Wednesday, 7 November 2018

Stuart Syvret and VFC Discuss "The Jersey Situation."


Former Health Minister/whistle-blower Stuart Syvret


Yesterday (6th November 2018) former Health Minister/Senator and whistle-blower Stuart Syvret gave a presentation to States Members during their lunch break at the States Building. Following the presentation VFC was granted an exclusive and in-depth interview with Mr. Syvret to discuss the contents of his presentation which was primarily concerning "The Jersey Situation" not to be confused with "The Jersey Way."

Regular readers/viewers will be well aware of the infamous "Jersey Way" but the "Jersey Situation" is a different animal and one which all should become familiar with (if they aren't already). It is explained in the interview/discussion and was explained to States Members yesterday and it is believed that some Members had their eyes opened and were very receptive to the message Mr. Syvret was conveying. Will it make any difference..........Can it make any difference? This too is discussed in the interview/discussion.

We make no apologies for the length of the video. In times gone by we might have split it into two or possibly three sections but with renewed outside interest in "The Jersey Way" and indeed "The Jersey Situation" we want to make it easier for researchers (and ourselves) to be able to access this vital/crucial information and research as easy as possible. We know that those who matter will watch every second of the video, and those who don't, don't matter.

We hope those who do watch the video in its entirety will be given pause for thought and have their eyes opened as to what is still able to happen on our island because of "The Jersey Situation" and might be inspired to join the cause and speak out against it.

Again, in times gone by, we would have written, in the main Blog Posting, about the contents of the video/interview/discussion but, as mentioned in the above paragraph, those with the real interest will watch it,  not need to be told what is in it, and be able to make a reasonable conclusion based on the evidence.

We thank Mr. Syvret, not only for this interview/discussion, but for continuing to stand up for what is right despite the threats, death threats and intimidation he has received, and continues to receive, for being an anti-Child Abuse/corruption campaigner.

112 comments:

  1. To give us an idea. Can we have the list of the newer states members who attended Stuart Syvrets presentation yesterday.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sorry guys, when you ended the interview by saying you hope London may one day get involved, which we all know will never happen, you may as well draw the curtains.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh I think you'll find some customary allies of the Jersey establishment in London are in for a few shocks in the fullness of time. I'm reliably informed some of the individuals ought to develop a tolerance for prison food. There's a limit to how much Russian oligarch money & influence can jeopardise Britain.

      Delete
  3. I cannot pass comment on the interview as I have not yet watched it, but will do so tomorrow when my mind is fresh. However I am intrigued, and pleased that Stuart was afforded the opportunity to offer his presentation yesterday, but interested to know how this 'came to pass' and also who did,and did not attend. Pleasing to hear that some were receptive to what he had to say because to be honest, he did get an awful lot right, and has been a stalwart regarding child abuse issues.

    Look forward to listening tomorrow.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If I was in the shoes of the Jersey establishment I wouldn't be worried about Stuart Syvret so much, as he said you can't combat the mafia power from in Jersey. But I would be very worried about men like Graham Power and Lenny Harper and their determination, influence, and contacts. The impression I get is that they were the wrong men to try and go to war against.

    Your problem in Jersey is you have no figures of authority and competence amongst your elites willing or capable of ridding yourselves of villains and idiots. The consequences of that are going to be severe, it would appear.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hopefully Stuart will have sensitised some newbies to what is going on and what needs fixing. And you have covered that in the interview.

    However, in response to your question of how it is going to be fixed, Stuart is not that clear. Perhaps some further development of this angle could be pursued in another interview.

    There is a vicious circularity in the present Jersey situation. The very people who should normally be there to solve the problems, right the wrongs and redeem the irredeemable are actually part of the problem.

    Stuart seems to be relying on eventual perceived damage to Britain's reputation to cut the gordian knot.

    However, looking at the present Brexit shambles it is likely that Britain will have no reputation left to damage. So what happens then?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you'll find, for some authorities in Britain, that the conduct of the Jersey money industry & partners in London is already beyond mere 'eventual perceived damage'. The seriousness of the situation long went beyond mere 'cosmetic' concerns. Astutely observed by Mr Syvret; the tide of dark money and its influence and power has become somewhat too much of a good thing. The safety and security of the state will be defended. Alas, it would appear your established chaps and their friends here know no self restraint. Do not be surprised if a little constitutional 'shock and awe' becomes employed to slap your fools into the 21st century.

      Delete
  6. Stuart's comments on timescales reminded me. Jerseys coming 30 year war

    ReplyDelete
  7. He speaks many truths. The establishment / mafia closed him down. Many people still have a great respect for him myself included

    ReplyDelete
  8. Great work VFC!

    It is great that a sizeable minority of states members felt able to take a few minutes out of their day to be confronted with some uncomfortable truths. What matters now is what they DO with the information.

    They should not need to be confronted. It is part of their job to keep themselves informed beyond the comfortable "Matrix world" that is built and nurtured for them. Are they up to the job?

    From time to time it is helpful to revisit pages from the Health Minister's blog.

    Todays extract is from:

    http://freespeechoffshore.nl/stuartsyvretblog/the-medium-is-the-massage-part-1/

    I have made only a few minor amendments. Can you spot them?...

    "Although Jersey is a self-governing jurisdiction, which makes its own laws and sets its own tax rates and so forth – like a mini-nation state, – it is, effectively, a single-party state. 98% of political candidates run for office as so-called 'independents'. [now93%?]

    How this manifests itself in practice is, of course, a de facto Conservative [& Mafia] Party – operating on a covert basis working to hidden agendas. Moreover – the ‘cultural’ resistance to political parties has been very carefully nurtured and promoted by the island’s media over the decades – particularly the Jersey Evening Pest. [or JEPeado as it prefers to be called]

    The reason for this is obvious to anyone upon a moment’s reflection.

    With political parties the voting public actually have a clear choice concerning which political philosophy and manifesto of policies they will be governed by. The electorate has power.

    And that is the very last thing that the Jersey oligarchy wants to see.

    Voter power, you might think, is a very foundation stone of functioning democracy. But in Jersey it is viewed as though it were the second coming of Mikhail Bakunin.

    Instead, in Jersey, people like me trawl around the election campaign trail – trying to sell our wares to the voters – usually on the basis of nothing more substantive than “Hey – I’m a nice guy – my great-uncle lived in this parish – and I like your pub - so please vote for me.”

    In my case I like to imagine I offer a little more substance – but the net result of this approach to democracy is a legislature comprised of a disjointed, directionless rabble which possesses no electoral mandate for a particular political direction or programme of policies.

    Such a lack of focus results in a “let’s make it up as we go along” approach to policy formation. Most members of the Jersey legislature, no matter how well intentioned, are just sitting around waiting to be led – waiting to be told what to do.

    And it is into this policy vacuum that the winds of power rush – sweeping up the gullible and the ignorant – and carrying them along on a Mistral of Groupthink. ....."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do hope that, in the interests of balance, the establishment and communications department organised a counter presentation to new states members detailing how much better the Ex-Health Minister's life would be now if he had NOT intervened to try to stop Jersey's most vulnerable children from being systematically beaten, raped and abused.

      As so many times before we can rely on the majority of politicians to do the right thing....

      ......for themselves?

      Delete
  9. You do not have to be a child. The majority of the #MeToo movement does not know that it was born.


    Stuart Syvret also described the "Jersey Situation" as a tensegrity structure.

    Prosecution of some well connected criminals cannot take place because their prosecution would cause the whole façade to collapse and they would bring all the other members down with them if one of the linchpins was pulled.

    On the subject of the "Jersey Evening sex-Pest", readers should study the following as this one of many allegations

    www.jerseycareinquiry.org/Transcripts/Day%2081%20Documents%20Optimised%201.pdf

    "The requested content does not exist." is the message you will receive because this and all the other 'public evidence' has been taken from public view.

    Fortunately VFC is here to drip feed what the public has already paid £23,000,000 for:

    "1. I was born on ###### 19## and am Jersey born and bred. My father was
    an old Victorian disciplinarian.

    2. At the age of 18 I worked for the States of Jersey. In order to assist my
    mother who was having financial difficulties, I went for an interview for a job
    at a ########################### The interview took place
    around 6pm on a winter's evening when I went to the interview in ###########
    The man who interviewed me was [737] I didn't know it at the
    time but [737] was a ##### I wasn't particularly interested ######
    at the time, but I do remember saying that ############# The
    interview proceeded normally and towards the end I asked whether he would
    consider paying me a lower wage and paying cash in hand: I wanted to help
    my mother out of her financial difficulties and this seemed like a good
    practical solution. I had no idea that it was not an acceptable thing to say, it
    felt like the right thing to do at the time.

