Friday, 3 January 2014

Stuart Syvret Released From Prison Exclusive (2)

Former Jersey politician/Health Minister and Senator Stuart Syvret has today been released from prison...........Again.

Team Voice recorded, and published, an exclusive interview with Mr. Syvret before he went to prison where he explains the "reasoning" of his imprisonment as he, and others, see it. The interviewe can be viewed from HERE.

His latest release comes a little over two years since his previous incarceration where we exclusively interviewed him HERE and he (rightly) predicted he would be imprisoned again..........And again.

We managed to grab a few words with Mr. Syvret today at the prison gates, on his release, at a very blustery La Moye. Apologies for the poor sound quality in this short video. We have also exclusively interviewed him (in a more weather forgiving environment) which should be published in the next couple of days.

He thanks everybody for their support online/cards/letters/texts etc. and hopes to publish a Blog soon to convey that thanks himself.






70 comments:

  1. VFC,

    I have to say that since I have know Stuart this is the healthiest I have ever seen him. He looks refreshed and very relaxed. Look forward to hearing the interview.

    All the best for 2014.

    rs

    ReplyDelete
  2. Time to pick up that sword of truth again Stuart, welcome back :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. IAN,- that was WELL EXPRESSED...!! Antje

      Delete
  3. good to see stuart out again and looking well. now the states have the pitman,s out my be they could all work together for truth and justice.

    ReplyDelete
  4. i should have added mike higgins will be next

    ReplyDelete
  5. No doubt it won't be long before he is back in again for snubbing the legal system.

    ReplyDelete
  6. We can see that victorious smile on the face of an undeterred whistleblower, with the bearing of a man who emerges stronger after every fight. All respect due for what will only be a triumph for Stuart, before the eyes of the world.

    Elle

    ReplyDelete
  7. A reader says:

    "No doubt it won't be long before he is back in again for snubbing the legal system."

    How true, how true.

    Unintended irony there.

    Stuart

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's nothing to be proud of.
      Your online judgement is a million miles away from being classed as a set up.
      You are not above the law and nor is anybody else and if Jersey courts are so corrupt then why do you stick around?

      Delete
    2. So what are you saying? If the courts are corrupt he should run away?

      Delete
    3. Well I would wouldn't you?
      These so called unlawful battles with the local justice system are like a looping Carry On film.

      Delete
    4. This subject is discussed in the exclusive in-depth interview to be published in the next couple of days. Who is the winner(s) of these court battles?..............Stay tuned.

      Delete
    5. statutes and acts are not law they are legislation witch is just the opinion of others so to force anybody to conform against there will is slavery! (IF THEY ARE COURSING NO HARM OR LOSS TO OTHERS)

      Delete
  8. I would feel pretty stupid just coming out of prison for contempt of court myself but everybody is allowed an opinion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is also an "opinion" that the court itself is/was UNLAWFUL

      Delete
    2. "I would feel pretty stupid" ... presumably not an unusual sensation for you?

      Delete
    3. This is silly talk VFC and the allegation of a unlawful court is just another way to dodge the law.

      Delete
    4. That is your opinion and I’m happy to publish it. Hopefully readers will look at the LINK and make up their own minds?

      Delete
    5. Of the judgement as well VFC?
      I am sorry but nothing has been achieved by this especially the prisoner.

      Delete
    6. Of course if it is/was a corrupt, or unlawful court, then the judgement wouldn't be worth the paper it's written on would it?

      Delete
    7. I think it is time you showed us States Members who agree with all these claims because I bet there are zero?

      Delete
    8. There are, in fact, quite a number of them, but alas they lack the courage, and integrity to voice their concerns. They’ve seen what happens to people who do.

      Delete
    9. Well that's handy.
      All I say is that anybody can write on a blog about a court being unlawful but when it comes to proper channels and proper people being addressed with these claims we never seem to see lift off.

      Delete
    10. Oh come on VFC, do you really believe that?

      Delete
    11. When the Jersey courts are “the proper channels” and if they are corrupt/unlawful then “lift off” is hardly likely in fairness.

      Delete
  9. I agree with the first comment Prison suits Stuart. No doubt he will be back in before too long. Best wishes for 2014 and the fight for Justice.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Okay, we will leave it at that. I am off to Chambers.
    I hope I don;t get nicked by any unlawful police :-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Enjoy yourself Jon try and stay out of trouble.

      Delete
  11. My first comment as I watched that video is how well he looked. Seems to me that the authorities are doing him a favour, giving him much needed R&R time and also time to recharge his batteries.
    exJHB

    ReplyDelete
  12. STUART ,-I feel so happy that YOU are now released from HMP La Moye !! You look good & healthy ! Now enjoy your freedom !! ANTJE

    ReplyDelete
  13. ''I think it is time you showed us States Members who agree with all these claims because I bet there are zero?''

