Wednesday, 2 July 2008


It has been a very sad day in our political history. I will re produce below an e-mail I sent to my 3 "representatives where I asked them how many Parishoners they had been in touch with before making this HISTORIC vote for them and how I would like them to vote.

I did bump into Deputy Baudains and Connetable Gray Monday night, the night before the debate was due to start on this HISTORIC vote of no confidence in our council of ministers.

I asked them how they intended to vote. True to form Connetable Gray said he didn't know and will make his mind up on the day.................yes that old chestnut!!

Deputy Baudains told me straight on how he intended to vote, that was he intended to vote "POUR" on the vote of no confidence against the council of ministers and probably "CONTRE" to the vote of censure on Big Frank. I must give Deputy Baudains credit where it is due, he is a straight talking man and doesn't appear to be scared of standing up to be counted and possibly more often than not votes in line with the electorate.

Deputy Ian (GST 28) Gorst on the other hand appeared to do everything he could to avoid me on this monday night and indeed made a good job of it. All concerned were at a hustings for the procurer de bien public. Ian (GST 28 ) Gorst arrived late and left early so there was no chance of me engaging with him. So had no idea as to which way he was going to vote.....yeah right!!

Those of you who have read my last entry, under the heading "Democracy" will know I have asked Deputy Ian (GST 28) Gorst to come on here and engage with the electorate and possibly educate us. Thus far he has ignored my invitation. Indeed he has completely ignored (as he so often does) the e-mail below. He didn't even send me one back saying "private and confidental for addressee only"

In the e-mail below I have made a couple of predictions, these predictions and the e-mail were sent before I bumped into my said representatives that evening.

I know I predicted correctly on the no confidence vote, but haven't seen the vote of censure results yet, but I don't think I'm in for any suprises!

Like I said at the beggining of this post, it is a very sad day in Jerseys political history. We now know without a shadow of a doubt the vast majority of people we voted to represent us, do nothing of the sort and are not afraid of the consequences at the ballot box.

We do have 8 courages men and women who are not afraid to do what they were put there to do represent the people who put them there!!! they are.

Senator Stuart Syvret

Deputy Alan Breckon

Deputy Frederick John Hill B.E.M.

Deputy Gerard Clifford Lemmens Baudains

Deputy Roy George Le Herissier

Deputy Judith Ann Martin

Deputy Geoffrey Peter Southern

Deputy Shona Pitman

e-mail to my "representatives"

Dear sirs.

I know this is probably a little late to be asking but I have been very busy with other matters.

I'm not sure how many parishoners you have sought to get their feelings on tomorrow's, possible "historic" vote of no confidence in our council of ministers and the not so historic vote of censure on cheif minister Frank Walker?

I am taking the advice from a few politicians who are encouraging the electorate to engage with their Parish deputy's and Connetables.

I would like to let you know how I would like you all to vote, and how I would be voting myself if it wasn't left to my elected "representatives" Which incidentally is the same way everybody I have spoken to (which is possibly in the hundreds) would vote.

I would like you (as my representatives) to vote "pour" on both propositions. For the avoidance of doubt I would like you to support both propositions.

I would like to make a prediction, my prediction is Deputy Gorst will vote "CONTRE" Connetable Gray will vote "CONTRE" and Deputy Baudains will vote "POUR".

I have taken a little time to study your voting records and as it stands Deputy Baudains appears to be in touch with the electorate, and has represented me and the majority with his votes, so credit where it is due and please don't prove me wrong tomorrow.

Connetable Gray has a bit of a mixed record but does seem to be fearful of sticking his neck out.

Deputy Gorst appears to establishment through, and through, and his votes in no way reflect the vast majority of the people he is supposed to be representing.

I hope you feel inspired a parishoner is showing an interest in our "Democratic" proccess and carry the will of your electorate when voting tomorrow.




  1. I come into contact with GST28 Gorst, on a semi regular basis.
    He is a very strange person, with an equally strange dress sense.
    Establishment though and through.
    Get him out

  2. Greetings from a distant place.

    We thought we should send you an acknowledgment that many of the topics of your blog and on the websites of a few other Jersey activists have become rather compelling to readers far beyond the shores of Jersey.