    3. After I mentioned cash in hand told me that he thought 'we
    could come to some sort of arrangement' and proceeded to violently rape
    me. I mentioned something about reporting it, but [737 just laughed and
    said 'Who would believe your word against that of a ######### .
    After hearing that I didn't feel confident to report the incident.

    4. I was in a terrible state when I left. My clothes were torn and I was
    bloodstained. I walked to my next door neighbour's house as I wasn't
    comfortable to go straight home and face my parents. My neighbour's name
    was ##### When I knocked on the door her husband answered.
    He exclaimed 'Oh my God' and went to get ######.
    ##### gave me some of clothes to wear so that I could go home.

    5. I reported this incident much later on in my life and I will go on to talk more
    about this later in my statement. I would be happy for the Inquiry to access
    my police statement about this incident.

    ……."


    For some reason you will NOT read about these allegations in the JEPeado.
    This is only one of many rape allegations against this tensegrity linchpin. He can do what he likes and is still paid huge amounts of *your* money.

    Maintaining the Matrix is not cheap, and this is it's nature.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, that statement is one of the especially interesting ones, a selection of which have long been shared amongst, er, Jersey Situation aficionados here in the City. Incidentally, we're very puzzled as to what on Earth the Jersey mafia imagined they could achieve by taking the archive down . For a year and a half. Everyone and their dog has the whole thing copied already. Everyone I've spoken with can't help but classify this as another disastrous blunder. What happens when the 'revised' version gets published and interested observers around the world gleefully go through it comparing it microscopically to the original to see which bits have been censored and altered?

      That is going to look 'splendid', isn't it.

      The capacity of your Jersey Bosses to employ dummies seems boundless.

      Delete
  10. So Syvret spoke to some States Members. Without any doubt, some who attended will have been involved in the jobseeker sanctions cover-up. For almost 2 years between 2013 and 2015, the Social Security Department was closing the claims of some households on the back of a supposed 6-week sanction but then refusing to allow those households to make fresh applications for benefit when the 6-week period had ended, unless the sanctioned jobseeker had continued to satisfy actively seeking work requirements for the whole of those 6 weeks regardless of the household having no eligibility for any benefits. The Department was even disregarding some periods of certificated illness that the sanctioned jobseeker may have had during those 6 weeks and - quite remarkably - was also disregarding any periods of WORK that the sanctioned jobseeker undertook during the 6 weeks unless they were working at least 35 hours per week on average.

    Although there is a requirement to be actively seeking work when the Income Support claim is open and benefits are still being paid, there was no similar requirement in law (during 2013-15) after a 6-week sanction took effect and closed the claim. Yet Social Security officers were telling the recipients of these 6-week sanctions that unless they continued actively seeking work during the 6-week closure period when no benefits were being paid, then that household would not be permitted to re-apply for Income Support at the expiry of the 6-week period. Sure enough, in cases where a sanctioned jobseeker just turned up at the expiry of the 6 weeks to recommence actively seeking work and make a fresh application for Income Support, the Department would point blank refuse to issue a new form and the jobseeker would be told that he/she would not be permitted to re-apply for benefits until a fresh period 6-week period of actively seeking work had been completed.

    Needless to say, this resulted in a supposed 6-week denial of benefits in law continuing to last for months, with the household having no statutory right of appeal to challenge the continuing period of time beyond during which they were prevented from re-applying for benefits. When these sanctions were adopted by the States on 8th October 2013, absolutely nothing was said about the 6-week period of non-payment having the ability to last longer than that without means of appeal, nor about any requirement for the sanctioned jobseeker to continue actively seeking work during the closure period. Yet many States Members would have been informed privately of the real situation.

    In June 2015, the States Assembly was forced to adopt a rectifying amendment which quietly added to the Regulations the same requirement for the sanctioned jobseeker to be actively seeking work during the 6-week closure period that they had been enforcing nevertheless unlawfully for the previous 2 years. This is when the real stink began because it became impossible for the small group of States Members who had strongly opposed these sanctions when they were debated in 2013 to remain unaware of the unlawful activities that had been going on for the previous 2 years. I personally e-mailed Deputy Judy Martin at that time and fully explained what had been going on. I sent a carbon copy of this e-mail to Deputy Mike Higgins. Neither did anything or said anything and this remains the case 3.5 years later. Both of them conveniently skipped the States Meeting when the rectifying amendment was adopted. Deputy Geoff Southern has also remained completely silent on this issue for the past 3.5 years despite spending most of that time on the Scrutiny Panel which oversees Social Security. Now Deputy Martin is Minister for Social Security and Southern is her Assistant... and the silence about the Department's law-breaking continues.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A serious issue, to be sure. But a bit of a distraction tbh, in the context of this posting and interview which is all about deeper darker very serious criminality. I hope we stay on subject.

      Delete
  11. Without knowing the states members who showed an interest. We cannot have any idea if Syvrets efforts were worthwhile. Can someone please enlighten us.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You can always e-mail all States Members to ask if they attended.

      Delete
  12. My riends went to Cyprus a few weeks ago and met two Russian couples, when they said they were from Jersey the replie was that it is where the realy dirty money is and its organized and a few people were running the island i wonder what they know then.

    ReplyDelete
  13. At last. Someone says openly the hitherto unsayable. The 21st century Jersey establishment are a collective of mafia syndicates in partnership with global mafia syndicates.

    'The Jersey Way' is 'our thing'.

    It's always been about 'doing the business'. Capisci?

    Your Stuart Syvret, he's a brave man.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Capisci? Yes, I understand and totally agree with you.

      Delete
    2. May I point out, in case it is lost on some of your readers, the significance of the phrase used by the person who commented yesterday at 20:35? He likened 'the Jersey way' to 'our thing'.

      'Our thing' in Italian is 'cosa nostra'.

      Cosa Nostra is the description given to themselves by the Sicilian Mafia. The foundation of their culture of criminality has no 'organisation' as such, no written 'constitution', no 'contracts', rather, just a 'culture', a 'way of doing business', an 'understanding'. 'Our thing'.

      To liken 'our thing', cosa nostra, to 'the Jersey way' is a very astute and helpful observation. 'How 'the Jersey way' works isn't written down anywhere, it isn't a formal system, instead it is a 'culture', a way of 'doing business', an 'understanding'. And like 'our thing', cosa nostra, 'the Jersey way' is fundamentally not compatible with the rule of law.

      Delete
  14. Just imagine if the States Members who attended, got together and not only shone light into this darkness, but never gave up until the rule of law is made to apply in each and every case. No exceptions, no omissions.

    ReplyDelete
  15. What a low calibre the Care Inquiry was to not want his evidence, not support him to coming forward or even subpoena him so he had to. Of ALL the 100,000 people in Jersey, they miss out Stuart!! To me, it confirms the inquiry was nothing more than an establishment damage limitation exercise. Kind of obvious when they put Richard Jouault in charge of resources.

    It must have been hell to be Stuart, and probably still is. Doing the right thing and having the full weight of the Jersey Way sticking a metaphorical knife in his back. Putting him in prison, placing legal injunctions on him. Loosing his winning case in court. The phrase 'the deserves a medal' comes to mind. But the UK establishment will never award those who expose the Jersey and ultimately the UK Situation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "low calibre" seems a very charitable description of the Care Inquiry.

      "£23m fraud" would be more accurate, surely?

      Delete
  16. Hi, I believe a friend of mine was stating that there was some post on twitter, Stuart Syvret made in regards to survivors and a legal case. I thought this was all done with? and is there not a statute of limitations on these things?.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Let's consider the law. Insofar as criminal offences are concerned, there is no statute of limitations in UK or Jersey law. It matters not that a crime was committed thirty years ago - if the crime comes to light, and sufficient evidence is available, a prosecution can be brought.

      As far as civil legal claims are concerned, there are time limitations, known as 'prescription periods'. For many claims, these will be three years, or six years in certain cases.

      But - and it is a very significant "but" - civil legal claims are NOT time-limited if some kind of fraud, dishonesty, crime, or similarly unlawful act or omission has been committed by the defendant organisation or public authority.

      And that most certainly - and indisputably - is the case in respect of the public authorities of Jersey. The evidenced fraudulent and corrupt conduct by the Jersey authorities is vast. Thus those people who were failed by the Jersey authorities during their child-hoods are able to bring claims. They will not be time-barred.

      The relevant legal maxim is the latin phrase "fraus omnia vitiat" - "fraud vitiates everything". Thus everything - even time-limits - are vitiated, that is 'neutralised' or rendered ineffective and not applicable - if some kind of fraudulent conduct has occurred.