    Now we are talking the same language. Read Trevor Pitmans Blog. States members do agree but are too scared to speak out.

    ReplyDelete
  14. It is good to see Stuart looking so fit and healthy. Clearly a very bad judgement by the Royal Court, no jurisdiction, no evidence of any data being processed, no evidence that anything he said not being absolutely true.

    Peaceful non-compliance is the enlightened way of facing a colonial system which will not even accept it is at fault, as Gandhi demonstrated.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Healthy? When is he off to London to take this Island down like he said he was to do years ago?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Stuart has never looked better. He's certainly more widely read and he can count on greater support from around the world now.

    ReplyDelete
  17. A truly huge welcome back Stuart and wow! you do look really well.

    A New Year and probably the same s**t, but we know you won't waver. All the best.

    ReplyDelete
  18. No victory here, he just did time for crying out loud and if he thinks Prison is good use of life's precious time then more fool him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I’m not sure he has ever said that prison is “a good use of life’s precious time.” But am happy to publish a link where he has said it. I agree there is no victory yet and time will tell who, if anybody, will emerge as the victor(s).

      Considering the 4 proxies who brought the case against him, in the first place, argued that what he wrote about them caused them stress and harm and their names are more well known, and written about, than they were without this court case one could argue that they are losing the battle and more fool them?

      Delete
    2. I have not seen anymore writings about the 4 proxies and from law reports they have a court order for syvret to stop harrassing them which is permanent.
      I also hear blogs will come under control of closer domains and servers as its happening all over the world due to policing issues.
      This will then bring blogs even closer into line for prosecution when legislation comes in later this year as cyber insults are rife at the moment.
      But like somebody said, its always only words and no actions, or is it frustrated words more than anything?

      Delete
    3. The 4 proxies, as a result of the (not so) secret court case, have been named in an early Day Motion and on UK Hansard as well as a number of web/bBlogsites.

      The JUDGE MADE LAW will no doubt now be able to close down ALL Blogsites that expose corruption on this Island. The new legislation on cyber-bullying, it is argued, is being dreamt up to silence those exposing the truth and has nothing to do with cyber-bullying.

      Delete
    4. Are you seriously saying that calling people names like scum without conviction is exposing truth?
      The EDM happened in 2012.

      Delete
    5. No, what I, and many others, are saying is that Stuart should have been given the opportunity to prove what he wrote about the proxies was true and they should have been given the opportunity to prove what he said wasn’t true. What, instead happened was a (not so) secret court case that concluded the 4 proxies were caused stress and harm for what was written about them and not whether it was true or not……..As far as I understand it.

      Delete
  19. Wishing all the best to Stuart for the New Year.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Pitmans lose their seats in States for bankruptcy BNP euro member declared bankruptt but keeps his seat this must surely mean Euro courts will find in Pitmans favour (eventually)

    ReplyDelete
  21. yes stuart looks well .
    whats next?

    ReplyDelete
  22. The exclusive, and in-depth interview with Stuart will be published tonight on RICO SORDA'S BLOG.

    ReplyDelete
  23. 2 seats up for grabs. Can anyone perhaps persude Stuart to......

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He has been approached by a number of people urging him to stand. He has flatly declined.............

      Delete
    2. You cannot change the system from within, as Stuart has ably demonstrated. We just have to wait for the system to kill itself... I'd give it one more term before it is absolutely bankrupt; morally and financially. We need to be working on what we will replace it with... a new model of government which quite simply makes the old model obsolete.

      Delete
  24. I see there is still one person making numurous posts who appears to agree with every word the JEP print, and disbelieves all FACTS provided by various blogs, I do feel sorry for this brainwashed person, perhaps in need of help, such as the difference between TRUTH/LIES FACT/FICTION.

    Good to see Stuart in such good shape and very happy after a holiday from oppresshion, I guess its back to unpaid work, fighting for true justice in Jersey.



    ReplyDelete
  25. Yet another example of the depths our Jimmy Savile-supporting state will go to to persecute anyone who dares expose high level child abuse.

    Best wishes to you, Stuart, you are a brave and principled man.

    Robert Green (Hollie Greig Case)

    ReplyDelete
  26. Can I just ask the owner of this a blog hypothetical question?
    If you have no faith in the data protection law then how would you deal with a blog set up just to destroy your family?
    It's only a reverse scenario question but I think a very valid one because people on here seem to think it will never happen to them and this can happen to anybody new at anytime.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There's a clue to the intended purpose of the Data Protection Law in the name. There are different laws that are intended to prosecute those who indulge in harassment, defamation and misuse of computers - and applying those laws is how the scenario you describe should be dealt with.