    As an American who uses the example of Jersey to explain to the distractable teenage mind the importance of a dynamic press to any fully informed and engaged electorate, the possibly diminishing political influence of the JEP vs. that of the internet has provided a wonderful teaching tool. Since February, when the knowledge of the Haute de la Garenne story became global, we have been able to follow numerous attempts by Jersey's leaders to control public opinion, especially through the JEP, and compare that with the alternate local media coverage emerging on the internet.

    If the countering influence of the free speech found on the internet is making a significant difference in the island's electorate, the results could become more apparent when future votes are tallied, and we evaluate the next election's results and voter turnout.

    In the meantime, we have found ourselves very impressed with the impassioned local activism, as expressed on blogs such as yours and those of Senator Syvret and Simon Bellwood.

    In fact, Stuart Syvret and Lenny Harper are emerging as unlikely folk heroes in this distant Rocky Mountain city. On an almost daily basis, there are surprisingly accurate student predictions being made about what Frank Walker or the Bailiff may say, and how it might be echoed by the increasingly feeble sounding JEP, whether our own letters to the JEP will ever be published, and how (on Planet Jersey) Jason and Jersey Spud will spin the views of what seems to be a still surprisingly clueless finance industry.

    Far more, however, we are using what Stuart Syvret calls the "microcosm of Jersey" to better understand how our own country became so misled, and so dangerously complacent in the face of globally catastrophic American leadership, and our increasingly consolidated corporate-owned media.

    We have discovered it is almost always easier to see our choices more clearly in the example of another place or time. It is my hope that even here in our region, the examples of Jersey activism we have come to admire, will help sow the seeds of campaign participation among more students during our upcoming presidential election season.

    - A fan in Denver

  3. I fully agree that today's vote revealed an almost complete failure of the island's politicians to vote with a primary concern for the views and wishes of the public.

    It's disgraceful. The vast majority of those who voted in favour of the Council of Ministers should hang their heads in shame...though it's doubtful any will, because our antiquated political system will ensure the majority hold onto their seats come next election.

    Welcome to democracy, Jersey style.

  4. Fan in Denver.

    Thank you for your comments. It is a reminder Blogs are viewed worldwide.

    Mistakenly I publish my posts with only the local Jersey electorate in mind and forget what we are facing is pretty much commonplace in other "DEMOCRATIC" civilizations.

    I will be publishing more e-mails to (and not so much from) our local media and my "Democratically" elected "representatives".

    You will notice I have been trying to get Deputy Ian (GST28) Gorst to engage with his electorate on here and explain to us how he is voting in the complete opposite direction to the vast majority of his Parishoners. Unfortunately he, like most of our "representatives" do not engage with the people who put them there.

    I am pleased my blog is reaching far off shores and people can identify with it. It is always inspiring when people leave comments because sometimes one wonders, is it all worth it? and the comments remind me that it is.



  5. Well,the vote pretty much went as expected,but clearly showed how out of touch the majority of the present politicians are from the Electorate.

    They are failing in their duties to represent the same people that voted for them.
    Channel Television did an online poll that clearly showed over 80%of people who voted online voted for Stuart Syvrets proposition.
    As it is only an indicator of public feeling,it still shows that the vote by the politicians did not match the feeling and consensus of the public view point.
    A straw poll at any work place,any bus stop would confirm this also.

    Having listened to the various speeches online,cringed at some,shuddered at a couple of others.Noted the ones who were blatantly electioneering,and those who were more interested in self -preservation.
    There were a couple of speeches which did have elements of humility,and appeared sincere in their tone.
    Some valid points also, and credit where credit is due to some of the achievements we have overlooked,for example the skateboard park,and the fact that by 2010,the residents of Bellozane area will be free of having to endure the stench emitted from the Incinerator plant.!!

    Many thanks to our friends from the USA,who have followed this story with great interest.
    You have many problems of your own,and it is only as a result of ordinary people who are prepared to investigate, and read alternative news sources,and to stand up and be counted,that can highlight and change things.
    We can't rely on the mainstream media or our Governments to inform us.
    Have produced a link which you may already be aware of,if not it is a must read, as it shows news and sources of information our Governments would prefer us not to know.Lots of American articles,and Middle East issues.
    Excellent article last few days,regarding how politicians and businesses are manipulating us.

    Starts in the Education system,through false patriotism and flag waving.All attempts to foster unwelcome policies and actions on it's people.They utilise scare tactics,so we believe the spin,particularly on what they percieve to be enemies of the State.
    Massive industry and big business.

