After the very short sound-bite the Former Chief of Police, Graham Power QPM, was afforded recently by BBC Radio Jersey, Team Voice wanted the opportunity to build on it and thankfully Mr. Power agreed.
Mr. Power agreed to have a video recorded interview over the Internet with us, which is the first time Team Voice has attempted such a venture. Being the first of it’s kind for us there are a couple of minor glitches with audio and visual reflections, which we will learn by for future recordings.
The interview below, as the title suggests, is the first part of an in-depth interview with Mr. Power where he talks on subjects as the Wiltshire Report, HMIC Reports, ACPO Reports, the media, the Home Affairs Minister(s) to name but a few.
We hope that the series of interviews will add just a little bit of balance to the “story” the Home Affairs Minister, Senator Ian Le Marquand, is running with.
once again excellent work vfc great interview.
ReplyDeleteThis reminds me so much of how the secret family courts are being run. Those courts are so lop sided, the judge decides what evidence is being used, and time after time I was denied to put my side of the case to the court, it was dreadful.
ReplyDelete"The use of the evidence is very selective" YES! Its good to hear these things straight from Mr Power, well done for making this video.
Well done!
ReplyDeleteYou need to find a way to get this into wider circulation. YouTube, Facebook, Twitter??
http://www.ehow.com/how_5813410_record-skype-video-conference.html
ReplyDelete:)
Keep on fighting Mr Power, you have a lot of supporters.Well done VFC.
ReplyDeleteHe hasn't got most people's support - what a badly run investigation - it was right that he went.
ReplyDeleteSCRUTINY
ReplyDeletePRESS RELEASE 17th March 2011
Immediate release
Wiltshire Report
The Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel acknowledges that the Home Affairs Minister was right to place the Wiltshire Report in the public domain. Indeed, it is long overdue even though, at this stage, some material remains redacted.
The panel has studiously avoided comments on the merits of the case in regard to Messrs Power and Harper as it is not part of its remit to adjudge individual cases.
That said it is very concerned at how information has been released, what information has been released and the overriding fact that all this work was not incorporated in a proper disciplinary procedure where all parties would have had the opportunity to present their cases.
Instead an unseemly public spat has continued where none of the parties feel satisfied and where it appears natural justice has been denied. In an attempt to retrieve some of this very unsatisfactory situation, we would implore the Minister to ensure that Mr. Power's case is placed in the public domain.
Second, we would ask the Minister to refer the Police Chief's Disciplinary Code to the Assistant Minister(Treasury) for Human Resources so that an independent assessment can be arranged to assess whether it is fit for purpose and conforms to best personnel practice.
Again we would stress that the Panel's concern is to ensure that proper process has been instituted so that the chances of a repetition of this very unfortunate episode, with the inevitable personal grief it has caused, are minimised.
Ends
Well done to both you and Mr Power for this interview.
ReplyDeleteI see whilst writing this there is a comment from an inteligent person who is, due to their higher intelligence able to tell us that GP has'nt got most peoples support. Well that may be but unfortunately the majority of people over here dont really care about anything so long as it doesnt affect them so perhaps fair comment.
Maybe on the basis the commentor has such a higher all knowing all seeing eye he or she could explain whether the majority of people who are interested in the case on either side of the fence, are or are not supporting him.
Perhaps the individual could back these ascertions up with some basic facts, maybe how many people he or she has asked and not just their mates.
VFC,
ReplyDeleteIs it worth asking Mr Power if he, [Mr Power] has kept incontact with Mr Brain and if not why not?
The commenter who was "anti" Graham Power is typical of the "antis". In the interview the former Chief Police tells us there are two lever arches of documents in the Wiltshire Report, as well as his own 62,000 word defence that have not seen the light of day. But still the commenter's mind is made up, documented evidence and facts don't come into the equation, and in this case literally!
ReplyDeleteI have been in contact with Mr. Power QPM and offer a redacted piece of our correspondence.
ReplyDelete"The full version of the wiltshire report fills two large packing cases (yes...I mean packing cases....the ones Pickfords use.)...................... there are the "summary" reports some of which have been published. Then there are the bundles of witness statements and documents which make up the bulk of the paperwork. The whole "wiltshire report" would fill the boot of a small family car.......................
The theory is that the "covering report" summarises the evidence and removes the need to go to the original source documents and witness statements. But as Daniel Wimberly has pointed out.................how are we to be sure that this is what has happened unless we see the original evidence?....... in fact some of the supporting documentation supports the report and some does not. Some actually contradicts what the report says. Summarising conflicting evidence in a complex case is a difficult task. In the wiltshire report it has not been done well. Had the case gone to a hearing then we would have sought to take the case away from the opinions of the reports authors and back to the source evidence and hoped to show that the evidence had been mis-represented in the report. As things worked out we did not get the chance. However, for what it is worth the defence position is that the "Wiltshire Report" does not constitute a fair and accurate summary of the evidence which accompanies the report."
