In the British Channel Island of Jersey.
In July 2007 the Jersey establishment decided that child abuse and the concealment of child abuse had been too useful and widespread a currency in the local power economy to let the history of those crimes be exposed.
Too many civil servants, managers, police officers and politicians had, over the decades, been too incompetent, idle and negligent in their failures to protect vulnerable children. They thus had a stake – an “investment”, let us call it – in ensuring such child protection failures remained hidden.
Naturally enough, when anyone fails so badly, there
will always be others around who note it, and log it for future reference. Colleagues,
subordinates and others who will be aware of the “investment” in concealment by
those who might later – err – be in a position to “assist” them in some way. Suddenly those who have witnessed the failures
have their hands on some very valuable “currency”. The promotion they’ve been
waiting for? The 100% student grant for their teenagers? That well-paid and
secure job in the public sector for their graduate daughter? The planning
permission for their house? All can be purchased with the “currency” they hold:
that knowledge of the negligent and indefensible failures of their superiors to
protect vulnerable children.
Naturally, there will be yet others – fewer in
number, perhaps – who hold more valuable notes of the “currency”; those who are
aware of things that go beyond mere incompetence and negligence, and instead occupy
the territory of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. Possessing such
“purchase-power” over colleagues, superiors, and, indeed, other public-sector
agencies, can buy you even more. Five
months holiday a year? Off-balance-sheet “bonuses”? Your mortgage paid,
perhaps? (It really is amazing what can be “purchased” – silence for example -
by those desperate to “buy” when it’s tax-payers money being used.)
And a few people in the system really do win the
lottery; they strike pay-dirt. They find themselves in a position whereby they
could give true and convincing statements – were they so minded – of X or Y
colleague or manager conspiring in, or actually committing child abuse. They
could encourage victims to speak out. They could go to the police. Enriched
with such knowledge, then, well – it’s pretty much name-your-price. Such is the
value of that “currency” you hold, those over whom you hold the knowledge will
pay anything – provided, of course, they’re in a position to. So it pays to
choose your “debtor” wisely.
But – on the other hand – what you want in exchange
for your “currency” may not be financial? May not be basic graft &
nepotism? Maybe you want your “debtor” to do something? Use their position in
some way – in support of some bigger objective of yours, and of your friends
and allies?
Naturally, when such a valuable “currency” exists –
such powerful “dirt” to use the common phrase – it won’t only be the small,
self-interested individual who will want ‘in’ on the racket; bigger, powerful
entities too will want a piece of the action. Entire departments with something
to hide? Suppressive police forces? Corrupt prosecutors? Politicised
judiciaries? The security services? Powerful financial institutions? Organised
crime? Media empires?
After all – if a person is worth being “owned”, the
competition for rights of “ownership” may be intense indeed.
This is why governments, oppressive regimes,
security forces and mafias around the world love child abuse. They simply love
it. No other criminal activity, no matter how bad, is as foul, or gives such
“leverage”, such “ownership" – such control – over those who commit it. And once
a person has acted so despicably, or shown an unhealthy interest in the
under-age or those on the borderline, or has failed to prevent the crimes, and
instead helped to conceal them – then that person is “owned”. Forever more.
Whoever holds the “currency” of your despicable
secrets, owns you. Now, more alert readers may have spotted the inherent risks involved in this system of acquiring and selling such “currency”. It has no societal utility; it is ethically bankrupt; it is shameful, and by-and-large it is illegal. Those who begin to dabble in the “currency” of knowledge of the child protection failures and child abuses and related conspiracies to pervert justice? Well – their hands aren’t exactly clean, shall we say? Indeed – even a small, initial “trade” – perhaps even a merely tacit one, as opposed to overt coercion, contaminates the “trader” – be they individual or organisation - or public authority - with the very same “dirt”. Just one involvement in the concealment of child protection failures, let alone the concealment of actual child abuse? Suddenly, you’re no longer just a “trader”; others – you can be quite certain of this – will hold the “currency” over you. Someone, somewhere, will know of your contemptible actions. For example, the people you were exercising your “currency” over.
By this stage, things have become more interesting.
Bluff and brinkmanship enter the equation; the scale of the respective malfeasances
will be weighed in competition; who has the worst knowledge over the other?
Which party’s “currency” has the greater value, by being “backed” by more
“investors”, those who also hold a “stake” in the “currency”? Who, indeed, has
the more powerful protectors? Which third, or fourth, or fifth parties might
also hold some of the “currency”?
It’s easy to see, is it not, just how terribly,
terribly – err – complicated things become. Especially when so much child abuse
has been concealed by so many for so long. It is an inevitable consequence of permitting
such system-failure - of allowing child protection failures to be heaped upon
child abuses, to be heaped upon child abuse concealments, without corrective
intervention – that your entire system of public administration becomes
contaminated, and bound by a corporate, shared interest in concealing the
truth.
The “currency” that is exchanged through the system
– the knowledge – is never used in anger. Were it to be, the consequence for
everyone involved and the very system of administration would be Mutually
Assured Destruction. Younger readers may not be familiar with the phrase; it
comes from the days of the Cold War, when the West and the Soviet empire were
poised in militaristic stand-off, the only thing preventing nuclear war being
the assurance that such a war was not winnable, and would only result the
annihilation of both sides.
“Mutually Assured Destruction”: it is what holds
defective systems, criminals, competing power factions and corrupt administrations
poised in grudging status quo.
In fact, the more astute of those who you hold
“currency” on, will encourage you into the “trade”; they’ll let you get your
hands dirty; get a bit contaminated, maybe over-reach just a little. We can
borrow a mafia expression to describe one who has gone through this
contaminating process: a “made man”.
To become a trusted foot-soldier in a mafia, certain
“initiations” are required. One of these is to kill a person as a
contract-killing. Once you have thus produced your first corpse – “made your
first bones” – you are a “made man”. Committing such a crime demonstrates
various things. Amongst which is that you too are committed to serious criminality.
In respect of failure, incompetence, malfeasance, negligence,
corruption and other forms of out-right criminality, there are an awful lot of “made
men” in Jersey.
That’s a lot of people with a powerful shared
interest in stasis.
Where might one look for evidence that the recognition
of “Mutually Assured Destruction” had united individuals, state-institutions
and media in concealing the true scale of Jersey’s child abuse atrocities and attendant
breakdown in governance? What might such evidence look like?
On the 20th September the Jersey Evening
Post, published an editorial comment which said, amongst other things:
“In
the House of Commons earlier this week Mr Hemming, a political ally of former
Senator Stuart Syvret, asserted that this Island is utterly corrupt and a
hotbed of conspiracies and cover-ups. We have, of course, heard all this
before, but the one thing that is consistently missing from these allegations
is any sort of proof that would stand up to serious scrutiny.”
Sometimes it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that
people who pay for the Jersey Evening Post buy it because they like being lied
to. It’s hard to imagine any other reason.
So dripping in fear, and incredible are the
assertions of The Rag, as it’s known locally, it seems scarcely worth spending
time on these days. Nevertheless, for the record, for anyone who is still so
foolish as to believe what the JEP says, and who requires sight of the bloggers’
evidence, and proof what lies are written in Jersey’s only “newspaper”, I recommend
the blog postings I have linked to below this article. They are merely a few of
my postings – there are many others, and also highly important and dramatic evidence
published on other blogs, such as Rico Sorda, and Voice for Children. But you
will find enough documented evidence at the links below to keep you reading for
many, many hours – in fact, days.
The Jersey oligarchy and its media can only pretend
that the evidence is on their side - and
the destiny of such pretence is the death of legitimacy - meaning the death of
the public's faith in the Jersey system and its media.
Happily, that inevitable public awakening is
accelerated by every deafening silence of the BBC - and every plainly untrue
editorial leader comment in the Jersey Evening Post.
In passing, it is worth noting that yesterday was the first anniversary of the day the BBC were
given a copy of the interim statement of Jersey's former Police Chief Graham
Power. You can read that statement for yourself, at the final three links posted
below this article. That the BBC never reported a word of the statement is a
fracture in the foundations of the organisation.
Even the BBC has failed to wake up to the new
reality of the internet age.
What that reality means, is that the former immense
power of the media – namely, that of omission, which was always a greater power
than publication – is dead. Now, any media still attempting to trade in that
power only accelerates the destruction of its credibility.
The various individuals in the Jersey system over the years and decades who
had failed to ensure child protection, those who had covered-up child abuse,
those who had abused children, must have felt increasingly confident in the
course of the last five years as the envelop
of Mutually Assured Destruction grew and grew, reached ever upwards, to bring
in senior civil servants, corrupt police officers, States departments, the island’s
parliament, the judiciary, all of the local media, the Law Officers Department,
the Attorney General.
Many of those with an “investment”, as it were, in
the “currency” of concealment must have relaxed, begun to sleep easy at night –
confident that the culture of cover-up, by now embraced by the very organs of
the state in Jersey, was “Too Big To Fail”, just like certain banks.
Ironically, it was that ease of conspiracy, that
willing involvement, that mutual commitment to the corrupt enterprise – the very
nature of “The Jersey Way” and its complete failure to manifest any functioning
checks and balances - that has contained within it the very seeds of its own
destruction.
Corporate failures, conspiracies and the corrupt concealments
of crimes occur in all systems. But in most systems, sooner or later, a boundary
is reached; eventually the crimes are thwarted, the scandal exposed – like Hillsborough
for example. Eventually, some check and balance halts the malfeasance – before
it itself becomes the very defining essence of the jurisdiction in question.
Jersey’s authorities never reached that restraining
boundary. Indeed, given the crypto-feudal nature of power in the island, there
quite simply was no limiting boundary – no ultimate lawful constraint – to be reached.
We are then left contemplating the sheer scale of
what we observe; an entire edifice of public sector administration – and the
arms the state, legislature, executive and judiciary – and the local Fourth
Estate – all component-parts of, and protectors of, a system in which “the rule
of law” no longer has any deterrent value.
A system in which the only strong deterrent effect to
be seen and noted by the public is the corrupt oppression of those such as
Social Services Ministers and Chief
Police Officers who try to uphold the law, and to protect the vulnerable and weak from child-abusers and serial-rapists.
The entire notion of good governance, civil society
and the rule of law has been stood on its head in Jersey, on such a scale it threatens
the very respectability and credibility of
Britain.
It may have seemed invulnerable, but “The Jersey Way”
has become too big to be “too big to fail”.
The rule of law will out.
Stuart Syvret
WANT
TO READ EVIDENCE?
GO
TO THESE LINKS:
Posts
366 comments:
1 – 200 of 366 Newer› Newest»Quite wrong, Stuart. In the sixth paragraph from the end "quiet" should be "quite".
This takes Jersey blogging to a new level.At last a considered, coherent overview, crafted with skill.
My only worry is the readership and that readerships reactions. This is a complex story in a world of 'No Evidence!' headlines and as such may obscured by noise and bluster.
I hope the proverbial 'whetted knife' will be wielded in Brighton .
Well done .
Stuart.
Will be publishing a Blog about BBC Jersey soon and how a producer has taken the lead of editor Jon Gripton by ignoring e-mails and refusing to answer legitimate questions.
