Wednesday, 3 July 2019

Les Chenes "JUSTICE?"


Senator Sam Mezec (Children's Minister)

On Monday 1st July 2019 the government announced its REDRESS SCHEME for Survivors of the brutal regime suffered during their time at Les Chenes Secure Residential Unit and for those in a Jersey Foster Care Placement.

From the get-go parts (but not all) of the Old Media were (and still are) reporting the Redress Scheme as "Justice" for the Survivors. It would be interesting to learn how many Survivors the Old Media have spoken with who believe what they are(n't) getting is "justice." Certainly the ones I have spoken with see it as the only option available to them. Their abusers are NOT going to face charges so they (Survivors) have to make do (for the most part) with a couple of quid.

After the public announcement at St. Paul's Centre (Monday 1st July) VFC was granted an interview with Children's Minister Senator Sam Mezec. We took away the governments (and parts of the Old Media) agenda as passing this scheme off as "justice." Instead of declaring money (and an apology) is being offered to Survivors wouldn't it have been a better declaration to make that their abusers have been jailed AND the Survivors have been "adequately" compensated?

We asked the Children's Minister questions along those lines. "Why is this all about money and not justice?" "How can a price be put on a childhood/lifetime of misery and torment?" How on earth did the conflicted, and untrusted, Law Offices Department/Attorney General's Office get to be the Administrators of the Redress Scheme? The very people who have failed the Survivors for failing/refusing to prosecute (and allegedly protecting) their abusers. Staggeringly the Children's Minister told us that some Survivors asked for the option to have the Law Offices Department administer the scheme. The Minister, through the Lawyer representing many of the Survivors, says that partly for the simplicity of it and partly for the COST some survivors chose the Law Offices. Really? The Survivors voluntarily chose to make things as simple and cheap for the government without being pushed down that avenue? They weren't told that if we put the administration of the scheme out to tender then that could take a lot more time and your ordeal could drag on, unnecessarily, a lot longer? We asked, alongside the governments apology, shouldn't there be an apology from The Law Offices Department/Attorney General's Office? We know that the AG's Office has some (many) uncomfortable questions to ANSWER.

It is two years to the day that the Independent Jersey Care INQUIRY published its REPORT and RECOMMENDATIONS and one has to ask; "has attitudes towards Child Abuse, and Survivors, changed in any way?" "How is money perceived (by the government and parts of the Old Media) as "justice?" As mentioned above, and in the interview (below), those Survivors I have spoken with have ALL said this is/was never about money, it's always been about justice. It's the government (along with The Law Offices Department) who have made it about money, it is not the choice of all Survivors. Their choice would have been not to have been abused in the first place.



192 comments:

  1. Excellent post hitting all the nails on the head. Minister Mézec's body language is not good. Not exactly a happy man? Boxed into a corner by the COM?

    An interview with Lawyer Collins is now a must though it might not end up clarifying matters.

    One slip of the tongue by the Minister does suggest that the Law Officers' processing cases might not have been the first preference of Lawyer Collins's clients but was reluctantly accepted by them in the face of an alternative construct formulated by the COM/Lawyers' Office.

    You really can't beat a well conducted face to face interview, now can you?

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Very good interview VFC. I can't comment on whether or not the survivors of the awful (and in many cases), unlawful treatment and detention they received at Les Chenes will suffice for them, but, I agree that I am sure most would prefer to see the perpetrators of their abuse brought to book. Money can't buy justice, money can't buy peace of mind and closure. In any event the amounts are in most cases an insult.

    It is to be hoped that they will be offered the free specialist mental health service tailored to their own individual needs as recommended by Alan Collins (JEP 25th May 2019). This would be of more practical help, and, the apology should be a public one in the States Chamber as the previous victims had. I see from the paperwork handed about at the launch the apology would be a written one sent to survivors individually.

    Don't try and hide 'Government of Jersey' and the Law Officers Department. It will mean more if you issue a public apology.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry folks- I did mean to say that I wondered if the compensation offered will suffice for the survivors.

      Delete
  4. Well I never saw that coming did you......?

    "Grave and criminal assault case against lawyer dropped"

    https://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2019/07/03/grave-and-criminal-assault-case-against-lawyer-dropped/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. TAXI FOR STEENSON3 July 2019 at 18:06

      Jersey judicial system eh...

      Delete
    2. To the pub perchance? Now just imagine if that was you accused of a barney at your private address. Would the case not proceed? Gee but they have more brass neck than a thing with a brass neck. F***ing shameless.

      Delete
    3. I am quite sure the lawyer being a Crown Advocate and needed for important hatchet jobs by the Bay-Leaf had absolutely nothing to do with the decision.

      But let's think about this.

      A Crown Advocate has, not for the first time, serious questions to be answered about his behaviour/professionalism and is neither dragged through the court system like a common pleb. Nor given the old heave-ho as a common pleb would be.

      One rule for us. One for them. It is almost enough to make you want to go out and celebrate with a dozen or two sherbets and then refuse to pay your taxi driver because you are special.

      Delete
  5. I do not suppose that anyone will ever be able to add up just how much money the corruption, perversion and ineptitude of previous regimes in Jersey has now cost the taxpayer. Some of the politicians and officials who had responsibility during that era are still waking around masquerading as respectable citizens. If they had any sense of shame they would have changed their names and moved to South America. But I expect that many of them will still be on the "A List" for gatherings of the "great and the good." (and presiding at Lodge meetings no doubt.) It is the Jersey Way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. South America is generally much cleaner politically than Swamp Jersey.

      Delete
  6. Sam Mézec kept saying things like: "that's an important question" …...and then NOT actually answering it!

    That said, Mézec did not do badly in the interview. It is IMO good that he came across uncomfortable and even a bit shifty because this is an non-verbal admission that the situation, the redress scheme and his answers were incomplete and inadequate.

    It would be far more of an insult to survivors and islanders if a minister said they considered this to be adequate, or that financial compensation is a substitute for justice.

    ReplyDelete
  7. No blog on Les Chenes Secure Residential Unit would be complete without a tribute to Simon Bellwood.
    In addition to the brave work he did in his own right (which cost him his career as a professional children's social worker) Simon Bellwood was also one of the people who engaged (the equally/more heroic) Health Minister Syvret in the dysfunction and cover up in Jersey Children's Services

    http://simonbellwood.blogspot.com/2008/04/intro.html

    "....My story will make reference to the following people:
    Joe Kennedy - Manager of Secure and Residential Services (currently suspended following evidence given at the employment tribunal)
    Phil Dennett - Coordinator of the Children's Executive
    Linda Dodds - Child Protection Team Manager
    Tony Le Sueur - Head of the Children's Service
    Marnie Baudains - Directorate Manager of Social Services
    Micheala Clifford - Head of Health and Social Services Human Resources
    Madeleine Davies - Human Resources Business Partner for Education Sport and Culture
    Mario Lundy - Former Assistant Director of Education, Sport and Culture (Now Director)
    Mike Pollard - Chief Executive for Health and Social Services
    Tom McKeon - Former Director of Education, Sport and Culture
    Steven Austin-Vautier - Chief Executive of Home Affairs
    Mick Pinel - Head of Human Resources for Chief Ministers Department
    Bill Ogley - Chief Executive of Chief Ministers Department
    Frank Walker - Chief Minister

    …….

    ReplyDelete
  8. @How and Why at 13:18

    That's some ID Parade of Simon's.

    Many since tried and convicted in the court of public opinion but unfortunately not (yet?) where it counts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, quite some ID Parade. Some readers will recall the eye watering golden handshakes "negotiated" by and for several of the celebs in that cast list. At least one of these cover up merchants was rewarded with nearly half a million!
      Just a couple of these rewards for failure to protect children will exceed the total paid to ALL the survivors of their abuse …...and with gold plated pensions to boot. Indeed, how are some of these people swanning around on the streets and not in prison?

      It is the cast of a mummers farce, with no doubt a few cameo appearances not even listed.

      An interesting player who IS on the list is "Tony Le Sueur [Ex]-Head of the Children's Service"

      Now you would have thought that the a fit for purpose CoI would have squeezed this man through a fine sieve.

      Extra points for any readers who recall how things shook out...…

      Delete
    2. Needless to say the "currently suspended" Joe Kennedy was quietly reinstated once they thought the dust had settled.
      A good number of characters on Simon Bellwood's cast list kept reappearing in positions of control and oversight of children over the intervening decade. Marnie Baudains I particularly recall being promoted to the top position of "independent" [HaHaHa] oversight of children for a period during the "nothing to see here" wasted decade. ......please does anyone know if a final bill to the taxpayer has been agreed for just the two "Family X" children (£238 million!! was a figure under discussion - my recollection is that there were moves to hide the full cost of this incompetence from taxpayers by making it an ongoing yearly payment rather than a lump sum) UPDATE PLEASE, ANYONE
      Losses of this magnitude really are a team effort.

      Re-employing unfit or incompetent people has consequences for the taxpayer as well as the scores of children they fail.

      Our Tony Le Sueur continued to ride the Jersey merry go round and amongst oher things he was involved with CAHMS ...and after a damming scrutiny report got moved sideways [again]
      As a CoI curved ball I should also quote that "He is also a long time friend and colleague of witness 7 and was also his line manager at one time. He claims that witness 7 is innocent, the accusations are all lies."

      But readers will know that Tony Le Sueur is yet more special than that ….

      Delete
    3. So what is so very, very interesting about the CoI and "Tony Le Sueur [Ex]-Head of the Children's Service"?

      I said "... you would have thought that the a fit for purpose CoI would have squeezed this man through a fine sieve."

      The most unhinged conspiracy theorist would be hard pushed to make up what actually happened. -Instead of being "squeezed through a fine sieve", this man and his "partner in crime" Richard Jouault were deployed by the £24 million fake CoI to "sieve" States information before it is even presented to the CoI !!!

      Is there any way the CoI could nave made itself any more conflicted ???

      I think Ex Health Minister Syvret's words are better than mine:
      "So that those not familiar with the Jersey child-abuse cover-ups - and a number of similar symptomatic failings to deal with serious crime which characterise what passes for "public administration" in Jersey - are kept informed, Richard Jouault was one of the most senior and primarily involved civil servants in concealing decades of child-protection failure and covering-up child-abuse in Jersey.

      Jouault and a number of similar colleagues - routinely lied to me as the relevant politician, lied, and deliberately misled by omission.

      The fact that the Jersey Committee of Inquiry agreed to abdicate core evidence-gathering and collation functions to the States of Jersey - and expressly to profoundly conflicted individuals such as Jouault and his similarly conflicted colleague Tony Le Sueur - is one of the main acts by which the CoI destroyed any possibility of ever being able to possess vires in any engagement with me.

      The administrative law case-law on 'bias', 'abdication/fetter', 'structural unfairness', 'HRA-violation', 'procedural unfairness' - is all there - settled - for anyone who cares to look.