      The following is a famous passage of a judgment by Lord Denning:-

      “No court in this land will allow a person to keep an advantage which he has obtained by fraud. No judgment of a court, no order of a Minister, can be allowed to stand if it has been obtained by fraud. Fraud unravels everything. The court is careful not to find fraud unless it is distinctly pleaded and proved; but once it is proved, it vitiates judgments, contracts and all transactions whatsoever…”

      Jersey's many child-abuse victims should seek and obtain effective legal representation. Such legal representation will - expressly - plead fraud and corruption by Jersey's public authorities (very easily provable) then legal claims by the victims will not be time-barred.

      And - remember - there is no statute of limitations in respect of crimes. So criminal charges can be brought without time-limit. And there are - literally - dozens and dozens of significant prima facie criminal acts committed against the child-abuse victims by Jersey public employees and Jersey public authorities - crimes such as conspiracy to pervert justice, perjury, misconduct in public office, child-abuse, fraud, embezzlement etc.

      There is no lawful way in which Jersey's public authorities can escape justice. Time-limits do not shield them.

      Stuart Syvret

      Delete
  17. On the final day of the Care Inquiry (18 months ago?) UK lawyer Alan Collins presented evidence of the many outstanding abuse cases that had been "ignored". He is still having to try to persuade our government to take appropriate action about these cases. He has received no support then or since from Jersey lawyers - yet he is still having to drag our government to respond too. Bearing in mind that the devastating Inquiry Report has been long published with its condemnation of the Jersey Way and we supposedly have a Children's Commissioner, a Minister, a Director General, Charlie and a "Pledge" which all States Members and civil servants have been asked to sign - it should be obvious that the inability to reform Jersey's structures has fallen under the spell of something quite extraordinary. Bearing in mind too that the role of the Bailiff is another of the reforms that the Inquiry Report urges - and it s patently obvious that the "Jersey Way" simply cannot contemplate such an "interference" and is resisting this at so many levels.
    When we also bear in mind that such fine pillars of the Jersey Way as UBS is facing yet another gigantic fraud based court case in Paris we really should be able to see where the power lies in little Jersey. It may well be "emotive" to talk in terms of the Mafia - but that is the reality. Not the gangsters from Italy any more than any other country these days but it is international crime at a level that the world has never seen before - and Little Jersey is caught up in it. So far, nobody has been blown up in their car for exposing such activities in Jersey - but around the world that is the reality for many politicians or journalists who try to expose the corruption that they encounter.
    Of course Stuart has suffered personally for trying to do the right thing politically - as have others. It is all part of the Jersey Way - or whatever term is used - to suppress the voice of dissent. We are none of us perfect but the flaws in Jersey have been evident for a very long time and I keep referring to the events of 1769 in order to give an historic perspective. Sark is now presenting yet again in it own tiny way the same sort of constitutional barriers that arise in all the Islands with monotonous regularity and the same call for the cavalry to be sent in from somewhere - usually from London - goes out.
    I am linking here to this interview with Deputy Tadier that followed the failed show trial re Nick Le Cornu and his wife. Once again a dissenting political person was clearly targeted but after the fiasco of the trial there was no expression of concern from other lawyers or politicians and Deputy Tadier could see no possible redress for the injustice. Even questions in the States are not allowed.
    Such is the Jersey Way. It has been exposed because of the Care Inquiry but could equally have been revealed by another critical tribunal with £millions of resources.
    Its not to minimize the gravity of the abuse of children - but rather to emphasize that it is this system which has been historically so flawed that such scandals can exist. And now that the enormity of the institutional failures has been investigated and analysed - we as a little community are still unable to grasp the enormity of the problem and how it might be dealt with - and of course the "mafia" wants to keep it that way.
    Here is the link https://youtu.be/DEAoU3Dif8k
    Maybe the Voice can activate it for me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. or you could just go to the european courts of human rights..........if the victims are allowed to consider themselves humnan.Why has this not been done already and why should the victims have to ask these authorities or any to do what the are paid to.

      Delete
  18. These new states members are still finishing at midday every second Tuesday. Let's hope they are doing their homework.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Replies
    1. Agreed.
      I knew an inmate who was with Morag.
      She showed no remorse at all.
      A heartless woman.

      Delete
    2. The sentence was pathetic.

      Delete
  20. Stuart Syvret openly named several very serious criminals when he spoke to States members last Tuesday. But he did preface his words by saying 'this would only be the tip of the iceberg'. Chat amongst States members has been red hot about this. They take it there's a great deal more to come when circumstances permit. Amongst those he named and whose crimes he broadly described were several very highly ranked former and current public officials. The powers that be are seemingly frightened by this, judging by the vibe. Just beginning to wake up to the inevitable. Smarter rats jumping ship and all that.

    The mafia syndicates which have captured Jersey and run the place are frightened of Syvret. We hope he's taken precautions. Being frightening to the Mob is not generally a signifier of long life. However, I get the sense from my intelligence that even if they whack him, it's too late now. The overreach by the Jersey 'families' has been remarkable to observe these years.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That they're 'frightened by this' is putting it mildly. This weekend I've heard hard core Jersey establishment types speaking about if there was any chance of getting William Bailhache's resignation announcement reversed! Not because they doubt Tim Le Cocq's commitment to protecting The Jersey Way when he succeeds Bailhache, he's a 'made man' after all. But they doubt a Le Cocq Bailiff era will be as successful as the Bailhache Brothers era in kicking the can down the road.

      Delete
    2. You just wait.

      We've already seen the London authorities starting to get tough with the regime in Sark only last week.

      Outside intervention seems to be closer than people thought.

      Delete
  21. Listening to your interview and the mention of the useless Lieutenant Governor (29m54s in) reminded me that I wrote to the current fella's predecessor some 5 years ago about Stuarts incarceration and, despite a reminder, have not heard back, not even an acknowledgement, since.

    That's how useless these guys are.

    Letter & reminder reproduced below.
    _________________________________

    To: governorsoffice@gov.je
    From: Pól Ó Duibhir
    Subject: Imprisonment of Stuart Syvret

    Dear Governor

    Are we to take it that you have no problem with the current imprisonment of Stuart Syvret, whatever the proximate cause of this move by the Jersey courts/administration (as you know, they are all the one).

    You will be aware that Stuart Syvret, through a campaign of speaking truth to power, and also involving civil disobedience, has been testing the conflicted administrative/judicial system on the island.

    One of his objectives is to bring this anomalous situation on the island to the attention of those whose responsibilities should oblige them to do something to rectify it.

    It is quite clear, that, Jersey being a Crown Dependency, the only channel of appeal is to Her Majesty, ideally through you as her representative on the island. You will be aware that those conflicted persons currently exercising authority on the island do so through the powers conferred on them by Her Majesty through her Letters Patent.

    Could you confirm that Her Majesty is content with the way these powers are being exercised, and if she is, how she justifies this view in the light of the lack of separation of powers and the lack of respect of the requirements of the ECHR, matters which have been highlighted by Stuart Syvret, most particularly in the period since his dismissal as Minister on foot of his revelations about child abuse on the island.

    On the other hand, if Her Majesty is not satisfied with how the powers she has delegated are being exercised, what is she proposing to do about it.

    You will be aware that most of those outside the island, who know what is going on there, are aghast at the breakdown in the rule of law. Such a breakdown is not only in breach of the ECHR but also has serious implications for the stability of the island's important financial sector.

    Thank you,

    Pól Ó Duibhir
    (former resident on the island)
    10/11/2013
    ____________________________________

    Reminder:

    Do you think I might get a reply or even an acknowledgement of the email below soon?

    Or is it your habit to ignore inconvenient emails.

    Pól Ó Duibhir
    17/11/2013

    _______________________________________



    ReplyDelete
  22. Pól Ó Duibhir - why did you think Stuart Syvret was any different to other members of the Public?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's a very good question and it is a pity that the Lieutenant Governor hadn't the wit or grace to reply to me and ask it.

      The list is a long one but some points would be:

      -not every member of the public has been a Minister sacked for investigating what turned out to be widespread endemic child abuse,

      - not every member of the public has their house unnecessarily raided by a small army of police in a warrantless search in which the place is turned over and privileged information is confiscated

      - not every member of the public has a public interest defence thrown out in court in mid process

      - not every member of the public campaigns online for justice only to have their blog taken down on spurious legal grounds

      - not every member of the public has to go as far as "the mother of parliaments" to have his oppressors named (and unfortunately not apparently shamed).

      Now if you want to see a self-proclaimed ordinary member of the public, there's always Jon.

