Today a rally took place in the Royal Square, organised by anti Child Abuse Campaigner Cheyenne O'Connor asking for pedophiles to remain on the sex offenders register for life and for a minimum sentence of three years imprisonment to be imposed on those who are convicted as highlighted in our PREVIOUS POSITING
Around 150-200 people turned up to support the cause which considering the subject matter, and the culture of fear still so prevalent on the island, this must be seen as a success and full credit to Cheyenne O'Conor for organising the event and to those who turned up.
There were two speakers at the event, the first was a very brave Survivor of Abuse Emma, who spoke of the ongoing physical and emotional scars and how this is also felt by family members long after the abuse occurred.
The second speaker was former Health Minister and whistleblower Stuart Syvret. Stuart spoke of events that took place in late 2007-2008 when he spoke out about the child abuse and the hostility he faced then, and now, for doing so. How the Jersey situation now is no better, if not worse, than it was back then. He also gave us a sobering reminder that not all those who were in the "care" of the States of Jersey made it out alive and deserve as much thought and recognition as those who did. Some say those who didn't make it out alive are the lucky ones................................
Below is a short video of today's events/speeches. Possibly more (video) to follow.
Is it true that not a single States Member was there?
ReplyDeleteI personally didn't see any.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteWhat nonsense. No elected States members ever go to public rallies on controversial subjects, and subjects which only have a small active base. If it had been a rally on say reducing private school fee subsidies, which would have brought out about 2000 Jersey establishment types, we can be certain at least half the States assembly would have been there.
DeleteWe all know the score.
I was going to ask you where you've read these comments you refer to but then I thought to myself, why bother feeding a troll.
DeleteOne word sums up the comment at 20:29
Delete"Trolling"
Two words are better: "Paedo Trolling"
The basic lack of adherence to facts is what makes it Trolling.
The facts are not obscure or difficult to find:
http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.com/2018/11/stuart-syvret-and-vfc-discuss-jersey.html
"Yesterday (6th November 2018) former Health Minister/Senator and whistle-blower Stuart Syvret gave a presentation to States Members during their lunch break at the States Building"
Ther were over 400 comments on that blog - Most of them reasonable, informative and factual -only a few of them were nonsense Paedo Trolling.
No doubt the comments count would have been even higher if VFC had published all of the Paedo Trolling. Hilarious!
Indeed it is hilarious how these people are using exactly the same methodology they used in 2008. The situation is quite well explained here:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZP37TMBAo6Q&feature=youtu.be&t=110
These people have even had shedloads of taxpayers money shovelled in their direction by the Data peado-Protection Officer.
The walking proof that children are not safe.
The Trolling comment slipped through the net and has now been removed. In edition to the more than 400 comments on the previous Blog Posting there were more than 200 Troll comments which weren't published.
DeleteThis Blog Posting has also been bombarded with Troll comments and apologies to readers that I dropped the ball with the one that got published.
DeleteIMO troll-comments should occasionally be published.
I quite understand the merits of a zero-tolerance approach but it is actually valuable to have occasional selected paedo-troll comments published so that readers see what Team Voice are up against.
(Is this group still sending death threats to you and your family BTW?)
Jersey's paedo-trolls even include the odd privately educated Vic College boy so these people lack basic morals and judgement more than they necessarily lack a basic intellect.
What a waste of a life and all those private school fees. But truly hilarious.
Generally it is the children I am concerned with but in this case it is the parents I really feel sorry for!
Zero-tolerance to paedo-trolling will never truly work. These people are foul rather than completely stupid. They will modulate their comments to a level which they hope will sneak through -using basic techniques of misrepresentation, omission & diversion -we see this on most threads.
Amongst the cynical paedo-trolling there will likely be a few 'genuine' comments from people who do not know any better - "JEPeado Believers".
It is important that JEPeado Believers have their say and that yourself and other commenters have the opportunity to help them with some facts to get over the damage done by years of JEPeado-Propaganda.
The *occasional* overt paedo-troll comment warns readers to be wary of the snuck-through troll comments.
There is also a free speech issue here -It is important that alternative views are given an airing so that they can be evaluated -none of us have a monopoly on fact and judgement.
Obviously the paedo-trolling must not be allowed to dominate or divert the thread but I think Team Voice usually judges it about right.
Personally I was in favour of publishing the paedo-troll's criticism of Ex Health Minister Syvret @ 20:29
Like I said: "The walking [talking, paedo-trolling] proof that children are not safe."
"Zero-tolerance to paedo-trolling will never truly work. These people are foul rather than completely stupid. They will modulate their comments to a level which they hope will sneak through -using basic techniques of misrepresentation, omission & diversion -we see this on most threads."
DeleteI think that is absolutely right. There are highly invested & motivated individuals working on this.
I think it may even be someone's full time job (if you can call it that) to try to get their comment in first.
