Wednesday, 30 November 2016

Advocate Philip Sinel Interview.


Advocate Philip Sinel

With the recent revelation that the Jersey Child Abuse Committee of Inquiry announcing that it won't be publishing its report until the first quarter of 2017, and with the departure of the Lieutenant Governor VFC was keen to capture the thoughts and opinions of local prominent Lawyer, and constitutional expert, Advocate Philip Sinel who we have interviewed once before on similar matters which can be viewed HERE and HERE. Of particular interest and relates to this posting also is the submission Mr. Sinel made to the Carswell Review which we published HERE.

In our in-depth, and exclusive, interview (below) Advocate Sinel explains why he believes Jersey's constitutional arrangements are a barrier to the Child Abuse Inquiry's report to effect any change on the past and present regime run by "an oligarchy that will support itself and intimidate those who disagree with it." (Usually through its "Justice" System.) He goes on to tell us that he believes the Child Abuse inquiry's work has been and is "being undermined by the Attorney General's Office, the States of Jersey Police and the Data Protection Commission."



Lieutenant Governor


Unlike parts of the State Media Advocate Sinel is not fawning over the Office and departure of the Lieutenant Governor and we think it would be fair to say he (like many others) has very little confidence in the LG due to his dealings (or not) with him. Mr. Sinel tells us (interview below) that he has had to go over the head of the LG and contact HM Private Secretary Sir Christopher Geidt  who appears to be as unwilling to deal with "the Jersey problem" as the Queen's representative on the Island.

This is a compelling, insightful, and somewhat alarming interview from the perspective of a prominent Lawyer who has first hand experience of how the constitution and "justice" system operates in Jersey. Much more is discussed in the interview than has been highlighted here which makes for compulsive viewing.

Part two coming soon...................










73 comments:

  1. Interesting to hear Advocate Sinel's damning assessment of the Lieutenant Governor's disinterest in triggering intervention even when presented with evidence of clear wrong doing and corruption. This is after all coming from a lawyer not a politician or blogger.

    I believe that I am correct in thinking that you have in the past published interviews with both Trevor and Shona Pitman and Deputy Mike Higgins who confirm exactly the same thing. Just what hope can this appalling state of affairs give us here in the island that things will ever change toward a true and functioning democracy?

    Apart from rioting and storming the States chambers and corrupt court as I believe happened back in 1769 (your readers can find out about this fascinating thwarted French revolution on Mike Dun's Tom Gruchy blog if interested) what hope is there in the final analysis?

    I don't mean to sound depressing, and I respect Advocate Sinel for being brave enough to speak out again on what many of us know to be true, taking a step back it seems nothing will change until it will already be too late. My only question to the Advocate would consequently be 'so what should we all do, Sir?'

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 'So what should we all do, Sir?'

      That's the Sixty-four Thousand Dollar Question because nobody knows.

      Delete
    2. If nobody knows what to do next then what is the point??????

      Delete
    3. I believe that 13:22 made an alternative suggestion
      "rioting and storming the States chambers and corrupt court"

      Is there another way?

      That is the time honoured way of of dealing with shysters who horribly violate rights and even violate children.

      Why should the "body count" Sinel opened with, only consist of the innocent?

      Delete
  2. What was this great Dep Mezec speech about? Hopefully calling for UK intervention?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is on Reform Jersey's Facebook page but you will have to scroll down a little way HERE.

      Delete
  3. Trying to find Advocate Sinel's (damming) evidence on the Child Abuse Inquiry's website is not an easy task. Readers can view it from HERE. Although you will need to type the word "Sinel" in the search box to reach it.

    A great number of appendices are listed but there appears to be no way of seeing them. Not very helpful/transparent.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here is only a tiny example of what is published in Advocate Sinel's evidence:

      "My greatest desire for many years has been to stand in Court representing a client and to know that the process and result will be unaffected by nepotism bias, political or personal agendas or the like; such days are rare, for me they are red letter days. I feel that the Royal Court operates in many respects as an extension of the executive, surveys suggest that my view is not an isolated one."

      "This has a grim effect on the Island's culture, which is very much one of fear and concealment. The dysfunctional judicial system is so carefully aligned with the interest of the once party ruling States as to be a source of despair for many; it is a very significant factor in allowing serious crimes to go unpunished and for victims to go unaddressed, it is a culture which encourages crimes and punishes innocents and victims, it is a culture of concealment and deflection."

