The fugitive - episode two - the charges

Howard Fredrics is still on the run from British police this morning after being convicted of the charge of harassment against Sir Peter Scott Vice Chancellor of Kingston University. In a series of articles and music tracks Dr Fredrics drew attention to goings on at the University that he felt was in the public had a right to know. One such article was a recorded message by a member of staff at the University urging students not to give poor grades for the Uni on the National Student Survey forms stating that if they did their degree would be devalued. Unfortunately this recording no longer appears on the website. Whilst employed by the University Dr Fredrics made a number of salient points about aspects of Health and Safety and also matters relating to validity of marking and verification of grades. It is clear from some of the exchanges between members of staff at the Uni that HF’s strongly worded (although accurate) emails caused some worries within the administration.

Dr Howard Fredrics failed to appear in Court on 22 December to answer charges that by virtue of operating a website, http://www.sirpeterscott.com since July 2007, he had breached Section 6 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. The Act, which was devised to deter stalking, was, in this case, applied for the first time ever towards the dissemination of musical works contained on the website. The case was brought by Sir Peter Scott who said that the website was intended to “embarrass and humiliate” him filed his claim to harassment after losing his battle to claim that the website Sir Peter…… was a trade mark and should not be used by HF. The WIPO dismissed his claim alongside a strong rebuke.

After the allegations by the V-C against Howard Fredrics the police conducted a thorough investigation and stated that the site contained nothing that could be construed as harassment and in fact contained no references to Sir Peter Scotts private life. Indeed the site is not about Sir Peter Scott at all, but is centred on factual events that have taken place at the University. Despite the police findings and advice the CPS decided that they would continue to prosecute and refused Dr Fredrics’ application of discontinuation.

On the day before the trial was due to be heard HF’s solicitors were forced to withdraw due to reasons related to a separate professional matter. This left him without legal representatives and despite his request the court refused to postpone the trial until a suitable legal team could be appointed and briefed. In Bullied Academics Blogspot this is cited as a breach of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. On the day of the trial Dr Fredrics was ill (his health having suffered greatly from this experience) and was unable to attend. The trial proceeded in his absence and without anyone to speak on his legal behalf. Dr Fredrics was found guilty and convicted of harassment. A warrant was issued for his arrest directly afterwards. No one knows where Dr Fredrics or his wife Lori are but it has become apparant that Lori Fredrics was able to join her husband during these last few weeks. The Times Higher Educational ran the story on the 7th of January and comments on the site point to accusations of bullying of staff from management in higher and further education. It seems that this has reached worrying proportions and challenges the prospect of academic freedom of speech. Question are being asked about the idea of whistleblowers being protected in the workplace under the terms of 'making a disclosure in the public interest'

Dr Fredrics tribunal meeting was held on the 6th of January 2010. In the next episode you will find out the reason why Dr Fredrics fled and the outcome of the Employment Tribunal

The fugitive – Episode one – In the beginning

This man is on the run from British justice. Would you like to guess the crime which he has been accused of? Did he murder a child in its bed? Did he extort money from some little old lady? Did he master mind a bank robbery? No, none of these things. Howard Fredrics is guilty of holding an opinion.
At least that is what British justice has meted out to him this past month. To understand how this all happened we need to go right back to the beginning. What I present here is no more than an abridged version of what has been happening in reference to this case and I recommend that you investigate further by taking a good look at a website called www.sirpeterscott.com while you still can, because it is quite possible that this site may well be removed in the future. For now let us begin at the beginning.

Dr Fredrics is a composer and sound designer, not the type of person one would normally associate with the acts of aggression he has been convicted of. He is well respected within his profession and has had a distinguished career in education in the USA for the past twenty years and more prior to his appointment as Senior Lecturer of Music Technology at Kingston University – London which is where the story starts.


In June 2005 11 members of staff at Kingston University were persuaded to file a collective grievance against Howard Fredrics. It would appear that this grievance was compiled in response to various questions raised by Dr Fredrics about some of the internal verification processes of the University. There was also the question of Dr Fredrics refusal to sign a grievance against another member of staff early in 2003. Howard was unhappy with the way this grievance was solicited and in fact asked questions about the legality of putting a grievance together in this way asking whether or not the University had contravened its own policies in handling the matter in this way.

Howard Fredrics was formally dismissed from his position as Senior Lecturer at Kingston University in 2006. It is not quite clear if the website www.sirpeterscott.com was born before or after Dr Fredrics dismissal. What is clear is that Dr Fredrics and other contributors to the site have not been shy about publishing facts about Kingston University which paint a very ugly picture of malcontent and misadventure. In an attempt in May 2009 to shut down the site Sir George Peter Scott (Professor) the vice chancellor of Kingston University appealed to the WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organisation) on the basis that the name sirpeterscott was protected as a trade mark however the WIPO ruled that his complaint was not upheld and the ownership of the domain name remains with Dr Fredrics. Having spent four thousand pounds of tax payers money on trying to block the website you can understand Sir Peters disappointment at the ruling although the HEFC’s decision that this was an acceptable use of public funding must have softened the blow. However it didn’t stop there, and soon Dr Fredrics was about to received a summons to answer an accusation of harassment.