Thanks VFC and to Mr. Power.
ReplyDeleteCertainly not the same picture that skippy is painting.
ReplyDeleteTo anonymous(16.46).Read again , "you have a lot of supporters", not ,"most people support you" are you so scared that you can't read right?
ReplyDeleteWell done Team Voice - excellent stuff. Had to laugh at the media debate today. Shona Pitman really put things in perspective when she reminded us how le Marquand said he couldn't tell the Scrutiny paanel too much because he had promised The Rag a 'scoop'! Says it all. As for Radio BB Establishment C the comments attacking Trevor Pitman were outrageous. Voice should get a media box in the Chamber and show these people what constructive journalism is all about. Look forward to next installment.
ReplyDelete"in fact some of the supporting documentation supports the report and some does not. Some actually contradicts what the report says. Summarising conflicting evidence in a complex case is a difficult task. In the wiltshire report it has not been done well."
ReplyDeleteNow i can see why they let it drift away. There was no way this was going to a disciplinary case. William Bailhache under cross examination lol the media arn't even allowed to interview him.
Would your average person in your average job be happy at being suspended and no reason given. Then to wait on a disciplinary investigation to be produced that is passed off as a report of your conduct?
ReplyDeleteWould that same person then be happy to walk away with no right of reply professionally nor publicly to this disciplinary report that has been used as PR to achieve public condemnation in your character as alleged in the disciplinary investigative report?
I dont think so.
This much seems relatively simple. ILM is only doing exactly what someone in his position would do to prevent the real truth from being understood by the general public. He is not brilliant, but as a cover up merchant ILM is always pretty consistent, and very predictable. It appears that nothing by way of logic, evidence or fair play will ever derail his mission.
ReplyDeleteChelloise
Why can't the Wiltshire Report be made available online? Some of us are very good at reading throughcase loads of documents - anyone who has been through the secret family courts has had to do that anyway, I think those secret family courts can be good training for this sort of thing! Is there any reason why the Wiltshire Report can not be placed online, in the public domain? After all, it has been paid for out of the public purse, so it belongs to the people, doesn't it? If the people paid for it they ought to be able to read it!
ReplyDeleteNow this is very perceptive analysis by Mr Power into the desired role for the Police in Jersey and is spot on. I think it is the first time he has made such comments. What he has said is that those that exercise power expect policing to deal with street crime, which is a social activity of the poor and the powerless, whilst ignoring anything done by the powerful - corruption of power and money. Jersey is a tax haven and there is no desire from the powerful for any kind of oversight into those activities.
ReplyDeleteSpot on Mr Power. Lets hear some more. Sure evidence of corruption at the highest levels and vindication democracy campaigners in Jersey.
I hope the BBC Radio Jersey and JEP journalists listen to Power’s words and read my comment bringing it to their attention. Now do they understand what they are expected to do and is whose interests. Its time for Mutiny.
I have a Kindle and because my eyesight is failing I put all my documents onto my device. I have got 800 books/documents on it so far, and I have only used a quarter of the available space. The entire Wiltshire report would surely be no larger than the entire published works, including letters, of Charles Dickens, which hardly take up any space on my little gadget. If the Wiltshire Report was downloadable I would put it on and get the robot voice to read it every night for 2 hours while I did my knitting.
ReplyDeleteI have now listened to this interview a couple of times and mr power makes so much sense. What happened to Natural Justice? A re we now saying that senator le marquand was given an agenda? looks like it. Why sis he make such a mess of it.
ReplyDeleteMr. Power tells us,
ReplyDelete"The full version of the wiltshire report fills two large packing cases (yes...I mean packing cases.
He goes on to say "The whole "wiltshire report" would fill the boot of a small family car."
How many pages, in total, has Ian Le Marquand published? He also told us on BBC Radio Jersey that there is no more to come (or words to that effect). That is some serious redacting! Just why aren't the "discredited" media reporting this?
Have ANY of the "discredited" media made an application under FOI to have the rest of Wiltshire and Mr. Power's defence published?
"How many pages, in total, has Ian Le Marquand published? He also told us on BBC Radio Jersey that there is no more to come (or words to that effect). That is some serious redacting! Just why aren't the "discredited" media reporting this?"