      "Our much vaunted judicial system lacks the respect of the islanders and foreigners alike, not least because it has become a tool of the establishment and of the egos of its participants and proponents."

      Delete
    2. It is indeed a startling document. One reads it with a grim sense of "this is the truth".

      (I.T. hint by the way...if your PDF browser of choice doesn't display a search box, click CTRL+F to display it, then search for Sinel)

      What is also interesting about this document is that Advocate Sinel's full statement had a number of appendices, mentioned at paragraph 19 then listed in full at the end of the statement. For example, "Correspondence between Philip Cowan Sinel, Lieutenant Governor, Ministry of Justice and Her Majesty, meeting notes and related".

      Advocate Sinel's statement was effectively "read into the record" on day 139 (29 February 2016) where one of the lawyers to the inquiry Mr Livingston said:

      "MR LIVINGSTON: Good afternoon, Members of the Panel. Over the past 18 months you have received oral and written evidence from numerous individuals involved in the care system between 1945 and 2014. Madam Chair, in addition to this evidence the Inquiry has also received a number of statements and written submissions from others, which you will have the opportunity to read and consider in the writing of your final report. All of these documents will be made available to the public in due course. The following includes evidence from 35 different witnesses, most of whom have provided written statements or submissions to the Inquiry themselves, a small number are statements given to the Police or to the Redress Scheme which have not previously been read into the record. An index of this evidence can be found at {WS000732}. I will read out for each witness the document reference for their statement and a very short summary of what the statement contains."

      See http://www.jerseycareinquiry.org/Transcripts/JERINQ%20-%20Day%20139.pdf

      Why does the Inquiry not put the appendices up on its website - in an easily accessible form - when it has put countless other appendices up there? Advocate Sinel has gone to the trouble of preparing the evidence, the taxpayer has paid for the Inquiry, why can't we see the documents?

      Delete
    3. glitch in that link Polo?

      ? without typo :
      www.jerseycareinquiry.org/Transcripts/Day%20139%20documents%201.pdf#page=314

      Delete
    4. Thanks. Was in a rush and should have checked the version I posted.

      Delete
  4. From Mr Sinel's evidence and I couldn't have put it better myself.

    "I wish to provide evidence to the Inquiry about the corruption that exists in Jersey and the many flaws that exist in the Jersey system and the way that serious crimes are pushed under the carpet and the assortment of child molesters, thieves, rapists, murderers and swindlers have been exculpated by the Crown and by the Judiciary and the way in which the critics of such behaviour are ruined by the deliberate actions of corrupt Judges and prosecutors".

    ReplyDelete
  5. The LG is appointed by the Queen but who in Jersey gives him the Job?

    ReplyDelete
  6. A tweet from @ITVChannelTV earlier today:

    "Jersey's Lieutenant Gov. says the island's reputation is its "most important commodity" during his final (and second) speech in the States."

    Makes you f****** sick doesn't it?

    Reputation, reputation, reputation....AT ALL COSTS!!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. An excellent post VFC. I didn't know the COI lawyers were withholding Dannie Jarman legal advice and banding it as all Syvret's fault. Have I got that wrong? Does the COI have blood on its hands? I'm sorry- please can you explain this. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My understanding from the video was that Danni Jarman was badly let down by the courts and by the Lieutenant Groveler. I don't think that the CoI was mentioned in relation to Danni. I would also like to know what Sinel was referring to.

      http://freespeechoffshore.nl/stuartsyvretblog/dannie-jarman-in-memory-tribute/

      indicates that Danni died almost a year ago on 15 December 2016

      She was young, how did she die? I have guessed suicide but never liked to ask.

      Delete
    2. Sinel mentions the late Danni Jarman after about 14 minutes.

      www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHFPOeNFjl8&feature=youtu.be&t=800

      Seems to indicate the unwarranted/unlawful withholding of legal representation (not for CoI?) and that the LG thought it was funny!

      Delete
    3. Thank you for your summary. I get it now.

      Delete
  8. Well done Advocate Sinel

    Highlighted the constitutional and structural issues which have allowed and exacerbated the decades of child abuse.

