Friday, 20 August 2010

Napier “for your (John Richardson's) eyes only”

In February 2010 twenty six of our States members (The P9-26) voted against Deputy Bob Hill’s proposition (P9/2010) which was for a public committee of enquiry into the people and process used to (illegally?) suspend the Chief of Police Graham Power QPM. Twenty six was enough to defeat the proposition despite this strong arguement from Deputy Hill.

It is apparent that Members voted against the proposition on the promise of an alternative proposal submitted by our Chief Minister Terry Le Sueur, (TLS) where instead of an open and public enquiry, a Commissioner would be appointed to carry out the review and this would be much quicker and simpler process than that required in the formation of a Committee of Inquiry, but would still provide the level of assurance Members were looking for. Members were advised that the Terms of Reference proposed by the Chief Minister contained a specific clause that asked the Reviewer to establish whether there were grounds for a full Committee of Inquiry. Should this be confirmed, the Chief Minister (TLS) committed to bringing back to the Assembly a Proposition for a Committee of Inquiry. The Terms of Reference also required the Commissioner to review all information relating to the original suspension procedure, including relevant sections of the suspended Chief Officer’s Affidavit It was also proposed that the quicker and simpler review would not take any longer than 4 to 6 weeks.

Deputy Bob Hill was asked by the Chief Minister if he would be part of the selection process to appoint the Reviewer, Deputy Hill only agreed if the Chief Minister would allow him to be involved with the ongoing work of the Commissioner, the reporting mechanism and the reports themselves, including the Final Report. The Chief Minister agreed to this arrangement via an email dated 1st March.

For those of you who haven’t been following this latest debacle you would do well to have a look on Rico Sorda’s Blog where he has been covering it extensively because at time of typing the “accredited” media, who have been copied into this correspondence, have not published/broadcast a single word of it.

It turns out that this review which was going to take four to six weeks is SIX MONTHS LATE and still there is no sight of it. However it is apparent that 2 position/interim reports have been submitted by the Commissioner but Deputy Bob Hill (who is supposed to have oversight) has not seen anything.

However Deputy CEO John Richardson has!! We are led to believe has asked for, and received, an interim or progress report, or what was the other thing TLS called it? Ahh yes a “position paper”. Call it what you like, John Richardson, it is believed has seen two of these reports, position papers and Deputy Hill? Nothing, nada, zilch, sweet Fanny Adams.

Why is this significant? Because John Richardson’s immediate superior is CEO Bill Ogley. Former CPO Graham Power QPM (in a sworn Affidavit) has implicated Mr. Ogley in some, what might be termed as “dodgy dealings” which will, I believe, make Mr .Ogley, (Mr. Richardson’s boss) either a suspect, or witness, in the Review conducted by Brian Napier QC.

Below is a couple of e-mails that are the latest in a chain that have been published by Rico Sorda which I hope will give the readers some idea of the struggles that Deputy Hill and others, notably Deputy Trevor Pitman, have in trying to get Terry Le Sueur to keep his promises.

From Bob Hill
To Terry Le Sueur
Cc "All States Members (including ex officio members)
Date Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 10:08 AM

Subject FW: The Review into the suspension of the Chief Police Officer.

Dear Terry,

Thank you for your email but it again does not address my request for answers, so I again request the information.

I welcome the support from Deputy Pitman whose comments I am sure are shared by all fair minded States Members.

I attach a copy of the JEP dated 27th March in which it is stated that the review would take about 4 to 6 weeks you will note that the Terms of Reference are included in the report. I also attach the written answer you gave to Deputy Pitman on 19th July.

I have informed you that I am shortly to go on holiday and wanted to have sight of ALL of Mr Napier's Reports in accordance with our agreement. If you do not want to see them that is down to you but in the interest of good government and our agreement I want to see them. I also want to see Mr Napier when he is next over and have asked that he does not come over whilst I am away. Please may I have the two Reports that Mr Richardson has received or it be arranged that I see them with Mr Richardson. Finally please may I and Deputy Pitman be informed whether you have received Mr Napier's Final Report or if not, when is it expected?

As a matter of courtesy I am copying this email to Mr Napier.

Regards, Deputy F. J. (Bob) Hill, BEM.,
Deputy of St Martin

Deputy Trevor Pitman’s e-mail referred to above.

From: Trevor Pitman

Sent: 6 August 2010 23:58

To: Terry Le Sueur; Bob Hill

Cc: All States Members (including ex officio members)

Subject: RE: The Review into the suspension of the Chief Police Officer

Dear Terry

In all fairness this report is now seriously over due - ridiculously so to be quite honest. Six weeks we were told by your good self. Will you please now advise us as to the proposed date when this will be with us. It must also, with the greatest of respect, be possible to answer Bob's questions. It was agreed that he be kept fully in the loop alongside you - so surely what he is asking is perfectly reasonable and could be ascertained with a couple of phone calls. We really shouldn't have another shambles like Ian's total loss of control of the disciplinary process.

Regards Trevor

Deputy Trevor Pitman’s written question referred to above.



