tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post5584862259739768367..comments2024-03-20T11:09:50.796+00:00Comments on voiceforchildren: Unhappy Anniversary. (7)voiceforchildrenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16825129148579102037noreply@blogger.comBlogger50125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-77053022979991029372015-11-19T12:14:15.694+00:002015-11-19T12:14:15.694+00:00Bit of a pattern developing here?
http://voicefor...Bit of a pattern developing here?<br /><br />http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.com/2015/11/bob-hill-in-critical-condition.html?showComment=1447886928722#c7385121150507692625<br /><br />Anonymous18 November 2015 at 22:48<br />Shocking betrayal of all people like Bob have fought for in the truly abysmal range of questioning put to Bob's former colleague Trevor Pitman today at the Care Inquiry. This was a key witness by anyone's standards and the Care Inquiry wasted him. No wonder more and more people are reluctantly concluding this will.be just another whitewash. Maybe Philip Bailhache was right in wanting it closed down - if for all the wrong reasons. Frankly he and the other untouchables really need not have worried.<br /><br />Reply<br />Anonymous19 November 2015 at 08:04<br />Absolutely so true. It was just a quick 'whizz through' of his time as a Youth Worker, and no interest shown in the remainder of his very relevant evidence which I know he had taken a lot of time and effort to collate and prepare. Shockingly amiss on the part of the CoI and hugely disappointing for Trevor. However, being the feisty character he is he did take the opportunity to put some strong opinions across.<br /><br />I too sadly am now starting to have my doubts. I just hope I am proved wrong.<br /><br />NOTE PREVIOUS LINK:<br /><br />http://bobhilljersey.blogspot.com/2015/11/independent-jersey-care-inquiry-16-5.html?showComment=1446973560497#c6607300210525191991<br /><br />Being shamefully jerked around in an already stressful situation is very likely to have been a contributory factor in Bob Hills stroke a few days later.<br /><br />Thank you [not] Commission Of Non-inquiryAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-24528986376538355172015-11-18T19:01:40.714+00:002015-11-18T19:01:40.714+00:00Anyone know who is appearing tomorrow as an anonym...Anyone know who is appearing tomorrow as an anonymous witness ? <br /><br />Day 11019 Nov 2015<br /><br />10:30 Anonymous witness<br />Evidence relating to working within Jersey Residential Care Homes<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-39563045467401705762015-11-17T21:57:59.593+00:002015-11-17T21:57:59.593+00:00Roy Boschat's claim against the States of Jers...Roy Boschat's claim against the States of Jersey Police has been thrown out. He had all the time in the world to bring a case within the normal time limits, but failed to do so. That's what the judgement says. <br /><br />It's an interesting read, and gives even more background on the serious professional standards issues that Lenny Harper had to deal with. <br /><br /><a href="http://www.jerseylaw.je/judgments/unreportedjudgments/documents/display.aspx?url=2015%2f15-11-03_Boschat-v-Chief_Officer_of_States_of_Jersey_Police_220A.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.jerseylaw.je/judgments/unreportedjudgments/documents/display.aspx?url=2015%2f15-11-03_Boschat-v-Chief_Officer_of_States_of_Jersey_Police_220A.htm</a><br /><br />Nevertheless, in a States Assembly proposition scheduled for 1st December 2015, Deputy Terry McDonald wants to give £360,000 of taxpayers' money - our money - to Mr Boschat. <br /><br />I do hope that all of the Harper/Boschat correspondence is given a proper airing in the States debate. Team Voice, perhaps you could draw the attention of the sensible States members with whom you are in contact to make sure that they are fully informed of all the circumstances?<br /><br />It beggars belief that Deputy Terry McDonald thinks this is an appropriate thing to do.<br /><br />By the way, I am not posting this under your Bob Hill posting as it would not be appropriateAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-16977656792571381802015-11-17T18:35:42.962+00:002015-11-17T18:35:42.962+00:00Public witnesses this week :
Day 11120 Nov 2015