      There is no "public inquiry" in Britain in the post-WWII years which has operated on such a jaw-droppingly ultra vires basis as the Jersey CoI. Sadly, I get the strong impression of the crew involved, they're so incompetent - and so out of their depth - they don't know that.

      Stuart Syvret " [September 2015]

      Delete
    4. Mr Syvret has made many historic observations in the unfolding course of The Jersey Situation. All recorded in perpetuity thanks to the happy historic accident of IT and the internet. The following was always going to prove particularly insurmountable for the opponents of the rule of law as an historic statement of fact, 'There is no "public inquiry" in Britain in the post-WWII years which has operated on such a jaw-droppingly ultra vires basis as the Jersey CoI. Sadly, I get the strong impression of the crew involved, they're so incompetent - and so out of their depth - they don't know that.'

      Wise words indeed. The 'crew' involved were so incompetent and out of their depth, and devoid of imagination, they never considered the possibility of prison sentences. So let me add to the facts. A few of the Jersey fellows, or certainly their protectors who've received the questionably used public funds involved, need to be seriously thinking about obtaining good legal advice and considering strategies which involve turning-Queens-evidence (note for our USA readers, a form of de facto plea-bargaining).

      Mr Syvret has also written of how the conduct of what he terms 'the Jersey mafia' has come to be a 'clear and present existential threat to the reputation and standing of the British state.' Given his record of being right, may I suggest it would be unwise to bet against him.

      Delete
  9. It is like getting blood out of a stone. As ever this is too little too late.
    Does any one else see the comi-tragic aspect to the M for C's words:
    ".....therapeutic support which hasn't previously been offered, which now will be offered ….." WTF ?

    Over 12years since Simon Bellwood highlighted to the authorities the abusive (and in fact illegal) treatment of children at Les Chenes (for which he was sacked) but also a whole 2 years of "Jersey putting children first" ...or whatever the glib hogwash was in the aftermath of the report by the £24,000,000 fake CoI

    WT[flying]F ?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Over here within our chambers coffee room we have been asking ourselves if this rather young minister really appreciates the gravity of the situation in which he has now inadvertantly immersed himself. The Jersey situation is dire young man. This cannot be over-stressed. To put it bluntly it is 11.59 for the criminal factions who run your island. The train is a-coming round the final bend.

    ReplyDelete
  11. On your previous blog discussion was had on whether there was any sexual abuse at Les Chenes Secure Residential Unit. No conclusion was reached.

    Sad experience has revealed it would be uncommon (exceptional even) for for child sex abuse not to occur in a Jersey "care" institution.

    Whilst far from conclusive this would throw some light on the culture and pre-historic management at Les Chenes:

    http://simonbellwood.blogspot.com/2008/04/stuart-syvret-my-opinion.html

    "4. In my position of Centre Manager, I have been informed of numerous incidences of malpractice, including SEXUAL harassment and bullying, which are alleged to have occurred since Mr Kennedy has been employed by the Children’s Executive. It has been suggested on a number of occasions that members of staff have felt unable to formally raise these concerns about Mr Kennedy for fear of reprisal. As their manager, I feel I have a duty to advocate for them and I hope that this formal complaints process will offer them protection and enable them to express their concerns in confidence."
    [Simon Bellwood 1 January 2007]

    So if adult staff were not safe from sexual harassment …...what chance did the incarcerated (or indeed solitary-confined) kids have?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Simon Bellwood's correspondence with Health Minister Syvret 3, 2 and 1 (in reverse order)

      http://simonbellwood.blogspot.com/2008_04_23_archive.html

      Delete
  12. Teflon Tony Le Sueur was manager of Chidren Service i.e. child protection for several years approx 2005 to 2009, yet he was not a qualified social worker and had no experience of front line child protection work, His background given during the IJCI was youth service ,residential child care worker (at a time when Heathfield was not being run well and the manager had been allowed to "leave" because of inappropriate behavior, this also given in evidence to IJCI and a matter of public record.He was then appointed manager of Adoption and Fostering before becoming manager of Children Service. The question is How can someone who is unqualified and inexperienced in child protection make decisions regarding children's welfare and safety,Who appointed him? If we look at the testimony of Detective Inspector (not sure of rank) Alison Fossey she went to see him and Marnie Baudins with serious concerns regarding certain cases which had been badly handled, children were at risk and cases not managed professionally,(available on IJCI transcripts and documents) what was their response, flannel and did nothing to change things ,this was in 2006.long before the inquiry and even before Syvret. Any decent manager receiving such serious criticism of their department would have attempted to take things in hand. As we all know there were many reports over the years yet nothing changed.(see the scrutiny report into the co-ordination of services for vulnerable children to see the concerns of other professionals regarding children service) ,what happened? absolutely nothing .Teflon Tony was finally moved to implement the Williamson report say no more what an unmitigated disaster that was.I absolutely support survivors receiving compensation but the cost to the tax payer is enormous yet these clowns are walking around with fat pension pots.
    I can also confirm with a previous poster that he was a close friend of witness seven and also his line manager and he was saying that 7 was innocent and that survivors were either" misremembering" or lying in order to get the money.

    ReplyDelete
  13. A discussion on how to prevent paedophiles abusing children rather than waiting until they have.

    With Tom Gruchy, Alan Collins (Lawyer for Survivors), Jill Gracia (former Secretary for Jersey Care Leavers Association) and VFC. Published by Tom Gruch HERE.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Any news on the supposed return of Trev Pitman to blogging? His return seems to have been rumoured almost as long as the Second Coming. For the record I am one of those would welcome it. Our choice of new media as you call it is pretty reduced these days. Good interview with Mezec. Can't help feeling that he could and should have said a whole lot more in answer to your questions though.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Do we actually have an Assistant Childrens minister? I only ask because it only ever seems to be Sam Mezec in the firing line.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Sadly as a victim I said my bit to help prevent abuse in the future I thought I could cope and when asked if I wanted compensation said no, but having little help from psychology they left me wait two years I am in a mess the past 50 plus years have left me with PTSD unable to do a full days work it’s been hell yes the money would help but I am not entitled to any! Also if the abuser has money should that not be given to the victims! What a mess abuse is so damaging and the cut off times are way too short god help our kids.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Hi I was at les chene for some years, I would like to start by pointing out that I have CPTSD, the medication for which costs me just over £200 per month out of my £300 month benefits,the medical payment from the redress scheme (if I am ohhh so lucky to get it) would cover about a years worth,it is not covered by the NHS, it is also of note im 41 and was diagnosed at 19 with PTSD which was kept from me and my medical practitioners for the entire duration and there for has remained untreated. only received my medical records last week(which are no way complete these are just psych records)which made me aware of this.The statement of "how dose one put a price on this kind of abuse , you cant " well this a load of rubbish...1 you paid people to do it and they earn more in 1-2 years of abusing us 30 years ago as to what is being offered to us for a life time of suffering 2 the professionals involved lawyers, senators,judges care inquiry workers all make more in 1-2 years as well than the entire amount offered to us , in short child abuse is worth a pretty penny to these people. 3 the police/courts/legal/system are ridicules in there refusing to arrest the people who did this nor to stop them working with children, this is in short criminal( as it endangers other children and not just who have already suffered) this I might add is the priority and not money!!!! 4 how many times must this happen before the people themselves actually do something? to go though this and have any belief in humanity is destroyed!! 5 the statement that they are prepared to pay since 1946-2005 is saying that for 59 years this has gone on with abatement...are honestly believing them when they say "ahhh but its different now" 6 dont forget we lost our secondary educations as well, I have revisited education through out my life but I become triggered and panicked when in an educational setting due to it being a place of trauma, nor has home tutoring or self tutoring helped 7 i have been out of work for 11 years, no not on benefits just psyched off, I have been street homeless for another 3 ...I am not entitled to a quality of life a working person is due to no fault of my own. 8 why are we not allowed to sue those who did this to us? is this not a normal legal practice? once again telling us we are not the same as others as "normal people" 9, the evidence is stupidly obvious!! at the independent care inquiry the on site nurse stated of her own free will " I was employed with no medical training what so ever" this is basic fraud, as to why this particular person was employed is quite obvious, the police however seem unable to work this out even when you tell them verbatim!!! 10 we are not allowed to use the legal frame work of England ...so we are not really UK citizens...nor that of the European courts of human rights.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Chatting about this upcoming march to celebrate women getting the vote/women in politics with my work colleague. Hope this won't be just a PR stunt for the usual bunch of Establishment lobby-fodder?

    I would say that I would like to see some of the real female heroes at this; women who have really shown that we aren't just meant to be tokens to make the men feel alright about themselves.

    But who is there? Most of those who became prominent in the war era are sadly gone. So now?

    Chris Wakeham for one. A true Jersey legend even if she wasn't born here. Must in her 90s now I would imagine but well worth a statue never mind a march.

    As for modern times things get even more difficult. We might have more of us women in the States now but the only one who really rocked the boat and made a difference for me was Shona Pitman. Fearless. But who knows where she is now having been so appallingly treated?

    So if it is just going to be a case of giving a platform to Establishment noddies like Moore, Pinel and Vallois think I will stay home and watch my husband do the dishes while I put my feet up with a drink.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mrs Wakeham was as you say a wonderful and tenacious woman. That she never became a States Member was a huge loss to the island. Likewise the late Stella Perkins. After that I have to concede that you are right. Shona Pitman and probably Wendy Kinnard, particularly in her latter days, are the only two who appeared capable of keeping their principles and going toe to toe with the middle-aged bully boys who have always run Jersey politics. What a sorry thought in these days when women are meant to be equal.

      Delete
    2. Has there ever been a credible Minister for Home Affairs since Wendy Kennard?

      Delete
    3. Polo.

      One would say "no" in answer to your question.

      The HA Minister after Wendy Kinnard was Andrew Lewis who was found (by the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry) to be a LIAR.

      The one after him was Ian Le Marquand was a toilet DWELLER.

      The one after him, Kristina Moore, who is a good little girl who does as she is told by the establishMENt and refused to publish the former police Chief's interim defence case alongside the prosecution case on the States WEBSITE. No doubt she will be portraying herself as a "strong woman" at next week's events.

      The next (and current) one is Len Norman who is paid (from the neck down) to re-establish THE JERSEY WAY.

      What a sorry bunch of non-credible Home Affairs Ministers we have had since the departure of a truly strong woman Wendy Kinnard.

      Delete
    4. You are forgetting the 'good little girl' HA Minister Moore simply chuckling and saying 'but this is a woman we all know!' when the brave, non-conpiracy theorist Deputy Mike Higgins asked questions about the Jersey police refusing to hand over details of the driver who had run down the above mentioned Deputy Shona Pitman on a zebra crossing. I do believe that you even did a blog on that little saga? But Polo's suggestion is correct - we have not had a single credible HA Minister since Kinnard and probably not had one before her either. Le Marquand was as someone once said a political Mr Bean.