'Will the Chief Minister clarify the full reasons as to why the report into the issues surrounding the suspension process of the Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police - promised to the Assembly to be completed in six weeks - has instead not been completed prior to the announcement that all disciplinary measures were to be dropped; further still, when will this report be completed and made available in full to all States Members?'


The original timescale for the completion of the independent review into the suspension of the Chief Officer of Police was six weeks as stated in the Deputy’s question. Unfortunately, due to difficulties in arranging convenient dates for interviews and travel disruptions caused by the Icelandic volcanic ash cloud, it was not possible to complete the interview process with one of the key witnesses during the Mr Napier’s first visit to Jersey. A second visit had to be arranged to that suited both people.
All of the interviews were completed by 9th June 2010 and I am awaiting the final report. Unfortunately, due to other work commitments, Mr Napier was unable to complete his final report immediately after the interview process was complete.
I have been advised by Mr Napier, that he is currently writing his final report which should be completed by the end of July. Once the report has been issued and all parties concerned have had the opportunity to consider any findings, it will be published in full.

Submitted by VFC.


  1. I would imagine that as a proposed 4/6 week report is now still not finished nearly six months later, that the cost must also have escalated to a ridiculous amount!!

  2. This is exactly what we have come to expect from TLS - a a total and shameless lack of integrity.

    Once again, the civil servants are running the show, protecting themselves and each other.

  3. Self-imposed Egg Smile20 August 2010 at 13:10


  4. Personally, purely as a thrifty housewife, I would insist on having this report FREE- due to the overrun timescale, I certainly wouldn't expect to be paying more !

  5. It stands to reason that Ogley is to/has to go.

    The problem is who has the guts to tell him? When is the right time? And how will they tell him without too much disruption?

    And this only the start!?

  6. The Chief Minister has replied to Deputy Hill's e-mail.

  7. Who is this Mr Napier, if he is the same as:

    Gateshead Councillor (Labour) David Napier (1994)

    Then I have found an interesting story from 1994 which includes Northumbria Police, David Warcup and David Napier, but surely not!! the Mr Napier.


  8. Since my last post I have discovered that it is not David Napier but Brian Napier (I assume no relation). However the story does illustrate how duitful!! David Warcup was....



    Because I constantly requested copies of Minutes I was somehow awarded a "Final Written Warning" by Gateshead Police Commander Supt. David Warcup (known as "cock-up") who did not have the decency to acknowledge receipt of my written response.


  9. Mr Brian Napier, putting a face to the name:

    Brian napier QC

  10. One question that Team Voice will be seeking the answer to. "Has David Warcup received a Scott Letter?". Make that two.....If not, why not?

  11. clearly the States Members who voted for Terry's inquiry were suckered once again!!

  12. Well done Voice, Bob and Trev. Process not procrastination that is what we are interested in.

  13. Regarding the media and reports , well done VFC team for all your hard detective work and very informative blog.

    This is work that the BBC, CTV and the JEP should take in their stride but do not.

    Have a look at The Sky news website at

    The Boss for BBC Jersey ( Denzil ) is to go, Mr Jon Gripton is to replace him.

    Therefore the internet shall be used to send a message which starts like this.

    Welcome to Jersey Mr Gripton.

    As you may be aware, Jersey is a beautiful island with a long and colourful history.

    Sadly in the last few years several scandals have hit the headlines.

    As the largest and most powerful of the news mediums in the island, BBC Jersey has had many complaints levelled at its local door step, and that of the BBC complaints department in London and to Ofcom.

    The problem Jersey has, is of light touch if not regular non-existent local professional reporting by BBC journalists who appear to not want to get involved. This is clearly amplified and underlined by several small but significant private local blog web sites who receive and publish new fresh political and other important information that leave the BBC trailing woefully behind.

    Continued at

    Place your own comments and information should you want to.

    Tim South

  14. Tim.

    Thanks for the link and your vote of confidence in the Blog.

    I am sure that BBC London are aware of the Jersey BBC's "way of doing things" but I'm not convinced it isn't all done with the blessing of BBC London or indeed the orders of BBC London.

    Unfortunately I am rapidly losing respect for the BBC as a Corporation. You mentioned about the amount of complaints that have been made about BBC Jersey. How many of those complaints do you think were upheld? I would hazard a very educated guess and say not a single one, but stand to be corrected.

  15. VFC,

    Who is Tim South?

  16. Re; "VFC, Who is Tim South?"

    I don't know.

  17. So NINE DAYS after VFC publish this the JEP publish this

    Try and keep up JEP, try and keep up.

  18. And your posting was better and much more informative VFC.

  19. Diane get in touch with the voice they might give you a scoop if lucky.

    The blogs are leading the way again

    Great work

  20. Can you believe it ?

    The interview panel for the new police chief will be Ian Le Marquand, Bill Ogley, Ian Crick's replacement Ruth Davies, two members of the Appointments Commission, (probably) Walker and A Lewis, a representative from HM Inspector of Constabulary, (probably) Warcup or Gradwell!

    How can they get away with this?

    Because they can!!!