...Public witnesses this week : <br /><br />Day 11120 Nov 2015<br /><br />09:00 Public witness<br /><br /><br /><br />Michael Gradwell<br /><br />Yes<br />Day 11019 Nov 2015<br /><br />10:00 Tbc<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />14:00 Public witness<br /><br /><br /><br />Tbc<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Deputy Michael Higgins<br /><br />Yes<br />Day 10918 Nov 2015<br /><br />10:00 Public witness<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />14:00 Public witness<br /><br /><br /><br />Trevor Pitman<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Andre Bonjour<br /><br />Yes<br />Day 10817 Nov 2015<br /><br />10:00 Public witness<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />14:00 Public witness<br /><br /><br /><br />Ian Le Marquand<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Daniel Scaife <br /><br />YesAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-76482807118437127952015-11-16T10:44:40.673+00:002015-11-16T10:44:40.673+00:00This is a good time to restate our gratitude and r...This is a good time to restate our gratitude and respect for our Jersey (& UK) bloggers and campaigners.<br /><br />Our thoughts and prayers are with Bob Hill and his family.<br /><br />Those with only a passing interest will not appreciate just how demanding and time consuming this work is. In addition to the workload it can be fraught with dilemmas, stress and uncertainty.<br /><br />This is even without the unwarranted attention from the Jersey authorities or their unofficial (but protected and funded) representatives.<br /><br />Play audio at <br />http://therightofreply.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/another-reminder-of-jerseys-freaks.html<br /><br />Male Nurse M:<br />http://freespeechoffshore.nl/stuartsyvretblog/a-mass-murderer/<br /><br />It is unlikely that any campaigner has escaped the attention of Jersey's protected thugs:<br />http://ricosorda.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/the-jersey-troll-blog-abuse-2-it-gets.html<br /><br />Having failed to intimidate Jersey's more resilient campaigners Team-Peado turned their attention to the blogger's nearest and dearest. Rico's wife came under sustained attack even though she was pregnant, seriously unwell and at risk of loosing her baby. Despite being furnished with the evidence Bowron's Police refused to investigate: <br />http://ricosorda.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/jersey-cyber-stalker-part-3-our-story.html<br /><br />We are all aware that tireless campaigner Bob Hill has been getting older but his stroke has been a shock nonetheless. Age and stress are all factors which can contribute to stroke.<br /><br />I have not yet had time to read Bob Hill's evidence to the CoI/CONi but I am very concerned by the apparently gratuitous way in which he was treated. One suspects that this was done in order to make his evidence as difficult and disjointed as possible:<br /><br />http://bobhilljersey.blogspot.com/2015/11/independent-jersey-care-inquiry-16-5.html?showComment=1446973560497#c6607300210525191991<br /><br />"Póló 8 November 2015 at 09:06<br />I don't know where [Counsel to the Inquiry] Patrick Saad was coming from, but to my reading, you were treated disgracefully. <br /><br />The inquiry was hopping all over the place, interrupting you, not having the relevant quotes always up on the screen, and so on.<br /><br />I have appeared before parliamentary committees of politicians, many of whom were grandstanding in a disgraceful manner, but I never had to contend with the runabout you were put through.<br /><br />Much of your testimony was from intelligent analysis of what was reported to be going on around you. And that was perfectly valid. In your testimony, it is made to look like a fault just because you were not directly at the receiving end of much of what was reported.<br /><br />Without the blogs, much of the analysis would not have been done in the first place because the source material would still be locked up or destroyed.<br /><br />Just as well submissions are all being published. That interrogation did not do you justice."<br /><br /><br />Good luck Bob. <br />x<br /><br />As for the bad guys and their over zealous representatives; May their god teat them mercifully<br />(but not too mercifully!)Devils Advocatehttp://voiceforchildren.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/bob-hill-in-critical-condition.htmlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-42648265980763816402015-11-15T23:22:29.760+00:002015-11-15T23:22:29.760+00:00I too am perplexed by Rico's position on this....I too am perplexed by Rico's position on this.<br /><br />Rico is a reasonably intelligent guy and is very knowledgeable and chances are that we are not privy to all the information he has.<br /><br />There are other aspects like the threats to the whistleblower Health Minister's life or the understandable emotional concern that survivors get their CoI (in whatever form)<br />This does look like an emotional reaction. If it is a well though out response then Rico seems unwilling to share what is behind it or explain why the (legal) advice and analysis is wrong<br /><br />Without such a central witness it will be a Commission Of Non-inquiry<br />It is a fatal error to play by their rules.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-51479309634097094192015-11-15T16:47:49.532+00:002015-11-15T16:47:49.532+00:00OK Rico, have it your way. But there is no escapin...OK Rico, have it your way. But there is no escaping the fact that by being an apologist for the COI in not summonsing Syvret, what you're supporting is, a) unlawful, b) wrong & not in the interests of transparent inquiry, and c) just what the Jersey Establishment wants. You are obviously and simply wrong, Rico. I hope for their sake there are survivors reading this who'll act independently and regardless of your bad advice on this question, write to the COI and require it to summon Syvret so those survivors ultimately get the benefit of Syvret's testimony. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-53221769364117064452015-11-15T15:35:33.967+00:002015-11-15T15:35:33.967+00:00Someone has got to me??? Are you having a laugh. T...Someone has got to me??? Are you having a laugh. The COI Is going on. Stuart has decided to not attend it. That's it. No lengthy court cases required. That's the truth. No need for war n peace replies.rico sordahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09370637157786202673noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-56692752041449719862015-11-15T14:45:45.972+00:002015-11-15T14:45:45.972+00:00Rico, your intransigence and repeated willful igno...Rico, your intransigence and repeated willful ignorance on the subject of Syvret being called as a witness is starting to trouble to me. Who speaks to you on this issue? What influences are you under? Has someone been 'advising' you on this? I have to ask because you're just so wrong about this there has to be an explanation. <br /><br />Not for the first time you seem to be almost frightened of the prospect of the public inquiry meeting its statutory duty and summonsing Syvret. It just doesn't make any sense. <br /><br />Here is what you say, 'Why do you think the COI is going to chase Stuart through the courts to give evidence? That's ridiculous. This is full steam ahead with him or without him. Stuart doesn't recognise a jersey court so wouldn't turn up. Not rocket science. They know that, we know that and Stuart knows that. This isn't about one person. No one is more important than the other.' <br /><br />That set of assertions by you Rico is so wrong its hard to know where to start. Firstly, as another commenter suggested there are several options facing Syvret, and him just ignoring a subpoena is most unlikely. It's far more likely that he takes the subpoena to court and uses the opportunity to successfully force the COI to stop breaking the law, and provide him with legal representation. There are limits to just how corrupt even your courts can be. Look, the public inquiry is a statutory quasi-judicial inquisitorial body. It can no more fail to call a known, key witness, than could any criminal or civil trial in a court fail to call a key witness. What is obviously one of the fundamental things to have gone wrong in Jersey? Clearly, its the failure of statutory bodies in Jersey to obey and meet their legal obligations. You Rico, in increasingly puzzling desperation seem hell-bent on defending and supporting the continuance of that Jersey failure, by supporting a COI that is failing to meet its unavoidable, obligatory lawfully compulsory obligations by it a) refusing to give a key witness legal funding, and b) failing to call a known key witness. I repeat, the COI is legally obliged to act in certain ways. Far from it being 'ridiculous' for the COI to summons Syvret and enforce his attendance (& give him a lawyer) the way they're acting now, unlawfully, is what is 'ridiculous'. The COI must subpoena Syvret, because the COI doesn't have any choice in the matter. It is legal obliged to subpoena Syvret. <br /><br />It looks increasingly likely that someone has 'got to you' Rico and filled your head with nonsense. The sight of any Jersey campaigner supporting a COI in acting unlawfully in the customary 'the Jersey Way', and agreeing with and supporting the unlawful denial of legal representation to your sides's key whistleblower is 'obviously ridiculous'.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-25703968489096920202015-11-15T07:22:27.780+00:002015-11-15T07:22:27.780+00:00Also