    Sinel doubts that the CoI will deal with the underlying structural issues.

    You would have thought that £27 million would buy a full functional solution not just a bit of window dressing.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anyone hear about the farewell do for the Lieut Gov. 200 of the 'great and good' seated for salmon lobster and guinea fowl fine wine from dunnels. Anyone see this in the news, anyone know the guest list? what about the cost?

    ReplyDelete
  10. I have been informed that the LG is appointed not by the Queen but by the Bailiff, Senior Jurat and someone from the appointments committee..

    No conflict there then.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are right there is no conflict.

      Delete
    2. Again taken from a link in the main posting:

      "So the people he is supposed to be watching over recommend him to the Crown? Who exactly is on this “Jersey Panel” that recommends him for appointment? According to the BBC “A selection panel made up of the Bailiff, a senior Jurat and a member of the appointments commission would then make the decision.”
      How can it be that the very people he should be grassing up for any wrongdoing effectively get to appoint him? Why is there no mention of this change in the appointment process on Government House’ website?"

      A huge conflict of interest and nepotism.

      LINK.

      Delete
  11. Always good to hear the views of Advocate Sinel – one of very few CIs lawyers who seems to have tongue in his head outside of a court.
    In fact one of very few “professionals” in these Islands prepared to speak on anything very much beyond today’s weather....
    I wonder if Advocate Sinel had anything to say about UK lawyer Alan Collin’s final submission to the Care Inquiry in which he outlined his concerns about the possible routine and illegal detention of many hundreds of young people in Jersey over decades in the unregulated name of “care orders”, “probation”, “fostering”, “restraint” etc etc?
    If Alan is correct the potential bill for compensation could far exceed anything that has so far been spent on the Inquiry or compensation for “abuse” – but there have still not been any public comments or expressions of concern that I have heard from Jersey’s lawyers or professional care providers or politicians.
    Is it just the same old omerta policy at work or something even more sinister?
    I interviewed Alan Collins with others from the CLA in discussion on the same day that he gave his evidence... http://tomgruchy.blogspot.com/2016/06/child-care-in-jersey-so-you-think-its.html

    Mike Dun

    ReplyDelete
  12. It is time you found out from other local Lawyers whether this opinion on Jersey's constitution is shared.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Off your TROLLey1 December 2016 at 11:00

      Why only "local Lawyers" -why not UK or international lawyers (who cannot be victimised and ruined)
      Why not other people with knowledge and experience?

      Health Minister [ex political prisoner]

      Police Chief [unlawfully suspended during said child abuse investigation]

      Deputy Police Chief [victimised and derided by the state and JEPaedo etc.]

      .........


      PMSL

      Delete
    2. Re: "It is time you found out from other local Lawyers whether this opinion on Jersey's constitution is shared."

      Contained in the main posting is a link which contains the answer to your question:

      "Asked why Advocate Sinel believes those in his profession who are, shall we say, "unhappy" with the Jersey Judicial system are not speaking out publicly he replies "they do not wish to join me in the dock." "They know what's going to happen if they start poking their heads above the parapet."

      LINK.

      Delete

  13. Chilling !!!!

    www.jerseycareinquiry.org/Transcripts/Day%20139%20documents%201.pdf#page=314


    I think that at this point Ex Health Minister Syvret should mention that he told us so.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Mr Syvret

      I feel better now

      Delete
    2. Better that he will never be part of a the biggest historic investigation into Child abuse this Island has ever seen? Somewhat ironic.

      Delete
    3. It is indeed scandalous that the CoI failed in it's duty to subpoena a whistleblower as important  Ex.Health Minister Syvret (AND others)

      Mr Syvret's testimony will be missed but I am far less concerned about the loss now that I have read Advocate Sinel's witness statements

      www.jerseycareinquiry.org/Transcripts/Day%20139%20documents%201.pdf#page=314

      This absolutely supports most of the things Health Minister Syvret has said

      The real test of the CoI is whether they act on Advocate Sinel's evidence and ensure that the necessary changes are made, or if this is a £27 million window dressing exercise.

      As Sinel says, Jersey's vulnerable (and not so vulnerable) will not be safe until the structural flaws and separation of powers are corrected.
      It will all happen again.

