Sunday, 20 May 2012

Open Letter To Home Affairs Minister Re-Post.


Home Affairs Minister, Senator Ian Le Marquand, STILL, after FOUR MONTHS, has not acknowledged the e-mail from Former Senior Investigating Officer of the Jersey Child Abuse Investigation Lenny Harper.



We thought we would re-post it to remind readers, Ian Le Marquand, States Members and State Media that the revelations contained in Mr. Harper's e-mail STILL need addressing.






This e-mail from former Senior Investigating Officer of Jersey's Child Abuse Investigation, Lenny Harper to the Home Affairs Minister, Senator Ian Le Marquand, is self explanatory and came about because of Mr. Harper's, Former Police Chief Mr Graham Power's, the Victims/Survivors of Jersey's Child Abuse atrocities and a couple of Bloggers determination to get to the truth behind the State Media's and government's spin and "official line."

We, as Bloggers, have ripped apart with documented facts and evidence all the spin and Tooth Fairy nonsense given to us by the State Media and government concerning the Child Abuse atrocities. This e-mail further adds to it..........And there is much more to come!



 from Lenny Harper
to: "i.lemarquand@gov.je" 
cc:
 voiceforchildrenvoiceforchildren ,

 ricosorda ,
 "ASibcy@jerseyeveningpost.com" ,
 BenQueree ,
 "chris.stone.01@bbc.co.uk" ,
 "news@channel103.com" ,
 "radiojersey@bbc.co.uk"
date: 24 January 2012 19:41
subject
 Revelations in Met Report to IPCC


Dear Mr Le Marquand;
I am unaware if you have read the latest blog from Rico Sorda, but in that he talks about the Met Interim and final reports which you, Andrew Lewis,  and David Warcup regularly and frequently used as the reason and justification for suspending Graham Power and the savage smear campaign against myself in which you referred to me as an "incompetent maverick", and also, I presume, authorised the States of Jersey Police to tell Scotland Yard that I would be facing a discipline investigation over the Child Abuse Enquiry if I was still in the force.
Whilst I am grateful for your subsequent clarification that nothing in the decision to enter HDLG justified discipline considerations and that indeed Mick Gradwell would be the person facing serious discipline charges were he still in the force, the revelations contained in the Met report submitted to the Independent Complaints Commission (as a result of my complaint against the author of the Met reports), that in fact neither the Met Interim report nor the final report contained any critical or damning comments about myself or any other officer, raises series questions as to where you received the information that it did, and even more significantly, if it didn't come from the Met, where did it come from.
As for your own part in spreading the perception that the Met reports (interim and final) were indeed critical and damning of myself and Graham Power, I have been quoted in the blog posting as asking a number of questions concerning your role.  I reproduce the relevant excerpt below and would ask that you give me the answer to the questions in respect of your role.

My complaint was rejected not because any of the criticisms were true, but because NO SUCH CRITICISMS HAD BEEN CONTAINED WITHIN THE MET REPORT. Paragraph 5.3 of the Sweeting Met report lists the complaints that I had made, i.e.; that the report was “critical and damning of me without ever speaking to me. That it had criticised me for my handling of the financial management of the investigation, my victim support policy, the lack of a Gold Group, the finding and labelling of human remains, my use of the term ‘shackles’ and the use of the term ‘cellars.’ In reality, according to the Met report to the IPCC, “having reviewed the report written by DSU Sweeting and his team, it is clear that no such criticisms are levelled at Mr Harper.” The report goes on to say in Para. 5.4, “The report was neither critical nor damning.”

The implications of this are profound, and extremely disturbing. David Warcup did not submit the Met report to the Home Affairs Minister but instead wrote him a letter outlining what was allegedly in the report. It was critical and damning enough to launch a brutal smear campaign against me, and by extension, against the victims, and to justify the suspension of Graham Power. According to Ian Le Marquand, what Warcup told him was in the Met report gave him no option but to suspend Graham and to label me an “incompetent maverick.”