      In any event my current comment was about the lack of even a courtesy acknowledgement of my letter from the Lieutenant Governor's office.

      Delete
    2. Polo.

      Thank you for providing documented evidence that the LG looks to be ignoring possible judicial corruption. As asked in the video discussion/interview just what is the purpose of the LG if not to be the eyes and ears of the Crown to ensure good government and the rule of law? Who is he answerable to? This IS "The Jersey Situation."

      Delete
  23. What a stunning backdrop! Good to see Stuart still active. Excellent interview.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Very good interview. Well done VFC and Stuart Syvret. Be nice to see a few more political figures give you an interview. They might not all be of the standard of a Syvret, Pitmans, Higgins but surely they can't all be in the club? Can they?

    ReplyDelete
  25. As a long-standing observer of events on Jersey I have been reflecting on your interview of former Health & Social Services Minister Stuart Syvret. I have followed events there since the international coverage began in 2008. My conclusion, and it is one shared by fellow observers, is that the Jersey establishment is in defeat. It cannot now win. The inevitable is only a question of time.

    Why do I come to this view? Because any organisation which finds itself in some form of crisis must firstly contain and limit that crisis and then bring about, engineer if you will, an ending to the crisis. This is standard strategic management. But when we look back over a decade's worth of deep and continuous crises, the Jersey authorities have done the opposite of 'contain & time-limit'. They have responded to one embarrassing fail with another, often worse, failure and controversy. And then, another misguided action in an attempt to damp down the previous one. And then another act of stupidity in an attempt to suppress the deleterious effects and impacts of the previous folly, etc. etc. And so it goes on today. You are now lumbered with the inescapable consequences of running the most dysfunctional and unfit 'public-inquiry' in modern British history. (Was it imagined no-one would notice? What on Earth were you thinking? Just astounding.) But still the madness continues. The latest insanity? Attacking and undermining the democratic authority of the public by introducing legislation to jail their politicians for 5 years for whistleblowing. (Seriously? Dear oh dear.)

    Rather than 'containing' the crisis of governance on Jersey, the island authorities have amplified it again and again. And again. And in so doing have disobeyed with reckless effrontery that other golden rule of crises management, 'limit its endurance'. Follow a clear strategy to limit the time frame of the crisis. Have a clear (and credible) target at which it can be said the proverbial 'line' can be drawn under the controversy. Instead of doing that, the Jersey authorities have become seemingly addicted to the generation of a constant supply of most unwise responses to each self-generated crisis in something akin to a radioactive chain-reaction.

    The Jersey establishment has already generated enough 'fuel', enough material, to keep the engines of constitutional controversy running enthusiastically for at least the next 4 decades. And yes, I have kept a weather eye on events on Jersey enough to make that confident assessment. And the wonder of it is that even now there's no sign on the part of your leaders that the madness is ending.

    Basic response to a crisis: limit its scale. Limit its time-frame. The Jersey authorities have done the direct opposite, and amazingly continue to do so. For this reason the Jersey establishment are, ultimately, in defeat. And deservingly so. No shareholders would tolerate such staggering incompetence from their board of directors.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "The latest insanity? Attacking and undermining the democratic authority of the public by introducing legislation to jail their politicians for 5 years for whistleblowing. (Seriously? Dear oh dear.)"

      Unbelievable if true.

      Which legislation is this?

      Delete
    2. The draft legislation is the proposed Draft Cybercrime (Jersey) Law 201-

      Whilst it will be protested that this is merely 'standard legislation', rather it must be read in the context of a clearly evidenced knowledge of the anti-democratic abuse the Jersey authorities make of laws such as RIPL and of the DP law. Those existing laws were corruptly abused without remedy to oppress and suppress the then Senator Syvret and his vulnerable constituents including child-abuse victims he was helping. Read in that light the 'creative' application and adaption of the cybercrime law and its misuse against democracy seems boundless. 'Troublesome' politicians and their 'troubling' constituents will have this law abused against them in all kinds of ways so as to thwart effective political opposition, and thwart the common law right of people to communicate in confidence with their elected representatives.

      There are several articles which will enable and allow your politicised and conflicted Attorney General and Bailiff to seize material of all kinds from members of the public and their elected representatives. Parts of the proposed law carry 2 year prison sentences, for example under the computer misuse (Jersey) Law.

      And let us suppose a whistleblowing member of the public has communicated some damning document, revealing public wrongs, to her elected representative? Naturally enough the politician will wish to protect her constituent from exposure. So the Attorney General and the Bailiff order a raid on the politician's home, seize her computer. The computer is 'locked' by a code, and the politician refuses to disclose it, knowing that a campaign of victimization will be pursued against her constituent. The penalty on the politician for refusing to disclose? 5 years in prison.

      There are other parts of the proposed legislation which, in the Jersey context, amount to police-state suppression of the free functioning of democracy. Not least because you do not possess an independent, lawful, objective, non-politicised judiciary, and the proposed law hands what are huge, and frankly unchallengeable, powers to the unelected politicians of Bailiff and Attorney General.

      Not lost on external observers is the clear subtext to present legislative steps being taken on Jersey. What is observed is the consolidation and retrenchment of power into the hands of your traditional elite, and the limiting, intimidating, chilling and controlling of elected politicians. That much is plain from the proposed changes to parliamentary privilege on Jersey. Your politicians will face 6 months in jail for merely 'leaking a States document'. We have to wonder if that will be imposed as a consecutive sentence, to be served after the 5 years for shielding a whistleblowing constituent, perhaps?

      Clearly, the cybercrime law, whilst similar laws exist elsewhere, cannot be regarded as safe in Jersey given the island has none, literally none, of the standard divisions of responsibility, separation of powers, independent regulation, lawful judicial function, independent police force, agencies free of personal confliction, and all the other safeguards which functioning democracies possess.

      After the evidence of the state oppression and suppression of Syvret and his constituents by profoundly conflicted agencies and individuals, Jersey cannot be seen as fit to introduce and operate laws which will then be abused against democracy.

      Delete
  26. Hope this has been shared with Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.

    ReplyDelete
  27. At 18:57 yesterday reference is made to what should be the 'basic response to a crisis: limit its scale. Limit its time-frame.'

    I have come to follow events on Jersey from afar, as a part of my PhD research on the social psychology of systems (organisations) in crisis. If I let myself I could write you 50 pages of commentary on what is going on in Jersey authority decision making, so I won't.

    But I would like to recommend to your readers that they do some basic reading on phenomena such as 'sunk cost fallacy'. Insofar as your establishment can be viewed as an 'investor', it's 'spend' (by which I mean all of the doubling down on the corruption and cover ups, not all of which are financial investments but rather spends of 'credibility', and 'investments' in very high risk activity) falls into classic 'sunk cost fallacy' territory. This is the theory used by economists to describe what are frequently irrational decisions by individuals and companies to carry on 'spending' on activity which has already proven to be unprofitable, and has caused significant 'losses', the 'thinking' being that 'well, we have 'spent' x million, and it hasn't worked. But if we stop spending on that 'investment' or 'project' all of the x million we've already spent will be wasted. So we may as well carry on that 'investment'. This is described in the literature as 'loss aversion'.

    On viewing the Jersey situation we also see another classic theory confirmed, in that the near complete absence of 'personal responsibility' (direct risk of 'losses' on the actual individual decision makers) greatly amplifies sunk cost fallacy behaviour. It is far easier to carry on with an wholly irrational and failed decision making path if it isn't you, personally, running the risks and taking the 'losses'.

    Thus we produce a component of what will be a complete description of the social psychology of 'the Jersey situation'. People like your leaders have carried on with an irrational 'investment' in cover ups and corruption because a) it is not them personally who are making the 'investment', and b) sunk cost fallacy thinking causes them to experience 'loss aversion' (they already in effect made a vast 'investment' which is a 'loss' because it hasn't worked) so they wrongly respond by pouring more 'investment' into a loosing strategy.

    Another very similar theory describes the phenomena of 'escalation of commitment', which likewise describes irrational decision making by individuals and organisations whereby some prior decision or policy or course of conduct has proven to be a mistake, a failure or actualy disastrous, but because so much commitment has already been made to the wrong path of action, the response of the individual or organisation is to do completely the wrong thing, and 'escalate investment' into what is already an irredeemable failure.

    We observe all kinds of classic organisational dysfunction on the part of Jersey's authorities because of the failure of those authorities to mitigate against irrational decisions driven by 'invested' influential individuals. This is largely why your community is in the crisis it is.