      Delete
    5. That was another shameful episode in the workings of The Jersey Way.

      Delete
    6. You could likely make a whole blog simply by providing links, almost as Exhibit A, Exhibit B etc, to the multitude of appalling examples you have provided your world-wide readership with over the years.

      All so different. But all being driven by the same motive: control of power.

      That you would need to add some new letters to our alphabet would be a certainty. Your blog will probably become a key historical document in itself in a 100 years time.

      Delete
  19. A reminder of the (what looks to be) dishonesty of Ian Le MARQUAND.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Le Marquand was a weak dishonest gobshite.

    These are his entries in my rogues gallery from way back.

    Link

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A "weak dishonest gobshite"? Please do get off the fence Polo and stop mincing your words. LOL!

      Delete
  21. "Jeffrey Epstein Arrested! Mike Cernovich and Stefan Molyneux"
    www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtiV0VJsc9c

    The rest of the sewer dwellers will be shitting themselves
    Where will this lead? The Clintons? The Duke of York? …

    ReplyDelete
  22. why is it to victims have posted,and directly after the topic was moved to something unrelated? it would seem strange if these tactics hadn't been used before.......the Jersey way.

    ReplyDelete

  23. Jack Maguire of the JEP is trying to get in touch with you.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. VFC what are you getting involved with the JEPaedo for?

      Delete
    2. I am sure the Rag know where to find Jersey's finest New media mogul?

      Delete
  24. Look out for some more Tommy Takedown fake news from the disgraced Panorama show tomorrow night. Here they will be peddling the right-wing myth that Labour as a party is full of anti-semites.

    Look out particularly for the worm the party got rid of because he failed to action complaints about such matters, which will obviously arise in all big organisations, quickly enough. Or didn't act at all. Now is individual is trying to promote himself as one of the good guys.

    How very strange that toeing the line of failing to report all the many Jewish individuals and groups who have spoken out in support of Labour, and the real target of all these smears Jeremy Corbyn, the UK media has not been reporting the support for the party from legendary Jewish political campaigner Noam Chomsky.

    Is it really any wonder why so many people are abandoning 'mainstream media' sources and turning to blogs like this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm sure your question was a rhetorical one? But the answer anyway is NO! It is not. Corbyn for all of his real or fabricated faults has a record of challenging racism that not a single soul in Westminster can match. He also clearly has principles and sticks to them. That type of thing will never go down well with neo-liberal newspapers, tax dodging business people and the City of London generally.

      Delete
    2. That's why they are terrified of him. It is the same reason your progressives get attacked, smeared and generally misrepresented in Jersey. The Jersey Way probably exists in varying forms everywhere.

      Delete
  25. £24 million embezzlement of public funds.

    It is an unambiguous criminal act for any individual or organisation (formal or otherwise) based in the UK to either bribe, offer to bribe, or to receive a bribe. This is applies to inchoate acts and omissions which take place partly or wholly in other jurisdictions. In such cases a UK criminal offence is still committed.

    These are testing times for the UK Crown Prosecution Service, and the Director of Public Prosecutions. On the basis of past performance (e.g. repeatedly failing to prosecute Cyril Smith) we have to doubt that UK mafia influence will be overcome in these cases. After all, a senior former UK DPP officer was the private businessman the Jersey establishment, via a fraudulent 'public-inquiry', paid for a whitewash 'clean bill of health' for the Jersey prosecution system decisions. An assertion which cannot be other than false, even on the basis of already known, established public knowledge and uncontroversial settled case-law.

    There are many types and examples of acts and omissions and courses of conduct committed in the UK, which are linked to events on Jersey, such as involvement in the cover-up of whole-sail corruption, rape and child-abuse. All such acts and omissions are criminal offences under UK law.

    It's going to be a slow process, obviously, but the task of ultimately compelling the UK authorities to bring these evidenced UK based criminals to justice is underway. In this era, the ultimate success of this battle against corruption is not in doubt. There is so much evidence, including evidence for involvement by UK public authorities at the highest level.

    Then, the final siege by the forces of modernity and the rule-of-law will be mounted against the Jersey mob.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sure the Jersey public inquiry was always going to be corrupt. But the amazing thing was how open they were about it. It's perhaps not so surprising really that they should have chosen to 'hide in plain sight'. After all, it 'worked' for Jimmy Savile. The thing that gets me about your public inquiry is not so much the corruption which was to be expected I guess, but instead the incompetence. The mistake the powers-that-be made was to let people into shaping and running the process who were always going to be way too emotional. A set of individuals who are obsessed in their hatred and fear of core whistle-blower Stuart Syvret. Clearly, your public inquiry, even if being run in bad faith, had only one job of competence. Cool, strategic bridge-building, rapprochement and reconciliation. That mission statement would have been the key consideration of any competent (even if cynical) inquiry team. The 'peaceful' as it were, 'negotiation' of the 'settlement' of hostilities. Sure, of course, there was always going to be some 'collateral damage'. You don't get as rampantly corrupt, subversive of democracy even, as your Jersey boys did, and not expect to pay a price for it. But a competent process could very well have engineered a reconciliation process. An outcome which would have been vastly advantageous for Jersey, its reputation, and its main industry. Instead of that outcome, a handful of frankly manky and conflicted individuals were enabled to subvert the whole process into a 'let's-marginalize-intimidate-exclude-humiliate-and disempower-Stuart-Syvret' exercise. The consequences of that have been predictably catastrophic. Added on to all the pre-existing Jersey corruptions, you now have an openly fraudulent public inquiry to defend for ever more. An exercise which has served only to show that governance on Jersey is in truth so decadent and stagnant, as your critics have always stated, that the place can't even run a public inquiry with good faith and competence.

      Delete
    2. Good observations. However I detect a lack of sophistication, and a failure to recognise basic mafia methodology when you see it.

      Always when massaging & manipulating the conduct of public authorities mafia business always ensures there's just a little, a really small, 'hook' hidden somewhere in the bait. Just that tiny bit of gain, of self-advantage to tempt, then you have them.

      Just one little nibble is all it takes. Maybe some very vague 'guidance' as to what constitutes a legitimate work expense, you take the 'benefit of a few $100, maybe take private charted flights to your place of 'work', say, Jersey for example, just engage in one little bit of a fiddle, and then they have you.

      Then, before you know where you are, you have gone to step 2, step 3, step 4, step 5, and suddenly you find yourself committed to the subversion of procedures, and what is the concealment of big money gangsters, sabotage by foreign governments, anti-democratic subversion, murderers, rapists, child-abusers.

      And if you turn aside now, your gangster colleagues 'own' you, and will take their vengeance.

      This is all playbook 1. Rudimentary, basic stuff. Jersey and its 'business advantages' has imploded itself. Not in fact surprising given the hick-town inadequacy and self-perpetuating nature of your local gangster public officials.

      Delete
    3. I cannot see anything corrupt about the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry and I wish people would get behind those who are trying to better this Island for its children and stop putting them down all the time.

      Delete
    4. Oh VFC, we do love the occasional Paedo-Troll comment you let out of it's urine drenched cage.

      This Paedo-Trolling has been an omnipresent element of the Jersey landscape since Health Minister Syvret (and then the Police) revealed the abuse and dysfunction in Jersey's Children's Services over a decade ago in 2008

      Genuine posters would object to being called a "Paedo-Troll". To be fair, there may be the odd gullible retard who through ignorance or honest lack of mental capacity, still accepts the Mafia narrative on the decades of covered up child abuse in Jersey's orphanages and other establishments.

      To demonstrate that he is indeed not a "Paedo-Troll" 09:20 AGAIN is offered the opportunity to explain how a £23 million CoI was "not corrupt" or in any way FIT FOR PURPOSE when it constructively excluded the then actual Health Minister ….and filed to find any cover up in the said decades of covered up child abuse.

      Do please explain yourself @09:20 and explain how supporting the cover-up that is the oxymoronic "Independent Jersey Care Inquiry" …..is going to help children?

      Delete
    5. @9:20 It must be said that "Paedo-Trolling" was a temporarily successful part of the establishments years of cover up and minimisation after 2008 and it was utterly relentless on the JEP website …...aka the JEPeado Troll Zoo

      With everything which has emerged and the £238million "family X" claim the Paedo-Trolling looks as counter productive and sick as it always was.

      Please explain how a fake CoI is going to "better this Island for its children"

      Delete
    6. I am not a PAEDO-TROLL you sicko.
      I was at HDLG and I gave evidence to the Independent Care Inquiry which something the former Health Minister never did.
      But before I lose it completely, FUCK YOU AND FUCK THIS BLOG.

      Delete
    7. Really @10:20? It would not be the first time Jersey's troll types have pretended to be survivors of the abuse they seek to defend.
      Once you have furnished the blog administrator (in absolute confidence obviously) with evidence of your claim I will retract my suggestion that your opinion is as fake as the CoI, and unreservedly apologise.

      If you are a genuine survivor of Jersey's decades of abuse it is possible that you are grateful for any straw of comfort the establishment throws you -such as the fake CoI (money well spent?).
      You are obviously entitled to your opinion ….however it is unlikely that I or others will change their mind on the CoI until you explain how the £23 million CoI was "not corrupt" or in any way "FIT FOR PURPOSE" …..and/or explain how a fake CoI is going to "better this Island for its children".

      The floor is yours ……..

      Delete
  26. Ooops......Lots of arguing this morning.....
    .....As an idea could VFC direct the attacks against the CoI to Senator Mezec for his thoughts and comments because nobody else can answer them and we appear to be going around in circles again. ;-/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL @11:11 ….it is a bit disingenuous to say that we "going around in circles again". It is more accurate to describe it as the repetition of the same dead-end playbook. Let me explain:

      START
      1. Defence of the £23m Fake CoI ("Independent Jersey Care Inquiry") as being somehow adequate, non-corrupt or fit for purpose or the assertion that this Fake CoI is somehow "the best thing for children"

      2. Chalange to back up 1's claim that the CoI was "fit for purpose" either in it's conduct (e.g. the constructive exclusion of the then actual Health Minister) or it's core conclusions that there was "no evidence" of a cover-up or of failure to adequately prosecute establishment abusers.

      3. Abject failure by 1 to provide even the most basic explanation or evidence of fitness for purpose of the CoI requested by 2.
      …..an abject failure only exceeded by the failure of the CoI itself !!!

      END

      To be accurately described as the "circle" you suggest, stage "3" would have to credibly deliver us back to Stage "1" .It does *not* ….and is therefore a dead end .....not a circle.
      ….a dead-end playbook of a vacuous and failed narrative endlessly repeated by the establishment and it's trolls in preference to providing the simplest explanation or credible evidence.
      There are variations on the theme or course …..extra stages of repetition, squealing, or troll-grunting culminating either in silence over the simple but still unanswered requests, or in an attempt to divert or change the subject …..as in your comment @11:11 ????….