      Delete
  14. I think Stuart was right to not take part in the COI. As Sinel points out, the CoI wasn't set up to handle the big issues of corruption. Jersey won't learn the real lessons it needs to learn, it'll just put a few periphery points on the table and say 'lessons have been learned.' What makes it more ironic, is TPTB together with us, knows very well what the real lesson should be. And we know that they know this, and they know we know they are avoiding it and getting away with it. Nothing fundamental will change. No rule of law. The status quo under a monarch who doesn't do anything about it and an entire echelon whose job it is to deflect what ever comes to light. I patiently await the black swan.

    ReplyDelete
  15. At the end of the day Stuart Syvret never took part in the COI and that cannot be undone.
    This COI will be the only one of its' kind because there is no way a new COI is ever going to be set up again with as much voluntary participation as this one had.

    ReplyDelete
  16. In a comment under your previous posting VFC, a reader - Cynic25, on November 2016 at 14:04 - said this: -

    "The report will be longer than War and Peace, no-one will read it, the JEP will gloss over anything embarrassing, the truth will be buried as usual. You'll be able to point to evidence in the report, but no-one will believe you, and people will still not bother to go and look for themselves. The Troll will carry on trolling; same old same old. Why would Stuart subscribe to all that?"

    I thought that comment was so succinctly on-point as to merit re-posting here.

    Let's face it - when the void ab initio "protocols" - invented by the CoI - and promulgated ex cathedra - expressly in defiance of - and contra - Part (e) of its "legislative-purpose" - were too long and complex for 99.999% of people to even read - let alone understand - and the MSM have scarcely acknowledged even the very existence of those openly ultra vires said protocols - what chance of a real public understanding of the full report?

    Stuart Syvret.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You keep on quoting Ultra Vires and Human Rights when none of it has been tested or proven.
      Anybody can say something is unlawful on a Blog but it is in Court where such claims have any substance if true.

      In any case it is evidently that your views are not shared by some four hundred people who took the time to give evidence either in writing or orally. So why go on?

      Delete
    2. My God somebody gets it.

      Delete
    3. I agree with 10:26, Health Minister Syvret was one of the first to "get it" when he honestly answered a question in the parliament stating that Jersey children's services were not fit for purpose and announcing an investigation and overhaul

      It was no accident that the establishment immediately laid into him and Mr.Syvret proceeded to "get" just how dysfunctional Jersey is.

      The multiple dysfunctions now very astutely supported by Advocate Sinel's submission to the CoI

      www.jerseycareinquiry.org/Transcripts/Day%20139%20documents%201.pdf#page=314


      Thank you Mr Sinel. You are a good and brave man. Thank you!

      Delete
    4. @08:05 "your views are not shared by some four hundred people who took part"

      How would 08:05 know what the views of these 400 people are????

      Many of them clearly had massive reservations

      http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/jersey-child-abuse-committee-of-inquiry.html

      "Jersey Child Abuse Committee of Inquiry A Fake, Partial, Incompetent?"

      Delete
    5. When I said 'get it' I meant the comment at 8.05.
      Mr Syvret's views are not concrete and never were.

      Delete
    6. Oh, you agree with yourself? LOL

      You say "Mr Syvret's views are not concrete"

      Indeed not; "concrete" is a mixture of sand and gravel bonded together with cement.
      Mr Syvret's views are based on experience and evidence. Much of that evidence is presented by Advocate Sinel in his statements to the CoI:

      www.jerseycareinquiry.org/Transcripts/Day%20139%20documents%201.pdf#page=314

      (from  page 314 onwards)

      Were you able to understand the many critical points the Advocate was making?


      Mr. Bailhache on the other hand is away with the fairies:

      http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/jersey-child-abuse-inquiry-and-william.html

      Delete
  17. I see from his statement to the COI that Philip Sinel is from the gilt-edged establishment Jersey background - attended Victoria College, father ex-forces, and so on - but presumably was deemed to have gone 'off-reservation' when he encountered things he couldn't support and started to criticise the establishment.

    Btw - not directly linked to MR Sinel's statement, but does anyone know where on the COI's website I can find WS000544?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have don a pretty thorough search and "WS000544" is not on the website or is very well hidden!!! (perhaps even under another name)

      It appears that "WS000544" is the statement of "Mr.K" the alleged multiple child rapist and torturer:
      http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/jersey-child-abuse-inquiry-and-william.html

      That blog is chilling
      Mr. K was let not only off the hook by the Attorney General, but effectively given a character reference by him! (the now Bailiff WB !)