    Frankly, competent organisations know all this stuff, and have done for years. They employ psychologists and sociologists so as to mitigate against the risks of irrational decision making by 'invested' individuals. Interestingly, given Syvret's comments, it is known that even serious organised crime syndicates (high value 'businesses') such as 'mafias' take their 'investments' so seriously, and the minimising the 'risks' they run, that the clever 'firms' employ psychologists. That has been observed taking place by law enforcement agencies as far back as the 1980s.

    ReplyDelete
  28. A comment above at 13:38 on the 8th November 2018, quoted some paragraphs from the statement of a witness to the public inquiry.

    That statement describes the rape committed on the victim by a senior and powerful Jersey mafia lynchpin.

    Operation Kraken considers it important and necessary to the public good that some further quotes from the same witness statement should appear here. So as not to create difficulties for VFC we redact the name of the rapist, but we let it be known that Operation Kraken globally has access to the unredacted statement, save the victim's identity, and the statement will be internationally published in the fullness of time as a necessary step in civil society opposition to international serious organised crime.

    Operation Kraken.

    “Contact with Senator Stuart Syvret

    102. In around November 2008 I made contact with the then Senator Stuart Syvret. I knew he was interested to hear about any abuse cases so I telephoned him and told him about my experience. I was worried, because Police Chief Graham Power had been suspended and I feared my evidence might fall by the wayside. I trusted Graham to do the right thing because my very close friend ******************, had told me that he was a man of great integrity. *************** was the **************** at the time.

    103. Senator Syvret had been the Minister of Health & Social Services and had publicly raised his concerns about the failings of the Child Protection System in Jersey, so I turned to him for independent guidance regarding what to do now my case had gone to the Attorney General and believed not to be robust enough to pursue through the courts.

    104. After disclosing my personal story to Senator Syvret he made enquiries concerning ****************. He discovered another victim of *************** through various contacts he had. This woman disclosed an experience of gross indecent assault to Senator Syvret. However, within a matter of a few months of taking up my concerns he [Syvret] was imprisoned for Data Protection Law issues, so I never got to hear what happened to this woman. I feel I was responsible for Senator Syvret’s imprisonment therefore, even though I had never asked for this line of action to result as a consequence of my disclosure.

    105. I would like it known for the record that I did not know Senator Syvret before this time and so ************* accusation (when interviewed by the police) that I had made up my story because Senator Syvret and I had colluded in a lie to bring him down because of a personal political vendetta on the part of Senator Syvret, was totally without foundation.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jesus. That is serious. A senior establishment figure being investigated for rape. The suspension of the Police Chief. The political imprisonment of a senior opposition politician who was supporting the alleged victim. Even on the limited facts contained in paragraphs 102 - 105 combined with a generality of knowledge of events in Jersey, this is seismic. Whilst I don't specialise in criminal law I have a general understanding of the field. I'm racking my brain to think of another British policing/political scandal of that magnitude. I can't think of one or anything which gets even close to this. I'm going to take a closer interest in events now. This is huge. Seriously. I'm genuinely shocked. The legal & constitutional implications of the events described are as dramatic as it gets.

      Delete
  29. Your Jersey establishment have really blown it, haven't they?

    This going to get extremely messy. Jersey and London are into unknown territory now. There's never been anything like 'the Jersey situation' before. God only knows what's going to happen.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Great timing by Syvret! Last Tuesday he said that major City law firms were basically 'front' organisations for serious organised crime. No doubt the usual suspects scoffed at his remarks. Have any of your readers seen the latest edition of Private Eye? On page 37 is an article which begins by saying the following.

    'As Security Minister Ben Wallace admitted last week to a parliamentary inquiry into financial crime networks, British law firms "are too often woven into their web"'

    Must check the railway time table. I do believe a train is coming :d

    Do your politicians know where they're going to build your second prison?

    ReplyDelete
  31. The authorities in Jersey very much need to establish a line of communication with Mr. Syvret. It is most regrettable, to say the least, that this was not done several years ago. The initiation of the Care Inquiry was the logical place to begin the necessary rapprochement. The provision of legal representation to him would have furnished a means of understanding his position and perhaps of influencing him, not in any improper sense, but through discussions. Nothing is ever lost by talking. It was a most serious mistake by the Jersey authorities to deny to themselves the opportunity to establish a line of communication with Mr. Syvret.

    ReplyDelete
  32. As Mr Syvret said in as many words. He was in a no win situation, if he had kept quiet he would have been hammered and because he spoke out he was and still is being hammered.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Let me state that that - categorically - formed no part of my thinking. Ever. At no stage did I consider, or weigh-up, which path might lead to me receiving less of a "hammering".

      I simply did what was right. I did what I was required to by law.

      The notion of doing anything else never crossed my mind.

      Stuart Syvret.

      Delete
    2. Let's be realistic here. If Syvret really wanted to avoid "being hammered" all he had to do was not find out (and worse still make public) that Jersey children were being abused on an industrial scale.

      He would not have been roughed up by the JEPeado, imprisoned and super-injuncted, had his livelihood and career destroyed and his life threatened.

      Despite his young age he was the longest serving states member at the time of his dismissal as Health Minister.

      What are current states members going to do to right the wrongs of the past (those that can be corrected, anyways) and to ensure the safety of present and future generations.

      The proper rule of law is the bedrock of child protection and public safety. Fake CoI's and Commissioners-for-Children are just wasteful follies built on mud.

      They crumble and shift even before the next wave of neglect and criminality hits.
      NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE ….as a certain Health Minister stated when answering a question ……..over a decade ago!!!

      Delete
  33. Former Deputy Trevor Pitman16 November 2018 at 17:00

    Nothing directly to do with this excellent interview with former Senator Syvret. But can I just use your pages - Jersey's most trusted media and reporter of real news - to briefly state how sad Shona and I were to be told about the untimely passing of Deputy Richard Rondel?

    Richard had the good fortune (some might say otherwise!) of being seated between me and Deputy Mike Higgins when he was first elected. As a person Richard was a pleasure to know - warm, funny and with a rare ability to, at least appear, to enjoy the company of all he encountered in the States. Your readers will likely understand when I say that this really was no mean achievement in a place like the States Assembly!

    I actually think Richard may almost have been too nice a person to be in politics - as he once acknowledged to me he really found it very difficult to confront people for fear of upsetting them. In a political arena which is, and likely always will be - often of necessity - highly challenging and even sometimes downright hostile this never can have been easy.

    Regardless of the above Richard made a huge amount of friends through his warmth and good humour. In what is a very difficult time Richard's family can certainly take some huge solace from this. He will be hugely missed.

    Trevor and Shona Pitman

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well said Trevor. Didn't know Richard but he seemed a very likable chap. Politicians do need to be willing to rock the boat though as you rightly say. Look where we are now. No one will say boo to a goose.

      Delete
  34. How great to hear from Big Trev and Shona. What do you think about what Stuart and VFC were discussing in the video? Will you come back and stand for election again? Do you still have your blog? I loved your BTR's they were a must watch and I would very much welcome its return.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Two f**king legends. Come back. Don't mess about or think you are not needed. It is dire over here. The States may as well not meet at all. Nothing happens.You would both top the poll + it would be a timely two fingers to the crooks Stuart talks about who treated him and the two of you so disgustingly.

      Delete
    2. I can but only concur 100% in regard to the comments above. Two politicians who acted for the people, without fear or favour. Very much missed for their honesty and forthrightness. However, as with Stuart, would you want to return to that which caused you so much destruction in your lives? I think not, but it is heartening to know their voices are being heard again.

      Delete
    3. Can we really afford the return of Pitman's Bald Truth calling out all and sundry while our leaders are handling the difficult intricacies of Brexit? We need to keep quiet and be respectful to those in London. Pitman would hardly observe that on his blog would he.

      Delete
    4. @14:26
      It seems that some people would use any excuse to avoid confronting corruption and child abuse.

      If you think " our leaders are handling the difficult intricacies of Brexit" you are delusional.

      Can we "really afford" to have a corrupt legal system?

      Were you campaigning for the protection of children and other abused islanders prior to this Brexit nonsense?
      I think not. but do please provide some evidence if you were.

      Delete
    5. @14:26

      The truth is not for sale.

      It is not the responsibility of dissidents to sit down and shut up on the grounds that the truth isn't "respectful" enough to the mafia syndicates in the City and their capos here in Jersey.

      Delete
  35. The truth is not for sale. True. But also true is the truth being held to ransom?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. WTF "the truth being held to ransom" is meaningless waffle.

      children being beaten, raped and buggered is not meaningless.

      ......Or perhaps it is to some?