In the meantime this should give your readers a small taste of what HASN'T been reported by BBC JERSEY
As for the JEP, well there's little point in pointing out their churnalism as they're doing a good enough job of that themselves.
New post and you are already at over 656,180 views. No, they have not managed to silence your voice. You can claim thousands waiting to hear from you. That is some power. It must strike fear in Jersey's broken judiciary.
The whole of the local main stream media have been part of the child abuse cover up as the local blogs have proven beyond doubt.
Stuart.
It's clear that the State Media don't want to get to the truth but there is at least one journalist that does, but she is banned from the UK and Jersey.
In order to put pressure on the authorities to allow this journalist to complete her research could I ask your readers to sign, and share, this PETITION?
Ref "quiet" should be "quite".
Noted thanks.
Hell, I never claimed spelling was a strong point of mine.
Stuart
This posting puts the whole disgusting clandestine mess into it's true prospective, and in a manner that all may come to understand. I love the cogency with which you write, it is an exceptional gift that benefits the abused and downtrodden of this beautiful but septic little enclave of Britain.
Your hundreds of thousands of readers can check out the JERSEY EVENING POST EDITORIAL HERE, and with more links than an anchor chain.
Stuart, I think the petition on behalf of Leah Goodman could do with a few more of those you visit your site, even just 1% of your 656,180, would increase the current count dramatically.
Come on, where is everyone?
Stuart.
Some evidence that, according to the JEP, the Bloggers DON'T PRODUCE
With respect, that 656,180 represents all-time page views since Google introduced their blog stats system a few years ago.
But the request is worth repeating; I've had, I think, over 500 page views today. I would urge readers to go to, and sign the following e-petition, and encourage others to do the same:
http://www.change.org/petitions/ukhomeoffice-restore-the-visa-of-banned-journalist-leah-mcgrath-goodman-freejersey
Perhaps someone can sort a link for us in a comment?
Stuart
LINK TO LEAH
Stuart.
PETITION
Petition Link
Stuart,could you advise Mr Hemmings to make recordings or get someone to take notes of any meeting he might have with Bailhace or others from Jersey,it would seem that Bailhache is to have meetings with others in the uk nodoubt to discredit you and Mr Hemmings.
Q: How can you tell a Jersey editor is lying?
A: His fingers move.
I think this is one of your most powerful postings to date. I have been asked several times why I believe a great many otherwise decent Islanders with knowledge of child abuse have not come forward, and why many more in Jersey have at least some vague indirect knowledge but still do not come out in support of full disclosure. I think you have presented the reasons with clarity.
Jersey so fully illustrates what happens when individuals' definition of greater moral good becomes confused with the concept of keeping a lid on something explosive for everyone's sake.
I have given much thought to the strange silence of the clergy and religious groups in Jersey, and I wonder if this fear does not explain that apparent apathy as well. If members of a religious organization believe exposure of Jersey's rotten underpinnings will cause a cascade of unintended financial and legal consequences for many - or most - members, the morally righteous course may seem unaffordable for the sake of their self righteous unity.
Jersey provides an exceptional opportunity to study the effect of what you aptly describe as a Culture of Concealment dependent upon the implied concept of Mutually Assured Destruction. This should be dissected in warning of how such horrors can continue to take place for decades within an otherwise seemingly decent society.
Quite simply Stuart this is an excellent posting which encompasses all that is wrong with this beautiful, but septic Island.
Superbly written.
I supported Stuart initially due to his stance on incinerator ash and the breathtaking stupidity of successive politicians placing it in 'harms way'on an exposed set of reclamation sites on the south coast of Jersey adjacent to an internationally protected intertidal site (Ramsar).
That politicians are again considering covering more of this area with a new toxic waste dump , says it all.
Those with 'the morals of a Bangkok Pimp ' might be in Brighton pressing flesh, but the ethical standards of a Colombian drug cartel remain in Jersey , proving perhaps 'that your grandchildren will be next'.
Q,How can you tell a politicion is lying? A, His or Her lips are moving, (not Stuart)
Mr. Syvret, I estimate you have had something in the region of 800 viewers today?
Might I suggest to some of those who I know to be reading this site, that they face facts, and recognise that there is no 'pain-free' means by which the Jersey 'Establishment' can extricate itself from the mire of its own making; no means of avoiding humiliation.
None of this is going away, clearly.
Do we actually have any wise heads, as in days gone by? Or do we only have the obvious lunatics leading our destiny?
What a strange comment above at 21:11 BST
"Might I suggest to some of those who I know to be reading this site, that they face facts."
Ok, fair shout, but then we have....
"Do we actually have any wise heads, as in days gone by? Or do we only have the obvious lunatics leading our destiny?"
That is the crux...."Leading Our Destiny"....Why would you need a leader? Where exactly is it that you think you are going that would require you to have or need a leader?
Take the law into your own hands! Show your fellow man that you are decent, honest and responsible enough to make your own decisions based on fairness and equality to your fellow man!!!
Ancient Shaolin Monk quote;
"You look to others for your own freedom?"
http://ricosorda.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-williamson-report-committee-of-non.html
You simply won't believe this one. I mean, you really won't.
How much did we pay him for an A4 sized report that is full of rubbish?
Spells it out for Mr. Gorst committee-of-inquiry
"Isles of Scilly split over toxic school saga
Claims of financial foulplay and counter claims of a council witch-hunt threaten to divide residents"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/sep/23/isles-scilly-toxic-school-saga?INTCMP=SRCH
Change the names - that could be a story about Jersey.
It seem axiomatic that entrenched, self-interested, toxic power-cliques always close ranks to put their interests first in small island communities.
Woe betide anyone who challenges the cosy, lucrative status quo.
Stuart
Stuart, over 900 readers yesterday?
Even if the Jersey mafia is restricting what you can say, your efforts to spread the truth and promote understanding of the real nature of power in Jersey continue to reach a very wide audience.
The public awakening is taking root, and can't be stopped. The anti-democratic repression against you only speeds up that process.
Stuart.
An Open Letter to Chief Minister IAN GORST
Mr Syvret, I commented at 21:11 above.
May I suggest that Mr. Evans opinions may be a little more inviting of debate if the illustration accompanying his comments was less aggressive?
Be that as it may, when I referred to those ‘leading our destiny’, I was not making some cryptic, philosophical point. Rather, I was referring to the customary paternalistic approach that we, and by we I mean mainstream Jersey conservative society, take towards those who end up occupying the senior, ‘Establishment’ posts in Jersey. We have been too relaxed, too complaisant, too uncritical, too unchallenging. The result is that our core institutions, for example, the Attorney General, Deputy Bailiff, Bailiff have become occupied by men who are plainly mad, misfeasant, inadequate and wholly unsuited to the Offices in question.
By that being so obviously so, and people such as Mr Syvret, his fellow internet campaigners, and the former Police Chief having adduced so much hard evidence that shows it to be so, the very credibility of the key, ‘Establishment’ Offices is in jeopardy.
That is what I meant by the pressing need, the very pressing need, for the Jersey ‘Establishment’ to wake up to the reality that it must engage in the unavoidable ruthless intervention itself.
For if it does not, others will bring about the ruthless intervention themselves.
This is the great challenge that faces Jersey traditionalists: do we have the ability and willingness to fix things ourselves?
If we do not, then those who would seek intervention, and those who would ultimately intervene, have every justification.
If Jersey governance cannot pull itself together, and clean itself up, the interventionists are right.
'Jersey Conservative' (poster @13.24)
Who was in charge during the 1950s and 1960s when all those nasty things were happening at Haut de la Garenne, and Edward Paisnel was running amok apparently unhindered on an island measuring 9 miles by 5?
It wasn't the Bailhache brothers but the kind of people you refer to as the 'Jersey Establishment'.
The island's malaise would appear to run rather deeper than you present, and throwing the gruesome twosome overboard would be little more than an exercise in damage limitation.
Ashamed Jerseyman
A quite astonishing edition of the Rag today: The full-page fluff piece on Philip Bailhache was nauseating as was the news that Ian Christmas (the magistrate convicted of fraud) may be back at work if he's cleared by an enquiry commissioned by the Bailiff's Office.
Presumably Mr Bright will, in future editorials, expand on his ‘mind your own business’ philosophy to discuss some of the great events of the 20th and 21st centuries, and how the British government seemed to care more in 1939 about the people of Poland than of Slough; or why it was so wrong for British MPs to campaign against the apartheid regime in South Africa. What has the repression of a few black people in a different hemisphere got to do with them? Perhaps he will condemn the more recent intervention by the British government in Pitcairn and Turks and Caicos Islands? On second thoughts, the last two examples are probably a bit too close to home for Jersey, so perhaps a criticism of the international community for imposing sanctions on that nice Mr Assad, who is just trying to mind his own business in the family estate, is safer ground.
Second, I’m not sure about Mr Bright, but last time I checked, Jersey is governed by the UK. The UK appoints the Lieutenant Governor, the Bailiff, the Deputy Bailiff and the Attorney General, with no reference to, or accountability whatsoever to the people of the island. All laws passed by our legislature (presided over by a UK appointee who, amongst other things decides which questions can be asked and has unfettered powers to exclude members on a whim) are subject to approval by the Privy Council. Who gets prosecuted for breaking these laws (or not prosecuted for breaking them, as the case may be) is at the sole discretion of the Attorney General – a UK appointee. Convictions are then secured by judges who are – you’ve guessed it – UK appointees. Jersey’s relationship with the outside world is controlled by the UK, and our fiscal policy requires UK blessing before implementation. Oh, and of course, the UK government is responsible for the proper administration of justice in the island.
So, Mr Bright, I would say that an MP from one of the political parties forming the UK government is very much within his rights to raise concerns in the UK parliament about serious wrong-doing in Jersey. It is, after all, the body that is ultimately responsible for Jersey’s governance. But I guess you prefer to hide behind the fantasy that we are a self-determining possession of the Crown, run by wise men in tights and pantomime robes?
If I may, I would like to respond to the gentleman who calls himself Ashamed Jerseyman.
I understand the point he makes; perhaps I did not explain my views sufficiently.
Of course many bad things occurred in the past in Jersey, including child abuse. It is also equally clear that most of those crimes were covered up by various employees, police officers, politicians, Attorney Generals and judges back in those days. Whilst I certainly do not defend those things, if one looks back to the era of the 1950s, 60s or 70s, one could point out a number of examples of cover-ups and similar wholesale governance breakdowns in other jurisdictions.
I think the point I was attempting to convey, is that when most democracies entered the modern era, such wide scale tolerance and concealment of gross criminality was so much rarer; for example, in jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom. It is simply remarkable that Jersey’s public administration, and the senior figures who lead that administration, can have imagined that the obsolete and unsustainable culture of cover up, to borrow Mr Syvret’s description, had any place in the 1990s, let alone the 21st century.
Consider the plain madness that has unfolded these last five years? Obstructing, then dismissing a Social Services Minister for trying to protect children? Undermining a Police investigation? Illegally suspending a Police Chief? Mounting massed raids without search-warrants on the leading ‘opposition’ politician? Prosecuting him for exposing the most justified of public interest matters? Ruling inadmissible his defence only when it became clear the case had imploded due to the tactical gross incompetence of the prosecuting lawyer? Getting allied freemasons in London to prevent a journalist from the USA from entering the UK?
