Carl Sargeant’s tragic death shouldn't be misused to stop women coming forward

But surely the point is that the way this situation was handled was dreadful. I thought everyone in this country was innocent until proven guilty. It was very stupid of him to be sacked and simultaneously accused. This really could be the end of Carwyn Jones.

Indeed, Carwyn Jones has A LOT to answer for. He should be ashamed. This was an allegation, Sargeant wasn't even arrested. To fire someone because of an allegation is a true knee-jerk response.

This article very much needed writing and is considered and thoughtful.

Someone very close to me was suspended from work recently. They were not told what the allegation was. It took the lumbering investigation process 6m to dismiss a spurious complaint. Those 6m were a nightmare for the person and family. Those people who seem to blithely accept harm done to innocent accused people as acceptable collateral damage in a broader battle might change their minds if they were put in a similar position.

I disagree with Leia that it is normal to be suspended from work without knowing why. That should never be the case. That gives too much power to employers to discriminate. Everyone should know what they are accused of. It seems that is what has happened to others accused of impropriety recently. Fair disciplinary procedures need to be in place and will not stop women coming forward.

What let to this tragic death has been on a gradual rise in our society since the immediate post-war era, with its roots in the Jazz age and before perhaps. And it must be said. The advent of blogs, fake news, newspapers of every grade down to the bottom, smartphones, wiretapping, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and such, as well as the denigration of High Culture and the Church, is not compatible with parliamentary democracy because it leads to a plebscape and mob rule when unchecked. People from all rungs of society now have the means to hurl abuse, downright lies and false accusations, and worse, to be taken seriously and given a platform. We speak of protecting women, and rightly so, but who shall protect people of every group and class from the proletariat in this new age where the common man's opinion is considered of equal weight in any, say medical discussion, as a doctor of medicine? Democracy does not work without experts, renowned public servants and vaulted institutions being protected from random accusations.

welsh nash you surely on a wind up , didn't think anyone spouted your deference and servile nonsense anymore , you may be a script writer for harry enfield or some other satirist , but to say that only the great and good should have an opinion shows where you are at , somewhere between the dark ages and victorian era .........

Ifan Thank you your reply. My comments were not aimed at your article which I thought was legitimate and balanced. It was exactly as you say in your reply a cry for improving the process Unfortunately the lumbering process remains par for the course in public organisations. I would not call it a witch hunt but unfortunately in the concern to deal with a previously neglected serious issue such as this, due process to investigate the truth of individual allegations can be sidelined. I agree that his tragic death should not excuse going back to ignoring or sweeping abuse to women under the carpet.

By letting the accused know what the details of the accusation were. Iinvestigating the accusation in a reasonable time and not letting it drag out because of the inflexible , bureaucracy of the organisation as opposed to time needed for a thorough investigation of the facts themselves

I was a bit surprised to see this article to be honest. It seemed a bit hasty. He has yet to be buried, his family have yet to come to terms with the grief and we know next to nothing about the circumstances, the claims or the facts. I understand the points being raised, but would rather have seen a bit of time elapsed before reading this one to be honest. I didn't know him, but found the news yesterday quite shocking.

I'm surprised anyone would defend Leia's safeguarding policy that he’d be informed “at the appropriate time subject to concerns about confidentiality”, in that it gives wide power so easily misused by an employer/investigating panel. The rights of the accused include to be given an outline of the accusation(s) at the outset. "Inappropriate sexual contact" is quite inadequate. Nor is it good/normal practice to proceed to suspension without hearing the accused response, for most such offences would be handled by discussion, maybe even a written warning. For Carwyn Jones to say he had no alternative is both a prejudicial comment (unwarranted by the low level of the accusation) and false as a serious offence would have to be referred to the police if not the Independent Commissioner for Standards who "investigates complaints against Assembly Members relating to breaches of the Code of Conduct or Standing Orders and provides advice and assistance on matters of principle relating to their conduct".

So...Labour Rulebook - full rules for disciplinary measures on Page 77: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6GtYu9coM3zeVZYTkRNVDlfaTg/view (I couldn't find a different one for Welsh labour - is there one?) But basically the TL:DR version... 1) May suspend during investigation. Elswhere the rules state Suspended members may not hold office. 2) While member suspended assorted meetings convening to decide if which bit of Labour rules broke and whether disciplinary measures will be brought 3) Detail of alleged rule breaking sent to accused 4) Hearing Which bit of this do people think didn't happen? How far through it SHOULD they have managed to get through that process in the three day window for how things turned out?