      Delete
  36. One wonders if your legal establishment figures have any inkling as to how much they are hated by their colleagues in London? Even their allies. There was a time when club dinner dates and bonhomie (plus the Big Fact Cheques) eased and distanced all notion of consequence. But now?

    Now former brought agents see the doomed lunacy they were stupid enough to engage in, and curse their fortune for ever aligning with such fools.

    There is going to be a very angry middle Jersey, to say the least, when the hammer drops.

    Is there anyone in the Jersey establishment, who can see looming reality? Who can lead? It would appear not. If there were they would have acted some time ago. The hour is too late.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The hammer is already dropping and middle Jersey is most certainly beginning to feel the pinch.
      Years of austerity was always going to come back and do in the middle class eventually.

      Delete
  37. I’ve noticed that the majority of complainants of corruption, being committed by the government and judicial mafia , talk a good fight ….but when it comes to fighting injustices if you look closely at what they are doing , or not doing as the case maybe , it becomes clear that they either have no intention to do what’s needed when fighting for justice as members of the public , or to exercise their powers as States Members to bring wrong doers to justice.

    This is because their judgements or actions are most likely clouded by their own individual greed, delusional ego , conflict of interest, or being corrupted. It’s very easy for this to happen in so many ways in Jersey.

    I've only seen one person in the States Assembly in the last decade who was never corrupted and has acted in an honourable manner and tried to follow all processes and procedures open to themselves as a States member and abiding by their oath of office to the letter - and that was Stuart Syvret - its just a shame that no one supported him in the ways that were needed...and that includes several people who portray themselves publicly against corruption and cover up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What utter rubbish. Trying to make out that only Stuart ever tried to 'do the right thing' only undermines the truth of the good and brave few who did the same.

      Delete
    2. Its true - show me one States Member who supported him and exercised all the powers open to them under Standing Orders powers so to make sure he had support in the ways he needed it , together with dealing with all the conflicts of interest that were apparent but never dealt with.

      He had too much on his plate , and not one states member stood up to assist him and victims under what would be the legislative intent of their powers as States Member.

      Delete
    3. Anon 11:55, i think you misunderstand as you think im talking about victims of the Child abuse situation - im talking more generally as a society as to why the issues that many people face , in so many areas , with regards to an obstruction of justice and why they are never dealt with under the legislative intent of justice.

      There is a difference between doing the right thing in fact and procedure , and portraying or believing to do the right thing upon their own interpretation . In matters of alleged corruption involving our government, police, prosecutory authorities, and judiciary , all that needs to happen is to make sure that that those who are subject to such allegations are not in a position of administrating , investigating , or reviewing the principal complaints , and that also goes for complainants - its a fundamental aspect of justice and States Members who are portraying to act in the public interest never seem to approach this issue with the attention it deserves under the legislative intent of their oath and powers, albeit when supposedly acting in the public interest.

      If the government, police, prosecutory authorities, and judiciary are committing offences then they will always carry on doing so because of no fear of them not being involved in overseeing or directing their own investigations - To this day ive only ever seen one States Member trying to address these issues and his name was Stuart Syvret .....and i did not see any other states members who did what was needed to support him by exercising the powers open to them under the legislative intent of those particular matters involving child abuse to solely deal with these matters which was obstructing independent investigation and review.

      Delete
    4. We have a real problem fighting injustices and corruption in jersey for several reasons, here are just some of the issues imo – some more obvious than others- some of which can be dealt with and some look very hard to overcome without some sort of education, event, or precedent.

      1. The Island’s Demographic

      1.1 A condition and a set of circumstances of living on a small island

      What I have noticed is that there is natural tendency for many islanders who are not born here , or have no roots here , to shy away from fighting corruption of our government, Police, and Judiciary under what would be normal processes . There always comes a time when decisions need to be made when trying to fight injustices and wrongs carried out by the local government and police.....but those decisions tend to be more difficult with those who have no roots in Jersey – they tend to approach injustices in a half-hearted way and just gradually accept the corruption because of fear of on-going persecution in their private or professional lives - I think it’s a natural reaction which Jersey people would also face if in another jurisdiction under the same circumstances like a small island and constitutional set-up.

      1.2 Many of these persons who are alleged to cover up corruption or benefiting from it can be business leaders , lawyers, civil servants , states of jersey employees etc , police officers and even states members - therefore a small but substantial part of the islands population not only knowingly accepts corruption going on in our government, policing and Judicial mafia, but their everyday working life thrives off it and they have been for decades.

      2. Ministerial Government – this style of government in Jersey facilitates corruption because of there being no separation of the Ministerial legal advisers and the role of prosecutors in the island – Mr Syvret explains this in the video and it’s not difficult to understand.

      3. The Legal Profession – Every Legal firm knows in Jersey that it’s imperative to act in the interest of the corrupt Police and authorities and to never really take them on using the full force of law - not just so they won’t be targeted themselves and it being against their financial interest when representing their own clients in the mafia's courts , but because it’s imperative that they don’t raise Human Rights issues in our courts which could set dangerous precedents for all of the dodgy dealings going on in these law firms and shell companies. It’s a “favour for a favour” profession with the courts and prosecutory authorities and the cover-up of wrongs is seen as an opportunity rather than taking on the mafia.

      The only way to resolve this would be for members of the public to gain legal assistance from lawyers outside of the island …but for that to change a law change is needed.

      Delete
    5. As a London based lawyer currently seconded to the UAE, but still maintaining a weather eye on the unfolding gangster enclave that is Jersey I found this interview hardly reassuring that anything has changed on your little tax Haven. Nevertheless if John Lennon was right that life is what blindsides you on a dull Tuesday afternoon while you are busy making other plans I might suggest that your corrupt overlords might get that blind-sided shock by way of my country's about to explode Brexit calamity. It is certainly long overdue.

      Delete
  38. Good to know there remains some outside lawyers monitoring Jersey.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Originally from Surrey , now living in New York. I did however live in Jersey for about 18 months in 2009/10 and have been reading your blogs since then. I wish i knew then what i know now about the place , but in all honesty it probably wouldn't have made a difference , maybe.

    I was working there as an accountant for a UK firm on a standard trust beneficiary case which fully complied with all Jersey Regulation with the firm i was representing . The firm i worked for employed a local lawyer in one the Jerseys biggest firms Carey Olsen and i was to assist him in presenting the civil case from a forensic accounting standpoint as expert evidence . I was working on this case for two years as it involved a very large sum - what was to happen within that two year period in Jersey will stay with me forever.

    Within the first few weeks of me landing in the island I was of the position that my qualified accounting procedures was going to win the case in court as i had never lost a case when providing my very detailed and bespoke reports to UK Courts . I expected an open and shut case as we had clear evidence of what i believe had to be fraudulent activity by the local trust administrator as i could prove it couldn't be anything else. I thought it would take no more than 6 months to get some positive ruling but i started to have concerns with the Law Firm that my clients had employed to present my expert evidence .


    ReplyDelete
  40. I was creating forensic accounting reports that surpassed all regulatory compliance procedures from a Jersey Legal perspective ( as i had read about Jersey court cases involving accounting regulations before i decided to assist in the case.) I knew what was required to assist in my clients representation but i started to get concerned when the Jersey lawyers employed by my clients were refusing to either present the damning evidence before the court or have them checked over by one of the local Jersey Accountants. I made several complaints to the local Bar complaints society but i never received a response . I tried to get help from the courts but they didn't assist in any way . I tried to contact some local Politicians and was given the name of a Senator Heegins i think , he said he was going to help but never returned any of my calls in the last 4 weeks i was there . This was when i started to have serious concerns about teh level of corruption and cover up in the island.

    I went to the police with the complaints about criminal conspiracy an perverting the course of justice as i learnt that one of the respondents had knowledge of specific information that would have been impossible for them to know about unless our lawyer had tipped him off . In the end the Police couldn't do anything as the courts told them it was part of a disclosure process which simply wasn't true and there was never any record of it being so to which teh Police agreed but they still did nothing . I've since learnt that the respondent in the case , the trust administrator who was subject to illegal accounting procedures and professional negligence , has a sister who is a Partner at the Law Firm we employed , im convinced there was foul play but it was impossible for me to prove . In the end my clients convinced their clients , who were two elderly ladies whose mother was actually born on the island before the first world War , to drop the case even though we clearly had all that was required to win the case from a high threshold . It was a very frustrating time for my clients and my family as i was there to win the case with my expensive forensic reports. I must have visited 8 different Law Firms to acquire legal assistance in Jersey but all of them refused to act on behalf of my clients stating conflicts of interest or not having the resources available.