      .....I think it would be helpful asses the quality of your diversion @11:11
      ;-/ LOL

      Delete
    2. So let's look at the quality of the diversionary comment @11:11 ………"...As an idea could VFC direct the attacks against the CoI to Senator Mezec for his thoughts and comments because nobody else can answer them …."

      It takes something of a sense of humour to suggest that the boy-Mezec is the only person who has the answers to the valid concerns and questions about the bizarre conduct and outcome of the CoI

      It would be good TV to see Sam Mezec squirm (even more than in the this blog video) while he again FAILS to answer VFC's questions but even that would get dull after a while. Lets face it that even if the boy-Mezec had adequate and honest answers he would not be able give them because as Children's Minister the CoM now have him on the leash of "collective responsibility"

      We know the answer. We have worked it out for ourselves or had it variously spelled out to us by no less than the actual Health Minister (who was constructively excluded the fake CoI). The Police Chief, the Deputy Police Chief and various other informed commentators including qualified lawyers:

      The Coi was a FAKE and will do little to change anything or protect Jersey's citizens or children

      QED

      Delete
    3. "The Coi was a FAKE and will do little to change anything or protect Jersey's citizens or children"

      No that is only your opinion and judging by the way the CoI findings have been taken forward it's got little relevance.

      Delete
    4. No poppet, it NOT "only your[my] opinion" it is the then Health Minister The Police Chief, the Deputy Police Chief and various other informed commentators including qualified lawyers.

      You "around in circles" Paedo Trolls are hilarious. Are you not still claiming to be a survivor?

      Let's sample one of these qualified lawyer's opinions:
      "..........
      123.0 In no way do I believe that anything has changed or will change; all of the harm will be perpetrated again one way or another as we as an Island have been abandoned by its monarch and a feudal power structure which favours abusers.

      124.0 (874, 7) Lundy, (737) et al and for that matter both Bailhache brothers remain at large in the community.

      125.0 I confirm that I am willing to give oral evidence to this Inquiry if required to do so, but for my own wellbeing I would rather not.

      Statement of Truth
      I believe the facts stated in this witness statement are true.

      Signed: Philip Sinel."

      ……………...

      The previous 122 paragraphs of Advocate Philip Sinel's statement can be read at:

      http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.co.uk/2017/03/jersey-child-abuse-committee-of-inquiry.html

      The good Advocate's wording is better than mine but confirms my words that "The Coi was a FAKE and will do little to change anything or protect Jersey's citizens or children"

      I apologise if my words were too tame in comparison to the facts and the abuse.

      Delete
    5. Or if that is not enough for you @14:31 you could try the opinions of actual politicians who were instrumental in getting the CoI setup only to watch it become a mummers farce before their eyes:

      http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/jersey-child-abuse-committee-of-inquiry.html
      "Jersey Child Abuse Committee of Inquiry A Fake, Partial, Incompetent?"

      Extract in Ex States Member Daniel Wimberley's words:

      "I describe the actions which have dashed my faith in you in detail in Appendix 1 but in summary:
      i) you have limited the scope of the abuse to be covered by your inquiry;
      ii) you have excluded victims from coming forward by putting out the message that the inquiry is not for them. This is an astonishing outcome for an inquiry into child abuse and is inexcusable.
      iii) in limiting the scope of the inquiry you have set aside the clearly expressed wishes of the States
      iv) in limiting the scope of the inquiry you have breached your own Terms of Reference (TOR)
      v) you have failed to consult people about the TOR as requested by the States;
      vi) you have failed to consult people on the procedures to be followed at the inquiry, as requested by the States;
      vii) You have maintained that the TOR could not be changed, when this is patently untrue.
      viii) you have undermined your relationship with stakeholders by the way you have treated them"

      Delete
  27. Whoever keeps on writing these angry posts about the CoI should be telling us what they intend to do next because the horse bolted 2 years ago.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No poppet (AKA Paedo-Troll?) the horse did not "bolt 2 years ago", it they bolted in 2009 when the child abuse investigation was derailed and all the priority suspects (including the delightful Mr K and not forgetting his wife) were let go by the lay officers decision not to prosecute.
      Decades of child abuse but no perpetrators to speak of …...Jersey's first confirmed miracle??

      Delete
  28. This comment is on the money. 'The mistake the powers-that-be made was to let people into shaping and running the process who were always going to be way too emotional. A set of individuals who are obsessed in their hatred and fear of core whistle-blower Stuart Syvret.' The Jersey establishment and its allies in London have lost basic competence and are in a state of anarchy in which they've doomed themselves to always be firefighting. It doesn't take an expert in these matters to see that what was 'needed'(from a 'professional' point of view, one understands) was a cool, dispassionate assessment of what the governance issues facing the Jersey arrangements were, the minimum steps required to address and neutralise those core issues, the unavoidable 'price' (in terms of terminated careers) which had to be paid, and how events during and especially after the public inquiry needed to be managed. I use the word 'managed' in the professional sense of envisaging the required events, then helping those events to come into existence. All of the foregoing absolutely required cool, dispassionate, detached assessment, and delivery, by non-invested professionals. Instead, what happened?!?! As very helpfully explained in early comments under this very posting, you placed the entire 'management' and 'filtration' of all Jersey government evidence in the hands of two senior civil servants directly involved in the history of child-abuse concealment, and who are actual friends and defenders of known, multi-victim child-abusers such as 'Mr K!!!!!!!

    I mean, really.

    And now you wonder why your public inquiry has zero credibility!!!! Dear oh dear oh dear. This is not hyperbole because I've given the matter long and curious thought and attempted to identify competitor examples of such, pardon my French, mind-fucking incompetence by public authorities in response to a scandal. I genuinely cannot think of a similar case in Britain. And understand the gravity of that comparison. There have been some shocking failures of governance, even the rule of law, and resultant extended cover-ups in Britain over the decades. But name one in which the authorities placed at the heart of running the consequent inquiries, directly conflicted parties? You may search, you will draw a blank. There's never been another public authority response in Britain as obviously, well, crap and nonsensical as this Jersey 'public inquiry'.

    It IS that bad. Record-breaking, overt, ultra vires, non-defensible, undisguised, unparalleled dumbfuckery.

    I just can't get my head around how these people ever imagined this was going to stand-up?! The enemies of the Jersey/London establishment must have jumped for joy when they heard how your public inquiry was going to run. Seriously, I mean lept out of their chairs, punching the air, and cheering "YES!!!"

    The child-protection campaigners would have been preparing themselves for a kind of cerebral chess-match of move and counter-move as the public inquiry unfolded, a difficult process in which they had to compete with the 'narrative' of your government, and to counter the spin-doctors. Instead they were saved all that unequal struggle by the self-immolation of your public inquiry, like “Err, yeah, that’s cool, lets place the inquiry in a non-neutral venue, lets refuse to give the key whistle-blower legal representation, and just to make sure, let’s place two of the most conflicted civil-servants we’re supposed to be inquiring into, in charge of evidence collation. What could go wrong?”

    I mean, here you sit, 12 years and £100s millions later, in July 2019, with nothing more 'advantageous' on your hands than a scandal which is qualitatively and quantitatively worse than the Watergate cover-up, and a situation which is only going to evolve in one direction.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We've heard all this many times but what do you intend to do?
      CTV tonight talking about the end of the 'Jersey Way' whilst you say the Inquiry was a waste of money. Well aren't you happy to hear the work of the Inquiry is addressing the 'Jersey Way', because I sure am?

      Delete
    2. @18:31 I can't complete with the hilarity of Ex Health Minister Syvret's post below but there is entertainment to be had. …...actually Jersey taxpayers fail to see the funny side of a £23,000,000 fake CoI and the tragically unfunny £238,000,000 "family X" claim resulting from the post 2009 period while were being reassured that it was all conspiracy theory and everything in Jersey is fine (now that part DOES "appear to be going around in circles", Mr Paedo Troll)
      Sigh!

      "what do you intend to do" [overseas lawyer at16:28] -not being a Jersey taxpayer he will get a repeat order of popcorn on Deliveroo and enjoy the comedy of errors as the saga unfolds and then unravels -he is in no hurry I expect.

      "CTV tonight talking …. blah blah …………" would this be the same CTV who's founding director, Wilfred Krichefski, was regular visitor to Jersey's HDLG orphanage where he liked to anally rape young boys?

      Wilfred Krichefski also had political control of Jersey's Police -how convenient for him

      More dark humour anyone?

      Delete
    3. Do CTV still have that award up in their reception that they got for trashing the child abuse investigation?

      Delete
  29. This is great insight: -

    "The enemies of the Jersey/London establishment must have jumped for joy when they heard how your public inquiry was going to run. Seriously, I mean lept out of their chairs, punching the air, and cheering "YES!!!""

    I confess that was pretty much literally my reaction.

    Even if we weren't all on the powerless side in the political-economy of child-abuse, we couldn't have wished greater stupidity by the oligarchy, even if it had been us with the ability to spend the resources involved.

    Jeez, the capacity of these people to f*ck-up is just remarkable. Really, its almost like there were people working on the "inside" of the establishment, secretly on the side of the good guys, and were sabotaging the capacity of the mafia to deal with the situation effectively, by making ever more ridiculous suggestions to them. Like, "oh, how about this? We enable deeply contentious, culpable witnesses to appear under not one, not two, but three different identities?"

    "Hey, yeah, that's such a good idea."

    You can imagine our putative secret agents down the pub after that group strategic meeting: -

    Agent 1: "See, I told you they'd swallow it. That's £50 you owe me."

    Agent 2: "Yeah, I should have known better than to take the bet after they accepted my suggestion that they locate the inquiry in the building of The Ogier Group."

    Agent 1: "Don't be hard on yourself, remember, I never believed they'd agree to limit what should be weeks of testimony by key witnesses, to a few hours each, but they did."

    Agent 2: "Well, in fairness, we thought the depth of the idiocy of these people had been plumbed when they accepted our suggestion that they try and run the first ever public inquiry which banned cross-examination."

    Agent 1: "hah hah, yeah, that was classic. I remember the expression your face as their eyes lit up in agreement. I thought you were going to choke!"

    Agent 2: "I nearly did, man! I mean, who the f*ck could have imagined anyone could take such a mad suggestion seriously?"

    Agent 1: "Hey, how about this, we suggest they duck out of the obviously problematic parts of their public-inquiry duties by instead paying private-sector businessmen for their opinion instead? You know, they could just phone-it-in?”

    Agent 2: "hah, hah, hah! Hey, you know, these people are such twots they might well just buy that. Lets give it a try! Ha ha."