Carl Sergeant's tragic death is a damning indictment on this kind of "Instant Response" culture which has consumed society of late. There does not seem to be any time for due consideration, reflection or just simple patience in our crazy media-led world, where people have to have opinions on everything and express those opinions almost instantaneously. Carwyn Jones as First Minister should have been strong enough and wise enough to resist this when these allegations were made against Carl Sergeant. No problem at all in suspending him whilst the allegations against were investigated. But to essentially act as judge and executioner by announcing a new Cabinet on the very same day as the suspension- minus Carl Sergeant- was an absolutely shameful act on Jones's part. The two processes should have been decoupled entirely. The Cabinet reshuffle could have waited a week or so whilst an internal investigation was instigated. And at the very least, Carl Sergeant should have been informed what the accusations against him actually were at the time of the suspension. Rather than being left in a state of limbo over the weekend, having to instruct his solicitor to write to the Labour Party to ask for details of the said accusations. Unfortunately, the suspicion remains that a First Minister so in thrall to the media's agenda, sought to use this Cabinet re-launch to divert public attention away from Carl Sergeant's suspension. Let's just pray that some good can come of this tragedy and a new more robust and transparent protocol to deal with accusations of this sort can be put in place. Sexual politics is fast becoming a nightmare in our public life. Some clear thinking is urgently needed to defuse this particular time bomb.

Leia 'But the timescale between the allegations coming to light and this death was three days. Is that a reasonable or unreasonable time in which to complete and investigation' I replied to a general question about how allegations could be dealt with not the species of this case. Of course 2-3 days is inappropriate. The person I know was left for months and in this specific case we don't know how long it would take for the investigation if things hadn't taken this turn. My first point was giving the accused some idea of what the accusation is I think 2-3 days is too long for that

Carl Sargeant: a working-class politician destroyed by middle-class hysteria. e still do not know for certain why Carl Sargeant, the Welsh Labour politician, took his life this week. Suicide is a deeply complex affair, and often springs from a deep-seated, hard-to-understand turmoil. But we do know this: Sargeant had been plunged into despair by accusations made against him as part of the increasingly febrile, nasty ‘Pestminster’ witch-hunt. And we know that the accusations did not merit police involvement – that is, they involved ... read more here: http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/a-man-is-dead.-are-the-witch-hunters-happy-now-carl-sargeant/20517

"Carl Sargeant: a working-class politician destroyed by middle-class hysteria." I agree with that statement too.

Can you all just shut up and stop it NOW,

It's worth remembering that the vast majority of suicides are NOT the direct result of one incident, however traumatic that incident may be. There are, more often than not, complex and varied reasons behind the total despair that leads to someone believing they have no other option but to kill themselves.

Even Alun Michael speaks up on BBC Today. He avoided direct questions by saying we can't know, but if the alleged offences were serious enough for sacking, the case should have been referred to Assembly officials. Saying Sargeant was the best Minister he's known (incl advancing policy re. safeguarding children and women), he surely went as far as a Police Commissioner can in blaming Carwyn for a wrong call. Despite his intervention and those of Leighton Andrews, Mark Tani etc, expect the Labour AMs to close ranks around Carwyn at today's internal meeting. Senedd was closed for the week rather than one day, precisely because Carwyn needed to avoid questioning till he'd rallied his troops.

Leia Because you asked the question about what should happen in general. I initially mentioned it because you compared it to what would happen in the normal work place as if that was straight forward process, when in fact it can cause enormous distress to innocent parties

As I said Tell people what they are accused of immediately And in general( not this case) make sure the speed of the investigation is related to the needs of the accuser and accused not the inflexible process of the organisation

Here is what should be different. 1. Defuse the overheated attitude to sexual harassment. Someone has now died because of the overheating and loss of due process. 2. Accept that most allegations are trivial even if proved. 3. Accept that suspension while investigating should be the exception. The damage done to say a teacher or doctor by suspension is way out of proportion to most allegations. I mean depression, injustice and even permanent loss of employment caused simply by the time investigations take, whether done by HR departments who are not expert, or by the police. . 4. Accept that 1% of rape allegations getting proved is not surprising. Most incidents are "he said/she said" and lack corroboration by independent evidence. I know this is no longer legally required but - hey - in the real world it certainly is and should be. 5. OK we've got criminal prosecutions arising from historical allegations well understood now. Something not criminal or prosecuted when done can become so 30 years later. OK, so we've cleared the air. Now we need a Limitation period for prosecutions as in many US jurisdictions. Now there is no excuse for bringing up allegations 20-30 years later. Not defending Rolf Harries or Saville, but the whole process can look very unattractive and unproductive all round.. 6. Make the legal test for harassment objective. Not subjective, as so often now. Need to scrutinise for malicious complaints the object of which is to (say) evict a man from his home, deprive him of contact with his children, or to get revenge for some slight or get some other advantage eg a political one. Not making this up, i have seen it all. . If we don't do kind of thing, our society will descend further into a sex war. Relations between the sexes/genders are inherently difficult enough without us facilitating conflict. It has all become so damaging and unnecessary and out of proportion. Go on, admit it. OK, ignore me. But the wheel is turning anyway as it always does. And needs to.