    I have some tips for anyone there and that is to NOT trust any lawyer in Jersey , and if you are forced to need a lawyer to represent you or your clients then make sure you do some homework on them before you do and make sure you go into it under the suspicion that your lawyer is easily corrupted.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sounds about right.

      Did Philip Sinel not have to go to the US courts to get justice for a client in a matter which, under "normal" circumstances, should have been sorted by the Jersey courts.

      Thank you for your detailed account (no pun intended). It clearly sounds irrefutable, based as it is on personal experience.

      Delete
    2. Don't know of any Senator Heegins but we do have an excellent Deputy Higgins who, despite battling illness in recent years, has pretty much been fighting a one man war for accountability in the States, what with the likes of Reform now being quieter than a gaggle of mute church mice since they were given jobs in the Establishment government.

      Delete
  41. Yes i remember now he was a Deputy , was he sick in 2010 ? that might explain things but he seemed fine to me . I did get the impression that he was stringing me along as all he had to do was address the issues with the Minister who was responsible for Justice in the island . He didn't return my phone calls or emails in the last 4-6 weeks and it left me feeling that he spoke a good game but never had an intention to act.

    There was another Politician whose name escapes me , i think it was the Senator i spoke with . I met him in one of the country parishes in the west of the island when he attended with his daughter and wife which was totally innapropiate as we were in email correspondence and he knew the context of matters i wish to discuss with him.

    I knew straight away that he had no intention of helping to address the injustices with the who were politically responsible . I remember the meeting and he didn't come across as a politician either , actually when i look back it was one of the most bizarre meetings ive ever had , prayers to all you islanders if he is still one of your politicians.

    ReplyDelete
  42. When is the next post likely? Live to know when PPC will be making the changes needed to our electoral system after the electoral monitors report.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL @13:08 -you mean IF not WHEN, surely?

      You will be stitched up for generations to come.

      Delete
  43. We will continue to be failed by our politicians and our fake democratic system.

    In our everyday lives it is easy to think that corruption is not serious -not deeply damaging to us, our families and the people we care about in the wider community.

    It is always easier to think the comfortable rather than the unthinkable.
    The wake up call came (or should have done!) when Health Minister Syvret and then the police broke the beginnings of the child abuse disaster.
    The child abuse disaster was the first inescapable and widely known result of Jersey's systemic judicial and political corruption and incompetence.

    In normal places the media provides some sort of safety net to inform the population.

    In the UK the TIMES has saved many hundreds of lives -probably thousands.
    Like all media outlets it has owners/controllers so there are some stories it will not print but it did grasp the nettle and print this one:

    https://youtu.be/FdPSAweX85I

    And it kept investigating and printing until all but the witless and the politically possessed were able to accept that there was a problem and also the most basic issues about it's nature.

    In Jersey we don't have the TIMES but only the JEPeado etc so we may as well lube ourselves up.

    Jersey corruption will continue and so will child abuse and the protection of well connected abusers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In the video posted @16:08 Andrew Norfolk said that 2 days after the Times blew the story Jack Straw went on Newsnight to say that he was well aware of the problem. This begs the question as to why he did not deal with the issue in the years or decades before.
      This should not surprise us as he was the Home Secretary who ignored and rejected Stuart Syvret's damming evidence on Jersey corruption leaving the Jersey population at risk for further decades.

      www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBJS3yIXZVk

      He cant even identify the problem correctly. The statistically significant factor is not racial as Jack Straw states -it is religious/cultural not racial.

      Delete
    2. I think this gentleman has come somewhat a little late to the party. The late Marlene Guest was championing the cause of these poor girls a lot earlier.

      The Beano is not the Rag

      Delete
    3. Thank you @19:26
      Regret that I am not familiar with Marlene Guest

      It should be observed the
      the phenomenon of gang grooming could send normal concerned people to the right or even the to the "far right"

      Lack of self control and intellectual rigour cause some identitarians brand conservatives like Mogg and even centrists like May as "far right"
      The far right certainly exists but is a tiny and insignificant portion of the population. Marlene Guest may have done good work but is she out of my comfort zone. A brief google brings up "BNP". Do you have information or a link you can recommend reading?

      Stupidity, callousness, fear and cowardice caused by domination by elements of the "far left" appears to have left victims unprotected and perhaps allowed the gang grooming phenomenon to reach near endemic proportions in some areas.

      This inaction and resultant growth is amongst the stupidity and self absorption of the left that will act as a recruiting beacon of the real far right if the left do not put their house in order and do it fast. Decent people do not tolerate the abuse and rape of children.
      Politically possessed lost causes will rant and deny these basic set of facts.

      Identity politics led to the election of Trump in the US. It can do fat worse this side of the pond.

      Delete
    4. Anon @10:20

      I am afraid to say that I do not have any 'suitable' links with regards to the late Marlene which may not offend one's sensitivities, but please remember that one should put aside any thoughts of concern as to who the messenger is and actually listen to the message being said.

      Marlene first identified the established Rotherham Grooming Scandal as far back as 2004. The even more worrying point is as to how far back this was going on before hand...

      Perhaps this safe link to the Guardian with it's healthy debate in the comments section may be of interest: Guardian 14 Aug 2014

      The Beano is not the Rag

      Delete
    5. Thank you "Beano"
      I think you misjudge me. I am a liberal -a real liberal who believes in free speech, not an identitarian (with a small "i" -identity politics victim of either the left OR the right).
      "Safe spaces" are for children and the subnormal. Incitement to violence is already illegal and any other "hate-speech" or "bad-speech" can be combatted with better-speech imo.
      Rotherham (& the other towns) is just the tip of the iceberg. These are tragedies in themselves but the political danger of allowing these situations to arise and take root is that a good deal of the "bad-speech" is actually correct.

      The established left wing identitarian reaction of shouting "racist" to any discussion is what has caused the tragedy and a justification for good people to move to the right. The right is just a balance for the left but the more that "wacist" is shouted in situations like this the further to the right people will be driven.

      With the exception of Jersey, most western countries have wandered towards the dangerous side of the Left. The consequence of maintaining this path (and particularly it's PC cr@p) will be populations moving into the danger zone of the right. The far left and the far right both include hateful ideologies. The hate of the far left is wrapped in perceived compassion but it is there in equally with the highest piles of dead bodies to the hateful vitriol of it's keyboard warriors

      Marlene Guest does not seem to have a wiki page. I wanted a link which provides balanced information on her and what she has done.

      I agree that one should put aside any thoughts of concern as to who the messenger is and actually listen to the message being said. You will recall the dogpiling and potty-mouthed insults I enjoyed for mentioning that Tommy Robinson claimed to be an early highlighter of Islamic gang grooming due to having a cousin who was a victim.

      Any link (almost) is safe for me to read. The question is -are they safe for you to post?
      Rather; is it safe for VFC's blog? Like myself you are in little actual danger but VFC's threads should imo primarily stay on subject or on child protection rather than too far into off island politics.

      Delete
    6. To my educated friend at 12:23,

      Marlene lost her life to asbestosis in 2015, and as such due to her leaving the Liberal Democratic Party and joining the nameless party who cause offence with just their name, mainstream commentators seem to overlook her life.
      And to get even further into the lesser commentated news, it was Nick Griffin and Simon Darby's attempts in trying to raise the issue of children being abused and thus being threatened with jail that caused Marlene to 'cross the house' as she saw that they were the only ones who appeared to be trying to do something.

      I am afraid, you will have to search on the words "Grooming" and "Rotherham" but in the meantime, I have come across a Dr Angela Heal who looks as though she predates Marlene who was bemused as to why no-one was acting upon her information: BBC South Yorkshire

      The Beano is not the Rag

      Delete
    7. omg Beano, that is shocking. .....I am always grateful for more education -Thank you

      The "no holds barred" 2003 Dr Heal report
      "went not only to police and local government but to safeguarding boards and the national government."

      But 2003 is not as far back as it goes:

      www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/aug/30/rotherham-girls-could-have-been-spared-ann-cryer

      "In 2002, when she [Ann Cryer] was Labour MP for Keighley, Cryer became the first public figure in Britain to talk out about allegations of "young Asian lads" grooming underage white girls in the West Yorkshire town. As a result, she was shunned by elements of her party, a panic button was installed in her house and Nick Griffin stood against her for the far-right British National party (BNP), claiming that she was not doing enough to protect young white girls."

      "Ann Cryer wept when she heard the news [August 2014]". "It reduced me to tears, reading all that went on in Rotherham,"

      "The really sad aspect of it is that many of these girls could have been spared. ……….. I simply thought it was a purely local issue that emanated from Keighley … If I'd known, I could have said, 'We need a national policy on this.' I was on the Labour party's national executive at the time, so I would have been in a good position to press for that. But no one talked about it."

