Gibraltar Corruption

Is there still Rule of Law in Gibraltar? Is there corruption in the local police?

Are employees' Human Rights protected? Is there a mafia in Gibraltar?

How corrupt are the Courts in Gibraltar? Is Entain a bad employer?

What did Mr Martinez get out of my Cross-examination?
Mr Martinez only got confirmation about what was already in my detailed written witness statement of 206 pages, which included the written evidence. The only thing Mr Martinez was able to force me to say was that I lied to HR about my team leader's bad performance. Mr Martinez put these words in my mouth by taking one of my statements in an email, praising my team-leader for trying to stop Camp 2 bullying me, out of context. The context was that I sat at this specific point in time between a rock and a hard place: on one side the daily bullying by Camp 2 and on the other side a weak management that I didn't want to upset as they were trying to do something about the situation. What I had done was praise my team leader in the early stages of my employment for making efforts to stop the bullying. Mr Martinez claimed that my praise was exaggerated as I must have known by then that my team leader bullied other people and that she did not perform well as a leader. I believed at the time that my team leader needed some support and encouragement and therefore I praised her. At this time, she had done absolutely nothing bad against me, so I had no reason to complain about her.

Later I saw how Susana Martin bullied Dennis Dorland and I heard the stories from Camp 2 about being bullied if she did not like you. The emails with praise were never seen by my team members, only by the head of department and HR. Months later, after the 30th January 2018 “chaos meeting”, I had an interview of only half an hour with Danielle Wood at HR about the state of affairs in my team. All team members complained to HR about bullying and unprofessional behaviour by our team leader. I did not because I focussed during the interview on being bullied by Camp 2 as till then, the team leader had not done anything negative towards me. Mr Martinez then put it in my mind that I had “repeatedly lied” to management and HR by withholding information which was not relevant for my own situation.

This was possibly, with hindsight, a mistaken attempt to protect my team leader as she was a fellow victim of bullying by Camp 2 while I was stuck between a rock and a hard place. But even if I “lied”, as I felt forced to say by Mr Martinez, this did not have any positive or negative effect on the situation. The bullying by Camp 2 was never stopped as my management was too weak and even stopped involving HR after further complaints sent by me. The fact that I did not mention that Susana Martin bullied members of her team during the short half hour HR interviews of each team member, did not have any influence as the team leader's bullying was exposed anyway by all other team members. HR did not need any extra confirmation about Susana Martin's bully-behaviour from me. I focused on my own problem: expose the relentless bullying by Camp 2.

An example of this accusation of “lying to HR” can be found in page 1673 E – 1682 E. During the rest of my cross-examination, Mr Martinez kept coming back about 25 times to this same point, which was a waste of time because I always repeated the same arguments and the same reasoning I had given initially. Hours were wasted on the same subject to wear me out mentally, for instance page 1692 B – F.

The aim of this continuing questioning about if I lied or not to HR is explained in page 1698 D – H, where the Chairman seems to defend Mr Martinez's approach, which I found torture by abusing my mental illness, by stating that it is about my credibility.

Page 1746 G – 1747 E: Mr Martinez tries to present me as a troublemaker and for the fifteenth time, the same question is brought up and I repeat my answer, more extended now, that they had no right to bully me.

Because of my inordinately long cross-examination, this led to the postponement of the cross-examination of my witness, Dennis Dorland, which made him and me very nervous. It was even suggested that he should have to return the next day, which Mr Dorland refused to do as he had to go back to his home in Granada. In page 1718 E – G this is pointed out to the Chairman. The several extensions of my cross-examination, created delays and very high levels of stress and exhaustion which significantly reduced my capacity to deal with the additional stress of being confronted face to face with the bullies and lowering the efficiency of my cross-examination of them significantly, making my access to Justice much more difficult.

Page 1723 D, I point out that we were going in circles and back to a point that was already cross-examined the day before.

All information published in this website is in the public domain or reflects the opinion of the author. As such this website's content is protected by Art 10. of the Gibraltar Constitution Order 2006, Protection of freedom of expression:
"Except with his own consent, no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of expression, that is to say, freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference."