Operation "Invicta", A conspiracy theory and A Promise.

Although VFC has built up a reputation for delivering hard evidenced facts that are generally covered up by the State Media we thought we would break from tradition and give our readers, what "might" be described as, a "Conspiracy Theory."

There has been many a conspiracy theory peddled, predominantly by the State Media, ever since former Deputy Chief Police officer Lenny Harper, and former Chief Police Officer Graham Power QPM blew the lid off of, what has been described as "Jersey's Dirty Secret." The Dirty Secret being the abuse of children, in State run institutions, and elsewhere, that was able to carry on for DECADES in Jersey.

Since the "lifting of the lid" we have witnessed smear campaigns against Mr. Harper and Mr. Power, misinformation and half truths peddled by State Media, and others, and conspiracy theories galore.

VFC, and other Bloggers (Jersey's only independent media) have, with documented evidence, provided its readers with the fuller picture and truth behind the "stories" told by the local Press, whether it be the Gradwell assertion that there were no cellars at HAUT DE LA GARENNE or the nonsense peddled by the State Media that the alleged Child's Skull fragment unearthed at HDLG was apparently a piece of COCONUT that contained 1.6% collagen (only found in mammals).

In short we have provided some facts behind the myths concerning the Child Abuse atrocities and left the conspiracy theories to the State Media.

In this posting we offer our readers a theory (conspiracy or otherwise) that the Jersey Establishment have been trying to nail both Lenny Harper, and Graham Power, with anything they can get to stick since the Child Abuse revelations and we concentrate this posting on how this apparent desperation to get something to stick against Graham Power QPM could involve the Curtis Warren Case, the three Police Officers who have just been cleared of any wrong doing concerning the alleged illegal bugging of a car used in the conspiracy to import drugs into Jersey, the parts played by key players such as Chief Police Officer Mike Bowron, former Acting Chief Police Officer David Warcup and others.

Regular readers will know that during the live Child Abuse Investigation Former Police Chief Graham Power was (illegally?) suspended from duty by the then Home Affairs Minister Andrew Lewis. The whole suspension was a complete shambles and the Jersey Establishment found themselves in a mess, of their own creation, and realised this suspension could not stand up to any scrutiny and they will need to find another way/reason/excuse to keep the Chief Officer suspended. Andrew Lewis retired from politics and was replaced by Senator Ian Le Marquand at Home Affairs. To cut a long story short Ian Le Marquand managed to suspend Mr. Power AGAIN and REFUSED to look at the original suspension by Andrew Lewis..........Job done?

The discredited Wiltshire Constabulary were tasked with (to coin a phrase) getting "something to stick" against Mr. Power so he could be disciplined over his actions, or in-actions during the Child Abuse Inquiry, thus justifying the suspension and discrediting Mr. Power and the Child Abuse Investigation. 
After the costly, bungled and FAILED attempt to discipline Mr. Power over the Abuse Inquiry, and yes it did fail, nobody should believe the rubbish about "running out of time" after two and a half years, and countless missed deadlines, it was strung out until Mr. Power retired because they knew that it would not stand up to any independent adjudication.

 
After that the Establishment STILL needed something to stick so they trawled through old cases and came up with the "Warren Inquiry" and the bugging of the car. Previously the Home Affairs Minister, Senator Ian Le Marquand and even  Warcup himself had said, words to the effect that it was a great operation and worthy of commendations for the police. So the Establishment were in a bit of a quandary. But no worries just get the new  Chief Police Officer Mike Bowron or THE CHOSEN ONE to find a reason to change tack and set off a criminal investigation designed to nail Mr. Power for, let's say, conspiring to pervert the course of justice or perjury? Granted they might not find anything jail-worthy but at the very least surely Mr. Power could be banged up for a couple of days for "questioning." That would teach him to defy the Jersey Establishment and it could set an example to others who might be thinking of "Stepping Out Of Line."
 
But like so many of their half thought out and hair brained ideas it had a flaw. Mr. Power was now living in England. No trouble you might think given that it was an English force (Hampshire) who were to do the Inquiry ?
 
Hampshire Police are an English Force so do not have any jurisdiction to investigate alleged crimes in Jersey. That is the territory of the Jersey Police. But not to worry, once they are formally invited to investigate a Jersey matter as official "mutual aid" to the Jersey Force they become temporary Jersey Officers with the full powers and privileges of the Jersey Officer but as Jersey Officers their police powers are confined to Jersey. So if they are Hants officers they cannot investigate Mr. Power for matters occurring in Jersey and if they are temporary Jersey Officers they can investigate Mr. Power as much as they want so long as they stay in Jersey. But as soon as they step outside of the Jersey they lose that authority.  So exactly what can they do about someone in England who they want to "pull" in relation to matters in Jersey? Well not a lot as it turned out.
 
