Sunday, 30 June 2019

Len Norman (with others) and "The Jersey Way."

Constable Len Norman

At the last States Sitting Deputy Mike Higgins submitted the following Oral Question to Home Affairs Minister Constable Len Norman.

“Will the Minister explain to members what actions, if any, the States of Jersey Police are taking to encourage the victims of sexual abuse to come forward and place their trust in the Police; and will he provide his assessment of how effective any such measures have been in ensuring the public are convinced that the Police investigate all allegations without fear or favour?”

The question, from Deputy Higgins, came about, seemingly, because an alleged Survivor of child grooming and similar alleged sexual offences felt she had no other alternative than to waive her anonymity and take to Social Media in an attempt put pressure on those responsible (States of Jersey Police/Law Offices department) for bringing her alleged abuser to "justice." From the information available it appears that the alleged Survivor had gone through all the correct channels in reporting the alleged crime only to be met with alleged protection of the alleged perpetrator by those who are supposed to be upholding the law without fear or favour.

At this point we should mention that the number 1 priority of this government is: "We will put children first." The government's priority comes in the wake of a damming (not as damming as it could/should have been) REPORT from the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry (IJCI) after decades of Child Abuse was exposed by Former Deputy Chief Police Officer Lenny Harper under the leadership of former (possibly illegally suspended) Chief Police Officer Graham Power QPM. Subsequently exposed by the IJCI itself.

In the wake of the IJCI report The Powers That Be have been busy ticking as many boxes as it can attempting to convince the public that things have changed, children are safer, and the protection of the system over the protection of children is an attitude of a bygone era.

Deputy Mike Higgins

Well judging by the "answer" (below video) to Deputy Higgins's question (above), nothing can be further from the truth.

One would have thought/expected the Home Affairs Minister, Constable Len Norman, to ask Deputy Higgins: "just exactly what have you read on the internet?" He might have said: "If you (Deputy Higgins) have any evidence of any shortcomings concerning the police force then I need to see that in order to have it investigated, and if needs be, hold my officers to account." The Home Affairs Minister could have said: "I need to hear first hand the alleged Survivors side of events because I have heard the police's side of the story." The Home Affairs Minister asked NONE of those questions and rabidly defended the cops/system without question (The Jersey Way).

Just as telling (of "The Jersey Way") was the silence of all other States Members during this question save from Deputy Montfort Tadier and Deputy Kevin Pamplin (videos below). If there appears to be any kind of Child Abuse cover-up, or allegations of, then surely, post-Operation Rectangle, post-IJCI States Members would be holding the Home Affairs Ministers feet to the coals? There would have been a barrage of questions from across the political divide to demonstrate that States Members are not going to allow history to repeat itself and sit silent while a potential whistleblower (Deputy Higgins) is labelled (by the Home Affairs Minister) a "conspiracy theorist." Alas the silence was deafening.

Deputy Montfort Tadier

Deputy Montfort Tadier was the only States Member to stand Deputy Higgins's (and alleged Survivors) corner. The Deputy has been an avid campaigner for Abuse Survivors since he was first elected in 2008 and was instrumental in ensuring there was a public Inquiry and indeed formulating its Terms of Reference alongside current/former politicians/Survivors and Bloggers. The Home Affairs Minister's "answer" to Deputy Tadier's question was yet another demonstration of "The Jersey Way." The Deputy asked the Home Affairs Minister to "work constructively" with Deputy Higgins in order to restore (some much needed) faith, and trust, in the government. The Home Affairs Minister seemingly refused to do this, refused to acknowledge the concerns of Deputy Higgins (and alleged Survivor(s)) and indeed the concerns of those of us who don't want to see "history repeating itself" where whistleblowers are marginalised and the State is rabidly defended without question. (The Jersey Way.)

