STICKING POINT
Tech whizz says pic of woman taped to chair wasn’t taken when she told tribunal it was
A PHOTO of a civil servant gagged and tied to a chair was not taken at the time the woman involved said it was, a tribunal has heard.
Marine Scotland worker DeeAnn Fitzpatrick was snapped taped to a chair in a picture which went viral at the peak of the MeToo movement.
It prompted a national outcry and a probe by the Scottish Government body until questions were raised over its legitimacy.
A digital forensic expert now claims the image was taken in August 2009, not in December 2010 as Fitzpatrick claimed.
Fitzpatrick claimed she was subjected to the ordeal because she blew the whistle on misogyny and abuse within the organisation’s office in Caithness in 2010.
But bosses later sacked her on the grounds that she lied about the timing and nature of the incident.
The Canadian is now pursuing an employment tribunal, claiming the dismissal was unfair and seeking to be reinstated by Marine Scotland.
She is also making a claim she was dismissed due to whistleblowing. Digital expert James Borwick told the hearing he was asked to look into the photograph and a number of emails in the case as part of the body’s disciplinary investigation.
Solicitor Andrew Gibson, representing Marine Scotland, asked: “With what degree of certainty can you say that this photograph was taken on the 10th August, 2009, and not the 16th December, 2010, and why can you say that?”
Borwick travelled to a Marine Scotland office in Campbeltown, Argyll and Bute, to access the original photo on the government body’s server.
He said: “By the end of my examination and my investigation, I’d examined a picture, DF.jpeg, that was stored on the ... server and that picture had a creation date of 2009, a last modification date of 2009, and the date embedded within it said exactly the same thing – 2009. So I’m certain it hasn’t been modified or tampered with in any way whatsoever.”
The tribunal also heard from senior civil servant David Wallace who took the decision to dismiss Fitzpatrick.
Fitzpatrick, representing herself, asked him: “Why would I intentionally lie about something that happened to me?
Wallace replied: “I’m assuming that the construction of a story which said the picture had been taken in 2010 rather than 2009 was beneficial to you in some way.”
The tribunal continues.