If you (the reader) are a little confused over all of this don't worry. It took Hampshire Police and the States of Jersey Police MONTHS to work it out! Probably when they did "finally" work it out they thought "what a bu--er."

So in the end a nice Assistant Chief Constable from Hampshire might have written Mr. Power a nice letter asking him if he would be an awfully decent chap and volunteer to be interviewed as a criminal suspect in relation to "Operation Invicta." (if it exists) Mr. Power might have written him an awfully decent reply saying "thanks but not thanks." 
 
That left them with the option of applying to London for authority to pull Mr. Power in England but given that such a formal application might require something as boring as actual "evidence" then that proved to be a bit of a sticky point.  
 
After a while Mr. Power "might" have received a letter from Hampshire Police telling him he had no case to answer, or to coin a phrase "couldn't get anything to stick"............................AGAIN!
 
So what to do now? They trump up disciplinary allegations against officers who worked with Mr. Power (during his tenure as Chief Officer) and might have been careless enough to confess that they did not think that he was the devil incarnate the Establishment want him to be and that Mr. Power might even have sometimes knew what he was doing as a 42 year Police Veteran decorated by the Queen. We offer the theory that the hope was that the three Police Officers would confess and say that they only did what they did (bugging the Curtis Warren Gang Members car) because the evil Mr. Power told them to and that they were too scared to do otherwise. That might provide enough material, or evidence for Mr. Power to be denounced and discredited or would/could get "something to stick!"
 
Some of the accused retired but three remained and by some means or another they acquired the nerve and determination to fight it out. In spite of all "offers" and other pressures, such as a trumped up suspension of Minty for not attending a meeting. They held out and when it came to that thing which the Jersey establishment fears, a truly independent hearing, all disciplinary allegations were thrown out for the trash that they were.
 
As the title of this posting states we offer this information in the form of a conspiracy theory. Readers are entitled to make up their own minds as to whether there is any truth in it, or not. Similarly readers might think that we have people on the INSIDE.

Of course one way of helping to prove this all IS a conspiracy theory is for the Hampshire, Investigation, Judgement/Report to be made public. What could the Establishment have to fear? Everybody's innocent aren't they? Everything is above board isn't it? There's nobody left to "blame" is there? God forbid that the Law Offices might have been less than blameless!

It is sometimes said that all conspiracy theories should be strangled at birth and we agree. Well with this one the Jersey Establishment has an opportunity to do just that. We PROMISE that if the judgement in the disciplinary case is published in full and if it shows that, notwithstanding the outcome, the disciplinary Inquiry and hearing were fully justified on solid evidential and professional grounds, then we will publically RETRACT our conspirary theory and APOLOGISE for any offence caused. So come on Senator Ian Le Marquand, Minister for Home Affairs, here is an open public offer. Your big chance to get one back at the Bloggers. Just publish the document and prove us wrong. And we promise to grovel..................

Ask No Questions........

Following the controversial decision of Home Affairs Minister, Senator Ian Le Marquand, to write a cheque to the tune of £10,000 to enable "Equality of Arms" to the three policemen involved in disciplinary proceedings concerning the bugging of convicted drug dealer Curtis Warren's gang member's car. Deputy Mike Higgins submitted an "urgent question" to be asked in the island's parliament.

For our overseas readers who might not understand how Jersey does "Democracy" it is worth explaining that any questions submitted to the island's parliament by a democratically elected politician has to be vetted and agreed by the Bailiff before they (questions) are "allowed" to be asked.

The Bailiff is unelected Head of the Judiciary and Chief Judge. So before a "democratically" elected member of the legislator can ask a question, in the parliament, it has to be "allowed" by the "unelected" Head of the Judiciary............Democracy a la Jersey.

The three Police Officers, who were severely criticised for their actions by the Supreme Court, faced a "secret" disciplinary Hearing and were cleared of any wrong doing. The Law Officers (judiciary), as a result of the police's disciplinary hearing have now been severely criticised themselves and in particular the Attorney General Tim Le Cocq.

Politicians wishing to ask questions have to submit their questions, no later than, midday on Thursday's before the State Sitting on the following Tuesday. However it was too late to lodge a question surrounding the £10,000 "Equality of Arms" cheque written by the Home Affairs Minister as it wasn't made public until after midday Thursday. So Deputy Higgins lodged what is known as an "urgent question."

The Deputy's question was aimed at Home Affairs Minister, Senator Ian Le Marquand, who, prior to being elected, was himself a member of the Judiciary for some thirty years.......(coincidentally!)