    [After a couple of hours of claret & shorts, on expenses, naturally]

    Agent 1: "What about this; we suggest to them they agree to having all of the evidence filtered and collated by two of the most conflicted civil-servants possible!"

    Agent 2, *spraying Chivas Regal over the restaurant sweet-trolley*: Hah, hah, hah, your going to f*cking kill me at this rate! But, you know what! These fools might even do that!"

    Agent 1:"hah, hah, hah, hah hah! They just might!"

    Agent 2: "hah, hah, OK, well, how about this then, put your expense account where your mouth is, let's suggest to them they can forget about the ECHR, and instead refuse to give legal representation to the main whistle-blower!?"

    Agent 1: "Come on. Now you're just taking the piss."

    It had to be something like that.

    Stuart Syvret

    Investigative journalist, historian, international anti-mafia activist.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To win a 23 Million pound "go directly to jail card" Please post your suggestions for the identies of the two agents in question to:

      "You should have seen this coming competition"
      The Bailiffs chambers
      Royal Square
      St Helier
      JE1 1BA

      Competition closes when all disbelivers have been dealt with. Names and addresses of winners (irrespecrtive of DP issues) can be obtained by submitting a large brown envelope of cash to...........

      Delete
  30. Jack Maguire wants your story.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Any more news on Big Trev's Blog?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The latest date discussed is for the 28th of this month I believe.

      Delete
  32. That's not too far away then. Waited best part of 5 years I would imagine so what is two weeks? Be interesting to see what his approach is from outside of the Jersey political arena. I wouldn't be surprised if he adopts a global political angle. Not exactly anything going on here that wasn't an issue in 2014 is there? Jersey, the place where nothing changes, at least from a positive perspective.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Mention of former Deputy Trevor Pitman leads me to note that his wife and fellow Deputy Shona was not in the media's rather naff photo of still living female Jersey politicians.

    Wonder if she wasn't invited by our Establishment as they seek to airbrush the tenacious pair out of history? Or did she tell them where to go?

    Don't think I registered former Deputy De Souza there either? Anyone know different?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah! Ah! Aaaahhhhh!14 July 2019 at 13:17

      Couldn't say. But I did notice that barmy former Deputy of my district St Brelade No. 1 who went on to star as the loopy Ann in Little Britain was there gurning like a mad old Cheshire cat. Some people will do anything for publicity I suppose?

      Delete
    2. What was interesting about last week's gathering of current and former female Jersey politicians is that it included Iris Le Feuvre, who gave a lucid and coherent interview to ITV Channel TV (or BBC Jersey) where she expressed how proud she was of the work she did at the education department.

      The same woman who gave no evidence to the child abuse inquiry on the grounds of capacity due to advancing years, if I recall correctly? Can someone conform that is the reason why she did not give evidence?

      Delete
    3. I think Debbie De Sousa lives in Portugal now

      Delete
  34. It's good to know big Ian is still blogging and I hope he picks up on the Jersey stuff again. Here is a link to his blog site https://therightofreply.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Two of the Jersey greats.

      Delete
  35. DOUBLE ZERO BASIL15 July 2019 at 13:31

    Can I just say that this blog is abssolutely brilliant. Long may you keep publishing the truth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jon 'Johnny' H15 July 2019 at 20:13

      You are right there Double 0. I always come here first for the truth. Not that I could afford the JEPravda and the likes anyyway until my petty debts are wiped out.

      Delete
  36. Surprised Deputy Mike Higgins disagrees with mandatory sentences for paedophiles and where were most of Reform Jersey today? I saw Rob Ward speaking but the rest had disappeared.
    Come on Sam Mezec, you said you put Children 1st.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jokin right?

      Delete
    2. Over 5,000 people want 3 year mandatory sentences as that is what it says on the Petition.

      Delete
    3. 5.000? Which means the vast majority, rightly ot wrongly, all disagree or sadly don't care either way?

      Delete
  37. Maybe he disagrees with it because it's not a sensible idea and won't do anything to actually help children.

    ReplyDelete
  38. While we are at it it should also be mandatory that those evidenced to have bullied abused children in to silence should be barred from sitting as Jurats or as any court official for life.

    Then how about Attorney Generals proven to have fabricated excellent supervisory records for their chums facing multiple abuse allegations getting a mandatory 20 years inside?

    From here we could probably move on to give similar mandatory punishment to AGs-come-Baliffs who tell Heads of Education that they won't prosecute so it is up to the department to just sack?

    Only in Jersey boys and girls!

    ReplyDelete
  39. Good for Higgins for not being bullied. I might not agree with him but heartily sick of poodle politicians.

    ReplyDelete
  40. When we have built the £7 billion tunnel (or maybe just a fiver, honest) to France can we build a new ALCATRAZ island?

    ReplyDelete
  41. Flurry of comments suggest everyone is coming home for tea. So I will just add that I agree with Higgins and others too obviously on this issue. Doesn't mean I am not supportive though before the trolling attacks starts.

    ReplyDelete
  42. So I take it that those who agree with Deputy Higgins never signed the petition then.

    ReplyDelete
  43. As Higgins' record shows as the only current member to always stand up for the victims he cares deeply. No ducking down below the ramparts for him. So what this 'non-support' for the proposition simply means is that he doesn't happen to think that it is the right move. Possibly he is wrong. Possibly he is right. What matters to me is that for all of his consistent support for us over the years when even some of the other good guys have gone missing I will accept his view without quibble. Everyone else should, in my humble, do the same.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Heard it all now. A 7 billion pound tunnel to France! Wonder when someone will talk about a glass covering over Plemont as an all year round under cover beach resort?

    ReplyDelete
  45. If Blairite, pro-austerity, hate the working class, closet Tory Baroness Hayter (very apt name) had beem spewing such vile language comparing someone she despised to Hitler here in Jersey wonder if she would have been prosecuted under our wonderful telecommunications law? No. I am being silly aren't I - she is loaded. And right-wing. Double safe.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Are comments about wider but still relevant political issues allowed on here? I sent the comment about the disgusting behaviour of the rightfully sacked former Labour Peer Baroness Hayter. Just shows this type of smearing to try and destroy people doesn't just happen over here in Jersey. It is everywhere the powers that be, usually right-wing, feel threatened or can't have their way.

    ReplyDelete
  47. The petition made a ridiculous proposal and that not reflect well on those who signed it. And before the normal tirade of abusive replies ensues, I suggest to those abusive idiots who would write such loutish tripe that they in fact listen to the more discerning of those states members who spoke in the debate against this petition, and pay particular attention to the attorney general’s summary of the recent sentences that have been imposed and the comparison with the uk, as well as those who spoke of supervision and therapeutic measures.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Uncomfortable as it may be there is a real argument to be made that in some cases Jersey sentences are actually too high and in realty there only to mislead the public how tough Jersey's bent court is; as all the mates of the great and good escaping court over the years and AGs and Bailiffs looking the other way entirely show.

      Delete
    2. Mike Higgins spoke real sense on this difficult matter. I admire the man so much. Jersey's most learned and thinking politician.

      Delete
    3. Ratty Jon-Sock19 July 2019 at 13:23

      Certainly the only one who understands the need for a Separation of Powers.

      Delete
    4. Gordon Adams-Artois19 July 2019 at 13:32

      Mezec understands this too to be fair. At least he has tried to bring an end to the Bailiff sitting in the States farce.

      Delete
    5. How we still have an unelected judge telling elected politicians what they can and cannot bring for debate in the 21st century is risable. Need a Royal Commission in to this corrupt practice.

      Delete
  48. "The petition made a ridiculous proposal and that not reflect well on those who signed it."

    I signed it so go and cluck yourself.
    VFC why do you allow such blatant trolling on here still?

    ReplyDelete
  49. Nearly 100 comments again! Still Jersey's most trusted alternative new media.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Add to that 113 comments deemed not suitable for publication.

      Delete
  50. Off subject but what recent inept debates have shown to me is that we need to bring about a one type of member States, with equal sized districts and increase the numbers back up to 53. We then might get a few more decent candidates if they can see we have the basis of a proper democratic system. Remove the Bailiff, AG and Dean too obviously with a people's representative to provide legal advice where needed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Could not agree more. Anyone with half a brain sees that these calls to reduce numbers to 'save money' is just a red herring to allow the further concentration of power in ever fewer hands.

      If it brought about equally balanced constituencies and a fair share of representatives for St. Helier then to me that is money well spent.

      We will never see those holding power held to account over issues such as covered by this blog until we get this equality between twon and country, ordinary plebs and the wealthy who think they can still run this island like a private club for crooks.

      Delete
  51. The Happy Camper20 July 2019 at 15:12

    I was told a rumour is going around that there is to be a new political party formed in time for the next election. Anyone else heard about it or who might be involved.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Could certainly do with one. The Establishment party still runs the show but is crap. And Reform is just crap.

      Delete
  52. Odd is it not how when sentencing a finance worker for having apparently downloaded indecent images William Bailhache said that the images were of children could not be overlooked, yet when it comes to golfing buddy the notorious Mr K, he not only overlooks the evidence but invents some non-existant excellent supervisory reports to help show Mr K's good character? What do your politicians and msm media in Jersey do for a living? Obviously not what they should be expected to.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We have heard about this unbelievable situation so many times. But can anyone clarify whether a States Member, any States Members, has ever called Bailiff Bailhache out about this with a question?

      Delete
    2. Don't be silly. Poddles nod their heads. They don't bark at the Bailiff in the night-time.

      Delete
    3. I was calling Bill Bailhache out about this - the very case - back in 2008.

      And we all know what he and his equally terminally conflicted gangster brother Phil did.

      The man is simply a gangster.

      As his handlers know full well.

      Don't fail to understand the gravity of this - nor its uncombatable metastasis - already of constitutional impact.

      Those who threw their lot in with the Bailhache Brothers are already on their way to metaphorically hanging alongside them.

      As a comment suggested a while ago, the best advice to be given to so many of the people involved - and they know who they are - is to seek truly independent (non-City of London/Inns of Court - i.e. non British mafia) legal advice - and start urgently and pro-actively thinking about strategies for turning Queens evidence.

      Hear that train 'a coming.

      Stuart Syvret

      Investigative journalist, historian, international anti-mafia activist.

      Delete
    4. I would amplify that reasonable assessment of the situation by stating that the real forces of the rule of law in Britain are on their way after the Bailhache brothers (& 3 or 4 other individuals) and would very much prefer not to have to go through the tedium of prosecuting and imprisoning circa 250 people spread across here and on Jersey.

      But we will if we have to.

      Time is running out for the 'bit-players' as obviously little or no mercy can be shown after-the-fact. Being a cog in an evil process and culture is all too invitingly easy if one thinks one can just wash one's hands of it by citing the Nuremberg 'defense' when the kinetics one has participated in inevitably go down the crapper, so to speak.