These things not back in some stagnant era of the 1950s, or even 1960s, but in the 21st century.
When I speak of ‘leaders’, or ‘wise heads’, I have in mind the very clear thought that more recent men, such as Sir Peter Crill, would have never countenanced any of those insane actions; they simply would not have occurred on his watch.
The expression ‘damage limitation’ is correct. That is what the Jersey ‘Establishment’ must do, and must hope that it can still do, rather than it being too late. Many people, like Mr Syvret I suspect, quietly hope that the Jersey ‘Establishment’ will not finally wake up and embark upon damage limitation. Those who hope for the utter discrediting of Jersey’s standards of governance are rubbing their hands in glee at every escalating folly of our current leaders, and at the prospect of a deeply messy battle through the courts of London; a battle, let us be frank, if correctly structured and focused cannot other than win. Perhaps some Jersey conservatives still imagine that a Secretary of State for Justice, no matter who, or of what party, will find it an inviting political prospect, to be defending the gruesomely ultra vires conduct of the Jersey authorities in open court? Example: the illegal suspension of a Police Chief? Perhaps some in Jersey imagine that the Lord President of the Privy Council will feel some mysterious motivation in defending plain breakdown in governance and the rule of law in this Crown Dependency? If so, I’d be inclined to think they deserve the rude shock that awaits them, if it were not for the fact that this lunacy jeopardises all of us.
What would the damage limitation be?
What would the damage limitation be?
I could not claim to be certain of which actions would succeed in ‘drawing a line’ under the crisis of the last five years, of bringing ‘closure’, to use the modern phrase. But I can certainly state what are the ‘non-negotiable’ minimal actions.
The individuals centrally involved in the administrative corruption of recent years must go. Solicitor Generals, Attorney Generals, Deputy Bailiffs, Bailiffs; the recent post holders are plainly finished, and will go. One way or another.
And let me say bluntly, if friends of William Bailhache are reading this, the best thing they could possibly do for him is to make him see reality, and make him understand that he must find, and find quickly, some form of ‘face-saving’ way of leaving Office, some means of suddenly ‘retiring’.
‘Ill health’, perhaps?
Let us be realistic about things. If the authorities in London are to be furnished with a fitting reason, let us call it an ‘excuse’, for avoiding the need to intervene in the face of the imminent pressure, and if they are to have some kind of ‘offering’ that may stand any chance of pacifying the aggrieved individuals in Jersey and elsewhere, the very least thing they are going to have to proffer is the departure of the misfeasant individuals.
The Jersey ‘Establishment’ needs to deliver that to London, in order to save London the difficulty of doing it themselves.
Damage limitation is the least bad option facing the Jersey ‘Establishment’.
Unfortunately, those currently at the helm are both the cause of the catastrophe, and the solution. Philip Bailhache and his brother William are both mad. Michael Birt, a vain, spoilt, inadequate and weak man who nevertheless had potential at one stage, but ruined that, for reasons Mr Syvret has documented elsewhere. Tim Le Cocq, simply an idiot and an imbecile. No ‘peaceful’ settlement, if I may use that not inappropriate phrase from warfare, is possible for as long as those four remain in any kind of public Office.
It is as simple as that.
It seems to me that conservative Jersey can either awaken, and embrace the unavoidable damage limitation, or face the ‘reckoning’ that will otherwise occur.
Was Proud Jerseyman guest editor of today's JEP? The Bailhache fluff piece was simply beyond parody! It had us howling with laughter...sorry, repect...!
Straight to Private Eye for an OBN!
"I think the point I was attempting to convey, is that when most democracies entered the modern era, such wide scale tolerance and concealment of gross criminality was so much rarer; for example, in jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom."
What about Rochdale?
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CCAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fuknews%2Fcrime%2F9253267%2FRochdale-grooming-trial-how-the-case-unfolded.html&ei=h8JiUOTOHKif0QXwx4AQ&usg=AFQjCNH0DDJ0-6lOYsJPNR18MZqLpFHpFQ&sig2=XcHhrRcpHjDRmTTcXnIT5A
What about Staffordshire?
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CCAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fhansard.millbanksystems.com%2Flords%2F1992%2Ffeb%2F19%2Fchildrens-homes-care-and-after-care&ei=5sJiUOmODMqu0QXV1oCICA&usg=AFQjCNF0cGPhTzkqvpIhUkZSHoP9Qn3GeQ&sig2=pyJrbQmpILOifpPuoy-Quw
What about this?
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CDAQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thesun.co.uk%2Fsol%2Fhomepage%2Fnews%2F4268021%2FPaedophiles-raid-Sarah-Paynes-site-and-post-sick-messages.html&ei=PcNiUK7kE-zY0QXKloDYDA&usg=AFQjCNFL0siZhrSzYljeZuznjZcv3lF4fw&sig2=_6T8-CPRYYolZd1m15RCMw
And this?
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&ved=0CEgQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.bbc.co.uk%2F2%2Fhi%2Fuk_news%2F8361025.stm&ei=cMViUPmjMOjL0QXBtIHgAw&usg=AFQjCNF87hax5jL4rS7qSLCOfnVCpfxYmw&sig2=GZK6imxlw5TK6xtwwzC_lQ
I think you are naive, or wilfully blind.
Stuart, your Jersey conservative reader says that the only way the Jersey oligarchy bring about a peaceful end to the war is if they clean things up themselves by doing things like getting the contaminated crown officers to 'retire', and the facing up to the failure of regulation and law in Jersey. Is he right that that would work? would that be enough for you to give up on the planned legal battle through the London courts against the Justice Secretary?
A reader says:
"Would that be enough for you to give up on the planned legal battle through the London courts against the Justice Secretary?"
No.
Stuart
If you think Proud Jerseyman wrote the article on Sir Philip who is orchestrating the Christmas Club Points Scheme? Brass Eye!
Stuart, i know you don't read the jep, but did you check-out the puff piece on phil bailhache in the rag as its mentioned by comments?
I did, out of curiosity, look at the on-line version. I'm glad I did. It is both remarkable and funny. It's actually a very, very important piece, for historians of Jersey's power-culture - as a key illustration of just how this community was led into folly and madness via Groupthink, cult-of-the-personality, and newspaper corruption.
The article is already fulfilling a very useful illustrative purpose.
I suppose if you had to pick one of the key characteristics of the piece - as with the recent leader comment - it is the undisguised fear; the fracturing panic so plainly on display in such clearly untrue and bizarre assertions.
Fear.
Fear and panic.
These people know what is coming. And they know there's no stopping it.
Stuart
Readers may be interested to listen to Four Thought on BBC Radio 4 in ten minutes. (It will be available again on iPlayer, I'm sure.)
This edition is on whistle-blowing. Here is the description:
"Entrepreneur Margaret Heffernan challenges the negative view of whistle-blowers and argues that people who dare to speak uncomfortable truths are vital to the success of businesses and other organisations. All too often important information is available, but acting on it is avoided because it would cause conflict. As a former CEO, she believes that a positive attitude to dissent is the key to progress.
Producer: Sheila Cook."
Oh how I laughed from this piece written by Lucy Mason in the JEP:
"The first is, of course, the decision of the States to allow politicians to sit on the Electoral Commission. They changed the original rules, rethought what everyone had agreed on and created a body which was far from the one that had been envisaged. And they did this, quite simply, because of Senator Bailhache.
He wanted to head up the commission, some people thought that because of his credentials (and their respect for him) that perhaps might be a good idea and that was that – a once independent body became an altogether different beast.
Secondly, after years of discussions, debates and decisions not to try and buy the headland at Plémont and return it to the countryside, the Council of Ministers is now considering launching a fresh bid to do just that. They are considering that, plainly and simply, because Senator Bailhache wants to.
On the one hand it is refreshing to find that there is a politician who is not a minister who can wield some power. In a system often criticised for centralising power in the hands of ministers alone, it is encouraging to know that the right person with the right experience and the respect of a large number of colleagues and the public can get things done even without a ministerial remit. "
Did Lucy write this tongue in cheek, or is she so brainwashed not to understand the implication of what she has stated. A person who has only been in the job for ten months, has lorded over everybody without being told to pipe down. It sounds like she's talking about some Mafia Boss rather than, not the chief minister, not even the deputy chief minister, but just the chief minister's lackey, the assistant.
It is very scary that this lackey has undone democracy in the way he been allowed to do, by what must then be a wet cabbage of a Chief Minister.
Jersey really do have problems. Who will ask the lackey what he thinks of Lucy Mason's piece and whether it is an accurate representation of what has happened?
I assume that the Chief Minister talks when he's told to, told what to say and when to say it, and told which aspects of his job to pass to his deputy and assistant, all because Philip Bailhache says so!
The CM wouldn't dare object, because of the 'respect' he has for his lackey.
I can imagine a conversation between Ian and Phil,:
P. Hey Gorsty, just cause you got the top job don't think for one minute you are in charge.
I. Now this is how its gonna be....
Letter published in JEP Page 10 26 September 2012
Don't snipe at Jersey unless you have the proof.
From Tom Jordan
Yet another British MP takes a one sided view of Jersey and tries to rubbish it.
I was a Deputy for six years and was on the Defence committee, which was in charge of the police, during 1987 to 1993, that was my watch. During that time I found the force open, transparent, eager to improve and, above all, honest.
The police are government servants and therefore cannot comment on criticism publicly. I find it galling that an outsider would try and stick his nose in our affairs without investigating these accusations thoroughly. It reminds me of Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, when he was being slated for all of his supposed wrongdoings after he was dead and couldn't defend himself. A supporter cried out on his behalf: ''The evil that men do lives on, the good is oft interred with their bones.'
I hope when this MP tries to insult, without proof, our Island and its police, he will take a balanced view and not keep sniping away with gossip and innuendo, all of it spiteful.
How little you know that infests itself right under your nose! I have all the proof he needs to justify his comments....
Ah, that letter from Tom Jordan - splendid. Just splendid!
Couldn't make it up.
The man always was an entertaining clown. Incapable of saying anything intelligent.
But to external observers in the real world, reflect upon that letter, and understand that it is not some screed written by an Assad supporter in Syria, or a Putin supporter in Russia - but rather a Jersey oligarhcy supporter, in the British Channel island of Jersey, pouring lunatic condemnation upon a British MP for having a concern for human rights, the rule of law and the protection of dissidents.
This is what the Jersey oligarchy's protectors have let this place - on the UK's doorstep - come to.
Stuart
that letter from Tom Jordan - splendid. Just splendid!
Tom Jordan,he that had every major establishment politician sign his nomination paper in his last election & still did not get elected (thank God)
Yes the Tom Jordan letter is more evidence of the 'head in the sand' mentality or as Stuart has often stated 'Group Think', some may say brainwashed or brain dead.
Of course its the same old tactic, attack the messenger not the assassin.
9th April 2010
If I were to return to Jersey – one of the tasks I would undertake on the survivors behalf would be establishing the truth in respect of the death of Maguire.