      "When Ann Cryer tried to bring abusers in her Yorkshire seat to justice [in 2002], she was shunned by police, social services and imams"

      Delete
    8. Can anyone comprehend the power being wielded under the cover of political correctness (AKA the fake virtue of fake compassion)

      "a panic button was installed in her house"
      This is a Labour MP on the national executive FFS

      I just played the video/audio off your www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-32586558 link

      Reports daily gang rape, threats and torture but the child has to endure it for two years! How did she survive?

      Delete
    9. I read the full article at
      www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/aug/30/rotherham-girls-could-have-been-spared-ann-cryer

      [The article includes some interesting snippets. e.g:]
      "Last week, Denis MacShane, the former MP for Rotherham, admitted he might have not done enough about child sexual exploitation by Asian men in his constituency because he was a "Guardian-reading liberal leftie". "

      [and errrr….. "journalism":]

      "Yet that's exactly what happened to Cryer [being branded a racist], an insult compounded when Griffin decided to contest her seat in the 2005 general election for the BNP. "His reason for challenging me: 'She didn't do enough to protect those white girls'," remembered Cryer. "That was nonsense. I'd almost killed myself trying to protect them." Griffin lost, polling just 9.2% of the votes to Cryer's 44.7%, but police were worried enough about Cryer's safety to install a panic button with a direct line to Shipley police station."

      [Now the Gardian-mindset is identified as a causal facet to inaction in 2003 but reading the 2014 paragraph above you would get the impression that Ann Cryer needed protecting from BNP neo-fascists, whereas ........
      www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/our-region/west-yorkshire-and-the-dales/bradford/heartbreak-of-mp-s-lone-battle-to-tackle-sex-abuse-in-bradford-1-8285026
      ...…..local reporting suggests that the danger of neo-fascist behaviour was from the left:

      " Ridiculed, branded a racist, a liar and a fantasist, the then-Keighley MP was forced to install a panic button in her own home as she became a target herself."
      [So the PC Guardian is still misreporting in 2014. -wasn't the actual danger from far-left-neo-fascism or islamo-fascism?

      This is the paper which famously concluded that the solution for areas feeling cultural strain due to high immigration was in fact (by it's analysis of the data) errr …….more immigration!

      It could be such a good paper but many of it's readers have no defence against the more dangerous side of the uber PC ideology it pedals.

      Delete
  44. The laughably claimed 'centre' such as Blair, Cameron represented and the inept, washed up Lib-Dems have some pretty unpalatable 'values' at their heart too as we should never forget. And Jersey, cover up capital of the western world prides itself on its allegedly 'centrism'. I think it is truer to say that wherever you go it really all comes down to the quality and bravery of individuals. Jersey surely shows this admirably too with the likes of Stuart, Trevor and Shona, Bob Hill and Mike Higgins etc.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Next we'll be seeing claims Jersey stalwarts Ted Heath and Jimmy Savile were secretly Guardian (interestingly in a recent large scale European survey the most publically trusted British newspaper) reading liberal lefties!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you @11:57 for your suggestion that Ted Heath and Jimmy Savile were Guardian readers but I don't think the idea has much merit.

      You rather miss the point.
      Political correctness and the fear of being branded a racist is one of the main things which protected the predominantly Muslem rape gangs allowing the problem to get further out of control and at least a further two generations of children to be terribly abused and damaged and in many cases done to death. There are differences of opinion but the official reports and the people on the ground state this as a fact. We should all find this fact uncomfortable and upsetting.

      These are not "claims" they are *facts* -insofar as anything deserves the name.

      I never suggested that being a Guardian readers makes a person more likely to be an abuser (or more particularly a rape gang abuser). However, as stated above, it is the Guardianesque mindset which protected the rape gang s and left their victims unprotected.

      Speaking of leaving these children unprotected the Guardian deserves a particular mention -In her write up on her 2003 whistleblowing Ann Cryer details the "help" she received from the Guardian:
      "At last, people were listening. It got an investigation into the mothers’ claims started, and I then worked with the Home Secretary, David Blunkett, on legislation that would make grooming a specific offence.
      Support was not forthcoming from all quarters. I couldn’t get The Guardian interested. Its reporters seemed paralysed by political correctness."

      The Guardian would be quite a good paper if it did not allow itself to fall into the unreal rabbit holes of Political Correctness and Identity Politics.

      The entire press is generally awful in the quality and balance of it's reporting but few can compare to our JEPeado which is balls deep in complicity and cover up.

      Delete
    2. By general standards, and accepting your principle points, the Guardian is an excellent newspaper, at least in comparison to the likes of the Daily Mail and Jersey's finest the JEP cover-up. So I see both of your points. Personally I prefer the Morning Star and Daily Worker. No big advertisers to appease.

      Delete
    3. Thank you for your civil reply @11.11
      I think one of the Daily Mail's most shameful moments was when it allowed career paedophile apologist David Rose to undermine the Harper / Power child abuse investigation.
      It was later revealed that this PR hatchet-job was in association with Jersey's "rent-boy" policeman Mick Gradwell.

      The Daily Mail's high point is probably it's 1997 front page which took an unprecedented risk by naming the racist killers of Stephen Lawrence.
      Ironically the Mail's bravery on that story was perhaps instrumental in the fallout 'flipping the script' and potentially allowing 'protected groups' to engage in actions without consequences (consequences for themselves, not the victims)

      Law and justice must apply to all the same. PC blinkering has got gang grooming to where it is now and it will take years (decades possibly) of concerted action to stamp it out.
      The toleration of Sharia enclaves is the thin end of the next divisive wedge.

      Interestingly the previous Ann Cryer quote
      "At last, people were listening. It got an investigation into the mothers’ claims started, and I then worked with the Home Secretary, David Blunkett, on legislation that would make grooming a specific offence.
      Support was not forthcoming from all quarters. I couldn’t get The Guardian interested. Its reporters seemed paralysed by political correctness."
      actually came form her own article in the Mail:
      www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4780326/Branded-racist-trying-save-girls-vile-abusers.html

      I detect a wicked sense of humour in that lady. What I call the Hard Left, she refers to as the Floppy Left.
      What does she know hat I don't?

      For it's faults the Daily Mail is probably something of a (albeit often rather non-cerebral) balancing force to the excesses of what is wrongly called liberalism.

      Free expression is the liberty on which all other liberties are based.

      Feel free to reference us any great articles by the Morning Star and the Daily Worker.
      (I'm serious)

      Delete
    4. It comes to something when the supposed big circulation guardians of truth and justice media have to be waded through with wellies and a bucket trying to sift truth from shite. A few years back I recall an excellent article turning up in the Big Issue In The North mag set up to help the struggling and homeless. Much to my surprise, I was in that neck of the woods buying a consignment of pool tables for any interested in trivia,this article did a very good take on the shocking court abuse of the Pitmans. If marginally resourced journals like that can carry out important investigative journalism you really don't have to ask why most MSM don't.

      Delete
  46. Anonymous @ 11.33

    I would include Voice in that list. He has kept the pot on the boil and has consistently offered others a fair, and sometimes overgenerous, platform which is denied them by the so-called MSM.

    What he does requires a lot of dedication and effort and is not without its dangers to him personally.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Quite agree. I was just thinking of Jersey politicians. Team Voice are brilliant beyond doubt, likewise Power and Harper.

      Delete
  47. Can anyone explain why Bailiff William Bailhache has not/is not being investigated for his now provenly fake statements about Mr K having always had very positive supervision reports? Why ever would our local mainstream media not report this hugely important and disturbing story?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Questions (not asked by MSM) still remain regarding William Bailhache.

      Delete
    2. Anon 12.11 - Because he is untouchable and runs the police with the AG .....hope that helps. The Bailiff and Deputy Bailiff are never subject to criminal investigations , and never will be , thats why they act the way they do.

      Delete
  48. Funny how this Government says its putting Children first from now on, whilst Schools put emergency contingency plans into place for Teacher Assistant Strikes on Friday.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Interesting, and thought provoking Blog from TOM GRUCHY.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Getting close to home for some. Queen's chauffeur

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Buckingham Palace refused to comment"

      Delete
    2. In spite of the corruption, spite of the decades of state sponsored child abuse, spite of the illegality the office of the monarch mounted first one Bailhache on us, and then mounted the other Bailhache upon us.
      Criminal appointments via the Monarch's Letters Patent.

      Thank you ma'am, but why have you soiled yourself in this way?

      Will her slack jawed, adulterous son be any better?

      He can't fail his subjects any worse.

      Delete