      The circumstances of the minor crooks of the Jersey situation are clear and do not in fact require independent legal advice (unless we're speaking of real fools). What they have to do is get pro-active in confessing, and assisting the forces of the rule of law in Britain to prevail.

      History, and other factors, will not smile upon them in their calculated silences. Some times, individuals have to do the right thing. Only that.

      After all, what was the immense war effort of the British people in WWII if not a kind of collective whistle blowing against, and opposition to, evil?

      Delete
    5. Interesting post @ 22:56. However, who are the real forces of the rule of law in Britain? Recent experience shows that the highest levels of the British Government seem to be content with “the Jersey situation”, and will act to reinforce it if the need arises. To whom would one go to turn Queen’s evidence? This is the problem. The corruption is so endemic and central to the machinery of government that there is nobody prepared to face it both for fear of reprisals, and economic risk.

      Delete
    6. The UK "Justice" Select Committee who should be scrutinizing our "justice" system are hell-bent on defending it and no doubt complicit in its corruption as demonstrated HERE.

      Delete
    7. Further: A number of former and current politicians, along with VFC, made submissions to the so-called "justice" select committee only to have them redacted or not published at all. Readers should take a look at THIS POSTING which too demonstrates the complicity of the "justice" select committee.

      I will get round to publishing the e-mail exchange I had with the Select Committee which further demonstrates its complicity with the Jersey corruption (as if the above isn't enough).

      Delete
    8. There may well be sufficient evidence for at least one of the “3 or 4 others” (which I assume to include much of the Island’s past and present judicial functionaries) to be capable of being prosecuted in the UK for their role in facilitating cross-border money laundering. That person may also be capable of being prosecuted for their role in the relevant predicate offence, which is a non-prosecuted offence locally, as well.

      Delete
    9. Upon reflection the phrase 3 or 4 others may have been conservative. Considering the topography of the serious organised crime we are surveying, that number of serious 'players' to be brought to justice will be somewhat higher. You make very valid observations concerning the predicate offences, money laundering clearly, but also the Bribery Act 2010 is obviously in serious play. As indeed is the preceding legislation given the endurance of the offences clear on the face of evidence and events.

      There is also, obviously, the by no means insignificant matter of the legislation of other jurisdictions entirely. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) which has certainly been egregiously violated by several large and wealthy institutions in the course of 'the Jersey situation' with those entities having very clear presences and business activities in the US and huge dollar values. I happen to be in a position to know that the latter fact has not gone unnoticed by law enforcement agencies in the US.

      But I feel my original point remains broadly correct. Law enforcement will not be especially interested in pursuing the small fish involved in all this (unless of course they have to) the real target will be the powerful players and their key henchmen. And it remains the case that the small players owe it to themselves (as well as civil society) to recognise the powerful crooks will continue as they've done throughout to build ramparts about themselves, using small players as sandbags.

      The fantasy of the transnational syndicates and cartels of possessing their own 'jurisdictions' in which they can somehow magically step out from the international rule of law is over.

      Delete
    10. Hmm, the Jersey situation has been a real trigger hasn't it? a real 'black-swan' situation as others have described it. I think historians are already noting events on Jersey as being the beginning of the end for high level international serious organised crime. That Russian mafia money should have been so readily available to the forces of the destabilization of the West isn't so surprising when one considers the mafia looting by places like Jersey of the former Soviet Union, and thus the 'debt' owed by the Jersey mafia to their post-1990 oligarch clients.

      Delete
  53. Just when you didn't think it could get any worse looks like we may well have a former Vic College Old Boy as Chief of Police in Jersey.

    So chances of former Vic College Old Boys who got to be Jurats despite bullying victims of abuse at the school in to silence being held to account are now even less than zero.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I went to VC and so did my Father.

      Delete
    2. You have my sympathy. So did I and I would not send a dog there in consequence. How that disgrace of a man was allowed to sit as a jurat is beyond belief. Private schools should have gone out with the ark certainly those getting money that should go only to making State schools as good as they can be.

      Delete
    3. My father went there too and so did my mother. But we don't generally talk about that much anymore...

      Delete
    4. Ah? Think I might have dated her? Back in the mid-80s? Had a moustache? Sideburns? Answered to the name of Sharrock? Always sitting under the bikeshed stairs with a laptop and a curly-wurly?

      Delete
    5. LOL! A curlywurly? Hadn't progressed to the trusty can of Stella yet then?

      Delete
  54. I have know knowledge of the person who wishes to become Chief of Police however regardless of his educational upbringing (even though highly questionable with regards to impartiality)what he should state without doubt publicly is that he will 'without fear or favour' uphold the rule of law and will under no circumstances become a political puppet to the PTB.

    ReplyDelete
  55. @IslandDissident

    Replying to
    @TheVoiceJersey
    "Possibly illegally" - I seem to recall he challenged his suspension in the Royal Court and lost."

    Your recollection has failed you. The (conflicted) Royal Court did NOT look at the (possibly illegal) suspension but DID critisise it HERE.

    Further; the then Home Affairs Minister, Ian Le Marquand, REFUSED to even look at the (possibly illegal) suspension as part of his Suspension Reviews (sic) HERE.

    To this day (nine years later) we, nor Graham Power, don't know the real reason as to why he was (possibly illegally) suspended. What we do know is (according to the IJCI) the (possibly illegal) suspension was carried out on a pack of LIES.

    Hope your recollection will serve you better after reading the links provided.

    ReplyDelete
  56. I notice the following observations, which match my thoughts, 'Considering the topography of the serious organised crime we are surveying, that number of serious 'players' to be brought to justice will be somewhat higher. You make very valid observations concerning the predicate offences, money laundering clearly, but also the Bribery Act 2010 is obviously in serious play. As indeed is the preceding legislation given the endurance of the offences clear on the face of evidence and events.

    'There is also, obviously, the by no means insignificant matter of the legislation of other jurisdictions entirely. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) which has certainly been egregiously violated by several large and wealthy institutions in the course of 'the Jersey situation' with those entities having very clear presences and business activities in the US and huge dollar values. I happen to be in a position to know that the latter fact has not gone unnoticed by law enforcement agencies in the US.'

    Of course, as any thinking person can readily understand, the capacity of Jersey's unopposed traditional mafia and its hegemony was always able to get its way in the context of events on the island, with the assistance of their casual London based protectors. In that sense there's been nothing surprising about their power (although the fact smarter allies allowed them to behave in such a doomed, crackers fashion has been curious, and one has to wonder what 'dirt' the Jersey syndicates have on their London allies?) But for all the years I and others have been following 'the Jersey situation' I've always raised an eyebrow, to say the least, at how these people imagined their many manifest international crimes were going to escape the law enforcement agencies of other jurisdictions? Because, God knows, the offences, and the organisations involved, are stark and clear enough! I've often contemplated (not without a certain amusement I have to say) the very real prospect of a number of your serious establishment Jersey crooks ultimately spending 25 years in a US Super Max with Bubba, the mutant redneck serial killer, as a cell mate. In all seriousness, it's a very possible scenario.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Any rumor as to when the idiots of your public inquiry plan to publish the consequences of their recent unofficial manifestation?

    Reading some of the foregoing comments reminds me of just how much trouble they are in as individuals. It must have all seemed so easy and so inviting and so lucrative when they were recruited.

    The Jersey public inquiry absolutely required people who were both moderate and smart to succeed as a salvage operation, which was of course its core task. The individuals recruited were neither, possessing the same unjustified self regard, and customary stupidity as their Jersey establishment employers.

    If they don't now bitterly regret getting involved, they're even more stupid than they appear.

    ReplyDelete
  58. I notice that one of your parliament's select committees has said it intends to take another look at the child protection issues, with a particular focus on, amongst other questions, 'The Jersey Way'. On the face of it this would appear to be an opportunity for the whistle blower Stuart Syvret to say that which he was prevented from saying by the island's defective public inquiry. Is it known if he is considering that possibility?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whilst an interesting possibility one would imagine the answer to that question to be 'no' unless the select committee provide to Syvret the human rights and basic resources the mock public inquiry refused to supply. Is there any possibility the committee would do that? If not they're wasting their time. The exercise would differ in no way from the fake public inquiry.

      Delete
  59. Is Trevor's Blog still being launched tomorrow?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If I was him I would leave it a week or two till this brutal hot weather has passed and parents get back frm taking their little darlings to Benidorm.

      Must say I am really looking forward to it, though it does worry me a little that the man himself has not confirmed the increased rumours, nor even denied them.

      Is there any chance of you getting an interview about it or even a confirmation of a date?

      Delete
    2. I believe the new launch date for former Deputy Trevor Pitman's Blog is the 4th of August. Will attempt to get an interview with him before then.

      Delete
    3. Really? This will be great news after so long a silence from Trevor. Wonder why he is coming back on line now? We certainly need a blog like the old Bald Truth in support of Jersey's finest. Amazed when I thought about it the other day to realise how the political blogs here on the island have dropped away. We can't afford such apathy again as to me things msm media wise now seem just as bad as pre-2008. Hope the interview happens and thanks for the update.

      Delete
    4. Dep Wickenden's Missing Expenses Form28 July 2019 at 16:01

      Reference Deputy Jess Perchard's call for kids to be taught about our political system to engage them and improve a shockingingly low voter turn out an obvious addition to this move would be to have a few more good and capable people to vote for. People like the above mentioned former Deputy and his wife I would suggest. Yet what do we do? Ilegally bar them from standing for election, right up to this very day and on through the next election unless I am mistaken. High time the UK or EU as we are still in it intervened and put a stop to this corruption.

      Delete
  60. Young people by and large are very engaged with the big issues affecting them in today’s changing world ... environmental destruction, species extinction, gender and lgbt issues, inclusion and inequality, etc. The fact that there is a disjoint between this and political participation does not reflect well on our political institutions which are not structured to encourage wider engagement, especially amongst the younger voters.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well done to Jess Perchard but the damning fact is former Deputy Shona Pitman was highlighting this same fact even before she was a Deputy - I clearly remember it being reported on, though I can't recall where.

      Think her own calls for improved engagement arose from her completing a Masters Degree of some sort. Must be a good 15 years ago regardless. Just shows those who get given positions as ministers basically do sod all.

      Most I would suggest don't even want more young people to become aware let alone vote.

      Delete
  61. Jumping back a couple of comments if I may? I for one would love to know what Trev Pitman thinks about the current state of Jersey politics?

    ReplyDelete
  62. Jersey is a Dark Age State somehow existing in the 21st century. We need more than just political education or the return of some of the handful of decent politicians we have had in recent years. We need a public Uprising and a storming of the Chamber and particularly the Royal Court. But will we get it? Nah. The peasants of a couple of centuries ago had far more bulls and pride.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed. They probably had more balls too?