Did you follow this up Stuart?
ex HdlG
Stuart.
The live, and interactive, guest on Blog TV tonight at 7pm is DEPUTY TREVOR PITMAN
A Very Jersey Coup.
For those of you, (like me) who find the purchase of Private Eye, Le Canard Echaine and The Phoenix too expensive weekly and have to resort to the Rag for written satirical humour , help is at hand. For that august journal is now 'Top Trumps'.
I am of course speaking of the two pronged approach that has been undertaken by their 'journalists' to elevate Sir Philip to Chief Minister de facto and to take significant progress in his accelerated canonisation.
To take these in reverse order. Canonisation in the 'modern' (not middle ages) context starts with;
Declaration 'non-cultus';Here the body is exhumed so that no heretical and cult status can be given to the body. In the case of the JEP this was the election support for Philip 'everyman' the normal workaday father and husband who has a desire to 'serve'.Not too contentious but very obvious.
The next stage is 'Heroic in Virtue' that the servant exhibited the theological virtues of faith, hope and charity, and the cardinal virtues of prudence, justice, fortitude and temperance, to a heroic degree. Lucy Mason ably obliged.He also 'fought the good fight' against the heretic Hemmings, by being 'cordial'. He now becomes Venerable.
The elevation to Blessed now fits with the fight against Mammon where a precious parcel of land is to be wrested single handedly from the grip of 'Scottish and Newcastle Brewery'(boo!), and handed with humility and without pomp to 'The National Trust for Jersey'(rah!).
If that were not enough, has not this very day the JEP put into pictures what every right thinking person already knows the headline 'Chief Minister asks States to buy Plemont Land' with a large picture of Sir Philip right next to that headline (only in tiny print below does the word assistant figure).
So now you know what to think, the blessed leader that everyone wants is sanctified and empowered by the JEP the bastion and organ of Jersey democracy( unless you are truly stupid and disagree).
Check this out :
www.thisisjersey.com/news/2012/09/27/death-by-careless-driving-law-to-be-considered/
I left the following comment in reply to "COM-Mentator " @1
---------------------------
Perhaps this is a smokescreen.
Perhaps we don't need a new law.
Perhaps we just needed the prosecution to actually present the evidence on the Dangerous Driving charge.
(the above photo being a goo d starting point, given that it is a 30 limit!)
Perhaps they shouldn't have let the car to be quickly covered up and apparently spirited off island
Perhaps comments like this didn't used to get published.
--------------------------
Leanne DT
:-) Perhaps I had better stop there to watch to see how long their less absurdly abusive censorship policy lasts.
JEP are stuck between a rock and a hard place - their only choice is to modernise from their "Ministry of Truth" business model - and it is going to hurt like hell.
If they do censorship shut down (as per pre-election 2011 etc.) they consign their mucky little business to history ;-)
This is just the beginning. If necessary we can open a 2nd, or even a 3rd front.
Page 10 27 september 2012
Jersey Evening Post At the heart of Island life since 1890
Planning a new way forward.
Is this a press release from the Council of Ministers? All decided.
No mention of Verita report commissioned by States of Jersey paid for by taxpayers. What are the Council of Ministers frightened of being uncovered if they follow Verita TOR?
Why have States members not been given the opportunity to hear the report from Verita?
http://www.channelonline.tv/channelonline_jerseynews/documents/Verita_Report_-_Committee_of_Inquiry.pdf
Stuart, you speak of tabling the legal action, or actions in London. You do realise the London legal establishment will stop at nothing, literally nothing in the 'legal' tool-box, to prevent any kind of full hearing from taking place on any of the key causes-of-action?
Literally, no matter just how incredible, how overtly biased, political or even corrupt the actions and decisions of the London judges are going to appear they will - simply will - prevent a full hearing in which evidence and testimony are at issue.
The evidence is already plain - many times over. There is a shocking breakdown in the rule of law in Jersey - one which even involves frankly undisguised judicial corruption. On the facts, the evidence, you have won.
Which is why the London establishment simply cannot afford this going to a trial of the evidence.
Just imagine such a hearing, in which men like you, Lenny Harper, Graham Power, appear as live witnesses?
The powers-that-be are running screaming from that prospect.
There are only three ways it can be avoided: contain this crisis in Jersey and require the Jersey authorities to get real and come to a settlement; let it go to the London courts, but take the great risk of rigging some laughably incredible strike-out - of ALL the causes-of-action and remedies, tort, HRA & JR; or see that you have some unfortunate and tragic accident.
Which of those three paths do you think London takes? And are you prepared?
Jersey equal fifth in the world???
http://en.avaaz.org/764/the-five-most-dangerous-places-to-be-a-blogger?utm_source=twitter_avaaz&utm_medium=social_media&utm_campaign=web-freedom
Ref. 15:27 above, and the thread on the JEP "Troll Zoo" site:
www.thisisjersey.com/news/2012/09/27/death-by-careless-driving-law-to-be-considered/
I thought they might CENSOR the comment including "Perhaps comments like this didn't used to get published."
Good ! They cannot face the pain of rebirth so they will wither of their own disease.
Did they catch it from their collaboration with the Nazis or was it always their way?
I have found it disturbing but fascinating cleaning out the cages at the Troll Zoo but new fronts becen :-)
More debrief to follow.
Hi Stuart.
Put up audio of VFC on the Radio yesterday. you & your readers can Listen HERE
Is this a new Era.
Stuart
Nice viewership figures for someone who is supposedly only a conspiracy theorist!
I doubt the City of London will ever be more likely to permit a transparent legal processing of your complaint than Jersey, and yes, it is unimaginable that men of integrity like Graham Power would be permitted as witnesses.
The forum you will need to aim for is then some place international? That would be befitting in this day and age of independent online journalism competing with corporate or state controlled big mainstream media. But where would that be in the physical world? Do you think the UN could figure prominently?
Stuart do you know if Ian will publish the comment piece in the JEP tonight. If not, I am happy to type up and post here as I do think it important to keep a record of this type of article.
Apparently there is some frightened and fearful rubbish - yet again - in today's leader comment in the Jersey Evening Post.
How does it feel, John Averty?
How does it feel?
How does it feel to be terrified?
How does it feel - to suddenly find control over your own destiny, experiences, choices - to be gone from you own hands?
How does it feel - to face that looming, shocking - fear?
It's bearing down upon you John.
And the poetic justice in it all - is that the corrupt abuse of power engaged in by you and your protectors has, as an incidental effect, summoned the doom of the Jersey oligarchy.
Watching your fear manifest itself in the intellectually and ethically bankrupt rants of the newspaper you control is being savoured by a number of people - some of whom had the grave misfortune to encounter you.
Stuart
More please.
Well stated, Mr Syvret, well stated.
There is a limit to how many High Court Judges can be bought - even given the plenitude of the Criminal Offences Confiscation Fund, regularly topped-up as it is, thanks to the decisions of the Jersey Financial Services Commission.
The truth will out.
I haven't commented on your blog previously, but am encouraged to do so, as I see some others from the Jersey legal profession are. I hope more begin to do so.
Enough is enough. The madness must end.
Mah mate Helier and I had just opened the doors to the bank this morning and he mentioned the Criminal Offences Confiscation Fund. He asked me who controls this pot of money; and I didn't have an answer.
So is it the police, the States or another entity?
The Beano is not the rag
Re the COCF.
Good question as to who "controls" this.
My guess is that the Treasurer of the States would be accountable for it. But another guess would be that the Bailiff and AG actually control it.
This is a pure guess. Does anyone know the answer?
Stuart.
Last night's live, and interactive, broadcast recording with DEPUTY TREVOR PITMAN.
Interesting candour relating to 'The Sausage Man'. Does that mean that he is not as protected as some others or that ,as Churchill did with the Channel Islands, declare them indefensible and 'open cities' for invasion.
JEP Page 7 28 September 2012
States advised of school child abuse safeguards
By Ben Queree
All schools must automatically report any child abuse allegations to the Education department following changes undertaken after the abuse scandal at Victoria College in the 1990s, Education Minister Pat Ryan has told the States.
Each school has a trained child protection co-ordinator, and there is a lead child protection officer based at the Education department, he said.
Deputy Ryans's statement came in response to a written question from Deputy Trevor Pitman about what changes in policy had been put in place at the department since the school's head of maths, Andrew Jervis-Dykes, was jailed for abusing boys on sailing trips in the 1990s.
Statement
Deputy Ryan's statement said: 'The Education department has a duty of care to children and young people in its care, and the children's service has a statutory duty to investigation all referrals relating to the possibility that a child is at risk of significant harm.
'Since 1990 investigations have been undertaken by the joint Children's Service and Police Family Protection Team, now known as the Public Protection Unit.
'In addition, the Education department has updated and developed its policies in this area in line with the UK guidelines and best practice on safeguarding young people.
'These are regularly reviewed.'
JEP 28 September 2012
No extension to deadlines for care home abuse claims.
By Richard Heath
There will be no extension to the deadline for claimants who were physically or sexually abused in Jersey's care homes to come forward, the Chief Minister has said.
Senator Ian Gorst, speaking in the States on Tuesday, said that the time frame of six months, which allowed claimants to submit an application under the historical child abuse redress scheme, was agreed with claimants' lawyers and he could see no reasonable grounds one which to extend it.
The minister was answering a question from Deputy Mike Higgins, who asked whether the deadline could be put back until a week after the assembly's debate on the scheme and the levels of compensation it will pay to claimants, which is scheduled for 9 October.
'The scheme was well publicised when it was launched and I am not aware of any reasonable justification for the time period to be extended beyond the 30 September 2012,' Senator Gorst said.
'In the event that any applications are submitted after the deadline, they will be rejected unless exceptional circumstances exist to justify them being allowed in.'
The scheme, which was designed to provide an alternative to full court proceedings, will grant compensation to applicants who claim that they were abused while in care at a States of Jersey establishment between 1945 and 1999.
Stuart accept my apology for posting the articles in the JEP tonight. I do it for your overseas readers and those not buying the post.
JEP 28 September 2012
COMMENT
ABACKWARDS GLANCE
Rob Shipley takes a light-hearted look at the week's news
TROUBLES AT MILL
John Hemming MP has been pretty rude about Jersey.
Sheltering beneath the umbrella of parliamentary privilege in the House of Commons - which allows those taking the floor to bad mouth all and sundry with impunity if the Speaker fails to intervene - he has said that the Island is wallowing in corruption and in need of a modern Hercules to purge its Augean Stables.
Ok, he used more basic expressions to convey his message, but he seems to think that former Senator Stuart Syvret might make an adequate, if less muscled, modern-day Greek hero capable of, figuratively speaking, diverting the rivers Alpheus and Peneus to wash out 30 years of ordure.
Recently, our version of a Foreign Minister, Senator Sir Philip Bailhache, engaged in what he has described as cordial talks with Mr Hemming.
The Augean anology and Mr Syvret are unlikely to have cropped up and, with luck Senator Sir Philip will have been able to put to the back of his mind the hostile MP's troubles with his former wife, who was found guilty of stealing his mistress's cat, or the account in the history of the satirical magazine Private Eye which asserts that Mr H became 'hogwimperinly drunk' when he was a guest at one of their famous lunches.
