Monday, 15 July 2013

Press Release of Deputies Trevor and Shona Pitman.


PRESS RELEASE: DEPUTIES SHONA & TREVOR PITMAN

SUBJECT:  APPLICATION TO APPEAL OUT OF TIME DUE TO JURAT’S CONFLICT   OF INTEREST
DATE:       15TH JULY 2013 (Embargoed until 11am)
CHALLENGE TO A JUDICIAL SYSTEM NOT-FIT-FOR-PURPOSE

Deputies Shona & Trevor Pitman have today announced that they have lodged an application to Appeal out of Time as Litigants in Person against the decision by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court (a judge and just two local jurats) to dismiss their defamation case against the Jersey Evening Post and 1st Jersey Limited: the estate agent, Broadlands; this resulting from the infamous ‘4 x the salary, darling!’ advert published in the newspaper.

The Deputies told the media: ‘We have taken this decision in the light of evidence coming to light that the senior Jurat on the case, John Le Breton, had a very serious Conflict of Interest; rendering the Inferior Number incompliant with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights This being that he has an evidenced, longstanding relationship, both social and working, over many years with a director of the Jersey Evening Post’s owners – yet chose not to reveal this nor recuse himself as required.

The grave seriousness of this failing is further highlighted, stated Deputy Shona Pitman, by the fact that, in contrast, both the Bailiff and Deputy Bailiff did recuse themselves from sitting on the case simply because of the public perception of potential bias due to their ‘political relationship’ with the two Deputies as States Members. ‘Under the Conflict of Interest rules both Crown Officers were right to recuse themselves; even though neither one of us has ever socialised with either judge in private; let alone visited either Crown Officer’s home to do so. Jurat Le Breton, however, did both with a director of a defendant company in the case. It is simply unacceptable.’

Yet the above conflict of interest is not the only concern regarding Jurat Le Breton that the Deputies have had brought to their attention by members of the public since the conclusion of their court case. In managing to obtain a copy of the government suppressed 1999 Stephen Sharp Report into horrific child abuse at Victoria College; the Deputies say that it became apparent that Le Breton actually had an evidenced history of refusing to consider evidence in making judgements. This relates to the case against a former friend and teaching colleague, the predatory paedophile Andrew Jervis-Dykes who plied young boys with alcohol on boat trips before sexually abusing them – even videoing abuse..

Deputy Trevor Pitman said: ‘That a man is allowed to be put forward to become a Jurat by a former President of the Education Committee – a States Member and Constable who was actually on the Victoria College Board of Governors at the time of Jervis-Dykes’ appalling abuse – and subsequently allowed to sit by two successive Bailiffs for a period of 14 years is quite horrifying. Let us not forget here, weighing up evidence is the cornerstone of a jurat’s role. Yet John Le Breton not only refused to look at evidence against this paedophile he then made it his business to actually write to authorities in Jervis-Dykes’ defence. This support included arguing that the paedophile had in fact ‘served the College in an outstandingly competent and conscientious way’; and even claiming that if the police did not prosecute there may be ‘no case (for Jervis-Dykes) to answer’!

The Pitmans state that having no money left to further engage a lawyer following a three year long legal battle they have, with the support of a dozen concerned political figures and justice campaigners, instead brought the revelations to every relevant justice authority in an attempt to get what they state is a clear and serious miscarriage of justice rectified.

‘We have written outlining what has come to light since the court case concluded to the Bailiff, the Island’s  Chief Minister, the UK Justice Minister (Lord McNally), and even last month, the Lieutenant-Governor who is the Queen’s representative on the Island. With the exception of Lord McNally – who we were blocked from meeting by the Chief Minister’s Office – we have even met with all of these individuals. All have in effect made excuses as to why they can do nothing no matter what the evidence. Indeed, in the case of UK Justice Minister, Lord McNally he incredibly simply offered to refer us back to the Bailiff – the very individual who allowed this to happen by his failure to ensure that Jurat Le Breton complied with the rules on Conflict of Interest and recused himself.’

‘It is because of all of this,’ concluded Deputy Trevor Pitman, ‘that we are now left with no option but to attempt to challenge this as Litigants in Person. Neither of us are legally trained and the strain of having to now do this – coming as it does after years of fighting for justice and on top of our political work – will be huge. Yet we have no option. To not do so means financial ruin – which is possibly what some involved would like. It is not lost on either of us that as public figures we actually have some degree of a platform to try and challenge this huge injustice – something most ordinary people do not.

Justice simply should not be down to whether one has deep pockets or be dependent upon who an individual is; whether they have ‘rocked the political boat’ or not. Of course, since making public what has gone on behind the scenes in our case we now know that we are far from being alone in suffering such abuse of the justice system.

It is quite clear that a Mistrial should be called in our case as it has not been compliant with Article 6 (the right to a fair trial) of the European Convention on Human Rights. I am learning of more people suffering serious legal abuses on an almost weekly basis. In fighting for justice ourselves we hope we are also giving hope to all others utterly betrayed by a justice system that is meant to protect everyone but which does not. We will endeavour to help anyone else we can. Indeed, we will fight all the way to Strasbourg if necessary until Jersey gets its judicial system in order’. (END)

In the exclusive, and in-depth interview below, we discuss the contents of this latest Press Release, the untenable and conflicted dual role of the unelected, all powerful Bailiff position. Tax-payer funded "secret" court case and more.

The Deputies previous Press Release calling on the UK government to intervene to restore good governance and the rule of law to Jersey can be viewed HERE.

22 comments:

  1. Good luck Trevor and Shona, let's hope that eventually you will get someone somewhere to listen and do something. What happened to you both is appalling. As you say, you are fighting the fight for all of us. If you, as polititions, and good ones I might add, cannot get anywhere with this then there is no hope for the rest of us. You have many of us out here who wholeheartedly give you our total support.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hear Hear! Good luck!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Good luck.

    The campaign against you and Shona has been blatant and concerted in my opinion.

    I do believe the fake letters campaign against you in the JEP shows the low they have to stoop, in trying to rally support and disguise the true motive behind this campaign to stop you doing your job for the people you represent.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon, Are you suggesting the fake letters were somehow the work of the government?

      Delete
    2. Yes that is exactly what I am suggest and believe.

      Delete
  4. At 4:25 onwards Shona submitted a statement and the Bailiff banned the statement being presented.

    This is truly shocking behaviour by the Islands parliament.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Doesn't that depend on the reason for not allowing the statement?

      Delete
    2. Perhaps you are missing the point? As mentioned in the video interview, the Bailiff, the unelected head of the judiciary, disallowed a statement from two democratically elected politicians. The Statement was critical of the so-called "justice" system. The head of the "justice" system took off his judicial hat and put on his legislator hat to silence politicians. In a so called 21st century "democracy" this looks like nothing short of feudalism.

      Delete
    3. I'm sorry but I think you may be missing the point. I haven't listened to the video but if it refers to the Bailiff not allowing a 'personal statement' then it depends on whether he disallowed it based on a sound interpretation of Standing Orders or whether he has in some way done something improper. In the UK, personal statements are allowed for two reasons. to announce a resignation or to correct an error previously made in debate. If the statement criticised the justice system then its just possible that it was more of a political statement than a personal one and so the Bailiff was perfectly right to disallow it. There is absolutely nothing 'truly shocking' about this.

      Delete
    4. Sorry but I can’t help thinking that you are still completely missing the point.

      The point is; should an unelected head of the judiciary be vetting what democratically elected members of Parliament can and can’t bring to the house? It’s almost irrelevant what the personal statement contained.

      Delete
  5. From the Senior Investigating Officer of Jersey's Child Abuse Investigation Lenny Harper.

    " I tried to post on your blog to wish the Pitmans good luck but it has failed twice, so pass my best wishes onto them if you can.
    Thanks Lenny"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Mr Harper. As you fighting for justice in Jersey is a very dirty job - but luckily some of are big enough to try and do so.

      Delete
  6. Trevor, what if you get a mistrial, and then a retrial, which you loose. Won't you just be even more skint?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please watch the video, your question is answered.

      Delete
  7. One question. Supposing that the case ultimately gets expunged because of a conflicted Jurat.

    Will the Pitmans be pursuing a full re-trial ?





    ReplyDelete
  8. Just remember Trevor and Shona, you are not alone in this fight for justice. Clearly there is a fundamental breakdown in the rule of law, endemic corruption within the Establishment and endemic corruption within the Judiciary. So much for Good Governance by the UK Justice Minister or Ministry. When will we all have to book the train tickets to Strasburg as a groupe lot ???

    ReplyDelete
  9. One of the Jurats who took part in the Judicial Review of the suspension of the Police Chief Graham Power during the historic abuse investigation, and who found in favour of Home Affairs Minister Ian LeMarquand, was also called John Le Breton. Could they be in any way related? And if they are, did his history of opposing the previous abuse enquiry at Victoria College render him conflicted in any way?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Just about everybody involved with the Judicial Review concerning the illegal suspension of the former Police Chief, including Mr. Le Breton, was conflicted.

    Rico Sorda did publish a Blog outlining the disgraceful sham and all the conflicts involved with this Judicial Review. Hopefully Rico can send us the link?

    ReplyDelete
  11. May I share something with all bloggers? As a lot of you know, Dame Heather Steele is supposed to be 'investigating' on behalf of the Diocese of Winchester, what she is investigating I do not know, but I wrote to the police and forbade her or any police officer 'appointed' by the Diocese to be allowed to access my records as I feel, and so do many, that this investigation is sham.
    This morning, one of the advocates who was used to destroy me and leave me homeless in the UK contacted me saying that Dame Steele had been in touch about me. I hit the roof and have made a formal complaint against the Diocese of Winchester.
    An investigation that is a conflict of interests which is harming the person they are supposedly investigating and refusing to give terms of reference is just wrong.

    Will anyone bail me out when the Diocese have me arrested in retaliation?
    HG

    ReplyDelete
  12. When Graham Power walked into his Judicial Review it was like a Christian walking into the lions den. Jurat Le Breton was one of the Jurats. Unbelievable as it is it is only the tip of the iceberg. It can be read here.

    http://ricosorda.blogspot.com/2012/06/graham-powers-judicial-review-part-2.html

    RS

    ReplyDelete
  13. As sickening as the Jersey situation:

    Eileen Fairweather
    www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10177681/The-truth-behind-the-child-abuse-cover-ups.html

    How do they get away with it?
    In Jersey we see how, in microcosm, and in a clarity which enables the more nebulous mainland situation to be better understood.

    At least the posh boys at Vic college got taken sailing and drugged with alcohol with probably only minor use of threats - better than being beaten shitless, tied up, or half drowned which have been the preferred methods by some at places like HDLG and some mainland homes that have been infiltrated by paedophiles.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hi VFC.

    Put up the Audio of Senator Bailhache giving his Statement, I let it Run not knowing the reason for the Pitmans Statement not being aloud. So you have The Bailiff telling Deputy Pitman that he was not going to allow it "Because he CAN" do that being the Bailiff???

    Wow

    You & your readers can listen to it HERE it's straight after Bailhache's Statement.

    Again we can say "you just can't make this Sh_t up"

    Also I've put up the Questions without Answers from the 02/07/13.

    TJW

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.