First comment on this blog
Anonymous16 February 2019 at 18:43
"Is it true that not a single States Member was there?"
A set up and roundabout way for stating that it was somehow not a significant event if it was not anointed by those precious States Member.
First comment on the previous blog
Anonymous12 February 2019 at 19:56
"I think the Petition is too harsh but it has been answered.
If we stick all sex offenders for life on the Register then who can Police it and the offenders will simply go underground and become even more dangerous."
Peddling the idea that registering sex offenders (particularly for life) makes them "even more dangerous"
First comment on the blog before that
https://voiceforchildren.blogspot.com/2018/11/stuart-syvret-and-vfc-discuss-jersey.html?showComment=1541619209543#c8674345043971579559
"To give us an idea. Can we have the list of the newer states members who attended Stuart Syvrets presentation yesterday."
Bit of a pattern here and also a preoccupation with states members.
On the one hand this could be an innocent request for information but this someone seemed to maintain a preoccupation with wanting identities of potentially dissident states members and even of legal professionals commenting on the site.
Just the sort of information that Team Paedo's death threat troll could gleefully make use of.
Keep up the good work. We love the smell of peado fear in the morning.
I really like Cheyenne O'Connor, she's an inspiration, a breath of fresh air, and I hope she carries on catching these deviants who use the Internet to try and sexual abuse and ruin the lives of our children.
ReplyDeleteAgree 100%.
DeleteShe is young and got the gift of the gab, loads of street credit and determined but the Courts have to start putting this scum away for longer so that the message gets out there.
Meaning years in prison not months and they get out 2/3rds in with good behaviour, its a joke.
Until the States assembly becomes balanced by woman you will always have a screwed up system. Men have sex with women every day. Some devients chose children instead. It’s these you need you need to stop.
ReplyDeleteRape and abuse on girls and women have happened through the ages and the centuries. If women want equality they should start the uprising.
Why this fixation on the type of genitalia @21:47 ?
DeleteYes we need an uprising, but not if it is a diversion from reality or the matter at hand.
I am sorry if you have had bad experiences and I hope that they have not been too damaging. Survival is the best outcome -survival and justice if it can be achieved. One of the most important aspects of justice is that it protects and prevents.
The operative deficit in Jersey is the deficit of justice not the deficit of women.
Jersey is certainly a backward society in some areas. "Toxic Masculinity" exists but this is merely a facet of the wider problem of "Toxic Humanity".
A commenter on the previous blog repeatedly insists that "even women can abuse children". Well Duh....this is true but equally importantly women can FAIL TO PROTECT children.
We see this in the vast majority of our female States Members.
By your evaluation our 'heroes' of child protection would be predominantly woman. They are not -they are men and predominantly so even in excess of the representation of men in the States.
Daniel Wimberly, Trevor Pitman, Higgins, Syvret, Bob Hill etc.
Shona Pitman is one of the few women to make the list. No disrespect to her but even she was probably outshined by her husband in this respect.
Yes, men and women have sex. So what?
I hope that the Pitmans are enjoying great consensual sex to this day ….and maybe even "every day" to use your words.
If women want to start the uprising, I am right behind them.
Go girls!
Nothing like a bit of 'Uprising'..................
DeleteWhat about a thrusting at the hustings? Though not much action at the 3/4 byelection one I sat through at Centre Point.
DeleteCredit where credit is due.
ReplyDeleteCheyenne O'Connor is a vigilante
This is not an insult. It is a statement of fact
REF. the Oxford English Dictionary:
"Vigilante: A member of a self-appointed group of citizens who undertake law enforcement in their community without legal authority, typically because the legal agencies are thought to be inadequate."
Would any sane person argue with that?
Indeed, would any sane person question the fact that "the legal agencies in Jersey are inadequate"?
We know who those people are but I emphasise that I did say any *sane* person. LOL
Of course an alternative to vigilantism is the proper rule of law.
Until we have the proper rule of law we need more vigilantes like Cheyenne.
Such tasks are not to be taken lightly or taken to excess. It must be noted that Cheyenne has an effectiveness and success rate that many professionals would be proud of.
People should not have to do this. Keep up the good work!
That is a fundamental misunderstanding of the child-protection work admirably undertaken by Ms O'Connor. The commentator at 05.13 describes her as a 'vigilante' and quotes the OED,
Delete'REF. the Oxford English Dictionary:
"Vigilante: A member of a self-appointed group of citizens who undertake law enforcement in their community without legal authority, typically because the legal agencies are thought to be inadequate."
Those words are an accurate description of 'vigilantism', but not of what Ms O'Connor does.
She does not, nor has ever claimed so far as I am aware, to be undertaking 'law enforcement in the community without legal authority.'
I consider that to be a seriously misleading application of the OED explanation. I make the point in the hope of averting similar misunderstandings.