This appears to be the official answer to the COCF issue -
http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/AssemblyQuestions/2010/Deputy%20de%20Sousa%20to%20TR%20re%20criminal%20confiscation%20fund.pdf
The Jersey Evening Post, its employees, managers, and executives are in no position to criticise others.
As will become clear.
Stuart
Well done researcher at 16.03.
We now know that although the taxpayer funds a very well paid police force, the money they confiscate the actual amount completely unclear to the treasury minister ( small m intended ) is spent by the AG and his friends.
Drinks all around chaps if you are in the circle paid for by a private access fund that has around £7 million in it or maybe not ? Slush fun comes to mind ?
Anonymous
It looks as though the cover up of child abuse isn't exclusive to the Jersey branch of the BBC. http://order-order.com/2012/09/28/jimmy-savile-sex-abuse-exposed-bbc-cover-up-allegations-mounting/
' Private Eye which asserts that Mr H became 'hogwimperinly drunk'Quote JEP
Whereas the JEP appears
'misshavershambling' apologies to Charles Dickens and Vivian Stanshall.
A reader says:
"Well done researcher at 16.03.
We now know that although the taxpayer funds a very well paid police force, the money they confiscate the actual amount completely unclear to the treasury minister ( small m intended ) is spent by the AG and his friends.
Drinks all around chaps if you are in the circle paid for by a private access fund that has around £7 million in it or maybe not ? Slush fun comes to mind ?"
Of course, the really interesting question is "who" - and "to what extent" - has benefited from Jersey's COCF - amongst Whitehall civil servants - and SPADs?
Happily, that is a question we are going to have addressed.
Stuart
With the opprobrium aimed at the JEP one should not leave out CTV ( Independent Television Company of the Year 2011)
Jess Stevenson reports
'A warship that can track a target the size of a cricket ball at three times the speed of sound has arrived in Guernsey.'
How was it on cricket bats, Lotus Elise ,full pork sausages or piles of confiscated cash?
Time will tell.
So now there is a "Consolidated Fund" too - page two from Anonymous post at 21:04:00 . Thank you.
So one wonders what that fund is used for?
The Beano is not the Rag
It would appear there is more than 7 million in the fund
http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/ScrutinyReviewTranscripts/2012/Transcript%20-%20Medium%20term%20Financial%20Plan%20Review%20-%20Chief%20Minister%20-%201%20August%202012.pdf
States of Jersey Corporate services scrutiny panel
Review of the medium term financial plan
public hearing with the financial minister
WED 1 AUG 2012
page 28
Treasurer of the States.
We also have other funds such as the
Criminal Offences Confiscation Fund which can be used to meet particular items of expenditure which
crop up that are within the terms of that fund. There is £14 million in that fund and there is a little bit in
the Drug Trafficking Confiscation Fund which we can also use.
Treasurer of the States:
But there is £14 million in C.O.C.F. (Criminal Offences Confiscation Fund) because of the recent
issues.
"How was it on cricket bats, Lotus Elise ,full pork sausages or piles of confiscated cash?
Time will tell."
:)
Of course, the really interesting question is "who" - and "to what extent" - has benefited from Jersey's COCF - amongst Whitehall civil servants - and SPADs?
Happily, that is a question we are going to have addressed.
Stuart
Friday, 28 September 2012 22:13:00 BST
If that accords with snippets that have come my way, this should result in a metaphorical mushroom cloud over Whitehall.
No cordon sanitaire possible in that event....
"Full pork sausages"???
Some clues please.
I’ve just read Ben Queree’s piece in today’s JEP. I just could not believe what I was seeing – I had to read it again just to make sure.
There has been a marked change in recent media reporting of child abuse – especially in the BBC – but the JEP has appeared to fervently hang on to its previous ridiculous reporting policy. However, Ben Queree’s piece is truly remarkable in that I cannot really disagree with anything he writes! What a sea change in approach!
Perhaps someone could post this piece on the relevant blogs?
Stuart, do you think the oligarhcy can avert the inevitable now?
No.
Only question is, 'how far inland the tsunami reaches?'
Stuart
Could a super injunction have been paid for from the COCF Fund?
It would of been a more balanced opinion by Mr Queree if he actually mentioned the Verita reports recommendations.
What is the issue for the Council of Ministers within them?
nTed"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong" Voltaire
Re the balance og BQ's article. I suppose he could have mentioned Verita but, looking at it objectively, he certainly gave the Williamson effort what it deserves and, overall, I think this is a very significant change of stance for the JEP.
I also note that they published the JCLA letter condemning the quality of their reporting.
Small steps maybe but still in e right direction.
The Jersey Evening Post - and all who work for it - are beyond redemption.
Even more so than is already apparent to all thinking people.
Stuart
Another enterprising Vic educated man makes the news
multi million drug trafficing
I understand what the commentor is saying at 14:07 re the article by Mr Queree.
I do not feel relieved that the paper has a change of stance, why comment on one report and not another One an in-depth commissioned terms of reference paid by Jersey tax payers (Verita) the other also paid by tax payers reviewing the first.
Why the focus on the Williams review of Verita?
Small steps maybe but same message coming from the COM the Williamson report is what ministers want.
STRAIGHT TALK
The recent sea change taking place within BBC Jersey, CTV and the one single Ben Queree article in the JEP, is their begrudging acceptance that Jersey State Media have lost the mighty power of exclusivity for Island information. Not only have the blogs outperformed them in their quality and integrity of investigative journalism, and called the State Media out on their complicity with evidence, blogs have brought serious outside attention to it.
By now, even the JEP employees must be aware of their pending cataclysm to be brought by outside media exposure of their blatant role in the abuse cover-up. But in the future, when thoroughly dissected for their complicit role in prolonging the agony of state sponsored abuse for decades, the JEP
can trot out only the odd and occasional unbiased piece, published in the same week as numerous examples of shamefully biased coverage of the COI issue. It wont save them from being seen as a tool for paedoprotectors every bit as much as they were for the Nazis. They have again backed themselves into that collaborator's corner of no escape or surrender.
BBC Jersey has obviously experienced some recent
executive order to begin building evidence it is no longer a state mouthpiece. That BBC Jersey has been frightened into toeing a line is, I think, no longer arguable. Less guilty of blatant lies than the JEP and "Award Winning" CTV, BBC Jersey had struggled to simply avoid all meaningful coverage related to what must become (once again) the biggest news story of the Channel Islands: the still ongoing cover-up of the child abuse scandal. By reversing their taboo on the inconvenient subject, BBC seem desperate to create evidence separating themselves from the media collaborators.
In the final analysis, BBC still has the most to lose. The only imaginable way they could save themselves from becoming a news story as big as the abuse cover up they contributed to, would be to get ahead of the story, and compete with the bloggers as investigative journalists, bringing the world's attention again to Jersey child abuse. They can't do that with John Gripton and friends at the local helm.
Hello SPADs.
Hello FACAWs.
How does it feel?
To have achieved your place in history?
As protectors of child-abusers;
As protectors of rapists?
How does it feel?
Was it worth it?
Stuart
Stuart.
Has their freefall finally made contact with the earth?
A reader says:
"Stuart.
Has their freefall finally made contact with the earth?"
Not yet.
But they're starting to experience ground-rush.
Stuart.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2210592/Esther-Rantzen-We-colluded-Jimmy-Saville-child-abuser.html
"And it ought to be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things" Niccolo Machiavelli Il Principe 1513
http://youtu.be/ghJrJEUNxBY
It's good she has come clean about this. I have a lot of sympathy for her, because the way whistleblowers and victims of abuse have been treated is frightening.
Even Jeremy Paxman was repremanded after this programme, for what he said to Frank Walker, and Newsnight went downhill afterwards, I stopped watching it because they were whitewashing the news instead of analysing it.
And whats more, we still haven't been told who nominated Frank Walker for an OBE and that ought to be in the public interest!
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/who_nominated_frank_walker_for_a#incoming-146996
This ought to be in the public interest.
BBC denies cover-up over Jimmy Savile
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9576926/BBC-denies-cover-up-over-Sir-Jimmy-Savile-sex-allegations.html
Jimmy saville Channel Television 50 years vote for your favourite face.
http://www.channelonline.tv/channelonline_50/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=498008
Being a Sunday and all that, I couldn't resist ,with all the talk of freefall (not talking about my favourite book by William Golding)but the Whale in The Hitch Hikers Guide.
The Book: It is important to note that suddenly, and against all probability, a sperm whale had been called into existence, several miles above the surface of an alien planet. And since this is not a naturally tenable position for a whale, this innocent creature had very little time to come to terms with its identity. This is what it thought, as it fell:
The Whale: Ahhh! Woooh! What's happening? Who am I? Why am I here? What's my purpose in life? What do I mean by who am I? Okay okay, calm down calm down get a grip now. Ooh, this is an interesting sensation. What is it? Its a sort of tingling in my... well I suppose I better start finding names for things. Lets call it a... tail! Yeah! Tail! And hey, what's this roaring sound, whooshing past what I'm suddenly gonna call my head? Wind! Is that a good name? It'll do. Yeah, this is really exciting. I'm dizzy with anticipation! Or is it the wind? There's an awful lot of that now isn't it? And what's this thing coming toward me very fast? So big and flat and round, it needs a big wide sounding name like 'Ow', 'Ownge', 'Round', 'Ground'! That's it! Ground! Ha! I wonder if it'll be friends with me? Hello, Ground!
[Cuts to a distant view as the whale hits the ground and spews up a large mushroom cloud of snow]
The Book: Curiously, the only thing that went through the mind of the bowl of petunias, as it fell, was, "Oh no, not again!" Many people have speculated that if we knew exactly *why* the bowl of petunias had thought that we would know a lot more about the nature of the universe than we do now.
My caveat. The Whale is not deliberately meant to represent any,all or several of the persons alluded to in the entirety of this blog and all its addendumb.
Hi Stuart just a couple of those Links.
Jimmy saville Channel Television 50 years vote for your favourite face.
BBC denies cover-up over Jimmy Savile
This ought to be in the public interest.
The Daily Mail didn't published my comment about- Jimmy Savile, Haut de la Garenne, his denials and subsequent suing of the Sun Newspaper, the illegal suspension of Graham Power and the denial of the BBC in respect to Savile's child abuse.
So I've sent the Daily Mail a redacted version.
Mr Syvret, I do hope many of those who have been bit-players and small-fry in the dangerous bureaucracies and the cover-ups you have exposed in recent years now see that the time has come to "bail out", as it were.
All the small fish, who tuned blind-eyes, remained silent or found themselves going along with the corrupt plans of colleagues to sabotage the child abuse investigations in some way, must now see the game is up, and they must jump overboard now, and swim for the life rafts.
Short of building a new prison, I can't see the inevitable purge encompassing too many of the 'plebs', to borrow a vogue term. Provided, of course, they now join the right side, and make sure they have a little 'insurance policy' in the form of an a-mail or letter or some such record of them having now communicated the truth to higher authorities. Such as London, for example.