ReplyDeleteIt sounds like Ian Le Marquand is spending far too much time on this vendetta against Graham Power. He declares that he is a Christian, as a fellow believer of the Lord Jesus Christ I would suggest to him that he ought to stop wasting his valuble time on this ridiculous and obsessive persecution of Mr Power and concentrate on something far more important, which is his own relationship with God, who I fear he has grieviously offended by his persecution of this good and honest policeman.
This just wont go away will it.Where will it end? Very interesting about the police and normal crime. Look forward to parts 2 & 3
ReplyDeleteBen Shenton
ReplyDeleteJim perchard
Sean Power
Terry Le Main
All up for election + so much more this year. How have the above been with the abuse enquiry, were they supportive. Anybody know
I would love to hear more on the David Rose (churnalist) article incident.
ReplyDelete"I would love to hear more on the David Rose (churnalist) article incident. "
ReplyDeleteOH YES PLEASE!
VFC, could you please try to interview David Rose, Richard Webster, Bob Woffingham and Diane Simon?
Un-BBC-lievable
ReplyDeleteAnd not forgetting that ILM was conflicted right from the very start!! The man should have been made to resign a long time ago......but this is the Jersey way!!
ReplyDeleteIs it possible that adverse national media was leaked or provided by the very same people who complain about damage to this Islands reputation?
ReplyDeleteStill waiting to hear from Mr Power
ReplyDeleteas to wether he has challenged Wiltshire through the Police organisation.If nothing else he surely should be reporting the reports author for incompetence. I cant believe that he is willing to sit back and retire with this smear on his career.
Can he take legal action (funds permitting)against the states of Jersey for this injustice.
Nature Skewed In Jersey
ReplyDeleteand where are parts 2 and 3 of Graham Powers report?
ReplyDeleteIt could have been a little easier to follow if someone hadnt chosen to be to wander around the kitchen during the interview. :)
Will look to upload part 2 of the interview over the weekend.
ReplyDeleteThat's a very enlightening interview.
ReplyDeleteVery.
Thank you Mr Power, and well done VFC.
ReplyDeleteA clear, concise, in depth and honest interview by Mr Power. No waffling or prevaricating - to the point and very believable.
More than can ever be said about ILeM.
My goodness how we need this kind of reporting.
Is there something I am missing here? The BBC like the JEP slag off Power, shut down the phone in and now instead of just letting us listen to States debates and making up our own mind we get a running commentary from Chris Stone slagging off the progressives. Our media are a joke. Long live citizen media!
ReplyDeleteTotally agree with the Chris Stone comment. Indeed Deputy Trevor Pitman raised the issue during the States and I'm glad he did. Deputy Pitman himself was actually the subject of one of Chris Stones "opinions" where after the Deputy spoke Chris Stone told us he (Deputy Pitman) was political point scoring. We also get a running commentary of what Geoff Southern is doing and Chris Stone is never short of opinions there either.
ReplyDeleteIt's my opinion that Chris Stone is abusing his position by giving us his opinions during live debates, we have to listen to him when we want to listen to the debate, and he is a credit to BBC Radio Jersey and the Establishment.
VFC,
ReplyDeleteIf I was you I would not be concerned that the Local MSM would rather report on trivia and rubbish.
What you have here on your blog site at this present moment in time, well over the last few days is history in the making.
Its just such a shame that it is not getting the exposure it deserves.
David=Syvret&Power.
ReplyDeleteGoliath=ExBailiff Bailiff Deputy Bailiff AG Law office COMs and many others....
David's sling shot=Citizen Media!?
As a member of the public, when I listen to a States Debate, I wish to hear it as I would within the 'house', not with someone giving a running commentary of their own personal views, if Chris Stones wants his own politics show, then perhaps he ought to keep it separate, those you wish to listen to his rantings can do so!
ReplyDeleteThe Wiltshire report is a scanned document which has had names removed by marker pen. It is therefore essentially a scanned image file, not a scanned and searchable document, and as such it is large in size, especially as the print is quite small.
ReplyDeleteThe best option would be to chop it up to bitesize bits and email it.
Sorry not sue how to do shortcut links, worth a read though:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.chris-uk.org/another-cover-up/jerseychildren-were-loaned-to-rich-paedophile-yachtsmen
JERSEYBEAN
ReplyDeletewell done VFC really appreciate your hard work,excellent posting.
There is no reason whatsoever that Syvret & Power cant join forces.
ReplyDeleteThis is why Sir Christopher has to let it happen....
Making good progress.
Is it time some bright young Deputy started asking questions in the States about BBC Radio Jersey and it obligations, and duties to cover political events. In particular there ought to be questions about the closure of the mid-day weekly phone in and the fact that Talback is reduced to a few soundbites between records. Even the soundbites are innane because the subject matter is innocuous - speeding, speed limits and guess, more speed limits.