The question submitted reads;

"Will the Minister justify to the States his decision to grant £10,000 to the defence of three police officers who were severely criticised for unlawful activity by the Privy Council on the grounds of Equality of Arms whilst denying similar support to the [former] Chief of Police Graham Power in his dispute and the States which fails to provide similar support to Public Servants facing disciplinary hearings"(END)

Regular readers and readers of our PREVIOUS POSTING will be aware that the Former Chief Police Officer, Graham Power QPM, was denied "Equality of Arms" by the same Home Affairs Minister.

The "urgent question" was submitted but the Bailiff (Head of Judiciary and unelected Chief Judge) disallowed it and here is his reasoning.

We apply a three-fold test to urgent questions. This question meets the first test in that is a matter of significant public interest and I assume for the moment – although I would need confirmation – that the second test is met, in that the matter has arisen since the deadline for oral questions. However I do not consider that the third aspect is met, namely that the matter is so urgent that it would be inappropriate to expect the member to wait till the next sitting to ask the question. The question can perfectly reasonably be asked at the next meeting. Leave is therefore refused.(END)

This set of events throws up a number of questions, none of which will be asked by the State Media, so is left to Bloggers (Jersey's only independent media).

Firstly we must question the ruling of the unelected Bailiff. "The question can perfectly reasonably be asked at the next meeting." We could argue that the ruling could be levelled at just about "any" urgent question and particularly if the judiciary didn't want it asked and is pretty flimsy considering it is preventing a "democratically" elected member of parliament attempting to hold the executive to account and thus serving the public.

We must then ask, seeing as though the judiciary has been so heavily criticised, as a result of the Police's disciplinary hearing, isn't the Bailiff heavily conflicted as his loyalties could lay with the Judiciary and might want to protect it/them or at least it could be viewed that way?

The over-arching questions are; how can it be in a supposed 21st century "democracy" that the unelected Judiciary have so much power over our "democratically" elected politicians? How many other urgent questions have been blocked by the unelected judiciary? How many written and oral questions have been blocked by the judiciary.......on flimsy grounds? How many propositions/amendments have been blocked by the unelected Judiciary? What impact has this had on our so-called "Democracy?" How can it be said that the politicians (Legislator) are running the island when it is decided by the unelected Judiciary as to what our Elected Members can, and can't ask?

Equality of Arms.

Back in February 2011 we conducted what is possibly the most in-depth interview ever given by Former Chief Police Officer, Graham Power QPM. We encourage those with an interest in "Jersey Justice" to read the interview in full HERE

Regular readers will be aware that Mr. Power was (possibly illegally) suspended from duty while (because?) his Police Force were investigating claims of Child Abuse in State run institutions, in Jersey, over a period of decades. Allegations, that if proven, amounted to, what was described as STATE SPONSORED PAEDOPHILIA.

Mr. Power was (illegally?) suspended following a letter written by, possibly the most conflicted person there was, in the form of Acting Chief Police Officer, David Warcup. The letter was leaked to Blogger (notably no the State Media) Rico Sorda which he duly published HERE.

The controversy surrounding the very dubious suspension of Mr. Power QPM still rumbles on today as the "official" version of events has been torn apart by local Bloggers and Mr. Power himself.

Which brings us on to the latest anomaly surrounding police suspensions and "Equality of Arms" as three Jersey Policemen who have just been exonerated from any wrongdoing concerning the reported illegal bugging of convicted drug dealer Curtis Warren "gang member's" car.

We are not going to explore, in this posting, the rights and wrongs, and who is to blame for the illegally obtained evidence in the Curtis Warren case, as we believe this has been covered excellently, by Former Jersey Politician and 30 year MET Police Veteran BOB HILL. Although we feel compelled to offer an "opinion" in that the three cops were hung out to dry in order to protect the Law Offices Department.

It has been stated in the discredited and DISGRACED Jersey Evening Post (Jersey's ONLY "news"paper) that "the officers’ defence was partly funded by the taxpayer. Home Affairs Minister Ian Le Marquand has confirmed that he agreed to pay £10,000 towards the officers’ legal expenses after their bills went over the limit that the Police Association’s insurance would cover."

So the three officers who were lambasted by the Supreme Court face a "secret" disciplinary hearing and all come out innocent but have their legal representation partly paid for by the taxpayer because, as has been quoted elsewhere, Home Affairs Minister, Senator Ian Le Marquand believes the Cops should be entitled to "Equality of Arms."

We are asking the question as to how Home Affairs Minister, Senator Le Marquand, believes that the three cops in the Curtis Warren case should be afforded Equality of Arms yet the Former Police Chief can be denied the same, by the same Home Affairs Minister? We are all equal in the eyes of the law aren't we Minister?............well................NO.