    The Century of the Self

    How politicians and business learned to create and manipulate mass-consumer society.

    Must Watch Video Documentry

    Adam Curtis, The Century of the Self tells the untold and sometimes controversial story of the growth of the mass-consumer society in Britain and the United States. How was the all-consuming self created, by whom, and in whose interests?

  6. Below is an e-mail sent to me by a friend, my choice was to share it with my readers (both of you)

    Two Choices

    What would you do? You make the choice. Don't look for a punch line, there isn't one. Read it anyway. My question is: Would you have made the same choice as these boys and will you forward it on and who to ?

    At a fundraising dinner for a school that serves learning-disabled children, the father of one of the students delivered a speech that would never be forgotten by all who attended. After extolling the school and its dedicated staff, he offered a question: 'When not interfered with by outside influences, everything nature does is done with perfection. Yet my son, Shay, cannot learn things as other children do. He cannot understand things as other children do. Where is the natural order of things in my son?'

    The audience was stilled by the query.

    The father continued. 'I believe that when a child like Shay, physically and mentally handicapped comes into the world, an opportunity to realize true human nature presents itself, and it comes in the way other people treat that child.'

    Then he told the following story:

    Shay and his father had walked past a park where some boys Shay knew were playing baseball. Shay asked, 'Do you think they'll let me play?' Shay 's father knew that most of the boys would not want someone like Shay on their team, but the father also understood that if his son were allowed to play, it would give him a much-needed sense of belonging and some confidence to be accepted by others in spite of his handicaps.

    Shay's father approached one of the boys on the field and asked (not expecting much) if Shay could play. The boy looked around for guidance and said, 'We're losing by six runs and the game is in the eighth inning. I guess he can be on our team and we'll try to put him in to bat in the ninth inning.'

    Shay struggled over to the team's bench and, with a broad smile, put on a team shirt. His Father watched with a small tear in his eye and warmth in his heart. The boys saw the father's joy at his son being accepted. In the bottom of the eighth inning, Shay's team scored a few runs but was still behind by three. In the top of the ninth inning, Shay put on a glove and played in the right fie ld. Even though no hits came his way, he was obviously ecstatic just to be in the game and on the field, grinning from ear to ear as his father waved to him from the stands. In the bottom of the ninth inning, Shay's team scored again. Now, with two outs and the bases loaded, the potential winning run was on base and Shay was scheduled to be next at bat.

    At this juncture, do they let Shay bat and give away their chance to win the game? Surprisingly, Shay was given the bat. Everyone knew that a hit was all but impossible because Shay didn't even know how to hold the bat properly, much less connect with the ball.

    However, as Shay stepped up to the plate, the pitcher, recognizing that the other team was putting winning aside for this moment in Shay's life, moved in a few steps to lob the ball in softly so Shay could at least make contact. The first pitch came and Shay swung clumsily and missed. The pitcher again took a few steps forward to toss the ball softly towards Shay. As the pitch came in, Shay swung at the ball and hit a slow ground ball right back to the pitcher.

    The game would now be over. The pitcher picked up the soft grounder and could have easily thrown the ball to the first baseman. Shay would have been out and that would have been the end of the game.

    Instead, the pitcher threw the ball right over the first baseman's head, out of reach of all team mates. Everyone from the stands and both teams started yelling, 'Shay, run to first! Run to first!' Never in his life had Shay ever run that far, but he made it to first base. He scampered down the baseline, wide-eyed and startled.

    Everyone yelled, 'Run to second, run to second!' C atching his breath, Shay awkwardly ran towards second, gleaming and struggling to make it to the base. By the time Shay rounded towards second base, the right fielder had the ball ... the smallest guy on their team who now had his first chance to be the hero for his team. He could have thrown the ball to the second-baseman for the tag, but he understood the pitcher's intentions so he, too, intentionally threw the ball high and far over the third-baseman's head. Shay ran toward third base deliriously as the runners ahead of him circled the bases toward home.

    All were screaming, 'Shay, Shay, Shay, all the Way Shay'

    Shay reached third base because the opposing shortstop ran to help him by turning him in the direction of third base, and shouted, 'Run to third! Shay, run to third!'