      Delete
    2. And now the States is full of sheep.

      Delete
  63. New blog post coming?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hoping to arrange an interview with former Deputy Trevor Pitman. All going to plan will hopefully publish over the weekend.

      Delete
    2. Excellent! Must admit that this had been talked about on here for so long I had begun to doubt it would ever happen. Does this mean his blog is really coming back too? I'll say this in advance regardless. Good on you Trevor where ever you are. We are so short of challenging and even questioning voices here in Jersey you wouldn't believe it.

      Delete
    3. Comes to something when we can get excited about a man who left politics, admittedly by a staggering abuse of justice, apparently returning to blogging after years of silence. Suppose in the final analysis that fact also shows us what a mire this island is sunk in to. Granted he was a true one-off and original but surely we need someone to step up and get in the States where it matters? Blogs can't change anything.

      Delete
  64. I too was starting to lose faith. We have heard for so long about trains moving down tracks, promises of the return of the bald avenger, and numerous apparent legal eagles pontificating about how the smart people in London are having their epiphany moments and seeing the criminality of what has gone on. There appears to be no hard publicly available evidence of any of these events coming to pass or making any real difference except maybe this first glimmer of hope that Trevor will be back online shortly. I wait with bated breath and hope that he comes out of his corner as bold and as feisty as he used to be, and ready to challenge us all.

    I know that many people are appalled at the way that the JEPravda is complicit in much of what has gone on but let us not lose sight of the fact that a not insignificant (but accepted shrinking) audience still dote on every word of regurgitated, unchallenged, hidden agenda, press release from the Jersey Communications bureau. I also know that you Voice have given them some credit more recently for some small signs of a more serious and informed approach. Maybe a campaign to have Trevor appointed as one of their regular guest columnists to provide some counter balance, if he were up for this, might be a step forward in winning over the hearts and minds of the grey army. After all these are a significant proportion of those who do consistently make the effort to vote, and invariably skew the results towards the election of good old Jersey boys and girls, and the preservation of the status quo, in my humble opinion. Can you ask Trevor for his view on this possibility?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh and I have not forgotten history as well and Trevors court case and the JEP involvemnt with that. But wouldn't it be better to try and fight their misinformation and lazy journalism ultimately from within?

      Delete
  65. Big Trev working for the filthy organisation which first was happy to help one of its key advertisers spread lies about him and his wife and then ultimately pushed for them to be made bankrupt and so removed from the States? Can't see that one happening any time soon!

    ReplyDelete
  66. You know, I wonder sometimes about the basic intelligence of people, even some commentators here: -

    "I know that many people are appalled at the way that the JEPravda is complicit in much of what has gone on but let us not lose sight of the fact that a not insignificant (but accepted shrinking) audience still dote on every word of regurgitated, unchallenged, hidden agenda, press release from the Jersey Communications bureau. I also know that you Voice have given them some credit more recently for some small signs of a more serious and informed approach. Maybe a campaign to have Trevor appointed as one of their regular guest columnists to provide some counter balance, if he were up for this, might be a step forward in winning over the hearts and minds of the grey army.

    Look, how long has this blog been going?

    And some people still think the total corruption - total breakdown in the rule of law on Jersey - is a problem of the hegemony of the local "newspaper".

    Look, Jersey is a Mob town. Jersey is entirely captured by the world's mafia syndicates. The only reason the military wings of the cartels have not been in evidence (by & large) here is because they haven't needed to be. Yet.

    Don't take my word for this analyses. Rather, conduct a simple thought-experiment. How could - how would - ANY tiny island jurisdiction - with no separation of powers - no independent police force - no independent judiciary - and an economy and main industry able to channel literally billions of dollars a year from "business" activity in other jurisdictions - resist infiltration, capture and subsumption by high-level organised crime syndicates?

    How?

    In those circumstances is there any credible means and methodology by which such a polity could protect itself from utter corruption?

    The answer to that question is "no".

    And that is no theoretical conclusion.

    We see the reality of total state capture by mafia forces in the example of Jersey.

    Look - these people have just been able to - almost without a bleat of opposition or objection - simply steal £24 million from the Jersey state - as payment for running an undisguisedly fake - fraudulent - "public-inquiry".

    Is there any point in people like Trevor Pitman - or me - returning to blogging? No. None whatsoever. Even if I could. And the notion that somehow gaining a few crumbs of concession of anti-establishment coverage in the JEP - the house-journal of the mafia syndicates running Jersey - is frankly fucking laughable. The only thing we need to be seeking for the JEP is the prosecution and jailing of the effective economic owners of the Guiton Group.

    Insofar as Trevor is concerned, let me offer him some frank advice. Firstly, whilst a good and honest States member, neither he, nor me, are ever going to be some kind of 'prodigal sons' returning to a grateful community. (And I advise him to remain somewhat circumspect and sober about the frequent big-ups he receives here, whilst honest, he was never some kind of "legendary" political 'heavyweight'.) If he and Shona have the wish to return to battle, they have to be clear about what it is they're re-engaging in; this is the international civil-society battle against mafia syndicate power. Simply that. If all Trevor is focused on, is, essentially, resuming the futile exchange of trollings with drunken, local protection-racket thug mafia scum, frankly I advise, 'don't bother'. Go and lead a life instead.

    But if he - and others - want to get serious - then there is an international anti-corruption war to join.

    Stuart Syvret
    Investigative journalist, historian, international anti-mafia activist.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My take on this news would be that it seems quite obvious, if Trevor Pitman is planning a return to political blogging, that he must 'have a life' to use the term above. With everything he and Stuart have had to endure I would also think that he ie probably under no illusion that his offering his comments and analysis via a blog is going to bring down the Jersey Oligarchy overnight. I may be wrong I appreciate but I doubt it. Also much as I admire Stuart in relation to another of his comments I do wish he would tell us how exactly his 'international anti-corruption war' is going? Not a putdown I can assure readers. It is just that we never ever seem to get any hard facts about how and where his 'war' is progressing

      Delete
    2. International anti-mafia activism is taking place all over the globe. Even at grass-roots level, even in places like Sicily, like Naples. If that fact has eluded you, I recommend starting with the works of Roberto Saviano.

      Insofar is my small contribution to that international civil-society activism, the last thing I intend to do is answer questions in public about it. I have enough routine, credible death-threats as it is.

      Stuart Syvret
      Investigative journalist, historian, international anti-mafia activist.

      Delete
    3. Maybe Mr Pitman just wants to have some fun Mr Syvret while probably making some well considered points? Even If that is all the man wants to do then for me Good on him.

      He and Shona have been treated appallingly just like you and I will be happy to hear his thoughts whatever his reasons. Probably won't agree with him all the time but who gives a toss.

      Just wish all three of you would/could come back to politics beause having just a couple more honest people in the States would be just tickety-boo.

      I also really have to ask. Why can't you blog if you so choose Mr Syvret? Not everything you might want to share with readers can be wrapped up under some super-injunction? Could you explain?

      Delete
    4. "I also really have to ask. Why can't you blog if you so choose Mr Syvret? Not everything you might want to share with readers can be wrapped up under some super-injunction? Could you explain?"

      "can't be wrapped up under some super-injunction?"

      What idiotic nonsense. As the author of the comment knows, we're talking about a situation in which 'super injunctions' apply. In the Jersey context, that's 'super-injunctions' decided and enforced, in secret, by conflicted and politicized 'judges', against which it's obviously impossible to defend, not least because it's impossible to draw and call witnesses, if you can't publicise the case.

      So the commenter expects Stuart Syvret to randomly 'take his chances', start blogging again, resume doing independent journalism, which could at any moment see him get imprisoned again, at the whim of Jersey's mafia 'judiciary', if he touches upon anything they don't like, in secret again, with not so much as a public hearing.

      Hmm.... That makes a lot of f*cking sense.

      Delete
    5. Not a backward step. Never take me alive. What happened to all that posturing? Yes we know that all of us here in Jersey bar you are idiots, scumbags,sheep and worse no doubt? Not just the only decent politician but no doubt the only decent person on the island. I voted for you in three elections by my reckoning. Not many of the St Mary elite you likely imagine would admit to that in public I'd wager. But would I vote for you again? Not a chance. You showed what a flake and a fake you are when you ran away to London. Don't know why this blog indulges you and your anti-mafia fantasies. You made yourself irrelevant. No one else.

      Delete
  67. As a City of London lawyer with an eye on The Jersey Situation this is a most interesting development.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you c*nts need to be more worried about Brexit.

      One of the very few bright spots on the grim horizon of demagogic isolationism is that the rest of Europe are going to cease tolerating off-shore finance. Sooner rather than later.

      I remember in the early hours of the morning of the referendum result thinking, 'oh well. At least the City Commune and its guilds are going to crushed by this. At last there's a chance for ordinary powerless people on Jersey to receive the protection of the rule of law. It isn't all bad news.'

      Stuart Syvret.

      Delete
    2. Now, now, steady on my good fellow. We're not all amoral raptors. A few of us (OK, a very few of us I concede!) are on your side. Though it's very understandable why you wouldn't recognise that.

      Delete
    3. Sorry to be a bit thick, Mr City of London lawyer, but what "is a most interesting development"?

      Stuart's comment @14:08 ?
      Big Trev coming back online ?
      …….?

      Delete
    4. No idea. From my perch overlooking La Brelades Golden Mile, pint of Black Velvet in my sweaty paw, I find this talk of world-wide anti-mafia activity and the apparent return to blogging of one our few decent if somehwat pugilistic politicians of recent years both interesting enough to make me put down the Racing Post. Can't quite fathom Stuart Syvret's seeming hostility to the latter but maybe I have read it wrong. He certainly still seems from his regular tirides on here to be more than happy to indulge this well documented pond life troll.

      Delete
    5. Well subtilty was never one of his strong points, I grant you, but I didn't read Stuart's comment as embodying 'seeming hostility to the latter', with 'the later' being Trevor's return to blogging.

      What I got from his comment was a sense of impatience with fellow campaigners and their apparent belief that what is needed is to roll the clock back to a point in time where people like Stuart and Trevor were in effect 'the opposition' in the States and were the only elected members who were writing serious counter-views to the Jersey establishment media.

      I can understand where he's coming from. After all, that situation did not work back then, so why on Earth, even if achievable which is doubtful, would it work now? I can't see how it would. I really can't. Even if Treveor and Stuart could contest elections, which we know they can't because of Jersey judicial corruption, the establishment media trashes them so much they'd have virtually no chance of ever getting back in. But even if they did, what would they be, other than a neatly cosmetic 'window dressing' token 'opposition' to the massive might of the Jersey establishment?

      Why bother? Really?

      Surely what both need to do is utilise the obvious oppression and suppression both have suffered, and use that at a national level against the powerful external protectors of the Jersey crooks?

