAL CONDUCT
INVESTIGATIONS OFFICE
Mr Ben Walker JP
A spokesperson for the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office said:
The Lord Chancellor, with the Lady Chief Justice’s agreement, has removed Mr Ben Walker of the Gloucestershire bench from office for failing to disclose that he had been convicted of 5 offences in his application to join the magistracy, despite clear guidance in the application form to do so.
Applicants to the magistracy are required to disclose any information that, if it became generally known, might bring the magistracy into disrepute or call into question their standing as a magistrate. This includes all cautions or convictions irrespective of when they were received.
Mr Walker did not declare that he had been convicted of 5 offences in either the application form or at interview, despite being asked whether there was anything in his private life which could damage his credibility as a magistrate if it became known to the public.
Mr Walker apologised for failing to disclose the information and said he had not sought to deceive or bring the judiciary into disrepute. He did not think that the matter for which he was fined amounted to a conviction, therefore, did not need to declare it.
A chairman of the South West Region Conduct Advisory Committee considered the matter under the Judicial Conduct (Magistrates) Rules 2014 and recommended that Mr Walker should be removed from office. The Lord Chancellor and the Lady Chief Justice agreed.
So, if he genuinely believed at the time of his application that being found guilty and fined in a court did not amount to a conviction, there is no way that he can still harbour that belief now, given that it was completely contradicted by the Lord Chancellor and the Lady Chief Justice when they sacked him.
So why does he persist it dismissing talk of criminal convictions as ‘fake news’?
Why indeed…?