      But bear in mind, of course, that families can be destroyed when the truth about a family member's criminal activities are exposed - for example, if a father turns out to be a child abuser or rapist, or somebody who has systematically protected such a person. I presume you aren't implying - hypothetically or otherwise - that a victim of such a person should be denied the right to expose their abuser in public, if they have been let down by an indifferent or even culpable legal establishment?

      Or that an online journalist should not be able to report such a story?

      Or are you actually implying that the rights of the Jimmy Saviles of this world to hide their crimes under the veil of privacy is more important than exposing their behaviour and obtaining a measure of justice for their victims?

      Delete
  27. I will ask one real question: under what basis should a blog like Staurt's register with the DPL? and what data he he have provided to him from the infamous four?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's an interesting question. Stuart claimed entitlement to disclose data about certain individuals under the 'public interest' and 'journalism' exemptions of the DPL. He has been denied this defence, and it seems that Jersey's legal establishment is keen to create a false impression that bloggers do not have the same status in law as the mainstream media. The simple fact is that the DPL does not define journalist - let alone 'accredited' journalist - so in the eyes of the law (if not the lawyers) Stuart, VFC, Rico Sorda etc all have equal status with the JEP, BBC, ITV etc - and the same right to claim the journalism exemption.

      However, our legal overlords have spoken: Stuart is not a journalist, and is not acting in the public interest. So in what capacity is he acting as a blogger? Well, it clearly must be a hobby (and we have no less an authority than the JEP to back this up). Stuart is therefore clearly exempt from the DPL on the grounds that his blogging is recreational:

      "36 Exemption for data processed for domestic purposes
      Personal data processed by an individual only for the purposes of that
      individual’s personal, family or household affairs (including recreational
      purposes) are exempt from the data protection principles and Parts 2 and 3."

      Delete
    2. So would this mean that if a company was to be formed by a blogger then the authorities would have to accept that this was no longer a hobby?

      the Beano is not The Rag

      Delete
  28. Hi VFC.

    Happy New Year.

    Just but a Post up about the new Child Abuse Scandal. You and your readers can listen HERE

    TJW.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Whats the scandal?
    If victims refuse to make statements then whats the Police supposed to do?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Let the public know why the alleged victims wouldn't give a statement? Is it because they fear their alleged abusers/groomers? Is it because they (like a growing number of people) believe it would be a waste of time because we have a corrupt, and politicised, "justice" system?

      Furthermore, why did the cops keep all this such a secret? Why wasn't the investigation made public, witnesses/victims sought? Why not alert parents of teenagers their children could be a victim of, or vulnerable to, a known grooming gang?

      Delete
    2. My sentiments exactly VFC. My immediate reaction to this was that this should have been made public long before now, thus informing families of what dangers could be out there and placing their own children in danger. Not quite a 'horse, stable, bolted' scenario, but it could so easily have been.

      I cannot think of one reasonable excuse as to why this has not been made public for this length of time. Even worse -the perpetrators walk free. They should be named and shamed in my opinion.

      Delete
  30. A reader says:

    "Whats the scandal?
    If victims refuse to make statements then whats the Police supposed to do?"

    An interesting question and an interesting subject.

    Whilst not possible to comment on the specific case in an informed way, it would be interesting to know whether the police considered charges could have been brought without formal statements of criminal complaint, perhaps with the females being called as witnesses - or on the use of other evidence, gathered by intelligence.

    And in such cases, it's legitimate to pose the question, "what influences - pressures etc - were on the victims?" Did they feel, for example, in any way coerced - or that there would be "consequences" on them if they went ahead with statements of criminal complaint?

    Certainly - in Jersey - witness intimidation - of a direct kind - or of a general nature - the fear of "consequences" - exists in all kinds of cases.

    As some of us know - the actual state in Jersey uses just such intimidations itself in certain cases, when statements of criminal complaint are, or may be, made - or supporting witness statements - and Jersey's corrupted public authorities would prefer certain matters were buried.

    Stuart



    ReplyDelete
  31. memories of Victoria College & Bailanche

    ReplyDelete
  32. I was under the impression the police could take a case to court without statesments for instance a man batters his wife she refuses to press charges police are called and I believe could prosecute.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I just half-heard something about John Hemming's (UK MP and Stuart Syvrets London landlord) advising people being investigated for child abuse or neglect should leave the country as they wouldn't get a fair trail? Can you shed any light on this or perhaps correct me if I've got it wrong, this seems an extraordinary suggestion but maybe its due to some sort of judicial failing in the UK?

    ReplyDelete
  34. Can't shed any light, sorry, haven't seen/heard anything along those lines.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Panorama tonight. Come on, do try and keep up. Even your hated bbc was on the ball.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-25641247

    ReplyDelete
  36. Keep up with this, why are the JEP not writing this stuff ? bloody hell.

    http://planetjersey.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3822.msg58558/topicseen.html#msg58558

    ReplyDelete

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