Extract taken from in-depth interview with Former Police Chief GRAHAM POWER QPM .


11th May 2009. Moore wrote to me and proposed that I be interviewed at a suitably neutral venue, possibly a Jersey hotel, in the week commencing 15th June 2009. He said that the interview should last for “at least a week." As the law currently stands suspects in murder cases and similar crimes may, with the authority of a Court, be interviewed for around three days. I know of no precedent for a disciplinary interview lasting for “at least a week.”

19th May 2009 and thereafter. My Professional Association attempted to move matters forward in correspondence with the Minister for Home Affairs. It is pointed out that the Minister and Wiltshire Police are benefiting from legal advice at public expense. It is suggested that an interview lasting for a week or more is potentially oppressive but that I will nevertheless consider taking part provided that I am given equality of arms by means of funded legal representation. Meanwhile we obtain an estimate for the services of an Advocate during the proposed interview. The round figure given is £30k. It is also pointed out that the Disciplinary Code places me under no obligation to attend an interview. It refers to me providing a written statement. That is all that I am obliged to do. Anything more than that would be a concession on my part, but one that I am nevertheless willing to make, provided that the arrangements are fair to both sides.

Q. So you are denied “equality of arms” and all legal advice obtained by Wiltshire and the States of Jersey is funded by the Jersey Tax payer?

A. In a word “yes”(end)

It appears then that the Home Affairs Minister can treat a Chief Police Officer worse than a murderer and deny him Equality of Arms on the strength of a letter written by a man who wants the Chief Officer's job, yet the highest court in the land can condemn the actions of three Police Officers for, allegedly, illegally obtaining evidence and the Home Affairs Minister gives them £10k of taxpayers money so that they CAN have equality of Arms............How does that work?

Independence For Jersey.

As a result of Deputy Trevor Pitman's latest BLOG POSTING we thought we'd explore the ramifications/consequences/implications of Jersey cutting ties with the UK and going independent.

As Deputy Pitman has explained in his Posting, Senator Philip Bailhache, and his brother, Deputy Bailiff, William Bailhache, have been exploring the idea of independence since 2007 if not earlier. One must remember that Senator Philip Bailhache was Bailiff (Chief Judge) at the time and his brother William was Attorney General, both positions, supposedly not political.

Philip Bailhache retired as Bailiff and run for election as Senator and was duly elected with the help of Jersey's only "News"paper The Jersey Evening Post. The Senator ran on a platform of "the government spend too much time revisiting already agreed decisions (propositions) in the parliament" and "members should show more respect towards each-other." Yet as soon as he was elected, the first proposition he brought was revisiting and already agreed proposition where he managed to take away (hijack) the independence of the ElECTORAL COMMISSION. The second proposition he brought (through the alleged Chief Minister Senator Ian Gorst) was to overturn a proposition already agreed by the States and attempt to buy Headland at Plemont but that proposition was very narrowly defeated (25-24). As part of that proposition, the Senator, was more than willing to invoke "Compulsory Purchase" or as it has been described by a number of people "Robert Mugabe Land Grab." It was during this debate (and others) that Senator Bailhache (further going against his election campaign) was accused of personal insults against fellow politicians and members of the public. Readers can make up their own mind as to whether the accusations of personal insults are substantiated by listening to THIS. Some readers might be aware that subsequent to the defeat of purchasing Plemont in the island's parliament Senator Bailhache is STILL trying to get his hands on it and cannot accept the "democratically" reached decision. A man with a mission, and by the looks of it, a man with disregard to (what passes for in Jersey) "Democracy."

So back to the question of Independence for Jersey, where Deputy Trevor Pitman explains, in his latest posting, that this was an area the Former Police Chief, Graham Power QPM, was asked to look into by the Bailhache Brothers. Mr. Power had written about this in his 62,000 word interim defence case to the disgraced Wiltshire Constabulary. The Interim defence case that discredited and disgraced BBC refuse to publish despite them having reported on the PROSECUTION CASE.

In it (Mr. Power's statement to Wiltshire) the Former Police Chief writes;

"Such views are not confined to the older elements of the honorary service. They can be found, albeit in a more developed form, in the senior levels of government and the legal establishment where some notable figures favour an eventual severance of links with the U.K. and would see the ready acceptance of U.K. working practices as running counter to this agenda. I recall that in 2007 I assisted a small working group which included, among others, the Bailiff Sir Philip Bailhache and the Attorney General William Bailhache. The purpose of the group was to prepare a draft contingency plan for complete independence. I submitted papers to the group on the implications for law enforcement, and used some contacts from my previous role to offer suggestions as to who outside of the island, could assist in developing such a plan. I provided contact details of key figures in the Scottish Government and Administration including the Scottish National Party. I recall that some of the advice and contacts I provided were in an email I sent, probably in July 2007. This and other experiences reinforced my understanding that there was a tide flowing against closer association with the U.K, and a strong local agenda to develop working models and solutions within the island."