http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.com/2015/10/...Also<br />http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.com/2015/10/jersey-child-abuse-inquiry-carries-on.html?showComment=1447185271869#c8329316464158140866<br /><br />"My understanding of the Syvret position is that he was concerned with the legal consequences of a number of the protocols draw up by Eversheds and rubber-stamped by the 3 member panel. One the things he needed legal advice for was to answer his concerns about those protocols. Basicly, his suspicion about the protocols was shown to be correct by the instant refusal by Eversheds to let him have legal funding with which he could question the protocols. As usual, he hit target. <br /><br />Looking at the resultant stand-off Eversheds, very unwisely, decided to press on regardless without engaging Syvret even though he's a core witness, on the gamble that he'd eventually cave-in and engage with the inquiry anyway. Good luck with that. <br /><br />The consequence is that Eversheds took a punt at the beginning of this process and gambled that they could doubly satisfy their clients by avoiding the messy business of primary engagement with stakeholders by ignoring part (e) of the decision of your legislature, and keep their fingers crossed and hope no-one noticed. But if anyone did get stroppy about it, they had in reserve the insurance-policy that they had the resources to just brazen it out, and no-one on the side of the good guys would have the resources to challenge them. Unfortunately for Eversheds and their clients, into that 'clever-clever' plan stepped Syvret. The result is they're running a public inquiry which is obviously and on numerous grounds unlawful, and which, far from delivering the 'line under the controversy' sought by Evershed's paymasters, they've instead delivered just another layer of obvious corruption, another example of attempted child-abuse cover-up, which is now in the mix as a part of the culture of concealment that Britain's authorities are unavoidably going to have to come to terms with. <br /><br />As a professional I'm very confident that, in the fulness of time, once you have a better legislature, your government will be able to recover every penny of fees that have been paid to Eversheds on the plain and evidenced grounds of gross professional incompetence. Look, Jersey tax-payers have spent their millions on this public inquiry, in the expectation that what they're getting for that payment is a public inquiry that meets the basic competencies, and satisfies the basic requirements of vires. They haven't got that. Instead they've been ripped-off by Eversheds with a process so incompetent it imagined it could go on its merry way whilst constructively excluding the key whistleblower witness. <br /><br />Note my advice. Your government, if comprising people of sufficient calibre and the right political determination, can recover your money from Eversheds."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-48360975927697002222015-11-14T21:58:52.677+00:002015-11-14T21:58:52.677+00:00We know that the CONi has no intention of subpoena...We know that the CONi has no intention of subpoenaing Syvret, because they and their client do not want his evidence and appears to be ignoring it's statutory obligation to do so with an escapade into legal La La land<br /><br />As a result of this the Commission Of Non-inquiry can only produce a final report out of La La land. They know that, we know that and Stuart knows that.<br /><br />The final report will be seen for what it is. It's hand wringing contents will still be damning so this attempt at protecting the higher echelons can only damage Jersey more.<br /><br />The UK lawyer gives the following advice<br /><br />http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.com/2015/10/jersey-child-abuse-inquiry-carries-on.html?showComment=1447269364747#c5185021115829691857<br /><br />"I haven't contacted the public inquiry and asked that Syvret be subpoenaed because I have no locus, no 'standing', to do so. I have no direct particular 'interest' in the legal sense in the Jersey child-abuse issues and I'm not even a resident of the island. Were I to write to the inquiry making such a request they'd refuse on those grounds. However, any person who can show a reasonable 'interest' in the subject matter of the inquiry, for example individual survivors, survivor representative organisations, involved whistle-blowers, campaigners who can demonstrate a genuine long-term involvement in the subject, etc will have the necessary 'interest' and 'locus' to ask that Syvret be summonsed. And the same is true for criminals, the culpable. They too have the right to require any key witness be summoned. I'm assuming no one has asked the public inquiry to subpoena Syvret as I imagine there'd be publicity if they had? It would be reported in the media, or at least on the blogs? Syvret himself I imagine would have something to say about it. Let me also put it this way, if a person or group with the necessary 'standing' has in fact asked the public inquiry to subpoena Syvret, and the inquiry has refused to do so, then it's vitally important for your case that that fact be made public. You should ensure the correspondence get's published on your blog. Documents like the e-mail or letter of request, and the corresponding written refusal from the public inquiry. If such a process and exchange has taken place, then what 'reasoned explanation' has been given, if any, for the decision to refuse to subpoena Syvret? As I say, I'm assuming that process has not yet taken place. But if it has and the panel has refused to summon Syvret, then that itself would be damning and very necessarily material which should be made public. On the face of things I can see no remotely lawful ground on which this public inquiry would or could refuse to summon an indisputably key witness."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-44860237202967180582015-11-14T16:53:25.127+00:002015-11-14T16:53:25.127+00:00Why do you think the COI is going to chase Stuart ...Why do you think the COI is going to chase Stuart through the courts to give evidence? That's ridiculous. This is full steam ahead with him or without him. Stuart doesn't recognise a jersey court so wouldn't turn up. Not rocket science. They know that, we know that and Stuart knows that. This isn't about one person. No one is more important than the other. rico sordahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09370637157786202673noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-83343705435056629622015-11-14T16:07:30.058+00:002015-11-14T16:07:30.058+00:00http://stuartsyvret.blogspot.com/2008/02/anatomy-o...http://stuartsyvret.blogspot.com/2008/02/anatomy-of-spin-temp-pass-1.html<br /><br />"I will recount the detail of this episode in a later post, for now it’s sufficient to know that I was barracked, shouted-down and unlawfully prevented from giving my speech by the Jersey Oligarchy.<br />As the meeting was curtailed, I stood looking around the States chamber as members rushed off for their lunch, and the abiding memory for me was experiencing a sensation akin to trying to swim across a lake of vomit and putrefaction."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-53365589107183691092015-11-14T15:38:21.228+00:002015-11-14T15:38:21.228+00:00These were actually THREE Serious Case Reviews dea...These were actually THREE Serious Case Reviews dealt with as one<br /><br />www.itv.com/news/channel/update/2015-11-13/senator-apologises-for-failings-highlighted-in-child-abuse-review/<br /><br />Amongst the recommendations: <br />the voice of children should be reflected at every stage, to make sure that their wishes and feelings are taken into account in the decisions made about their ongoing care.<br /><br />ASS Minister SENATOR PAUL ROUTIER: <br />"First and foremost I would like to say sorry to these children and their families. I would also like to thank them for participating in the SCR process; their insights have contributed greatly to our understanding of what happened and why.<br />All staff and all professional groups must work effectively together and we must create a new culture; one in which we challenge each other."<br /><br />Empty words?<br />Is Routier one of the ones who needs to apologise to Stuart Syvret, the Health Minister who was sacked for taking on the Civil Service and identifying these very problems, prior to the last decade of denial?<br /><br />Anyone who thinks that Jersey children are now safe is living in fairyland. <br />The rule of law is a prerequisite for the protection of the public and children.<br /><br />The Establishment has even formalised their control of the Police under their fake Police Authority.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-46430517095108335502015-11-14T07:12:27.011+00:002015-11-14T07:12:27.011+00:00That's surely right @19:11
Makes it all the mo...That's surely right @19:11<br />Makes it all the more amazing that in full public view Eversheds are keeping their heads down position E69, &(ignoring the fact that establishment nether regions have not even been washed for years!)<br /><br />But for Eversheds Jersey is a side show. A pushover with a controlled population who render themselves powerless and are even gullible enough to re-elect the likes of Andrew Lewis in spite of what he has done and what he has shown himself to be. Eversheds are lawyers to the UK cover up, to Special branch and probably the security services. The forces who protected and even made use of Power-Paedophilia for decades on the Mainland and Northern Ireland.<br /><br />The CoI has revealed much and has thrown shreds of comfort to islanders and victims. Nonetheless the Conduct of this CoI is already beyond belief and the entirely credible pro-bone legal advice is that Jersey taxpayers CAN RECOVER THEIR MONEY from Eversheds !!!!!<br /><br />SEE:<br />http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/jersey-child-abuse-inquiry-carries-on.html?showComment=1447185271869#c8329316464158140866<br /><br />Eversheds can return their "immoral earnings" or perhaps reveal a secret contract clause authorising the misconduct and cover up ......in which case we have a few more local villains to hang by their bits.