ReplyDeleteHi VFC.
ReplyDeleteJust put up the Audio of Questions without Notice from last Tuesday.
You can have a listen Here
OPERATION JERSEY
ReplyDeleteRico gives us yet more documented evidence that either Ian Le Marquand or the Chief Minister are being less than TRUTHFUL
ReplyDeleteCan you get Graham Power to email yourself, Radio Jersey, the JEP - and Ian le Marquand - with a letter requesting that his defense document is now published. Perhaps if a copy appears on the blog, ILM can't say he hasn't had it.
ReplyDeleteTony.
ReplyDeleteIan Le Marquand doesn't deny having a copy of Mr. Power's 62,000 word defence statement. He's trying to convince anybody who will listen that the reason he hasn't published it is because Mr. Power never asked him to.
If you have a look at Rico's latest posting (hyper-link above) you will see that either ILM is being less than honest, or Terry Le Sueur has some serious questions coming his way.
Reference the Chris Stone B(iased) B(ulls***) Corporation attacks on progressives why doesn't someone suggest this clown takes a look down and sees if he can spot the Beeb's favourite populist Ben Shenton? 99 times out of 100 mr. Stone couldn't because this sorry excuse for a Senator will have already scuttled off to his day job. How come we get no mention of that mr. Stone? I'm a taxpayer and people like this are taking my hard earned cash!
ReplyDeleteTony.
ReplyDeleteSince Ian Le Marquand replies to your e-mails, you might want to ask him if the Chief Minister made him aware of Mr. Power's request, on the 3rd of April 2010 to publish his defence to Wiltshire?
Somebody has been very economical with the truth, and it's either Terry Le Sueur or Ian Le Marquand, the public need to know who, and why.
The staggeringly unfunny Chris Stone doing stand-up "comedy" (for Comic Relief).
ReplyDeleteI'd say "Don't give up the day job!", but......!
"The staggeringly unfunny Chris Stone doing stand-up "comedy" (for Comic Relief).
ReplyDeleteI'd say "Don't give up the day job!", but......!"
Quite right. Looks like a younger version of St. Ouennais to me.
WHAT DREAMS MAY COME
ReplyDelete"Tony.
ReplyDeleteSince Ian Le Marquand replies to your e-mails, you might want to ask him if the Chief Minister made him aware of Mr. Power's request, on the 3rd of April 2010 to publish his defence to Wiltshire?
Somebody has been very economical with the truth, and it's either Terry Le Sueur or Ian Le Marquand, the public need to know who, and why."
I will happily do so, but I do need a copy of Mr Power's request so I can see exactly what he asked.
Tony.
ReplyDeleteThe letter is on Rico's Blog.
If I can have a new email from Mr Power requesting ILM release Mr Power's submission, I will endeavour to forward that and chase that up.
ReplyDeleteCan you also check if Mr Power has replied to ILM who said he was going to see if Mr Power wanted his submission released (albeit name-redacted).
Tony.
ReplyDeleteI can't get my head around your thinking here and perhaps we have crossed wires.
Ian Le Marquand has been saying that he's never been asked to publish Mr. Power's defence. Rico has just published a letter, e-mail, from Graham Power to Terry Le Sueur asking for his defence to be published, if Ian Le Marquand was going to insist on publishing the prosecution case. This letter, e-mail was sent on the 3rd of April 2010, was Ian Le Marquand made aware of it or not, and if not, why not?
Graham Power sending another e-mail would be non-sensical we, or I, am talking about the e-mail of April the 3rd 2010.
Therefore there is no point in checking if Mr. Power has replied to Ian Le Marquand recently as this all revolves around Mr. Power's e-mail of April 2010.
Can you point me to a URL for this letter? I can't find it on Rico's site.
ReplyDeleteDisciplinary action was dropped on 8 Jul 2010. Wiltshire was released in its severely redacted version around that time.
Any letter from Graham on 3rd of April 2010 would have predated that release, and GP would have been an employee of the States at that time. That may have caused and cause problems over how it is treated now.
Moreoever, there was no idea of how Wiltshire was going to be released - the present version has most of the text, but is name-redacted. I don't see how GP could have given permission for a name-redacted version of his defense back in April 2010 when there was no idea of how Wiltshire would be presented - and be sure - it is the request AND the name-redaction(on the same basis as Wiltshire) that is needed in any request.
I really think a new request, coming now, either via me or via Bob Hill etc, would be of immeasurable importance.
Tony.
ReplyDeleteRico has published the letter HERE
cover up = stems from the illuminati
ReplyDelete