    As Shay rounded third, the boys from both teams, and the spectators, were on their feet screaming, 'Shay, run home! Run home!' Shay ran to home, stepped on the plate, and was cheered as the hero who hit the grand slam and won the game for his team.

    'That day', said the father softly with tears now rolling down his face, 'the boys from both teams helped bring a piece of true love and humanity into this world'.

    Shay didn't make it to another summer. He died that winter, having never forgotten being the hero and making his father so happy, and coming home and seeing his Mother tearfully embrace her little hero of the day!

    AND NOW A LITTLE FOOTNOTE TO THIS STORY: We all send thousands of jokes through the e-mail without a second thought, but when it comes to sending messages about life choices, people hesitate. The crude, vulgar, and often obscene pass freely through cyberspace, but public discussion about decency is too often suppressed in our schools and workplaces.

    If you're thinking about forwarding this message, chances are that you're probably sorting out the people in your address book who aren't the 'app ropriate' ones to receive this type of message. Well, the person who sent you this believes that we all can make a difference. We all have thousands of opportunities every single day to help realize the 'natural order of things.' So many seemingly trivial interactions between two people present us with a choice: Do we pass along a little spark of love and humanity or do we pass up those opportunities and leave the world a little bit colder in the process?

    A wise man once said every society is judged by how it treats it's least fortunate amongst them.

    You now have two choices:
    1. Delete
    2. Forward
    May your day be a Shay Day

  7. The Monsters of Medomsleys 2

    Even when you prove your case and have the abusers jailed for 10 years the british government still continues the abuse of thses people in the hope the length of time will put the victims off or they will give up fighting and in some cases as in ours the victims take their own life in desperation.

    "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is
    for good men to do nothing”.

    The laws and statutes of this land were written for all men with no exception. It is not for our government or their agents to choose which laws either do or do not apply to them and then walk away from the culpability for their actions. Being a prison officer, police officer or even high court judge does not put you above the law.

    Would they allow a known sex offender to continue working for 27 years within the youth penal system? Would they facilitate his transfers from institution to institution while they knew that he was a danger to young boys? I’m afraid the answer is yes; they would and they did allow just that. ‘They’ are the Home Office and their employees.

    Neville Husband, a married 67-year-old from Shotley Bridge, County Durham, staged a string of sexual abuse offences at the Medomsley centre in the 1970s and 1980s. After his career in the prison service, Husband became a Clergyman of the United Reform Church. In February 2003, Husband was convicted at Newcastle Crown Court of abusing five youngsters and was jailed for eight years. The publicity surrounding the trial led to others coming forward, and in September 2005 he was jailed for a further two years after admitting attacks on four more teenagers. He is now a known and convicted paedophile who is currently serving out his ten year prison sentence.

    Husband himself worked for nearly 30 years as a prison officer and Home Office employee. As with most employers, his employers wrote his employment records, and right there on top of the pile of files is one dating back to 1967. It says Neville Husband had been arrested for the illegal importation of homosexual pornography directly into the prison. When training with the prison service, Husband claimed he bought the material for research purposes and was never charged. He was also quizzed in 1999 - five years after he was ordained as a minister - in connection with police operations probing mail order pornography. The case was dropped. One of his many victims is now pursuing the right to sue his employers for vicarious liability in a high profile sex abuse scandal.

    Kevin Young, suffered at the hands of Husband, while he was serving a short sentence at the Medomsley Detention Centre, Consett, Co Durham in 1977. Husband, who became a church minister after quitting the prison service, was jailed after admitting a string of horrific sex attacks on teenage boys. Between 1969 & 1984 Despite the Home Office’s attempt to block the move, last year Mr Young won a landmark legal case to launch a bid for compensation at a hearing in Leeds against the Home Office, which ran the detention centre where Husband worked. The Home Office tried to get the case thrown out, and their plea was that too much time has passed since the crimes occurred. This has customarily worked well as a defence for child abusers in the past, as the 1980 Limitation Act states claims for compensation need to be lodged three years after attacks took place. But Mr Young's legal team argued there was provision for people to lodge claims three years after the "date of knowledge". Abuse victims may not realise how badly they have been harmed until years after the attacks took place.

    Although the 1980 Limitation Act does do a valuable job and performs its function well in certain areas, it was never meant to be used or abused in order to allow the high and mighty of this land to manipulate the legal process in their own favour. The Judge (Judge Cockroft) at Leeds Crown Court rejected the Home Office’s plea of limitation. Even so, the Home Office has appealed against Judge Cockroft’s ruling, and tried to block Kevin Young’s fight for justice.