Deputy Kevin Pamplin

But possibly the most bizarre, if not frightening question, came from Deputy Kevin Pamplin. Deputy Pamplin is a member (although he should now be considering his position) of the "Care of Children Review Panel."  Its "mission statement" includes: "Following the recommendations put forward by the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry, thorough Scrutiny will be essential in ensuring that what is put in place is both fit for purpose and helps to improve the care and well-being of children in Jersey."

The last few words of that sentence being possibly the most poignant; "to improve the care and well-being of children in Jersey." So why is it that his one question, to the HA Minister, was about his concerns for "the care and well-being" of the Police Officers accused of wrong doing? Why aren't his concerns with the alleged Survivor and potential Survivors? How is that "caring for children?" How can that question not be seen as "The Jersey Way?" It has to be said that this did come as quite a surprise to me because from what I have watched of the Scrutiny Panel Hearings Deputy Pamplin has seemed to be on top of his game (for Jersey standards) and asked some searching questions of those brought before the Panel. Unfortunately his concern for the police, and not the (or any) alleged Survivor(s) with his question to the Home Affairs Minister (below video) does deem his position on the Scrutiny Panel untenable.

I've spent the last couple of weeks pondering whether or not to publish this Blog. My fear is that if Survivors see the exchange in the States, the attitude of the Minister, the concern for the well-being of the cops, and the silence of the vast majority of States Members then it might put them off coming forward to report abuse (alleged or otherwise). I had to ask myself is there confidence in our so-called "justice" system as Constable Norman seems to think there is? Is there confidence in our government to do the right thing and could any Survivor take their concerns to the Old Media should all other avenues fail?

The latest SOCIAL SURVEY suggests not with only 50% of islanders having confidence in the so-called "justice" system, only 33% have trust in the Old Media, and 28% having trust in the government. The Jersey Evening Post was the only outlet of the Old Media to report on the exchange and question the cops. It (JEP) reported that the cops DID send a file to the Law Offices Department who decided not to prosecute the case in question. So credit to the JEP for being the only Old Media to report on this which also helped me make my decision to publish a Blog on it. I have been made aware of at least one alleged Survivor who has, thus far, decided not to come forward because of his/her distrust in the system. While wrestling with whether or not to publish this Blog I had/have to think of the impact it could have on Survivors and would it stop them coming forward as it has (thus far) with the Survivor I have been made aware of? After the JEP reported it, it is of huge public interest, and do I think Survivors should trust the authorities? The answer, Im afraid to say, is "no" I don't think the authorities can be trusted to do the right thing. as Home Affairs Minister clearly demonstrated the number 1 priority is to "protect the system" and Survivors have the right to know the facts. If I was to hide these facts from Survivors then I would be as bad as the Establishment and parts of the Old Media.

I have e-mailed the Home Affairs Minister asking him a number of (perfectly valid) questions and asked him for an interview alongside Deputy Higgins in order that the most reliable, and factual, evidence can be published on the Blog. Deputy Higgins agreed to this joint interview but the Home Affairs Minister refused. I will look to publish the e-mail exchange in the comments section.

It is with a heavy heart I have concluded that nothing has changed despite Operation Rectangle, the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry, and its report. "The Jersey Way" of protecting the system, marginalising Whistleblowers and ignoring Survivors is stronger now than it ever has been.

Survivors can take some solace in knowing there are at least two States Members (Tadier/Higgins) who are willing to be a voice for them, put their heads above the parapet, and attempt to hold power to account.

The first video is an edited version to demonstrate the Home Affairs Minister's rabid defence of the cops and to label the Questioner/Whistleblower a conspiracy theorist for attempting to hold power to account. The full (un-edited) version is at the bottom of the posting.

The second video is of Deputy Tadier's support for Deputy Higgins and Survivors and NOT "The Jersey Way."

The third video is of Deputy Pamplin's concern for the well-being of the cops and NOT any alleged Survivor.

Tuesday, 18 June 2019

BBC Fake News.


On Thursday 30th May 2019 BBC State Radio was doing what most of the island's Old Media (formerly known as MSM) do and churning out another Press Release totally unchallenged and without doing the most basic rudimentary checks. The Press Release, according to Chris Stone of BBC Jersey, were signed off by the Jersey Police Authority.