So, if there was no such criticism in either the Met interim or the final report, where did David Warcup get it from? Rico Sorda has one theory involving the consultant shown the door by Graham Power for attempting to misrepresent the facts and who was then immediately engaged by Shredder Ogley and Frank Walker. So why did Warcup and Gradwell tell the world that it came from the Sweeting report? Could the gradual unfolding of this be the real reason why Warcup scampered away from the island pleading blog harassment and why the previously media loving Gradwell retired to wedding planning never to be seen again or to give any evidence to Scrutiny or anyone else?


It also raises huge questions about t Ian Le Marquand. Was he duped by Warcup into believing that the criticism was indeed contained within the Metropolitan Police Report? If so, why did he not ask some hard questions? Or, was he fully aware that the whole thing was a charade and a pack of lies intended to discredit the whole child abuse enquiry and so marginalise (once again) the victims of cruel abuse in Jersey’s government run homes?


As you can see, in the final paragraph of the excerpt, (immediately preceding this paragraph,) I pose three questions about yourself.  Put simply, Mr Warcup did not send the Met report to the HA Minister.  He summarised it in a letter.  Were you indeed duped, or did you know the whole story about the so called critical Met interim report was a charade and a pack of lies?


I would appreciate answers to the questions above.


Lenny Harper. (END)


Readers will note that Jersey's State Media are copied into this e-mail. Mr. Harper has not received as much as an acknowledgement of it from the Home Affairs Minister Senator Ian Le Marquand, let alone had his questions answered.  Questions are - will the State Media even report on this huge turn of events? Will they seek to get the answers from Ian Le Marquand that not only the victims/Survivors of Jersey's Child Abuse deserve but so do Mr. Harper, Mr. Power QPM, all the good officers that worked on the Child Abuse Enquiry under Mr. Power and Harper but the tax paying public who have paid for the smear campaign, witch-hunts and vendetta's against these people?

FOUR MONTHS LATER it turns out the answer to all the questions in the paragraph above is a resounding "NO."






18 comments:

  1. What is the Rico Sorda posting Lenny harper talked about in his email?

    ReplyDelete
  2. http://ricosorda.blogspot.com/2012/05/verta-1-report-what-are-council-of.html

    First part of the Verita Report and the Chief Minister calling in Andrew Williamson

    rs

    ReplyDelete
  3. It's another one of those YOU COULDN'T MAKE IT UP days where yourself and Rico have exclusively published some hard hitting real news which again is ignored by the state media. Then the filthy Rag publishes the usual crock of cr-p and launches a competition to discover a newshound.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Rico has published the exclusive. Clearly he has been leaked, yet another, document that whoever leaked it to him knew it would have been a waste of time offering it to the State Media.

    The document published here, on the other hand, is "an open letter" that WAS sent to the State Media and despite the evidence showing that people in high places have been lying, vindicates Lenny Harper, and goes even further to show that the former Police Chief was illegally suspended, and theState Media ignore it.

    This is why Bloggers are trusted and leaked documents and the State Media ARE NOT

    ReplyDelete
  5. They are attempting to break me and I am hurting like hell. There is no hell worse than being a survivor of a place like Haut de la Garenne and then having an MP in the family as well. I tried my best but they would not give me a chance.

    ReplyDelete
  6. VFC

    If any of your readers care about what happens with the islands Electoral Commission, please read this blog post -

    http://sammezec.blogspot.com/2012/05/time-for-action-re-electoral-commision.html

    It contains a template email that anyone can send forward to the EC so we can collectively pressure them and let it be known that we need a proper democracy in Jersey.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sam.

    I have sent my submission to ec@gov.je and here it is.

    from voiceforchildren voiceforchildren
    to: ec@gov.je
    date: 23 May 2012 13:23
    subject: Electoral Commission.

    Dear Commissioners.

    Firstly I write to express my abhorrence at the hijacking of the "independent" Electoral Commission that was agreed by the States in P15/2011. I legitimise what it has been replaced with much against my better judgement but am showing solidarity with like minded people before moves are made to request the Privy Council/London to intervene in order to obtain something that resembles Democracy to our, once beautiful, island.