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-73558582966693875062015-11-13T22:19:06.462+00:002015-11-13T22:19:06.462+00:00Not for the first time I find myself typing the wo...Not for the first time I find myself typing the words "So, it seems like Stuart Syvret was right all along back in 2007, wasn't he?"<br /><br /><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-jersey-34808250" rel="nofollow">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-jersey-34808250</a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.itv.com/news/channel/update/2015-11-13/review-into-child-abuse-in-jersey-finds-multiple-failings/" rel="nofollow">http://www.itv.com/news/channel/update/2015-11-13/review-into-child-abuse-in-jersey-finds-multiple-failings/</a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.gov.je/News/2015/Pages/SeriousCaseReviewStatement.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://www.gov.je/News/2015/Pages/SeriousCaseReviewStatement.aspx</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-84545586724454061042015-11-13T20:59:51.125+00:002015-11-13T20:59:51.125+00:00I should add, Barry, there's going to come a t...I should add, Barry, there's going to come a time when even John can't save you. But you see that, surely? Though John won't grasp it, having arbitraged power in Jersey as he has done so cunningly these decades, no soldier is indispensable. There are times in every firm when made men exceed the bounds of their usefulness and are jeopardising the viability of the enterprise. That time, I'd say, is here as John's going to discover. The indisciplined overreach by the Jersey division has to be addressed with some reminders of reality. And once the hammer's dropped on John? <br /><br />Association with him won't be a source of income and protection anymore. <br /><br />On the contrary. <br /><br />Oh how cruel and taxing fate can be. You, Barry, don't deserve this. You almost were one of the good people. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-64226783892852319522015-11-13T20:05:08.684+00:002015-11-13T20:05:08.684+00:00Oh, Barry, Barry, you always were a 'nice guy&...Oh, Barry, Barry, you always were a 'nice guy', very plausible, used to even believe it yourself. Do you remember those conversations we had during the early & middle years of your paid police career? You knew what wickedness was then, that knowledge and your self-confidence in your own righteousness was a refreshing palliative to this jaundiced observer of the 'Jersey Way'. With hindsight it's not so surprising they saw in you a fine, nay, ideal candidate for 'useful idiot' status. Recruited, big-upped, displayed internationally, inserted into all the right administrative circles - the word 'groomed' seems especially fitting - and now here you are. Owned. And you know, lets face it every close observer of this end-days perturbation in the world of Jersey knows, just why you're owned. I'm sure I'm not the only interested observer who could quote certain sentences from the evidence. <br /><br />What are you going to do, Barry? <br /><br />How did the good man get here? Where did it all go wrong? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-76887995653376143262015-11-13T19:11:26.100+00:002015-11-13T19:11:26.100+00:00I really admire the work you've done for survi...I really admire the work you've done for survivors Rico, but I think you're wrong when you say the COI 'couldnt give a hoot' if Stuart gives evidence or not'. He's a key witness and public inquiries are expected to interview all key witnesses. It's their job and it's what a public inquiry is brought into existence for. I think you're displaying a poor understanding of what are the binding necessities on the COI and worse than that, you're letting them off the hook of their responsibilities. The point is Rico, the COI don't actually have any choice. They have to interview all key witnesses. Interviewing the known key witnesses is not something they have the luxury of 'not giving a hoot' about. It's recognised in law that there'll be occasions when witnesses to some controversy might not want to give evidence. That's why the law gives the COI the power to compel attendance. In such a case a COI facing an intransigent witness HAS to use that power. This is a dimension I think that's been missing from this whole discussion for a year. People don't seem to understand that the issue of whether Stuart is called to give evidence to the COI is a decision of the COI, not of Stuart. The COI doesn't have a legally credible choice in this. They have to summon him, regardless of the consequences. I repeat, they don't have a choice. The law requires them to summons him. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-77620676200229164242015-11-13T16:53:50.148+00:002015-11-13T16:53:50.148+00:00"All hypothetical"
