Reform Initiative?

Monday, 10th March 2025 at 5.05pm. 

LinkedIn post link https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/reform-initiative-sunil-chadda-btpve 

Reform MP Rupert Lowe ‘lost the whip’ last Friday over allegations of threatening violence against the Reform Party Chairman, Muhammad Ziauddin Yusuf. The Metropolitan Police has confirmed that they are looking into an allegation of ‘verbal threats’. 

This is a serious allegation in its own right which is heightened by the involvement of The Metropolitan Police. If it is untrue, we would expect Rupert Lowe to say this in his denial. We follow his words. A BBC article from Sunday, 9th March reported Lowe as strongly denying the claims saying, “there is no credible evidence against me”. 

This is unexpected as Rupert Lowe does not deny the allegations. He does not specifically say that he did not verbally threaten the Reform Party Chairman. Rather, he prioritises a lack of ‘credible’ evidence which allows the original allegations to stand. This in itself is unexpected and it allows the potential for ‘credible’ evidence to still exist. 

If he hasn’t done what has been alleged, then no evidence can exist. The onus is on others to find evidence, thus making him innocent on the basis of a lack of ‘credible’ evidence as opposed to simply not having said or done anything. He does not deny the allegations.  

Lowe said he had spoken to the senior lawyer looking at the claims and said that she had told him that she was, “shocked” at the process, and that no evidence had been given. 

Yesterday, the lawyer, a KC responded by saying, “I have seen a number of statements made by Mr Lowe MP which are attributed to me and which describe my reactions to the process conducted by the party into the allegations made against both Mr Lowe MP and his constituency manager.” The lawyer added, “I find myself in the unfortunate and regrettable position of having to make this statement to correct the record. I have not expressed either ‘dismay’ or ‘shock’ at any time as to the process. Nor have I said, ‘there is zero credible evidence against [Mr Lowe], let alone said this ‘repeatedly’.” 

We note the lawyer goes direct to the heart of the matter and denies the specific allegations. This is reliable and expected. It takes direct ownership in denying the allegations, unlike Mr Lowe, who defers to the lack of ‘credible evidence’ against him.  

To say someone has denied that which they are accused of, we look for three things; commitment via the personal pronoun ‘I’, the use of past tense language and the specific allegation they are accused of. The lawyer said, ‘I have not expressed either shock or dismay at any time as to the process, nor have I said there is zero credible evidence against Mr Lowe.’ This is a reliable denial. 

The BBC put the lawyer’s statement to Lowe who then issued his own statement in reply. 

‘Ever since this malicious attack on my reputation was launched, all I have asked for from both Reform and the KC is credible evidence against me. None has been provided. It still hasn’t,’ he said. 

‘The KC has said she has been ‘chasing’ for that. I have received nothing. Because there is no credible evidence against me.’ 

How does Rupert Lowe know there is no credible evidence against him? In his words, it’s because ‘I have received nothing.’ 

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. 

He added, ‘I have spoken with the KC at length, on the phone and through message. I’ve got to know her over the last week, and she has been very helpful, and is a charming lady who is trying to do her job in the very difficult position that Reform has put her in.’ 

Notably, he does not deny that it is his words which has potentially put her in, ‘a very difficult position,’ in response to her having previously said, “I have seen a number of statements made by Mr Lowe MP which are attributed to me...’ 

As yet, Rupert Lowe has been unable to deny what he is accused of and allows the allegation to remain. He puts the onus and blame on others when he could simply say, ‘I did not...’. Something is stopping him from doing this. 

If you would like to see how we can help you, please contact us.  

We can help you to see that which is hidden in plain sight and accordingly advise a specific strategy which can be equally useful in the courts and in political and corporate environments. 

Article Reference: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7430zw4zqyo 

All blog subjects are identified, validated and written by the DDL Team. See www.ddlltd.com for more on Deception Detection Lab Ltd. If you would like us to analyse some interesting words, then please get in touch. We are happy to give you a blog credit or else publish anonymously, if you would prefer.