So we are asking just what are the motives of senator Bailhache and what would be the consequences of breaking ties with the UK and becoming independent?

There are an ever growing population that believe we have a corrupt , and politicised, Judicial System on the island. Would Jersey's independence lose us the "safety" of the Privy Council? The European Court of Human Rights? Are either of them any use to us now? How will it affect our currency? How will it affect our relationship with Europe? What impact will it have on our Finance Industry? Is Jersey currently run by the politicians or the Judiciary? Will that change if Jersey is to become independent? Who will benefit from Jersey's independence and who will suffer for it? Would the UK welcome, or contest it? What are the chances of independence becoming a reality? How can it be achieved? Should we be scared (more scared than some of us are now)? Should we welcome independence? Should we do all we can to endeavour this does not become a reality?...............What can we do?

VFC News Review 2012 Part 2

Part two of VFC News Review 2012 continues with a compilation of news/events published on Blogs (Jersey's only independent media) most of which will not be found on ANY of the island's State Media.

Happy New Year to all our readers/viewers and followers.

Section 1 Former Senator Stuart Syvret on THE BBC

Section 2 Deputy Montfort Tadier on PROPAGANDA

Section 3 Deputy Montfort Tadier on Jersey's SECRET CULTURE

Section 4 Senator Francis Le Gresley on COI into CHILD ABUSE

Section 5 Former SIO Lenny Harper on Jimmy Savile PART ONE

Section 6 Former SIO Lenny Harper on Jimmy Savile PAR TWO

Section 7 Media professional and BBC Editor doesn't know how to deal with a man holding A CAMERA

Section 8 Former Deputy Bob Hill on the MISSING Terms of Reference from CHILD ABUSE INQUIRY

Section 9 BBC Journalist, Sam Smith, produces a "fair" piece on Jersey Child Abuse and shows Home Affairs Minister, Senator Ian Le Marquand, to be way out of HIS DEPTH

Section 10 Leading Jersey Blogger Rico Sorda explains the Plemont vote perfectly as only HE CAN

Section 11 Leading Jersey Blogger Rico Sorda reflects on his year's BLOGGING.

Part one News Review 2012 can be viewed HERE.

VFC News Review 2012 Part 1

Inspired by Channel Television and their "News" Review of 2012  we, at Team Voice, thought we would have a brief reflection over some of the subjects we have covered this past year and have put together (in the video below) a brief, fairly random, selection of the stuff we have on film. Below the video there are links to the Blog Postings featured in the video.

For those who have watched the Channel Television compilation (below) and its various subjects it will come as no surprise as to why the Blogs (Jersey's only independent media) are fast becoming the Fourth Estate on the island and are a crucial source for real "news."

We have reported on the subjects, and asked the questions, the State Media, and their masters, would rather were kept quiet. We have given our "interviewees" an opportunity to speak without fear of being edited to a 30 second soundbite, or fear of being misrepresented, as the State Media are often accused of.

We have covered  many different subjects over the course of the year and interviewed many people, and to the best of our knowledge, ALL interviewees are satisfied that NONE of the interviews have been edited to suit an agenda and ALL interviewees were fairly represented in the published interview.....Can the same be said for the accredited media?

The, fairly random, clips we have chosen for our compilation start from January this year (2012) and reach June. We will publish the rest of the year in part two of the compilation in the next couple of days.

Readers/viewers might like to compare and contrast both video's/compilations and ask which has the more "newsworthy" content for a year's "News" Review?

VFC thank and credit The Right Of Reply Blogsite for CTV's compilation.

CTV News Review 2012 part 1




VFC News Review 2012 Part 1




Section 1 Lenny Harper on STATE MEDIA

Section 2 Does Your Neighbour own a PETROL BOMB?

Section 3 Scrutiny Dictatorial PROTOCOL

Section 4 Daniel Wimberley DEMOCRACY TERRORISTS

Section 5 Ian Evans and JERSEY JUSTICE

Section 6 Jean Neil and The Jersey HOME FOR GIRLS

Sections 7/8 Senators Ferguson and Ozouf on LIME GROVE

Section 9 Deputy Roy Le Herissier on VOTE OF CENSURE/CONFIDENCE

Section 10 Deputy Mike Higgins on who's been TELLING LIES?