      Both the non prosecution of Mr K, and  William Bailhache are mentioned multiple times and in scathing terms by Advocate Sinel

      While declining to prosecute Mr.K, William Bailhache appears to have made assertions in direct contravention of the expert medical report to court prepared by a Dr Jason Payne-James, a registered medical practitioner, & leading specialist in forensic and legal medicine


      There are multiple references to the statement "WS000544" on Day 65 and Day 66 (links below), but statement WS000544 itself appears to be missing/hidden

      www.jerseycareinquiry.org/Transcripts/JERINQ%20-%20Day%2065%20Final.pdf

      www.jerseycareinquiry.org/Transcripts/JERINQ%20-%20Day%2066%20Final.pdf


      Does ANYONE know how to find "WS000544" ???????

      Delete
    2. Doesn't appear to be on the site. Search throws up the references in the transcripts for Days 65/66. If the reference is to Mr. K's written statement it should turn up in documentation for Day66. What turns up there is the written statement of Person 64. It is not Mr. K's written statement.

      I tried searching the site with s quote from WSOOO544 and the only thing that came up was the quote itself.

      So clearly the document is not on the site.

      So what are the Inquiry playing at?

      Delete
  18. So just keep on whining, and watching your big TV's and thumping your computer keys bozo's. Just picked this up on another blog !!!!!

    http://planetjersey.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=4060.msg61164;topicseen#msg61164

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. From your link

      "When lazy well fed islanders get out of their arm chairs and houses and get involved. When only six hundred  [ and growing ] angry souls rip down the fence at the waterfront office site or gather in the Royal Square early on a Tuesday morning and pelt the Ministers with rotten eggs and tomatoes, then they will listen, they rule by complacency and cannot cope with a population taking arms and showing their power. Then Jersey will have a future."

      Well said!

      Delete
  19. Think its time people took a deep breath and waited for the Report.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We have no choice but to wait for the report.

      We sincerely hope that it is worth the wait.
      If it is not people will be justifiably angry about the wait AND about the £27 million taken from taxpayer's funds.

      www.youtube.com/watch?v=hamKl-su8PE

      Delete
  20. Witness Statement of  Ian Hamilton King #1

    2. I would like to give evidence to the Inquiry about the culture of corruption that I have experienced in Jersey, which operates to protect the reputation of those in the establishment. Corruption is endemic in Jersey when it comes to business matters. In my view, however, and based on my own previous experience of abuse and the covering up of abuse in London, I believe that the same protectionist culture affecting Jersey business transactions has operated to cover up the true extent of child abuse on the island.

    3......

    4. During this period, I remember talking to Frank Bough (of BBC's "Grandstand") and a television producer friend of mine, about Jimmy Saville. Since he died, many people have denied that anyone knew of Jimmy Saville's behaviour. The reality, however, is that back in the late 1960s and early 1970s everybody knew what he got up to. I once remember speaking to a friend who told me that ###### had had, "a traumatic day, fending off Jimmy Saville".

    5. I am given to understand that Jimmy Savile was also a member of the freemasons.
    .....
    However, over time, the organisation changed and became a much more unsavoury association, finding ways to enable its members to evade justice. The freemasons are prominent in Jersey and many establishment figures are known to be members.


    7. When I gave up music and started coming over to Jersey in around 1977/1978, I remember my wife, telling me about two underage girls in Jersey that Jimmy Saville was having sex with. I know that at least one of these individuals still lives in Jersey.