    Mr Young's solicitor, David Greenwood, of Wakefield firm Jordan's, said: "This stalls the process until it's heard in the Court of Appeal in London.
    "They have already tried to have his case thrown out, but they weren't successful. Now they are appealing against that decision.
    "Hopefully, if Kevin is successful again, he will be able to go on and prove that the Home Office neglected to care for him adequately and allowed this abuser to sexually assault him."

    Neville Husband hand-picked boys to work with him in the kitchens before brutally attacking them. One boy was forced to submit after having a bread knife held to his throat. Another was attacked when he was caught stealing icing and marzipan from the kitchen storeroom. Many of these offences were happening as early as1967 at Portland Young Offenders Institution, and at Medomsley Detention Centre for 17 years.

    Psychologist Elli Godsy said that these crimes were some of the worst sexual abuse she has ever heard of.
    “This is one of the worst cases of sexual abuse I have come across in my 17 years working for the home office and working with some of the most prolific sex offenders and victims in the country.”
    Sexual abuse on this scale could only happen in an institution, and Husband was continually moved around from one young offenders institution to another, allowing him to continue to sexually assault young boys wherever he went with absolute and total impunity. Countless young people were dehumanized and degraded in a never-ending flow of young flesh to the torture chamber.

    Governors and senior management were in full knowledge as to the horrors that were going on in the Medomsley Detention Centre. They became the people who aided and abetted Neville Husband in his perversions. They helped him to escape liability for damage done to so many people, over a very long time. Governors and senior management turned a blind eye to the blatant sexual, physical abuse, and constant barracking. This destructive behavior originated from those who were meant to be helping with the rehabilitation of young minds, with the intention that these young boys would go on to becoming productive members of society

    For example, governors and senior management not only knew what was going on in the kitchen area but they actively prevented all officers’ rights of search in Neville Husband’s designated areas. Former prison officer David Gordon McClure alleged that…

    "Tim Newell (the Governor) thought very highly of Husband and seemed to look after him.”

    “For example, on a regular basis on rotation we would thoroughly search various areas within the centre. This was to look for cigarettes and alcohol.”

    “All main areas of the prison were searched except for the kitchen area.

    “The prison management would not allow anyone but Husband to have access to the kitchen area. If anyone did try and search this area there were reprimanded by management.” especially a governor called Tim Newell”

    “There were always very strong rumours that Neville Husband was homosexual and that he was sexually abusing boys who were working for him in the kitchen. This was general knowledge amongst staff and boys in the centre."

    “Most evenings Husband would usually keep one boy back with him after the others had been dismissed and we all felt sorry for that boy.

    “Nobody reported their suspicions to anyone because Husband was so close to and supported by the Governor and his senior management. Without proof we knew that nothing would come of it except that we would be moved to a different prison.”

    We feel that as we were prisoners, articles from the Geneva Convention on the torture and degradation of prisoners would be more applicable in cases like this.

    * * *

    We go to court again in London on the 17th 18th and 19th of October to hear the reasons behind the Home Offices appeal against judge Cockroft’s historic decision. This may allow Kevin Young’s case to go forward to the high court.

    Mr Young, 45, said: "I've said from the start, this is not about money. It is about the principle that people knew this was going on but nothing was done about it.
    The experience left him mentally scarred, and he was determined to help bring his tormentors to justice. This started when police officers asked him to tell his story back in 1998 as part of the operation rose years ago.

    The evidence and testimonies of the many victims and other prison officers from Medomsley at the time Neville Husband was there, were instrumental in bringing him to justice. Jurors heard how Husband used intimidation and fear to ensure the silence of his detention centre victims, all from damaged backgrounds.
    Judge Esmond Faulks told him:

    "Their fear of you caused them to submit to your unwelcome attentions and this was in my judgement a gross breach of trust. You and others like you helped cause their damaged personalities. Until now they never thought anyone would believe them.

    After the case, Det Insp Simon Orton, who led the Durham Police investigation, said he was delighted by the outcome of the case.

    “It is clear this man feasted himself on these young men who were in his charge," he said. "I hope that this will bring closure for the victims. I have no doubt in my mind their lives will always be affected by what happened in Medomsley. My thoughts are very much with the victims still. DI Orton said:
    "He has never acknowledged any guilt."
    “They have been very brave."