Nick Pollard Report.

Now that the Nick Pollard Report has been published it is "business as usual" at the BBC. A few "mistakes" were made, a few people got pushed sideways and Mr Pollard found "No evidence of a cover up." 

Regular readers might recall that back in January 2011 Channel Television (CTV) scooped an AWARD from the Royal Television Society (RTS) for what appeared to be nothing more than a cut and paste job of a Report written by the disgraced Wiltshire Constabulary. The award sparked outrage, condemnation and utter bewilderment among the online community and it was described, by the Chair of the Jersey Care Leavers Association (JCLA) as, "A kick in the teeth" to the Abuse Victims/Survivors. 

The JCLA (and many others) wrote a letter of complaint to the  RTS with their disgust at the decision to award CTV this "prize." The award winning article broadcast by CTV was on the supposed "Expenses Scandal" involving the Jersey Child Abuse Investigation while under the control of former Chief Police Officer Graham Power QPM and Former Senior Investigating Officer DCO Lenny Harper. 

Mr. Harper "ripped apart" (in our opinion) the award winning, or offending, CTV broadcast which we published HERE and we subsequently published the letter of complaint to RTS from the Chairperson of the JCLA HERE.

There were calls for CTV to hand back their award, which evidently fell on deaf ears, but something that the discredited and disgraced BBC had the decency to do over their apparent "faked" Panorama Report HERE.

In the interest of fairness and balance CTV say "Channel Television offered a right of reply to former police chief Graham Power as the man ultimately responsible for the management of the abuse inquiry and included Mr Power’s interview as part of the broadcast report. I am very satisfied that our report was accurate, fair and balanced."(END)

In our opinion, and a great many others, there was no "expenses scandal" and we offer the view that it was no more than a diversionary tactic employed by the State Media to shift focus from the atrocities that occurred for decades in Jersey's State run institutions, including the possibility of murder. It was a tactic designed to discredit the two cops, Former CPO Graham Power QPM and former DCO Lenny Harper, who lifted the lid off of Jersey's dirty secret(s). Although all island State Media were "on message" it was CTV who won the award for their, what has been labelled, "a cut n paste job."

At this point it might be worth remembering the words of Former Chief Police Officer Graham Power QPM who said "The attempts to divert this debate into discussions concerning the trivia of expense claims, is a scandal of which all involved should be thoroughly ashamed." Mr. Power wrote those words when he was describing the allegations the police had received concerning DECADES of Child Abuse would, if proven, amount to STATE SPONSORED PAEDOPHILIA.

Hopefully readers would have now read the links provided so far in this posting and understand why there was/is outrage, confusion and complete bewilderment as to how an award was given to an article that was little more than a cut and paste job that many believe was designed to discredit the police officers who lifted the lid off of Jersey's dirty secrets. Readers might be asking what has any of this got to do with the Pollard Report into the discredited and disgraced BBC where Mr. Pollard found (a la Napier)  "No evidence of a cover up."

Well, it might have absolutely nothing to do with it but for the conspiracy theorists out there by, we are sure, complete coincidence and taken from the discredited and disgraced BBC's own WEBSITE Nick is a Fellow of the Royal Television Society and in 2007 was awarded the RTS’s Lifetime Achievement Award for Television Journalism. He was Chairman of the RTS’s annual Journalism Awards from 2008-2011.

Whether Mr. Pollard was still the Chairman of the of RTS's annual journalism awards when CTV received theirs is unclear but would make for the conspiracy theorists an interesting story if he was. For the self respecting Investigative Journalist it could make for an equally interesting story.

In the absence of any evidence to the contrary we offer this posting  as "food for thought" and possible "coincidence" and in no way impugn the integrity or professionalism of Mr. Pollard or his report.

We will leave the conspiracy theories to the State Media and  continue to follow/publish the "facts and evidence" in order that we maintain our credibility that is so lacking with the "accredited" media.

Speaking of which could we ask that those who haven't yet to sign the petition for banned US Author and Investigative Journalist, Leah McGrath Goodman, to have her visa restored? Please sign and share from HERE as Jersey desperately needs some objective and independent professional journalism from somebody who has no constraints from local editors.

Merry Christmas to all our readers/viewers and thank you for your continued support in helping us spread the word that not all people from Jersey are paedophiles or those who protect them. There are those of us that strive for the truth to be told, strive for a non politicised judicial system, strive for democracy, and strive towards justice and closure for the Victims/Survivors of horrendous abuse at the hands of those employed by the States of Jersey and others that robbed them of their childhood and innocence.

The fight (for truth and justice) continues.

Inside Out Jersey Child Abuse.