    8. In my view there has been an effort to play down the amount of time Jimmy Saville spent in Jersey. It is now very difficult to find a picture of Jimmy Saville in Jersey, but I remember in the 1980s, when I was researching a pub which I intended to purchase, looking through an album at the JEP containing hundreds of photographs of Jimmy Saville with Jersey establishment figures and members of the freemasons. I don't know where those photographs have gone.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Witness Statement of  Ian Hamilton King #2

    "Corruption In Jersey- experiences from business transactions"

    9. I moved to Jersey in 1982 with my wife. Initially I worked for Randall's brewery and then for Preston Holidays.

    10. I have found corruption to be endemic in Jersey business life, to the point where it has acquired its own name: "the Jersey way". A number of troubling experiences as a businessman revealed to me the extent of corruption in Jersey. I will recount a couple of examples by way of illustration:

    11. After I left Preston Holidays, I did some consultancy work and was taken on by the Bank of Bermuda to restructure a poor investment that they had made. I did a thorough job, but soon found out that there was skulduggery involved: I had prepared forecasts and cashflow for discussion at a board meeting. I was happy that they were accurate, but when I got to the meeting I realised that somebody had altered my figures in the document that had been printed. I pointed this out to those present and objected to the fact. As I was doing so, I received a hard kick from under the table.

    12. It subsequently turned out that the bank was trying to cover up a massive fraud involving several directors which involved gay porn and drugs. It was like being back in the music industry. -The -lawyers involved tried to set me up as a fallguy by making it look like I had amended the figures.
    ........
    The advocate admitted in the meeting that they were "terrified about what I knew". The finance director involved ended up receiving a conviction. He was sentenced to a term in La Moye prison. .....

    ReplyDelete
  22. Witness Statement of  Ian Hamilton King #3

    "Corruption In Jersey- experiences from business transactions" CONTINUED

    13. On another occasion, I was being advised by the law firm OGIER on a largescale project involving government investment. During the negotiations phase, I was tipped off by a senior business figure that Ogier were conflicted because they were also representing parties that were linked to the money laundering of funds related to the deal from NORTHERN IRISH TERRORISTS. As it was a "brown envelope" deal, I am unable to prove whether the tip off I received was true.

    14. I was very concerned as to what was going on, and particularly that Ogier appeared to be conflicted. When I asked for a meeting with JONATHAN WHITE who was the senior partner at Ogier, he flatly refused to see me. Eventually the managing partner of Ogier agreed to meet. The meeting lasted for an hour, during which the managing partner said nothing whatsoever. He repeatedly
    refrained from answering my questions about whether or not what I had heard was true.

    15. The above examples are symptomatic of a corrupt system commonly referred to as "the Jersey way". There are many other examples of conflicts and corruption within the Jersey establishment. The problem of conflicts of interest extends to senior appointments: the same Jonathan White who refused to meet me over the Ogier conflict has since been appointed as head of the Independent Police Authority, despite being Chairman of Jersey Finance Ltd, which plays a significant role in Jersey's finance industry. This raises real concerns given the importance of financial crime as a policing issue in Jersey, yet I personally know others who applied for the Independent Police Authority role but were rejected without a proper interview process.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Witness Statement of  Ian Hamilton King #4

    20. I have spoken to many people "in the know" who have told me sinister stories, for example, of children disappearing from Haut de La Garenne, and of boys from the home being abused at sea. The problem is that people who have first hand information are too scared to come forward, because they fear the consequences which they will face from those in power.

    21. There are also many in Jersey who refuse to do anything about corruption and malpractice when they become aware of it. In around 2006, I made a statement to the police in which I gave evidence against three Jersey advocates and directors, in relation to dishonest business practices. A chief inspector of the fraud squad admitted that I was right, but said that he wouldn't pursue the matter because it would just be "blocked" owing to concerns that it would bring the island into disrepute. He said that he might be able to pursue it, but only if I first commenced civil proceedings. Nothing further came of it.

    22. The Jersey media do not provide an effective check on the establishment. I have featured in the Jersey Evening Post on five occasions in relation to business matters, and each time the reporting was inaccurate. I once gave a three hour interview to Harry McRandle of the Jersey Evening Post, only to be told by him that he had been instructed by Frank Walker, {former Chief Minister) not to print the story because it was libellous. The Dublin Times carried the story on its front page.

    23. I am optimistic that Jersey is reaching a tipping point and that there will soon be more people who want to expose the establishment than who want to protect it. Once people begin to see things changing, more will come forward and the house of cards will eventually collapse.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Mr. King's statement can be read in full on the Inquiry's website.

    Link

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the link Polo, indeed Mr. King's damming statement is on the same page as Advocate Sinel's. I read it in its entirety yesterday and have considered publishing it as a Blog of its own. Similarly Advocate Sinel's two statements. Both damming indictments of "The Jersey Way."