I believe this is the email address for the department of the Secretary of State for Justice:
general.enquiries@judiciary.gsi.gov.uk,
I'm sure if you mark the email "JERSEY: CONDIDNETAIL - MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST CONCERN", the requisite 'insurance' effect will be achieved.
Time to turn 'Queen's Evidence'.
Before that time runs out.
To the reader who makes assertions about Esther Rantzen, and what she may or may not have known in other cases, you will have to provide some references to back you claims.
I have no knowledge of the claims you make.
Stuart
Stuart.
It looks as though Esther Rantzen is the first one to jump ship, so to speak....
Realistically others would have done this earlier, if their job, home, and in some cases life had/ has not be threatened!?
Being from the USA, I did not know who Jimmy Saville was until I googled his name. On Wikipedia, under "Jim'll Fix It," the following:
"On the same programme, Savile himself (unusually) took part in a Christmas 'fix-it' when he took a young boy to the Holy Land and Jerusalem to visit some of the places made famous by the biblical Christmas story. The boy explained later on the 2000 TV show I Love the '70s that he had never written to the show; but was selected from amongst the boys at his orphanage when the BBC requested a volunteer to accompany Savile on the trip."
"...A young schoolboy asked Savile if he could dance with male semi-naked troupe The Chippendales. The wish was granted, with the young boy 'stripping' to his bare chest with the dancers, leading to a high number of complaints from viewers. Savile personally responded to the criticism in BBC's The Radio Times, pointing out to the complainants that there was nothing untoward about the performance or in the intention of the child taking part and that anything construed inappropriate was in the minds of the adults watching."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim%27ll_Fix_It
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/apr/13/abuse-teenage-boys-detention-centre-crime
abused by adults and let down by police and social services
exJhB
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/apr/13/abuse-teenage-boys-detention-centre-crime
abused by adults and let down by police and social services
exJhB
From that Neville Husband Guardian article:"There are two things that are important to successfully sexually abuse somebody," Young says. "By successful, I mean without being prosecuted. One, anonymity or silence – if you can't carry out your act without people knowing, you're not going to be at it very long. The second thing you need is a victim who's 'reliable'; a reliable victim is someone who's already been abused to the point where, if they do speak out, who on Earth is going to believe them? And who on Earth is going to believe Kevin Young, the pauper's son, who has been in and out of care, who's a knife-wielding thug, a bully?" That is how a number of care home reports described Young, but he insists he was a quiet, over-obedient boy. "The truth is, nobody would have believed me."
That gets to the very heart of how child abusers manage to get away with it for decades. They libel their victims, so that people will just think that their victims are either born liars or deserved it anyway. They make the boy victims out to be young thugs and the girl victims out to be slags and slappers. Sorry if no-one likes the words slag and slapper, I dont like it myself, they are ugly words aren't they, but thats how child abuse victims are being described as, don't I know it just!
"Martin Narey was director general of the prison service when Husband was convicted in 2003. He had been the assistant governor at Deerbolt when Husband was moved there after the arrest of Johnson, and the assistant governor of Frankland. He went on to become CEO of Barnardo's, the charity for vulnerable children.
Why did Narey never call for a public inquiry? "For the simple reason that, at the time, I knew nothing about it," he says. "That may sound very odd, with what we know now about Neville Husband. But the first conviction, which came just as I was leaving the director general post, was not brought to my attention. I suspect it was because, at that time, the magnitude of Husband's offending was not known."
Would he support a public inquiry now? "I have no objection to some sort of inquiry – whether a public inquiry would be justified, I don't know. It is troubling that Husband was able, apparently, to hide his offending over such a long period. However, and speaking after having had long experience of child abuse issues at Barnardo's, I am now very aware of the ability and success of such offenders in conditioning those around them."
Narey admits that, when he was running it, the prison service dealt inadequately with sexual abuse in prisons. "As director general, I was intolerant of physical abuse and racism, and sacked a lot of staff… But at that time there was very little awareness of male-on-male sexual abuse, either in prisons or in wider society." Neither Narey nor Newell – still two of the most respected figures in prison circles – has ever publicly apologised for the failure to spot Husband's abuse."
The police should be investigating him as well, in relation to Barnardos activities with the secret family courts.
"The victims are appalled that they did not receive an apology. Steve complained to his MP, Stephen Byers, who wrote to the then justice minister Jack Straw. Straw replied: "The terms of the agreement did not include an apology." Hall says the settlement, and the nature of its conclusion, made him feel "abused again".
None of the victims has been offered counselling or psychiatric help; indeed, the terms of their settlement stated that if such help was required, the victims should pay for it out of their award."
How can they not even bloody well apologise? How much does it cost to apologise? Why do they have to stamp all over the victims of abuse even more by making such a song and dance out of even issuing a simple apology? Why can't they even do that?
If they cant even apologise that means they are not sorry. That speaks volumes.
Stuart.
Guest Posting from JCLA Chair and Abuse Survivor CARRIE MODRAL
Considering the BBC is an institution full of investigative journalists, the BBC carpet’s been held down pretty well.
It’s been four and a half years since that Newsnight programme. Do you think Esther would like to see what’s been going on under the Jersey carpet since then? Do you think she’d be interested to learn how they tried to shoot the Health Minister for raising concerns about systemic child protection failures? What about an update on Paxman’s mate Walker- did his words “there’ll be no cover up” ring true or false? False- he preferred to bully the very silent Wendy Kinnard, the then Home Minister, into resigning. (I still can't figure out why Wendy caved in with only a few weeks to go in office. Suspicious or dirty? I thought lefties were supposed to be brave!) How did the politicians behave? What about the progressive politicians? Were they silent? Were they silent when wearing their scrutiny hats? How did the civil servants behave during this time? Did they rip up evidence, meet in secret, change the wording from specimen to coconut, void to cellar? Did some key players disappear into the sunset with golden handshakes?
What was the role of Mr. lying in-camera Lewis when he replaced Wendy as the new Home Minister? Was it to get rid of the Police Chief Graham Power, like that’s some sort of normal, day everyday occurrence! What did this achieve other than getting bloggers even more suspicious? What happened to the investigation? Perhaps it was trashed and closed down after a load of expensive reports were written. What happened to Bob Hill’s request for an independent review by respected people who were willing to do it for free? The States chose an our chap. Did that last crutial term of reference just slip off the paper then? Apparently yes! Does the current Home Minister sound like he knows what he’s talking about? He thinks so.
Whats happened to the perpetrators then?…. .Not surprisingly, very little - a few disposable people went down. What did William Bailhache do when he was the A-G? He collected files on his desk and played golf. What about the events following Stuart’s public interest story when Stuart revealed the name of a nurse who kept stolen hospital drugs, illegal drugs and fire arms and raised suspicion for Shipman-like behaviour? Was it good practice to raid his home with a mob of riot police and without a search warrant? No. What was the result of his subsequent err…fair… trial? - Stuart won the argument but still lost. And last of all, treating them just like the Jersey authorities do, what about the survivors- what’s happened to them? Treated with dignity and helped to move on? I don’t think so. Most survivors have simply been re-vitimised by the States of Jersey justice apparatus. And the JCLA?- didn’t they have a bad time of it too when they got taken over at one point? Probably, well yes actually.
And what’s going on now? The Chief Minister can’t sort the TOR’s out. Why not? Is it because Gorst is a ghost CM and Bailhache really rules Jersey? Yes. So why does Bailhache back the vague, narrow and brief Williamson TORS? Because Williamson’s paid to be vague, narrow and brief and create no-go zones. Do you think Esther knows which TORS are better – Williamson that end in 1994 and contain research errors, or the date-free Verita, which may not be perfect but is favoured by survivors? Of course Esther knows, even plebs can work that one out. So do you think she’d be surprised to learn that the local media colluded with the Jersey authorities?- Not really. What about BBC Jersey? Honouring the BBC Charter, being impartial and truthful to their audience? Esther might notice just how much progress has been achieved by the Jersey authorities, learn of their conflicts of interest and note how effective the rule of law has been in Jersey during the last 4 years?
So, not very much to up-date her with!
I wrote to Jim'll Fix it once. Lucky he didn't want to fix me up.
Esther Rantzen: Rumours Followed Jimmy Savile
In 1996 Irvine Welsh published 'Ecstasy: Three Tales of Chemical Romance'. The first story, Lorraine Goes To Livingston, featured Freddy Royle, a necrophiliac TV personality who lives at a hospital he has donated a wing to, as the hospital turns a blind eye to his activities.
It was clearly a pastiche of Savile and yet no legal action resulted.
Welsh was hardly a BBC insider but everyone knew about Savile.
BBC management should not just be sued, they should be facing criminal charges as enablers.
The former estate of Savile should be seized and passed to his victims.
Maybe Jimmy had the evidence on all of friends in high and not so high places..... judges, coppers, media personalities, royals...... and so was "untouchable". Of course that would explain why we are now free to find out the truth about him, as he is unable to expose all the perverts and child rapists he knew.
And Stuart if you cant see that then you sir are a deluded.
Micheal Mcmanus
October 1, 2012 at 3:29 pm
Jersey is a place where the rich get to abuse children and those around them allow it, then cover-up for the abusers.
This is how the world see’s Jersey, this is how I see Jersey.
A reader says:
"Maybe Jimmy had the evidence on all of friends in high and not so high places..... judges, coppers, media personalities, royals...... and so was "untouchable". Of course that would explain why we are now free to find out the truth about him, as he is unable to expose all the perverts and child rapists he knew.
And Stuart if you cant see that then you sir are a deluded."
Why do you think I wrote this in the main posting:
"This is why governments, oppressive regimes, security forces and mafias around the world love child abuse. They simply love it. No other criminal activity, no matter how bad, is as foul, or gives such “leverage”, such “ownership" – such control – over those who commit it. And once a person has acted so despicably, or shown an unhealthy interest in the under-age or those on the borderline, or has failed to prevent the crimes, and instead helped to conceal them – then that person is “owned”. Forever more."
Those who are in power - or more significantly, those who would control power - own it - seek out child abusers - more so than any other kind of criminal.
No other crime is so condemned - no other crime gives such "ownership" over people in positions of power and influence: politicians, celebrities, police officers, lawyers, journalists, judges - news editors.
And just as those who have committed crimes against children are "owned"- so are those who turned a blind-eye - or went even further, and proactively assisted in covering-up child abuse, for example - by helping to abuse and oppress whistle-blowers, they too are "owned".
All such individuals - once they've taken that step - are wholly committed; there is no turning back. They are "bought" into the whole child-abuse "omerta" as surely as if they'd joined a mafia - or pledged some kind of Freemasonic vow. Which, lets face it, a number of them have.
To most ordinary decent people, the notion that there are so many people around who would participate, in whatever way, in the concealment of child abuse seems shocking, mystifying.
It ceases to become so - the moment you think about "power" - and all that that involves: influence, secrets, favours, mutual protection, threats, coercion, control.
Those who would wield power - be they governments, media empires, security services or mafias - love child abuse. No other crime - and no other concealment of crime - gives them such power.
Stuart
Sick Sick sick
If that is the case Stuart then the island you live on is the powder keg that
epitomises your words, and if the shot needs to hit the fan I cant think of a
better place.