    Following the news coverage of his first trial, that Neville Husband was called back to court. More than seven new victims had come forward, and he eventually pleaded guilty and what’s more dropped his appeal against his original 10 year sentence.

    Tim Newell was Governor from 1979 to 1981 at Medomsley. He was at Grendon prison as well as the architect of the restorative justice reforms. He says in his statement… “About five years after leaving Medomsley I was on a course at the Prison Training College at Wakefield, when I bumped into a Medomsley colleague John McBee. John told me that Neville had to leave the service over an allegation that he had abused a boy.”

    That would make it around 1985/86 when Husband, “Had to leave the service over an allegation that he had abused a boy.” In 1985/86, after being forced to leave Medomsley then got a promotion to senior officer at the Frankland Maximum security prison in Co Durham. Martin Narey was the governor at the Frankland from 1986 to 89, and the governor when Husband was promoted to a senior officer as ‘punishment’ for being caught sexually abusing boys.

    Public Relations

    Gerry Sutcliffe, parliamentary Under-Secretary for the Home Office is aware of outstanding civil claims relating to abuse of prisoners at the Medomsley detention centre which closed in 1983. His view is that while these civil actions are ongoing it would be inappropriate to comment on any calls for a public inquiry.

    “A cash boost in May this year thanks to £1.25million funding for voluntary and community organisations throughout England and Wales, announced Home Office Minister Gerry Sutcliffe.

    "Sexual crimes can result in high levels of distress and can be the most damaging physically and emotionally. This funding will help to ensure that victims of these terrible offences have timely access to advice, information, care and counselling that meets their individual needs no matter where they are in the country.

    "I am determined that the needs of victims of crime must be better met and this funding is part of a wider programme of Government initiatives to put the needs of those affected by crime central in the criminal justice system."

    This is what Gerry Sutcliff says in public; however when in private he is as bad as the abusers. He is allowing the suffering of all the victims from Medomsley to continue, and has failed to respond adequately to calls for a public inquiry into Medomsley Detention Centre and the decades of sexual torture many young kids were put through.

    The sexual abuse of a child is a uniquely horrible crime, because it destroys the child's sense of him or herself and undermines the capacity to trust. The fact that this crime is usually carried trusted and respected adults of some standing, makes the damage worse.

    Mr. Young, says that it is not just him, but other Medomsley claimants are still locked in an ongoing high court case against the Home Office.

    Mr Young, from York, said: "I saw some things that nobody should have to see as a young person.

    Governors of the Medomsley Detention Centre and their senior management "were aware of what was happening" at the centre and "failed to stop or act upon, in accordance with the prison protocols of that time."

    Many if not all of the vulnerable youths were from broken homes and fractured backgrounds. They took on the baggage of being in the care system, where they were also sexually and physically abused, not to mention ill educated. This was the only alternative to being looked after by the church. And we all know where that leads.

    I believe Husband had access to all the records about the inmates he chose to serve in his kitchen; he used these to great effect. I also believe that he was not!! allowed to have access to these private documents that were for the eyes of the governor and senior officers only ad he would use these to make his decision on who he could abuse. Who has little contact with the outside world?

    Who doesn’t have parents? How many come directly from the care system or had abusive parents?

    In Medomsley, we would start work early as we had to get all the breakfasts ready for all the other inmates. Husband would always be there, almost superimposed on every synapse of each young mind in his charge. He had enormity and presence in his own kingdom.

    I’ll not bother telling you how breakfasts were in Medomsley … sufficed to they were fast! Everything worked that way in places like that. Once you were at work, Husband would make an excuse to get past you while you were, lets say, tending the potato peeling machine. As he did so he would press his penis towards your backside fleetingly then carry on what he was doing.

    On the way back he would do the same thing only with more gusto, and we all knew what might follow. He would sense everything from the initial contact in the dining hall, where he would inspect the newest intake to the centre that day, and then he’d choose who would work in the kitchen.

    All his victims were threatened with their lives. Neville Husband laid claim to being in the Military and was trained to kill. “You could disappear in places like this and nobody would ever know.” “You could be buried in the bottom sports field and nobody would care.”