      Delete
    2. There is no such paper as the Dublin Times, I assume he means the Irish Times?

      Delete
  25. Deputy Sam Mezec's speech, that has gone viral on Facebook, has now been uploaded to Youtube and can be viewed HERE. More than 85,000 views, more than 1, 500 shares, more than 2,000 "likes", close to 400 comments and the local MSM have ignored it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Murray Norton's Airport Parking Space2 December 2016 at 18:39

      A very well done to sam Mezec on this. I must be honest and say that his effort IMHO was hardly up there with some of the great speeches made in the States in recent years, you have featured a number of these regarding corruption and (in)justice issues on this site as many readers will know. But what Sam's speech did I think was capture in a very short and to the point way exactly what so many people are thinking about the vast majority of our politicians. Maybe Sam can come up with another one to go viral on exactly what the disgruntled need to do to see their unhappiness remedied.i.e. VOTE THE B'STARDS OUT!

      Delete
    2. Deputy Sam Mezec on this global YouTube footage is superb. And the two ex-DJs, now assistant Ministers, in the picture, are also going global. Wrong place wrong time for them.

      Delete
  26. Anyone who has any remaining faith in the States of Jersey Employment Board, the Council of Ministers, various senior politicians and their senior civil servants.....well, they just need to read this blistering report, released by the *INDEPENDENT* States of Jersey Complaints Board this week, about the case of poor old Dr Alwitry (interestingly, a client of Sinels...)

    http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/AssemblyReports/2016/R.75-2016%20Res.pdf

    In all my years, never have I read such an excoriation of Jersey's pitiful systems of management and government. The fact that the Complaints Board, in an unprecedented move, had to spell out in words that a 10 year old would understand, how wrong the government's position and reaction is, is just astounding.

    More coverage on Bailiwick Express here: http://www.bailiwickexpress.com/jsy/news/top-states-executives-and-politicians-accused-deeply-worrying-treatment-sacked-doctor/

    Read it and weep!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The SEB has had it in the neck many times before. Bad employment practices, errors, suspensions that go astray, that are not justified, that are not reviewed.

      This was one of Bob Hill's pet subjects, and he was absolutely right. I keep these disasters on file . . .

      Question is - why do they not learn? They are paid good sums, and are supposed to be professionals.

      Delete
    2. Clarification

      I wrote: "why do they not learn?" but it was not clear who I meant.

      I mean the people in the upper reaches of Human Resources in the States.

      Delete
  27. According to ITV (hardly a reliable source for facts I know) the Jersey Evening Propaganda and its sister ship look like they are sliding toward the pan having to cut even more jobs.

    Hot on the heels of what, two price hikes in about 18 months? Couldn't happen to a nicer organisation some might say.

    ReplyDelete
  28. While we are trawling Jersey Inquiry evidence, I thought to attempt to answer one of my own perennial questions.

    I had pointed out that Mick Gradwell had been scheduled to interview Person 737 under caution some days after Graham Power was suspended. I wondered if the interview had gone ahead and, if it had, what the result had been .

    In his evidence to the inquiry Graham Power thought that 737 had been arrested but he didn't seem too sure.

    Well the position, drawing on witness statements is:

    A redacted witness did make a complaint which was backed by another complainant. The second complainant then withdrew their complaint in circumstance that suggested a payoff.

    Link pages 1&2, 21-24.

    The Attorney General, wondering aloud, seems to have had concerns that proceeding against 737 might reflect badly on Jersey's reputation and cause particular problems for the JEP. But on reflection he put in writing that the investigation should take its natural course.

    Link

    And to answer my own question, Alison Fossey gives a timeline of the arrests and interviews throughout Operation Rectangle. All the cases listed were ultimately subject to an advice file submitted by the police to the Crown Advocate and Attorney GeneraL A full written legal advice was returned in respect of each case.

    It is clear from this that 737 was interviewed and was arrested but that no further action was taken.

    Link

    Just sharing.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Phileep finds common ground with Irish govt:

    http://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2016/12/01/keep-border-restrictions-the-same-after-brexit-says-minister-after-talks-with-irish/

    ReplyDelete
  30. I believe that some witnesses were intimidated in relation to 737. Some I am aware gave evidence anyway although somewhat in a restrained manner. Others I know denied knowledge which they had because of the risk to their careers. Shame on them.