Sick Sick Sick 2
If Paul Gambaccini has been waiting 30 years for this to blow, then he is an accessory after the fact, and is just as culpable as the rest of the cowards who did nothing!!!
And, hello Michael, hope your doing ok mate.
Well, at least Esther Ranzen and Paul Gambaccini have come forward now, which is more than others in the know have done.
I can understand why people like Esther Ranzen and Paul Gambaccini keep their mouths shut, look how other whistleblowers have been treated. My own solicitor Richard Wise, who was really getting stuck in to investigating the Pindown child abuse scandal suddenly died, police officers have also suddenly died, people have had death threats, even Lenny Harper got death threats, some of the abuse victims have also had death threats, I know I have. Then Esther Ranzen will be well aware of how Stuart has been treated, and Graham Power, so why would anyone be surprised about her not wanting to pop her head above the parapet?
I'm just glad they have both said something at last.
Dear Stuart,
I posted a comment re: the identity of the driver of the Green Island crash...did you receive it? This disgraceful episode (yet again) in our Islands legal farse must not go unchallenged.
Mate of mine was sitting in his car in town in traffic listening to his music and drumming on the steering wheel when game show Mike (Bowron) approached him and said "call me picky, but I dont like you drumming on your steering wheel" my mate said "you're picky" and drove off.
how much do we pay this dipstick to bother law abiding people with his personal prejudices?
I too can understand the reasons behind the silence of people like Esther, however that silence perpetuated the misery, Tuning a blind eye because you are frightened of the consequences, for her and not the children,
Why did she not say something when she was on Newsnight talking about the abuses in Jersey?
If Game Show Mike was of any meaningful calibre, he would be calling in support to investigate certain corrupt cops in his Force - and investigating the illegal suspension of former Police chief Graham Power.
After all - formal criminal complaints have been made.
Stuart
Stuart, I think you've had over 1000 page views today. I think that Jersey conservative lawyer guy who comments is right. None of this is fading away. Looks like only chance establishment have of avoiding big problems is to bite the bullet themselves and clean up their mess before someone else does it for them.
The Jimmy Savile news leaks have caused previously silent people to finally speak about their long-held suspicions. It is probably only a matter of time before multiple credible stories begin to fill in the blanks. Then, the people who will be publicly derided will be those who covered it up or failed to investigate what was already obviously suspicious behaviour. It will be the same thing with Jersey child abuse. If you were in a position to know or see the evidence and you chose to look the other way, you will be deservedly known as paedophile complicit for the rest of your lives.
I have noticed a lot of anonymous people attacking Esther Ranzen since she spoke out, and I don't mean to be nasty to anyone who has been abused who is keeping anonymous for that reason, I can understand that, but I do wonder at people who attack others whilst hiding behind anonymity.
I'd also like to know why Esther Ranzen kept silent about things she should have told the police about, but having been in the horrible position of being treated like a criminal myself whilst trying to report crimes crimes committed against me I can understand why other people have been reluctant to put their heads above the parapet.
I just don't feel it is helpful to keep having a go at the ones who have come forward, for goodness sake, the last thing we want is for other witnesses to be put off doing likewise!
Stuart, I'm confused, how is it that ITV and the papers reporting on the soon to be shown program about Jimmy Saville can name him as accused of child abuse, whereas he has never charged, but when you have named some people in Jersey who have done bad things, you are threatened with the Data Protection Law (Jersey style)? Perhaps the ITV might be interested in some of your evidence.
Another thing that strikes me, is that although there has been a lot of talk about Jimmy Saville being on intimate terms with members of the Royal Family and Heads of State, there has been no mention so far of wether he was a friend of the Grand Master of the Jersey Freemasons.
Staggering page view numbers for this and related Jersey blogs. The effort to silence you is not working out too well for the oligarchy, is it.
The Mail today states "It emerged Saville was a regular visitor to Haute de la Garenne, the notorious abuse-ridden Jersey children's home"
Surely Jersey must now have the strongest COI possible, otherwise its going to be seen globally as an OurChap report.
Who is most afraid of the truth?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9580659/We-were-abused-by-Sir-Jimmy-Savile-too-More-damaging-revelations-about-the-Jimll-Fix-It-star.html
"They spoke out as it was revealed that police interviewed the star five years ago over an allegation of indecent assault and it emerged that he was a regular visitor to Haute de la Garenne, the notorious abuse ridden Jersey children's home"
Nothing less than a full & cleansing inquiry is required, 1945 to present.
Is Mark is hinting at something between the lines? I wish the average Jersey JEP reader could get this blog posting. public and private personas
Here is the Mail link to Savile Haut de la Garenne mention.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2211463/Jimmy-Savile-As-pressure-grows-BBC-cover-women-come-forward-ordeals.html
Savile accused of abuse at Haut de la Garenne
SIR Jimmy Savile was accused of an indecent assault at Haut de la Garenne in the 1970s, according to the States police.
The allegation against the late television presenter and Radio 1 DJ was made during the police investigation into child abuse at the former children’s home.
The police say that the allegation was investigated but there was insufficient evidence to proceed.
No charges were brought and the information has only now been made public.
Sir Jimmy, who died in October last year aged 84, has been accused of sexually abusing underage girls in an ITV documentary to be aired tomorrow.
He was a regular visitor to Jersey between the 1960s and 2003.
So much for 'no recollection' of ever having visited
S.O.
The celebrity link to HdeLG could not have come at a better time, and there are more celebs than just Saville involved.
He could not possibly have done this without someone locally knowing about it, arranging it and covering his back.
If the COM do not go for a full and proper enquiry now the whole world will know.
At last the BBC sees reality.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-jersey-19802630
We are now learning there was a police report in Jersey and also one in the UK. Two independent police reports now known about.
Another high profile ANIMAL too add to Jersey's shame.
Having trouble reaching Stuart on gmail ...
And JS was not the only one! The Jersey Opera house was the centre and Jeff le Marquand the pimp....and I should know!
Does the name Wilfrid Brambell bring back any memories?
The word down the station is that Game Show is playing hide the sausage with the Eyelash Mannequin
talk flammin english
Madame Fifi The All-Knowing & All-Seeing has a clear view through the crystal Orb of political, legal and puppet press meetings on and off the Island today. Desperate they are as minute by minute the scandal creeps closer to home. Oh my!
Game show I believe is the Chief of police MB hide the sausage? Eyelash Mannequin I believe could be the data protection commission EM
Hi Stuart.
On the BBC 10 O'clock news Editor of the Mirror said that if he had published a story about JS 18 years ago, would of been career suicide. So story didn't go to press.
Say no more. That's it everyone to shared to say anything, just like over here & every were else that's been touched with child abuse.
So its aloud to go on.
TJW.
I heard that a few months ago, and from someone in the know. I also recently heard that Bowron has been upsetting his neighbours down at Victor Hugo and a few are moving away as a result, he seems to enjoy ordering them about. Such a nice chap.
Hi Stuart.
Just have to comment on this.
"Game show I believe is the Chief of police MB hide the sausage? Eyelash Mannequin I believe could be the data protection commission EM"
Well I know EM is married with kids, what's MB.s position?
TJW.
GSM & ELM?
Come, come Stuart, surprised at your naivety. Talk about an alleged 'affair-of-convenience', perhaps calculated to spike other notions! Who do they bat for, in reality?
Crusing Sailor.
Well, we have a situation in which the BBC - in the sense of the BBC as a 'network', as a vital arm of the establishment - has shown itself to be very well capable of the corrupt concealment of foul crimes, with such concealment being engaged in by the very well 'connected' within that BBC 'system', within that 'omerta'.
The actor who played 'Bergerac' in the fictional crime series set on Jersey, is John Nettles OBE. A man who cultivated and maintains very close bonds with the Jersey establishment, and whose 'networks' within the BBC are legendary.
John Nettles OBE (didn't quite get the knighthood, unlike Jimmy).
Now, who is John Nettles's daughter???
Nemesis
Game show I believe is the Chief of police MB.
Hide the sausage?
Eyelash Mannequin I believe could be the data protection commission EM
Reposting as I missed out the full stop of MB.
And Jersey has just appointed Moynihan to save the finance industry. You couldn't make it up! He was at AIB for over 30 years and is currently CEO. Allied Irish Banks. Anyone remember what happened to the Irish banks followed by the Irish economy during that time? Didn't CEO Moynihan have any advice for those other high flyers in AIB back in the auld country? If not, why not? If he did, it didn't work.
I wonder what the calibre of the advice he will be offering to those tasked with saving our rapidly contracting major industry will be?
How’s about that then… Guys & Gals Jimmy Savile with the police force that ignored complaints by young boys at Medomsley as early as 1973
http://youtu.be/JTfGWkLUB84
"Well I know EM is married with kids, what's MB.s position?"
Err, on top?
The Beano is not the Rag
Dose the name Ted Heath ring any bells?
At this point, a second condition was introduced. Newsnight had learned that the Crown Prosecution Service had concluded that it was not in the public interest to charge Savile, and the Newsnight team was asked to find out why.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2211907/Jimmy-Savile-
It seems Crown Officers here & UK like the term "not in public interest" when it bloody well is in our interest.
Did Jimmy Savile’s BBC bosses, and the people who knew he preyed on underage girls, do everything they could do stop him? If not, they should explain why.
Phone: 03700 100 222*
03700 100 212* (textphone)
*24 hours, charged as 01/02 geographic numbers
Post: BBC Complaints
PO Box 1922
Darlington
DL3 0UR
In a comment, 'Nemesis' wrote, "The actor who played 'Bergerac' in the fictional crime series set on Jersey, is John Nettles OBE. A man who cultivated and maintains very close bonds with the Jersey establishment, and whose 'networks' within the BBC are legendary.
John Nettles OBE (didn't quite get the knighthood, unlike Jimmy).
Now, who is John Nettles daughter???"
The BBC's John Nettles OBE's daughter is Emma Martins, Jersey's Data Protection Commissioner, who has carried out the relentlessly anti-democratic oppressions of Stuart Syvret in an attempt to stop him exposing crimes like rape, murder, corruption and child abuse.
As I recollect, she even boasted of taking advice from her father, the BBC's John Nettles OBE, when she gave an interview to the local rag a couple of years ago.
Anon @ 11.35 Said
"It seems Crown Officers here & UK like the term "not in public interest" when it bloody well is in our interest."
We are 'NOT' the public, they are, in law we are the 'PRIVATE', so therefore they mean that it is 'NOT' in 'THEIR' interest!!!
Jimmy wasn't just busy at HdlG, he spent time at Sacre Coeur and Aquila Methodist Youth Club, as did Uncle Reg.
Saville was the lynch pin that's kept the inquiry from beeing properly investigated, hence the lack off prosecutions and the closing of the investigation
A year and a day has passed now dead , relatives acting for Jimmys estate can no longer order anymore super injunctions
There must be a lot off very worried people in Jersey especially the governor of Haut de la Garrenne at the time that must have know about this allegation of abuse.
http://youtu.be/OpDmSlnogWY
Time for the Bailhache Bloods to bail, The villagers are getting restless and are marching up the hill with fired torches and pitch forks.