      I can sympathise with Stuart's apparent view that what needs to be done is something different to what was done in the past. I can't for the life of me see how seeking re-entry 'by permission' of the Jersey establishment, back into the Jersey establishment's system, could remotely be in the public interest. We need a lawfull, democratic system, not merely 2 or 3 token representatives in an obviously corrupt suppressive system. Which is what we had before. As a voter, been there. Done that. Got the t-shirt. I've got no real interest in going back there again. I want 'the lawyers' in Jersey cleaned up and removed from the political sphere first. Only then will we have a fair and democratic system.

      Delete
  68. Well this is a lively blog thread in spite of shortly being superseded.
    I will go OT with a titbit from the mainland
    "Sexual Predator Cops Are Getting Away With It"
    www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VChAEyZobY

    This youtuber/activist is not very fond of the police and maybe has a bit of a history. interesting content sometimes though.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Does Big Trev have a Twitter Account?

    ReplyDelete
  70. He still seems to have an old one when I looked. Expect he will get back on this in time too if he going to be blogging again?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Twitter is old hat and all these Instagrams and Snapchat things just money making ploys that erode youngsters ability to coomunicate at deeper levels. At least someone writing let alone reading a blog has to think a little. I'm only 27 so not what you would call old but I really feel sorry for teenagers today. Worst of all they actually think that they must have them.

      Delete
    2. FaceBook has faded, certainly with the younger generation. Instagram and Snapchat are very useful and powerful means of peer to peer communication. YouTube has long been stodgy with random crap, but it, and increasingly similar video hosting sites, remain great ways of communicating on a documentary basis with the rest of the world. Twitter has become and remains probably the world's pre-eminent social media for campaigners, and is far from being 'old hat'. Social media for all its flaws, the trivial uses most make of it, and its capacity to manipulate us, still represents an historic event, when humans suddenly have the power to communicate directly with large numbers of their peers, and the rich no longer have a monopoly upon public discourse and narrative.

      Delete
  71. So, our regular peadotroll says in yet another non-factual attack on Stuart Syvret, 'Don't know why this blog indulges you and your anti-mafia fantasies. You made yourself irrelevant. No one else.'

    Well, we know from the evidence and from the history of events, and indeed the fact that the same people and same obviously corrupted and structurally dysfunctional systems remaining in place today, that the 'judicial' system in Jersey is difficult to describe as anything other than a politically oppressive and repressive criminalised apparatus.

    So we need not waste too much time on that.

    Rather, those familiar with how power works on Jersey will very much recognise the following, which could be a purpose-written description of how' business' is done on the island, and the island's transnational 'product':

    "Transnational organized crime (TOC) groups are self-perpetuating associations of individuals who operate, wholly or in part, by illegal means and irrespective of geography. They constantly seek to obtain power, influence, and monetary gains. There is no single structure under which TOC groups function—they vary from hierarchies to clans, networks, and cells, and may evolve into other structures. These groups are typically insular and protect their activities through corruption, violence, international commerce, complex communication mechanisms, and an organizational structure exploiting national boundaries.

    With few exceptions, TOC groups’ primary goal is economic gain and they will employ an array of lawful and illicit schemes to generate profit. Crimes such as drug trafficking, migrant smuggling, human trafficking, money laundering, firearms trafficking, illegal gambling, extortion, counterfeit goods, wildlife and cultural property smuggling, and cyber crime are keystones within TOC enterprises. The vast sums of money involved can compromise legitimate economies and have a direct impact on governments through the corruption of public officials."

    Sounds familiar indeed.

    That is the F.B.I description of mafia type activity.

    Mr Syvret is 100% correct in his analyses of your fundamental 'problem'.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm fairly sure that the blog won't publish this even though it isn't abusive. Voice does seem to give our former Senator license nobody else would be allowed to attack, mock and insult others and their views. But I'll try anyway because I know from friends who read this blog that far from being alone my assessments are held by others. This international anti-mafia spiel is just hokum. Hokum never backed up with even the slightest suggestion of any facts as to what might be being undertaken. It is the same with all of this weekly guff purporting to be from a number of lawyers from the UK. Every one of us who has followed Jersey events for a number of years can and do recognise the writing. It is almost but not quite funny. So give us a break. Lastly the Senator has a rant at some poor sod asking a quite fair question as in why he doesn't go back to blogging. The basis of this is that the former Senator allegedly can't. So why is it I ask in exasperation that the former Senator can post his thoughts and rants on this particular blog? Just asking. MI5, the KGB and the baddies from the Harry Potter movies really wouldn't hold off just because his comments are on a site owned by a different blogger now would they.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous @ 10:45

      You raise some issues which have also been puzzling me for a while now.

      Delete
    3. You ain't the only one sunshine.

      Delete
    4. 10.45 is having a laugh right?

      Jersey is one of the worlds, probably THE world's, leading 'off-shore' finance centre, with a long and internationally recorded history of big money international criminality.

      The reader above who quoted the F.B.I definition of serious organised crime is on the money. That's a perfect description of what Jersey does, and power in Jersey. When your troll says 'hokum', they're trying to say to us that the F.B.I no less don't know what they're talking about.

      Given a choice between an anonymous troll, or the F.B.I, I know which one I'm taking seriously.

      Delete
    5. I meant to add that Jersey isn't the world's biggest tax haven in anyone's book either, even the Tax Justice Network team's. We are bad for sure but there are bigger fish by far.

      Delete
    6. Catch a sprat to catch a mackerel.

      Or rather catch a swordfish to catch a great white.

      That is the self inflicted fate of the Jersey mafia.

      Delete
  72. Is Trev's Blog still live on Sunday?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. New release date is 7th August. I interviewed Trevor a couple of days ago and hope to publish the interview/Blog in the next couple of days.

      Delete
    2. What a little tease young Trevor is! Now I have to cancel my bridge night. Look forward to the interview.

      Delete
    3. The Jersey Troll must be like a ball-bag ready to explode. Now he will have two reasons to live. Voice and this new blog from Trevor. Gee but you can imagine there will be sticky socks in the Troll Cave come Wednesday!

      Delete
    4. Interesting to note that Deputy Pamplin is now singing from the Reform Jersey tax songbook. Make the imported tax dogers pay their way. An excellent idea. A rubbish DJ/presenter and a rubbish politician so far but he is right on this one.

      Delete
  73. Short trailer of upcoming interview with former Deputy Trevor PITMAN.

    Hope to publish full interview/Blog tomorrow (Sunday 4th August 2019) late afternoon/evening.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The boy looks well doesn't he? Clearly the Establishment attempt aided and abetted by their chums at the Filthy Rag to batter him down didn't work. Good on him I say and well done for getting this interview. I will be really pleased to hear what he has to say.

      Delete
    2. Looks like he has been holidaying in sunny a Tax Haven to me? Hopefully Turks & Caicos? That would be really taking the pee from our gangsters over here. You gotta give it to Trevor. He is bloody resilient.

      Delete
    3. Looks like the politician of old. Made me a little sad too oddly because I couldn't help thinking what a loss people like him have been.

      Whatever your politics it is difficult to deny when you remember people like Trevor Pitman how deathly bland, dull and uninspired our States is now.

      Above all how cowardly most of them are.

      Delete
    4. A very short clip but bodes well for the full interview and the returning blog. Must have taken you a long time to get this interview because I thought Trevor would have been lured back many times in the past with the crap that has unfolded over the last few years. Seems that most people who leave the States not of their own choice can't help but try and get in the spotlight to sound off but he and Shona have really kept their own counsel. That shows class, saying nothing until you have something you want to say.

      Delete
    5. Trevor gives a glowing tribute to the work of this blog and the importance of genuine Jersey blogs generally in giving people the real news. We could do with some more of them and the return of a few more old favourites beside.

      Delete
  74. I have to hand it you. This blogs generates more comments than any in the island. Genuine, thinking comments I mean. Nearly 200 yet again. To maintain that consistent quality over what must be a decade(?) speaks volumes for you and your team.

    ReplyDelete
  75. School holidays so maybe Trevor should have waited until September to launch a new blog? So many ususal readers will be running around trying to keep the kids busy. Its just that time of year isn't it.

    Really good to know that he really is coming back though. Not many could have rolled with the low blows that our corrupt judiciary have hit the Pitmans with. Will watch the full interview with interest and definitely check out his blog when it finally appears.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Thought I had heard it all with this bonkers plan about a tunnel and a bridge between Jersey. Guernsey and France. Now we are apparently looking in to sorting all of our energy needs with a huge barrage across St Aubins bay. With the mind-blowing costs involved, because for sure government will decide that they, or we, must contribute how do the marry this up with this huge push for austerity and hitting States empoyees?

    ReplyDelete
  77. In anticipation of publishing the full interview with Deputy Trevor Pitman later today. Readers might want to be reminded of a previous interview we did HERE It is as relevant today as it was then.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If ever an interview exposed what a total waste of time the Care Inquiry was this must be it.

      Delete
    2. I remember, at the time, reading the transcript of Trevor's session at the Inquiry and becoming more incensed by the page.

      They spent the whole time on his period as a social worker, and not very effectively at that, and filibustered until it was time for him to go. They ignored the rest of his submitted evidence, not to mention the additional stuff they buried him in in the lead up to his appearance.

      They did similar thing with Bob Hill. Anything that was not direct experience was hearsay and inadmissible. What did they expect, video footage of abuse? Trevor was a public representative and people came to him with their stories, as they did to Bob and Stuart. You would have to question the Inquiry's motives here.

      Regarding snowing witnesses under with last minute voluminous and uncoordinated material, I think this was also done to Bob, and certainly to Graham Power and possibly also to Lenny Harper. I'm dredging this up from memory.

      Regarding missing material and/or refusal of the authorities to find/provide it, Stuart has drawn attention to the filterers/coordinators of the supply of information which the Inquiry amazingly and wrongly accepted as some of the people in charge of this work were themselves liable to be questioned by the inquiry.

      And finally, the Inquiry itself failed miserably to follow up on many relevant matters raised in the course of its hearings.

      As you say, that interview has lost not one whit of its relevance today.

      And there's more!

      Delete
    3. Totally agree Polo. It was just an exercise in going through the motions for appearances sake. Around 200 pages when his statement was briefly on line before several brutal Jersey Judiciary demanded political excisions removed selected aspects, how that all got reduced to the joke of his public questioning is mind-blowing. We should have seen our worst fears were going to be true come the report right then. That we shelled out £23 million + for public evidence hearings that really basically asked witnesses no more that "So it was pretty bad this Jersey Way then?' before thanking witnesses for coming is incredible. Pitman's highlighting of several stunning abuses of judicial abuse alone should have seen a few of our leaders getting investigated by the United Kingdom authorties. With all the evidence from others that you mention it should have been a no brainer. Yet nothing happened.

      Delete