    ReplyDelete
  31. From Witness Statement of Leonard Harper :
    www.jerseycareinquiry.org/Transcripts/Day%20122%20Documents%20Optimised.pdf

    138. One matter that also came to light during the investigations leading up to the
    commencement of Operation Rectangle, was the fact that when children, particularly boys,
    went missing on the island i.e. had RUN AWAY from home and were then found, Parishes would often 'dump' those children into HdLG.
    However, NO RECORDS were kept of these incidences......

    ReplyDelete
  32. In the Dr Alwitry case who was the "former SG" constantly referred to?
    This although long makes excellent reading

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was former Solicitor General Howard Sharp, now in private practice. http://www.ardentchambers.com/howard-sharp-qc/

      Some of the stand-out paragraphs in the Alwitry document are on page 15. Here you have The Jersey Way in action, yet again:

      "The foregoing is underlined by the fact that the former Solicitor General was provided with an embargoed copy of our Report (i.e. the Report was released to him during the period when its circulation to people other than the Parties and their representatives was expressly forbidden). When the Board raised this apparent breach of the embargo, it was informed that the former Solicitor General was now acting as legal adviser to SEB in relation to our Report. At some point, therefore, SEB’s independent reviewer ceased to be independent and became its legal adviser. While acknowledging, of course, that he is no longer the Solicitor General, that is a remarkable state of affairs.

      The Board cannot think of another occasion in their collective experience where this has happened. It should not have occurred. It certainly should not have occurred in circumstances where SEB was aware that the Board had identified a legitimate concern that the former Solicitor General might not be seen to have been acting independently in the past because he would be perceived, rightly or wrongly, as being too closely aligned with the political establishment. It reinforces the point we have made above, in this case, regardless of his actual independence, the former Solicitor General could legitimately be regarded as too close to the senior States officials and politicians involved in this case for his investigation and report to be seen to be genuinely independent."

      Delete
  33. From Witness Statement of Leonard Harper #2
    www.jerseycareinquiry.org/Transcripts/Day%20122%20Documents%20Optimised.pdf


    156. In 2008, Panorama reported on this case and found the Maguires alive and
    well in France. I was liaising with Robert Hall from the BBC,who had strong
    Jersey family connections, at this time. Before Panorama got wind of the
    matter, I had myself detailed officers to try and locate them in France, and it
    appeared that the Maguires were looking after holiday homes for prominent
    Jersey residents. Panorama found the Maguires before my officers did.

    157. After the Panorama programme, I started looking for evidence that Alan
    Maguire was ever ilL No evidence ever came to light and I found no trace of
    any medical record indicating an illness.

    158. Around the time of the Panorama report, I placed two officers on the Maguire
    case, being Kim Newth and Philip Holmes. It was only at this stage that I
    discovered that many of the allegations against Alan Maguire were actually of
    a sexual nature, and yet no mention had been made of this on the police file.

    159. There were even allegations that the victims, who had alleged abuse, were
    actually wheeled into a room with the abusers, the police and Attorney General staff and were threatened. They were told that they were clearly. telling lies and they were effectively intimidated to the point in which the
    sexual allegations were dropped. ......

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. From Witness Statement of Leonard Harper #3
      www.jerseycareinquiry.org/Transcripts/Day%20122%20Documents%20Optimised.pdf

      161. On 28 April 2008, D.C. Holmes completed a report on the Maguire
      investigation. This report, which is at Exhibit LHS, set out the background to
      the Maguire case and listed the individual witnesses that had come forward
      and alleged abuse, the report includes detail of the allegations as originally
      made, and whether those accounts changed when the witnesses were re
      visited during Operation Rectangle. The witnesses that came forward, and
      alleged abuse, were:

      161.1  [76] - who alleged physical abuse by Jane and Alan Maguire
      and sexual abuse by Alan Maguire, namely that he had incited her to commit
      an act of oral sex on him when she was seven or eight years old;

      161.2   [82]- alleged physical abuse by Jane and Alan Maguire;

      161.3    [88]-alleged physical abuse by Alan Maguire,  [88] also
      alleged serious sexual abuse, sodomy, by Kevin Noel,  ##### ####### ####### ####### #######
      . Noel was convicted of such offences

      CONTINUES

      Delete

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