    Below is a template submission that I hope you will receive from others and you will pay heed to.

    Dear Commissioners

    I am writing to ask that the Electoral Commission does research to establish the work actually done by the different classes of member:

    How many propositions of substance;
    How many written Questions?
    How many oral Questions?
    How many supplementary Questions in oral question time?
    How many contributions to debates (excluding mere interjections)
    How many Scrutiny reports have different classes of member actively worked on?
    How many serve as Ministers or Assistant Ministers?
    What other work is carried out?
    etc.

    The reason I ask is that I never seem to read in the JEP of proposals brought to the States by Constables. They never seem to be taking the lead in Scrutiny. The reports of questions rarely feature their names. Very few were or are Ministers.

    It is obviously vitally important for the review of the composition of the States that you find out the truth on this. Only with this information can an informed view be taken.

    I also request that you publish the results quickly, (especially as it is not a difficult piece of research to do) in time for further debate and analysis to take place amongst the public.

    Name excised. (END)

    Have now received a response from the Greffe acknowledging receipt.

    ReplyDelete
  8. How many questions raised in the States by individuals is neither here nor there because its whether such questions are of real importance and many are not. This letter you have drafted makes no sense because you could argue that the people who raise many pointless questions only do so because they are not involved in anything else so they try to be seen as doing something by raising questions.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thank you for your contribution Constable.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Tomorrow (Thursday) night at 7pm Rico Sorda will be live and interactive discussing subjects including the Child Abuse (sabotaged) Committee Of Enquiry, the Treasury Minister's political future (if he has one), the releasing of Reports and generally how things are done in Jersey........Which has got the island into such a mess.

    We will be broadcasting from HERE

    ReplyDelete
  11. VFC, Stop insulting posters who have an opinion. You were doing this to people on your blog TV last Thursday. That makes you biased and a hypocrite when you have the audacity of accusing the accredited media of the same thing. Either allow opinions through without snide comment or allow none at all.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I do apologize I had no idea, if you’re not a Constable, that you would feel so insulted by being referred to as one. Then again thinking about it it could be construed as a hell of an insult, so once more, apologies.

    For the record I NEVER insulted anybody on Blog TV.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Its no wonder Simon wants nothing to do with these Blogs anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  14. For those sniping at VFC it is his blog and he has a right to decide who does and doesn't leave comments on his blog! Also its a good blog and what is being said needs to be said. When I was a kid being abused at HDLG and other places hardly any people spoke out for me. It was with the introduction of awareness of satanic ritual abuse in the 1980s that a light was switched on - despite all the negative press that went with it - there was some recognition and far more importantly people got out. I have said all that I can safely say now on blogs leaving comments and so on - but I am glad someone stronger than me is talking out. I deserved a childhood and did not have one. It was taken from me. All that VFC is doing is tackling a problem that needs sorting.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "VFC, Stop insulting posters who have an opinion. You were doing this to people on your blog TV last Thursday. That makes you biased and a hypocrite"

    This anonymous comment is ridiculous.

    There seem to be far too many deceived or deceitful people about these days who claim that someone's "opinion" is sacrosanct. Crap, stupid, ignorant or deliberately deceitful comments should be identified as such for two reasons.

    1)If the person making it is honest, and simply is repeating something fed to them, they just might have a re-think of their implanted "opinion".

    2) If the person making it is dishonest and is trying to manipulate public opinion, it is even more important that their Machiavellian tricks are exposed.

    The commenter's deceitful spin/misguided views was shown because they ONLY mentioned the "questions" part of the letter (ignoring the propositions and debate contributions bit) and put forward the slippery rhetoric that many questions are not of "real importance".

    Frankly, I think the "opinions" of such deceivers don't deserve publicity; indeed I think those who come out with such junk should censor themselves - there is enough spin, "public relations" and manipulation around in public life without it being added to

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.