Didn't another Bloods Brothers get chased from the island of Sark or am I wrong?
The Barclay Bloods.
http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/10/establishment-darkness/
linked here
http://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1349266089.html
Things may be glacially slow but they are still moving....
Over a thousand pageviews yesterday, I see, from the counter at the bottom of the blog.
When the Jersey government imprisons you again for exposing their corrupt failings in things like covering up murders, rapes, manslaughter, conspiracies to pervert justice, and child abuse, I take it this time there will be an organised campaign in London to draw attention on to Jersey and its unlawful jailing of opposition activists and dissidents?
I also assume people elsewhere will take over the running of this blog a the key campaign site for however long you're in jail?
Yes.
Stuart
Someone says, 'As I recollect, she even boasted of taking advice from her father, the BBC's John Nettles OBE, when she gave an interview to the local rag a couple of years ago.'
What? You mean Jersey's Data Protection Commissioner, Emma Martins, actually boasted in the Jersey paper about taking advice from her father, well connected BBC actor John Nettles, about
the case against YOU??
Is that fr f*cking real?!?!
Woah!
These people. Scary.
Showbiz families can oppress brave whistle-blowing politicians who are trying to expose and stop child abuse.
The Saville cover up starts to look less and less surprising.
Yes.
That is for real.
Emma Martins was given a big glowing interview in the Jersey Evening Post - the journal that is the protector of child abusers and serial rapists - in celebration of her prosecution against me.
She spoke of 'how terribly hard it had been for her - yet how she bravely soldiered on - in protection of a collection of scum - with only the unlimited resources of her tax-payer funded department budget and that of the Attorney General behind her - and how she had been able to complete her heroic struggle with the help and support of her father, BBC actor, and well connected friend of the Jersey oligarhcy, John Nettles.
I paraphrase the interview fractionally, but that was the gist of it.
Stuart
'kin hell!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19808658
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19809898
In respect of 1 or 2 comments that have been submitted - keep it real, please.
Stuart
Quote from JEP Wednesday 3 October Page 4 Cont from page 1
Former deputy police chief Lenny Harper, who ran the historical child abuse inquiry until his retirement in August 2008, said that The Sun newspaper had approached him during the investigation with a photograph alleged to be of Sir Jimmy at Haut de la Garenne in the 1970s. The picture has been circulated widely on Twitter since the recent allegations. He said:'From memory, I said ''It could be anywhere''. It was just savile on a grass verge surrounded by loads of kids. There was nothing to identify it - you could not even say that it was taken in Jersey.
'During my time there I had no allegation against him. If someone had come to us and said ''Jimmy Savile assaulted me'' I would remember that.'
He added that there was always the possibility that the allegation was made after he left.
JEP page 2 Wednesday 3 October 2012
Guernsey Jurats could sit in Jersey cases
Judges from Guernsey will be able to sit in some Jersey court cases, if the States agree.
Deputy Chief Minister Ian Le Marquand, the former Magistrate, has lodged a proposition today calling for Members to agree to amend the law. If the move is approved, the Bailiff will be able to appoint one or more Jurats of the Royal Court of Guernsey to sit as Jurats in Jersey if it was inappropriate for a Jersey one to be involved.
In a report accompanying the proposition, which follows 12 months of consultation with Guernsey, the move is described as an important amendment which would ensure that justice is being administered fairly and independently.
The report reads: 'At present there is no statutory mechanism for the appointment of a person of equivalent office from outside the Island to sit instead. Jersey is of course fortunate to have so close at hand a kindred jurisdiction with a Royal Court of similar high calibre to its own.'
So now there is a precedent for removing an AG in a Crown Dependency, next please: http://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/isle-of-man-news/isle-of-man-s-attorney-general-faces-perjury-and-forgery-charges-1-4988187
I'm making it a habit to vaguely follow your page views. I make it roughly over 1300 today.
All of that oppression, designed to silence you and stop you getting the evidence out?
Didn't work, did it.
Mr Syvret, may I recommend that your readers do consider the fact that charges have been brought against the Attorney General in that other Crown Dependency, the Isle of Man?
In particular, might I recommend it as sobering reading for current and former Jersey Attorney Generals, all of whom could to my knowledge face a list of equivalent charges, that of misconduct in a public office.
Face similar charges, that is, if they were not, themselves, historically and currently the sole prosecuting authority in Jersey. A situation which could, of itself, be considered something of a grave problem to the general public good in Jersey.
Perhaps more profitably, might I draw these considerations to the attention of the remainder of Jersey's legal profession, and again suggest that there is no 'easy' or 'low-cost' manner by which the Jersey 'Establishment' can extricate itself from its predicament. So much so, in fact, that I believe the point has now been passed, regrettably, when even the unexpected 'retirement' of Philip and William Bailhache, Michael Birt and Tim Le Cocq could bargain a peaceful settlement.
Having read Mr Syvret's blog, and those of fellow campaigners for some time now, I think it necessary for me to explain a blunt truth to fellow Jersey conservatives. That truth is this:
Mr Syvret holds all of the cards.
The Jersey Establishment held a few, at one time, but played them all, and Mr Syvret toughed it out.
I repeat, Mr Syvret holds all the cards. But what I don't think is 'getting through' to conservative circles, and our 'leaders' in particular, is the fact that Mr Syvret knows that he holds all the cards.
The Jersey 'Establishment's' ammunition is spent. The local authorities ranged all their weapons against Mr Syvret, and did their best to annihilate him.
It failed.
All Mr Syvret now has to do, is to secure a full hearing on, frankly, any one of the several dramatic and evidenced causes of action at his disposal, in the High Court on the Strand.
The plain fact is the Jersey 'Establishment', and the entire notion of a local legal jurisdiction, now needs Mr Syvret to 'come to the table', so to speak. My Syvret does not need anything that the Jersey legal/judicial system has left to offer. What are we going to do? Jail him again?
The Jersey law Establishment faces a crisis of wholly seismic proportions of such a scale that could even shake foundations in London.
Mr Syvret, I would estimate, knows that fact perfectly well.
The Jersey judicial system needs Mr Syvret, in order to have any chance of surviving. The point was long past when the Jersey judicial system had anything to offer Mr Syvret.
He holds the cards.
And I venture to suggest he knows it.
Believe me, once the question of the vires of the conduct of the Secretary of State, in respect of the breakdown in the rule of law in a Crown Dependency, becomes a substantive matter of contest before a London court, a threshold will be crossed, that can never be crossed back.
Hi Stuart.
Just put up two Interviews from today on Jersey Radio of Mark Williams-Thomas & Esther Rantzen.
You & your readers can Listen HERE
TJW.
Stuart,
One reason for your currently very high readership numbers is perhaps explained by the fact that fewer and fewer of even the most loyal JEP readers expect the whole story from their newspaper concerning the now constant chatter about Super Injunctions and MP's with immunity who can speak openly about these things.
It wouldn't be surprising if large numbers of very curious JEP readers have turned to this blog and other internet sources to find out what is going on with your court situation, especially now that John Hemming has made your mistreatment by the courts public knowledge. Even those who have not previously followed your blog do not have any choice if they are to keep up with the topics their acquaintances are talking about, even in whispered tones.
Now, with the Jimmy Savile story such big news, given his links to HDLG and the calls for an investigation of a BBC cover-up, where else in Jersey can the general public get the straight story if not from this and the other evidenced Jersey blogs?
Add to that a very frightened contingent of active or recent players in child abuse or in the on-going illegal concealment of heinous crimes and this blog is the "GO-TO" source for inside information.
The tables have turned from the time the oligarchs thought they had made you a permanently marginalized outsider. Now, as the commenter at 22:24 has described, the cards are all yours. You are the ultimate insider when someone goes looking for the truth about matters serious enough to bring down the government, and implicate BBC and the UK in the process.
Wow. You are getting over 1000 new readers per day?
Stuart.
Senator Francis Le Gresley tells VFC Exclusively "I WILL RESIGN" over Child Abuse COI.
On a local forum, 'Swompy' says :
"My Father was a taxi driver, and would come home telling how he was hired by JS to take him around the Island and a couple of times they went to HdlG, Late (70s to early 80s). On the way back from HdlG JS would boast to his PR man about touching up the little people."
So how does it feel to be part of the cover-up, 'Swompy'? Are you and your father proud?
Not necessarily "new" readers; this Blogger counter records page views. But, yes, traffic is high. I had 1625 page views yesterday.
Stuart
In a Times comment piece, Hugo Rifkind mentions his colleague David Sanderson's article on Jimmy Savile.
http://timesopinion.tumblr.com/post/32804536645/jimmy-saviles-affections-laid-bare-by-jimmy-savile
Sanderson has revisited Savile's 1974 autobiography:
Savile writes: “‘Ah,’ says I all serious, ‘if she comes in I’ll bring her back tomorrow but I’ll keep her all night first as my reward’.” He then writes that the girl did go into the club and “agreed that I hand her over if she could stay at the dance, [and] come home with me”. He wrote that he did then hand her over to the “lady of the law…[who] was dissuaded from bringing charges against me by her colleagues, for it was well known that were I to go I would probably take half the station with me”."
Savile confesses - in 1974.
A fundamental and key thing said by Savile there, is this - "for it was well known that were I to go I would probably take half the station with me."
There you have it.
That is how - and why - child abuse and child abuse cover-ups continue.
As I wrote in this blog-posting - the syndrome can be termed 'Mutually Assured Destruction.'
Everyone who has ever come across child abuse and child protection failures, and who abused - or actively covered up abuse - even those who merely said & did nothing - and the relevant public authorities - all have a shared, mutual interest in burying the truth.
"I would probably take half the station with me."
Indeed.
Stuart
Will Jerseys Channel TV award winning documentary now be given the scrutiny it deserves?
I am receiving various comments & questions concerning the suspension of a high-ranking Jersey police officer.
I am unable to host such discussion due to Jersey government reporting restrictions.
Stuart
Savile: Lawyer calls for a Jersey inquiry
Thursday 4th October 2012, 2:40PM BST.
Savile: Lawyer calls for a Jersey inquiry
SEVERAL Haut de la Garenne abuse victims have named Jimmy Savile as a sexual abuser, a UK lawyer representing them said today.
Alan Collins, of Manchester law firm Pannone, is helping the victims seek compensation for their treatment at the former children’s home and interviewed several four years ago.
He says that a full-scale investigation is now needed to establish what happened and whether the former disc jockey’s alleged actions were covered up here or in the UK.
Mr Collins’s comments come following the broadcast last night of an ITV documentary which featured women who say that they were abused by Sir Jimmy when they were teenagers.12 ECOSPSQ
Knowing the intellect involved, the order was probably 'breath out now'!
As complex and demanding as that?
did mike ask dave to drop emm off for him?
Stuart, now that this disgusting culture of misogynisim and abuse towards young girls is being exposed, we can expect, surely, to be hearing a great deal from our elected politicians in Jersey on this subject?
They will be asking questions, demanding answers, insisting that the whole appalling subject, and the attendant governance failures, are examined in detail.
Why, I'm quite certain such enthusiastic defenders of the powerless as Deputy Geoff Southern will be taking this matter forward vigorously.
Germain.
Post a Comment