    One centre he worked in closed in 1987. There, male inmates stayed until they were 21, and during that time in the North East detention centre he went on to becoming Reverend Husband, a minister at the Brighton Road Reformed Church in Bensham, Gateshead.


    The UK's most vulnerable children are being "betrayed" by a care system that is guilty of a catalogue of failings, according to a damning report. The majority of young people leaving institutions are destined to become prostitutes, homeless or spend time in prison, the study states. Harriet Sergeant, author of ‘Handle with Care: an investigation into the care system’, said:
    "It is not just a tragedy for the individual. A successful system of care would transform this country.

    "At a stroke it would empty a third of our prisons. It would halve the number of prostitutes, reduce by between a third and a half the number of homeless and remove 80% of Big Issue sellers from our street corners.

    "Not only is our system failing the young people in care, it is failing society and perpetuating an underclass."

    The report says that out of the 6,000 people who leave care on average every year, 75% (4,500) will have no educational qualifications and within two years 50% will be unemployed, while 20% (1,200) will be homeless. Just one out of a hundred will make it to university. In the year ending March 31 2005, 60,900 children were taken in care - most placed with foster parents or in children's homes. Failings of the care system included children being moved among foster carers too often, and homes focusing on short-term containment rather then the long-term well-being of the youngsters. The report concluded the system should be reformed to provide "secure, stable, long-term and loving care for difficult children".

    New initiatives that might help children should be explored and young people should be tracked after leaving care in order to build up a true picture of how the system was working, it added.


    One would think the Crown and its employees could not act with absolute carelessness and abandon. One would think that it has sufficient morals of the sort that bind humanity together, yet the above comments show that this is far from the truth. Even today, despite the sector’s growth in statistical knowledge and greater education, young people are still not tracked after leaving care. A public servant is allowed to continue sexually assaulting children with absolute and total impunity. The authorities, being in full knowledge of these horrors are allowed to escape liability for the damage done whilst simultaneously, those same authorities don’t hesitate to punish a child for stealing a watch. It is clear from what has happened, that carelessness and abandon are words that do describe the actions of the Crown and those public servants who are only there at all because they have our trust.

    We the undersigned hope that you can bring these matters to light in an effective way. This will make a difference not only to us, but the thousands of other abuse survivors whose abuse originated from being in the care of government institutions.

    To this end, we will be cooperative in any projects you wish to propose that we feel are for the greater good.

    Kind regards.

    Kevin Young says

    All who have a desire to seek the truths & facts surrounding the long term systematic sexual and mental abuse of young teenagers by Crown officers and ongoing litigation against the Home Secretary, The Home Office?

    “This is a most serious matter involving Crown officers!”
    Judge Cockcroft at Leeds crown court 9th November 2005

    How serious? How many officers? Who was involved?

    Only a much needed investigation and or enquiry public or independent into the long term criminal activities by known and named officers H.M.D.C. Medomsley, County Durham, (Now Hassockfield). Will begin to uncover what is quite frankly a horror story that really needs to be told openly and honestly so lessons not lip service may be addressed.

    “This is the worst case of sexual and physical abuse I have had to deal with in my 17 years as a Home Office physiologist ,dealing with some of the most violent and dangerous sex offenders in our prisons “
    Dr.Elie Godsi Leeds court 9th November 2005

    Between 1967 and 1983 many raped and tortured sadistically often on a daily basis throughout there 3, 6 month sentences by a small group of serving officers and with the apparent knowledge of more senior prison officials, assistant governors and governors, with criminal charges being formally lodged firstly in 1967 for criminal offences that clearly showed a most unhealthy appetite for homosexual pornography in regards young boys in bondage etc.

    The illegal importation of homosexual pornography both into the uk and then into the Medomsley youth custody centre its self, to be shown to the young inmates in private viewing situations between officers and inmates according to home office official documents and known as Portland Young offenders institute , only to be dismissed as not in the public interest!

    The relocation of the offending officers to other youth custody centres, despite formal criminal charges laid by Portland police, also charges that were to be subsequently drop deemed not in the public interest!

    Allowing them free access to continue there ways uninterrupted as they most certainly did, culminating in the rape and violent sexual attacks on many young inmates over a twenty year period.