Former Deputy Chief Officer and Senior Investigating Officer of Jersey's Child Abuse Investigation, Lenny Harper, has kindly responded to our request and submitted a posting on his thoughts and opinions of last night's "Inside Out" programme featured on BBC TV.

We had also asked Home Affairs Minister, Senator Ian Le Marquand to do the same, in order that we could give our readers/viewers a balanced article. Unfortunately, and characteristically, the Minister ignored our e-mails and after watching his "performance" on the programme one can understand if he feels the need to lie low for a while after being made to look (in our opinion) a complete fool, and inadequate, by journalist Sam Smith.

Fortunately (for them) our politicians are not expected to give an answer to any questions they "might" be asked of them by the local State Media but just look at what happens when Senator Le Marquand IS asked a question and his apparent disregard for the Victims/Survivors of the decades long Child Abuse.

Mr. Harper in his characteristic, no nonsense, style keeps the record, and history books, accurate as he dispels some of the apparent myths peddled in the programme by the Attorney General's Office and others.

Former SIO Lenny Harper.

VFC had asked me to comment on what I saw on the “Inside Out” programme tonight, so I sat down to watch it not knowing what to expect. So many times in the past, the media had promised to tell the truth about what went on in Jersey, and so many times had let the victims, survivors, and all working on their behalf, down. This time I was pleasantly surprised. Within the time constraints of twenty minutes or so, the “Inside Out” team did a pretty good job. Mind you, they had some help in the shape of the hapless Ian Le Marquand.

The aspect of this programme that stood out for me was the testimony of the victims who appeared. Together with Carrie Modral, their courage, determination, and dignity shone through. Despite the trauma this will have re-awakened, and despite the life-long effects suffered, they condemned those who had allowed them to suffer in a manner no one could deny. Watching the programme one could not help but feel anger at those authorities in Jersey who had inflicted such suffering on their own people. Firstly in allowing paedophiles to have unfettered free will in homes that they were supposed to be administering, and then to engage in the crudest and cruellest of cover-ups, not once, but again and again. What brought the qualities of the victims/survivors into stark focus was the contrast with the bumbling, struggling, grasping for words and excuses, Ian Le Marquand. His interview with Sam Smith was a lesson on when people would be better hiding in a TOILET. I doubt if making him look like an out of touch liar will be considered by Sam Smith to be one of her finest journalistic achievements. It was too easy. First he accused her of underplaying the complexity of re-examining the cases where people were not charged, despite myself and others being convinced of the strength of the evidence. “This is more complicated than you are making it” he whined. She demanded to know why.

Stumbling over his words he managed to say, “I don’t think prosecutors will be able to re-visit cases already looked at.”

“Why not?”she said.

“Unless there is new evidence.” However by now he was looking extremely uncomfortable.

Again Smith asked, “Why not?” Then, all over the place and hesitating like a frightened rabbit caught in headlights, he muttered, “Why not? There may be cases where they could do.” And to contradict himself even further, he went on, “In some cases they have.”

As if this was not bad enough, when asked by Smith if these people had not suffered enough he came out with the disgraceful line, accompanied by a smug smile, that “The criminal justice process never moves very fast.”

It certainly doesn’t when people like Ian Le Marquand and others in the Jersey Establishment do everything in their power to stop it from moving at all.

There were other disturbing revelations in the programme also. I knew that I had never had a formal allegation against Jimmy Savile whilst I was in Jersey. Tonight we discovered that “John” had made a formal complaint in 2009 and that the police (presumably Mick Gradwell supervised by David Warcup) had submitted a file to the Attorney General’s office. The AG’s office had ruled there was no further action to be taken. All this without even speaking to Savile. If there was enough to submit a file then surely there was enough to interview the suspect under caution. How did the prosecutors rule no further action without even knowing what the suspect would say to the allegation? John was angry that Saville was not even spoken to. I can understand why.

The Attorney General was asked about the cases which were not proceeded with. He apparently told the BBC that the reasons were made public in 2008 and 2009 and that to the “best of his knowledge” no one had ever challenged the assertions. This is rubbish, and the Attorney General knew it. I had challenged these assertions publicly many times. Indeed, I did it so publicly in one press release and a follow up report that the Attorney General ordered Graham Power to tell me to submit my reasons for criticising his office.