The BBC, on the radio, was repeatedly claiming (because it was in the Press Release) that Jersey has the lowest number of Police Officers per 1,000 population across England, Scotland, Wales and small island Crown Dependencies. I thought "that can't be true we have 13 Police Forces!" (12 Parish Police Forces and the States of Jersey Police Force)

So I did what the presenter of the programme asked and e-mailed in my comment.:

"You are reporting that Jersey has the lowest amount of Police Officers per-head of population in the UK. This seems a little difficult to believe considering we have 13 police forces. Are the Honorary police/Centeniers included in your (States Communications Unit) stats?"

I sent that question/observation in at 07:38, the programme finished at 09:00 and I was told:

"I passed your comment on to James to put to Dr Lane, but other questions got there first."

But here's the thing, there was the best part of an hour and a half to read out my question and it wasn't read out once. On the other hand there was an observation by a listener called "Paul" who said how wonderfully safe Jersey is and how he can leave his keys in his car, front door open etc and that was read out three or four times. How can there not be enough time to read out my (perfectly valid) question (once) but enough time to read out a lovely (show Jersey in a good light) fluffy observation 3 or 4 times? This is one of the questions that I asked Chris Stone that he refused to answer.

Could it be that the State Radio doesn't want its listeners to know the truth about how "over policed" the Island looks when the real stats get put out there? Why didn't The BBC question the Stats in the Press Release/REPORT? Why did such an obvious question have to be asked (but not aired) by a member of the public or New Media (formerly known as Social Media)? What kind of "journalism" is it when a Press Release, with misleading figures, can be churned out and when it is questioned (by a member of the public) the question gets buried?

Former (possibly illegally suspended) Chief of Police Graham Power QPM

Regular readers will know that The BBC has a long history of churning out State propaganda and indeed acting against its own charter in burying a DEFENCE CASE after reporting on the prosecution case of the (possibly illegal) suspension of the former Police Chief. Of course most people will also be aware of the BBC's protection of Britains most prolific paedophile Jimmy Savile and indeed the setting up of a right wing ACTIVIST not to mention the disgraceful treatment of a local left wing opposition POLITICIAN. We have also seen the BBC's claim (as if the links already posted aren't enough) to be "Impartial, Balanced and honest" ripped to shreds HERE. This is without mentioning The alleged Faking SYRIA'S CHILDREN as reported by former ITV and BBC Journalist ANNA BREES.

So after The BBC churning out the Press Release (unchallenged) and duping its listeners into believing that Jersey is "under policed" what is the real story here and just as importantly why doesn't The BBC (or any of the Old Media) want the public to know just how policed we are?

Firstly (and this is something I thought I'd never say) full credit has to go to the Comite des Conetables who supplied me with the figures I asked for. I emailed the Chairman of the Comite at 15:00 (Thursday 13th June 2019) asking for the figures of how many honorary Police Officers there were on the island. I got the reply at 09:05 the very next morning with the figures I wanted. Again, if it's that easy why didn't The BBC (or any of the Old Media) do it?

What The BBC is doing is knowingly broadcasting Fake News. It knows Jersey is a Police State and the stats back this up. It has done nothing (besides bury the truth) in order to inform the public of how many police officers actually police us.

Regurgitated (by Old Media) stats

The real truth is that according to the Comite des Conetables (as of May 1st 2019) there are/were 215 Honorary Police Officers. This includes Centeniers, Vingteniers and Constable’s Officers. So according to The BBC (because it didn't question the Press Release) there are 190 Police Officers on the Island which works out at 1.78 officers per 1,000 people. This, it is claimed in the Report (and The BBC), the least amount of Police Officers per 1,000 people across the UK.