    Most of these will remain silent witnesses, many with a duty of care, having failed in that duty have welcomed the immoral use of this statutes of limitations act designed primarily for medical negligence to allowing those responsible to avoid accountability and therefore deny justice to genuine victims. The Church and many other institutes have and continue to misuse the act to avoid accountability! In particular where the facts have been fully investigated and found to be true.

    Only by dealing truthfully and morality with past, so called historic abuse
    (Not historic to those who live with its affects today!) can we truly learn and there fore begin to avoid a large proportion of the inhuman and life destroying abuse that has and continues to blight our progress to a better and more just society.

    Home offices policies of inaction / avoidance and at times outright criminal deceit in this and many similar cases have resulted in the continuation of the most brutal and inhumane criminal treatment of young persons in their custody.

    A society that tolerates abuse is by its very nature an abusive society, and the laws required to deal justly and morally with abuse must reflect that society’s desires.

    I can fully understand the statutes of limitations when used for its designed purpose (medical negligence )but this law was never intended to be applied to victims of abuse who seek an opportunity for a fair hearing and with consideration for the well known and documented symptoms of those abused being unable to unburden there nightmares

    Sometimes until many years later, in reality most victims will live out there lives silent witnesses to the betrayal and humiliation that only they will truly know and there silent screaming heard only in there shattered minds . In reality for many years only the lawyers and legal frame have gained financially from all this pain and yet how quick the defence to constantly refer to the compensation always the compensation?

    They chose to further belittle and cause pain while collecting there fees in bulk, woe ye layers. Who would ignore our quest for justice peace of mind and a opportunity for some degree of closer that we and our families crave so badly.

  8. Thought the justice4survivors post would not be put up...

  9. Re: justice4survivors.

    I am sorry I have not been quicker either publishing or replying to your post.

    As you'll see I have not as yet published it, but that's not to say that I won't.

    I will have to seek advice on it, There are names on there, and court cases etc. I have to be absolutely certain what is written in your post is fact,and not defamatory. Believe me there are alot of establshment figures and certain local media members over here that would love to see this site closed down (they've already had one of my sites closed down)

    The case in which you were talking of sounds absolutey horrific, well that is to say it would have done pre Haute De La Garrenne, but tragically is an all too familiar story of brutal crimes against vunerable people committed by the very people who are there to keep them safe and covered up to protect the establishment.

    I think it is a little unfair to make the statement "Thought the justice4survivors post would not be put up"... Have you ever wondered why my blogsite is called "voiceforchildren" and there is next to nothing on here where I am being a voice for children?, there is a story behind that but unfortunately I'm not at liberty to tell you it.

    I am actively seeking advice on your post, I am very keen to publish it, these story's need to be told and should be in the public domain.

    Please bare with me, I am not a litigation lawyer, merely a concerned parent "forced" into blogging, whatever I'm allowed to.

    I am indeed having a meeting with a litigation lawyer this Friday. I shall ask him to give me his advice on your post.

    It is my opinion the guilty scum bags in your case should be named and shamed. If I can do that without breaking any laws, then please trust me I will!!

    The post won't be up before Saturday, so please bare with me.

  10. Sigmund Fraud.

    Thanks for your comments and I feel your frustration. To a lesser degree I can empathise with most of the concerns either in your (as yet un published) comment and of what I have just been reading on your website.

    I truly commend what you and your site are doing and indeed have now added it as a link on here.

    I've not got a great deal of time on my hands at the minute as I am busy trying to get some justice for, how can I put it?, certain possible wrong doings.

    However it would appear from what I've read on your site that everything you posted to me has already been published? if that is the case then I can't see any problem with me publishing it if it's already in the public domain.

    I'll still run it by the lawyer just to keep myself in the clear. And any assistance I can give to you or your site please don't hesitate to ask! Have also signed your petition and will encourage others to do likewise.

  11. Re justice4survivors

    You are truely a perosn of great insight and all our victims thank you from their hearts.

    Thank you for your grace and genuine concerns and thank you for signing our petition it all helps when I take my petition to the british parliament.

    I did ask stuart to sign the petition but realise that he too is a very busy person.

    and yes everything I have said in the post I sent you is allready in the the press across the country.

    We are still in litigation with the home ofice and hope to be out of it soon.

    nevertheless I will still fight on the behalfs of those who can not fight for themselves and I will always do so.

    Thank you. You indeed a true Voice of children and vulnerable people.

    You should be applauded

  12. Music from our victims and their supporters please enjoy...