Anyone watching the programme tonight who knew nothing about Jersey would look at the pain and suffering which has blighted the lives of the abuse victims/survivors, and compare their demeanour with that of the man who is supposed to be responsible for the system in place to protect them. They would look at what they were saying, and how they said it, and they would know who is telling the truth. It would be nice to believe that the Committee of Inquiry will be given the teeth and the freedom to get to the truth and bring justice to the people denied it for so long. There is a long way to go yet. The Terms of Reference have been butchered. Important aspects have been left out without an EXPLANATION. Who is to say that the bullies in some section of the government will not intimidate those voting in January to veto the COI altogether? (Although, when you witness the foot stamping in the States when decent members attempt to raise the issue of child abuse, you wonder if it will take much intimidation.) However, there can be no doubt now that the eyes of the outside world are on Jersey and Ian Le Marquand’s pathetic attempt to hide the uncomfortable truth tonight will only ensure this attention intensifies. The blogs of Voice for Children and Rico Sorda will continue to shine the spotlight on the sordid activities of those who have previously only had an acquiescing media to contend with. Now that the UK media has broken the ice, I am sure that others will follow. Let us hope that justice for those so vilely abused is not far away. Lenny Harper(END)

VFC credit the BBC for this recording, which in our opinion, was a "fair" piece considering the very limited time allocated (17 minutes) and could not be expected to do real justice to the full story of what has been described as "the worst cover up in History."

We would also like to echo the sentiments of Mr. Harper and humbly pay tribute to the courage, tenacity and dignity of Carrie Modral and all Abuse Survivors. We thank Former SIO Harper for not deserting the Victims and Survivors (a la Gradwell) of the Jersey Child Abuse atrocities and for making himself available to those of us who wish to report the "facts" involving the Child Abuse Investigation and related matters.

Jersey Child Abuse Committee of Inquiry TOR's

Former Jersey politician and 30 year veteran of the Met Police Bob Hill B.E.M. published a BLOG POSTING with his concerns of some omitted Terms Of Reference (TOR) for the Committee Of Inquiry concerning the decades of Child Abuse that was able to continue in Jersey.

Regular readers/viewers will be aware that former Chief Minister Terry Le Sueur commissioned Ed Marsden, of Verita, to draft suggested TOR's for the Committee of Inquiry which he/they did. In the meantime we had an election which saw Senator Ian Gorst elected as Chief Minister, and for reasons only understood by Senator Gorst, he commissioned Andrew Williamson to review the suggested TOR's of Verita and come up with a revised version.

Subsequently Mr. Williamson produced a 3 page document that was inaccurate, factually incorrect, and offered very little to the debate which was seen by some as a waste of time and taxpayers money.

Chief Minister Gorst then went on to lodge P118/2012 and told us "Verita’s recommendations had been used as the foundation for its TOR's" but as former Deputy Hill pointed out there were at least two TOR's that were omitted by the Chief Minister from the Verita TOR's which are; 

"Determine whether the concerns in 2007 were sufficient to justify the States of Jersey Police setting in train Operation Rectangle."

"Review what actions the government took when concerns came to light in 2008 and what, if any, lessons there are to be learned."

Mr. Hill addresses these omissions on his own BLOG and in the video below. There a few more anomalies that have recently come to light concerning the Chief Ministers suggested TOR's which we will be Blogging about in the coming weeks.

In this in-depth interview with Mr. Hill we discuss, among many other related issues, the, what appears to be, very low profile stance adopted by Chief Police Officer Mike Bowron concerning the alleged abuse committed by Jimmy Savile on the island. Why has there not been a high profile campaign in order to encourage Abuse Victims to come forward, as the MET have adopted with "Operation Yew-tree?" The impression given by Jersey's Deputy Chief Police Officer Barry Taylor,  that the MET police are controlling the States Of Jersey Police is also discussed.

Jersey has a once in a lifetime opportunity, with this Committee of Inquiry into the horrific Child Abuse that was able to be kept under wraps for decades. An ideal opportunity to restore confidence in the Police Force after the damage inflicted on it by Messrs Warcup and Gradwell. An ideal opportunity to show the world at large that the government is NOT willing to leave any stone left unturned to ensure the "failings" of the past can be repeated. An ideal opportunity to show that the culture that has existed up until very recently (and possibly still exists) will no longer be tolerated and that children in Jersey are safe from predatory paedophiles.

The Terms of Reference, submitted by the Council of Ministers/Chief Minister, need to be far reaching and fit for purpose. So far this does not appear to be the case and those of us who want to rid Jersey of its reputation as a paedophile protecting secret jurisdiction ask that the Chief Minister amends his own proposition to include the omitted TOR's of Verita or explain why they have been omitted.

Jersey, and more importantly, the Victims and Survivors of Child Abuse, need to be able to move forward and put this dark period in Jersey's History behind them. Without a full, robust, far reaching and fit for purpose Committee Of Inquiry this will not be possible and the reputation of Jersey, on the world stage, will not recover.