.....errrr Isn't..."All hypothetical" <br />.....errrr Isn't that the general idea with a "what if" discussion??????<br /><br />But yes the CoI have quoted off the blog so they can't claim not to know it exists.<br /><br />If this is adequate for the main whistleblower witness then why are they bothering with all the evidence and transcripts etc. etc...................<br /><br />Of course it is not adequate. They are either running a CoI or a farce!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-69411305339427025162015-11-13T15:58:37.861+00:002015-11-13T15:58:37.861+00:00All hypothetical. Not only is it unlikely the inqu...All hypothetical. Not only is it unlikely the inquiry would want to make a martyr of Syvret - something, I'm sure, he'd be only too happy to oblige - but his thoughts and experiences are all very well documented, mainly by him. These are in the public domain and as such are available to the inquiry. I'd put money on their never being any subpoena.theurbanmonkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05679590820741820958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-44890886568233646142015-11-13T15:29:29.656+00:002015-11-13T15:29:29.656+00:00and when Eversheds are done with the "busines...and when Eversheds are done with the "business in hand" <br />and pocketed the wad <br />will they spit or will they swallow?<br /><br />At least a conventional whore can wash herself/himself clean afterwards <br />and could even go to sleep with the satisfaction of a job well done <br />and good PR by word-of-mouth to build the client base.<br /><br />Eversheds' stains can follow them to their graves <br />(and, who knows, maybe beyond)Pass the Kleenex Lady Macbethhttps://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1898866410/file.jpgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-78407016252615425702015-11-13T12:50:04.491+00:002015-11-13T12:50:04.491+00:00I think it was position E69 ?
Yup, maybe if they ...I think it was position E69 ?<br /><br />Yup, maybe if they keep their heads down no one will notice that Eversheds are doing the whoring at the bidding of the Bangkok Pimp.<br /><br />They wish! The world changed while they weren't looking.The Joy of Sexthttp://genius.com/W-h-auden-sext-annotatednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-52942511757550715752015-11-13T12:41:42.359+00:002015-11-13T12:41:42.359+00:00Wot! isn't that the normal way of dealing with...Wot! isn't that the normal way of dealing with things?JEP Believernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3591695769525894359.post-3500726410990098582015-11-13T12:36:31.725+00:002015-11-13T12:36:31.725+00:00RESUBMITTED: Terribly sorry VFC. Always a pleasure...RESUBMITTED: Terribly sorry VFC. Always a pleasure to be a guest at "Château Voice".<br />Shall try not to let spill anything else unsavoury :-)<br />Respect need for sensitivity and political correctness but do feel you take it a bit far in the circumstances.<br /><br /><br /><br />"It'd be like the days of the Colosseum" .....Except that on this occasion the lone "Christian" would savage the lions and then likely take the opportunity to publicly piss on the paper caesars in the royal-box.<br /><br />Syvret is of course more of a humanist, but he is more "Christian" than the Faux-Christians who dominate this island. That must make them hate Syvret all the more!<br /><br />Very interesting observations regarding the "Sanitization" of evidence and witnesses prior to presentation at the CoI. This corresponds to an interesting observation by Póló on the runaround Bob Hill was given at:<br /><br />http://bobhilljersey.blogspot.com/2015/11/independent-jersey-care-inquiry-16-5.html?showComment=1446973560497#c6607300210525191991<br /><br /><br />Also interesting observations above regarding option S3, but is this a pantomime island where they could find an excuse for clearing the public gallery (or "pre-book" it for TeamPaedo players) and find a reason for holding Syvret's evidence in camera?<br />Is there a mechanism for Syvret to be held in contempt by the CoI, for being contemptuous of their contemptible behaviour?<br />These "switch the lights off and change the rules" tactics by TeamPaedo could also equally apply to option S2, but Syvret would at least have conventional legal backup who could burst out laughing on his behalf ......prior to arguing the toss<br /><br /><br />Also, a variant on the TeamPaedo response to option S2 is to refuse Syvret's right to his own choice of council and to say that he can have the legal representation appointed by THEM. <br />TeamPaedo have form for this in previous jailings of Ex-Health Minister Syvret. <br />BTW, Why did [reference to the late Advocate REMOVED]? Mid life crisis or something else?<br /><br />http://freespeechoffshore.nl/stuartsyvretblog/letter-from-exile-16/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com