What we don't know is how many Special Constables, and the like, exist across the UK and other Crown Dependencies. What we do know is, with the stats available, that Jersey has approximately  FOUR HUNDRED AND FIVE police Officers across the Island and not 190 reported/repeated by The BBC. Without knowing how many Special Constables/other Honorary positions across the UK/Crown Dependencies, far from being the LEAST policed jurisdiction Jersey is in fact the MOST more than Double the amount reported/repeated by The BBC.

According to the (unchallenged by the Old Media) report Scotland has the MOST Police Officers per 1,000 people with 3.15 and Jersey with the LEAST (1.78). Yet when one asks the most basic of questions "how many Police Officers do we really have" it turns out that we are the most heavily policed jurisdiction in the UK (according to available stats). I'm no mathematician or statistician but rather than 1.78 Police Officers per 1,000 people on the Island the true figure is closer to 3.80. (Beating Scotland's 3.15 considerably)

After The BBC and ITV/CTV didn't have the courage to come and defend their "journalism" at the recent PUBLIC HEARING just this post alone might help explain why. It will also go some way to explaining why, according to the latest SOCIAL SURVEY, 67% of islanders don't trust the local Old Media. MORE stats that have no not been reported on/broadcast by The BBC!

Don't be fooled by Fake News. We are a Police State and The BBC is actively keeping that information (and much more) from you.

Wednesday, 5 June 2019

New (and some) old Media appear at Child Abuse Panel Review.

On Thursday May 29 2019 Team Voice and Tom Gruchy appeared as witnesses at the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry (IJCI) REVIEW PANEL "PUBLIC" Hearing. We "New Media" (formerly known as "Social Media") were invited to sit alongside members of the "Old Media" (formerly known as Mainstream Media) to discuss a number of subjects/bullet-points. (below)

Unfortunately we only got the subjects/bullet-points the night before the Hearing which was nowhere near enough time to do adequate research but nonetheless, in the extremely short time we were given for the hearing (approximately an hour), we were able to hold our own.

Regular readers will know that the Panel went back on its word (pretended it didn't) and refused any media recording of all the "PUBLIC" Hearings as exclusively reported by VFC HERE. WE (New Media) were the only media to challenge this absurd decision as reported on in the above link. The Old media were compliant. So unfortunately were are unable to publish any video footage for the Blog. Which was our intention before the Panel went back on its word.

With the very limited time we had at the hearing, and the number of subjects to be discussed, it was an impossible, and unrealistic task and we should have been allocated at least a two hour slot and that's not counting the DAYS we would have needed if we were allowed to discuss the Old Media's role pre-2017.


Out of the Old Media it was only the Bailiwick Express and the Jersey Evening Post who had the courage to turn up. ITV/CTV and The BBC lacked that courage so credit to the two who did show up. Of course the Bailiwick Express was not around during the Rectangle Era, so had little, or nothing, to answer for. The JEP, and indeed ITV/CTV and The BBC were around and do have plenty to answer for so most credit should go to Andy Sibcy (Editor JEP). Sibcy wasn't the Editor around the time (Rectangle) the paper was doing its best to trash the Survivors/Abusees and those who tried to get them so-called "justice." We believe the Paper as come along way, for the better, under the Editorship of Sibcy.

The paper (alongside BBC, ITV/CTV) was relentless in attempting to discredit the Victims/Abusees, Lenny Haper, Graham Power QPM, Stuart Syvret and the Bloggers and should have been held to account for this at the (not so) Public Hearing.

However, The Panel was adamant the old media was not going to answer for its reporting before and during Operation Rectangle. At the very start of the Hearing the Chair, Francis Oldham QC, threatened to walk out if that line was going to be taken. Which begs the question "if we are going to ignore the "mistakes" of the past, are we not doomed to repeat them?" It would appear that the Old Media have (like a vast number of abusers) been let off the hook for its past crimes. It was the old "Jersey Way" war cry "let's not dwell on the past, and let's look to the future." So many crimes have been brushed under the carpet with that slogan and it looks like the IJCI Panel have adopted it also which is concerning.

Fellow Team Voice Member RICO SORDA, at the very start of the hearing said words to the effect: "The entire local MSM owe the Victims and Survivors an apology for its reporting during the Child Abuse cover-up." He is of course right. We cannot forget the further abuse Survivors/abusees were subjected to by the Old Media during the Rectangle Era. But, as mentioned above, Francis Oldham QC was having none of it and threatened to walk out (with the Panel) if we attempted to discuss anything that pre-dated the Panel's Report of 2017.

We should also point out that the Old Media, according to the latest SOCIAL SURVEY, only enjoys the confidence of 33% of islanders. It has a mountain to climb in order to win any trust back and by not dealing with its past failings it is difficult to see how this could happen. Bloggers, on the other hand, have earned the trust of Survivors/Abusees and whistleblowers through the years and continue to enjoy that trust. We (unlike to Old Media) can hold our heads high knowing we are on the right side of history and have spoken up for the truth.


Despite the almost impossible, and fruitless task, in holding the Old Media to account at the hearing, the Panel should be congratulated for attempting to get the Old and New Media round the table. There has always been a "them and us" attitude created by the Old Media and, although BBC/ITV didn't have the courage to turn up, we believe some bridges might have been built with those who did turn up and those who didn't have no intention of building bridges. The irony is that BBC and ITV/CTV could have got some much needed credibility just by showing up as Bailiwick Express and JEP did (from me anyway). And of course the Bloggers don't need to gain credibility from those who matter as we already have it.

We are pleased to say that the discussion around the table, at the hearing, was, on the whole, pretty amicable. We had an opportunity (albeit very limited)  to discuss our differences and indeed similarities with the Old Media and it wasn't a completely useless exercise for which we thank the IJCI Panel for getting at least some of the Old and New media together. This is something the Old Media has resisted for years and still resisted by BBC and ITV/CTV.

Below (in an e-mail received from the Panel the night before the hearing) are the eight subjects expected to be discussed in an hour by up to 7 or eight witnesses.

IJCI Panel


We are looking forward to welcoming you to Thursday’s session in St Paul’s at 9.45 am.

Our sessions have been lasting 50-60 minutes. We aim to keep to time as we have a full schedule.

Our focus is on the period 2017-present with a view to identifying what is new and emerging in that period. As with other issues we are reviewing, we are not discussing matters in the period before or during the Inquiry or matters dealt with during the Inquiry. 

In honing down the topics for the session we have drawn on our meetings with over 150 people in the last 10 days, including three more sessions with care experienced young people tonight.

The questions that will help us most are:

.What have you seen that is different in the last two years in services affecting children and families

.Key areas in the last two years for media reporting on child care issues.

.What media campaigns / reporting in the last two years have had an impact?

.The public response through media/social media to the Inquiry report and child care issues
Have there been any barriers to reporting child care issues since July 2017?

.Whether people in Jersey have tended in the last two years to use media rather than official processes to highlight complaints

.What is role of journalists in holding public sector agencies to account?

.Changing the tone of some debate and commentary to encourage more participation
In a climate of global concern about false and manufactured news and commentary, what safeguards are necessary to ensure accurate reporting?

Finally and importantly,
In one of Wednesday morning’s public sessions, we heard very powerful pleas from (name redacted), a Jersey careleaver, cautioning against the media sensationalising complex issues and asking for more reporting of, and pride in, the positive developments in Jersey's child care services. On her behalf we want to ask: how can the media help with this?"(END)

Needless to say hardly any of the subjects were discussed but as mentioned above it wasn't a completely fruitless task and the IJCI Panel should be congratulated for getting the New and (some of) the Old Media round a table and we look forward to building bridges with those (of the Old Media) who look for the same.

We will look to publish the transcript of the Hearing as soon as it becomes available.

In the meantime readers might want to discuss/answer the questions set (above) by the Panel? Or do readers agree the hearing/subjects should have included the Old Media's reporting (or not) during the Operation Rectangle Era?