Ms O'Connor is not undertaking 'law enforcement'. It is easily observed that the 'law-enforcement' in the relevant cases has been undertaken by the police, prosecutors, & judiciary.
Ms O'Connor's role has been that of a public spirited community volunteer, very much in keeping with Jersey's tradition of honorary service. She gathers evidence, supplies it to the police, then appears as a witness to testify to that evidence. It is clear that the actual 'law enforcement' is carried out by the relevant public agencies.
Of course, there is a serious debate to be had concerning policing priorities, and competency for that matter. It may be asked 'why should it be necessary that an important role in child-protection requires voluntary community support in this way?'
Therein is the debate. Your politicians need to set the policy and priorities of your police service. And as is proper in free democratic societies, the public are entitled to campaign to influence the policies. Let us be honest, there is a routine 'turnover' of people taken through the process of prosecution for a variety of 'offences' which many of us would consider to be comparatively trivial compared to planning and then seeking to undertake the sexual abuse of a minor.
The community of Jersey very much needs to rescue its control of policing policy and priorities from out of the hands of conflicted commercial interests. The decision by your former Home Affairs Minster Ian Le Marquand to give control of island policing policy to private business men was one of his gravest follies.
Anonymous @ 5:13
ReplyDelete"REF. the Oxford English Dictionary:
"Vigilante: A member of a self-appointed group of citizens who undertake law enforcement in their community without legal authority, typically because the legal agencies are thought to be inadequate.""
There is an important distinction to be made here. Cheyenne is flushing these guys out and then handing them over to the "justice" system.
The term "vigilante" usually implies doing the whole job yourself, which is not the case here.
I was very surprised to hear that no current States member turned up at the rally. If this is true, they are letting down those brave people who did.
"I was very surprised to hear that no current States member turned up at the rally"
DeleteDisappointing but not that surprising.
For the last 30 or so years there have always been a handful of good states members but we must face the fact that it remains a captured and gerrymandered institution under the power of "Jersey's royal family" (their own words I believe).
Despite the few good-uns the states chamber as a whole continue to be a danger to progress and the protection of children.
An opinion on this is offered:
"....The legal failings - the examples of ultra vires - on the part of your public inquiry are legion, and terminal.
To the extent that people should be prosecuted.
But of course none of that absolves your legislature or your executive of a substantial amount of culpability. For example, it became dramatically apparent at a very early stage that the public inquiry had simply chosen to unlawfully ignore a vital part of its actual legislative instruction, and instead go on a frolic of its own.
No respectable legislature would have tolerated that for one moment. What did we hear from the States of Jersey? deafening silence. ..."
The full thread can be read at:
https://voiceforchildren.blogspot.com/2019/02/cheyenne-oconnor-rally-saturday-16th.html?showComment=1550256071534#c5395889697208258116
This remans an elephantin the room for a "respectable legislature".
Furthermore a legislature with any fiscal competence and real care for children could even now extract from Eversheds and other culpable agents the majority of the £23 million cost for use on real child protection.
A reader says: -
Delete"Furthermore a legislature with any fiscal competence and real care for children could even now extract from Eversheds and other culpable agents the majority of the £23 million cost for use on real child protection."
That is so. One day there will be a majority in the Jersey legislature which will resolve that that very course of action be taken. I say "will" - because as things stand the polity of the island of Jersey has no - real - constitutional or legal credibility. Not when its legislature takes decisions to hand over £23 million of public money so that a specified public inquiry process and methodology be developed and undertaken - only for those who were given the contract to ignore the specifications.
No credible, non-subverted legislature would - nor could - sit in supine silence in the face of such startlingly brazen embezzlement of public finances and subversion of public policy.
But - this being Jersey - that is exactly what our legislature and executive have done.
And no amount of spin-doctoring can change that fact.
Recovering public funds which have been unlawfully disbursed in a process counter to agreed public-policy is but one of the painful steps on the path towards respectability which Jersey must now tread.
Stuart Syvret
Longer term readers will remember that Jersey's paedo authorities have form for this.
DeleteEx Met Policeman Bob Hill fought hard for a meaningful ToR in the Napier review of the hijack of Jersey's policing function by means of the constructive dismissal of the Chief of Police, Mr. G. Power
The "ourchap" report which was eventually delivered omitted this meaningful ToR !!!
The excuse for this omission was an "administrative error"
They thought we were that stupid?
The face CoI did not even bother providing an excuse
They found no cover up -which is quite an achievement when investigating decades of covered up child abuse.
They STILL think we are stupid!
What attendance did the State Media report?
ReplyDeleteThe JEPeado doesn't report
Deleteit misleads
Do you know what is so depressing about the list of champion politicians somebody named above?
ReplyDeleteI'll tell you.
Every one of them bar Higgins is no longer in the States punching for the victims and justice.
Not a put down but unless it was tampered with the photo on the rally on ITV doesn't show anything like 150 people let alone 200. More like 70 odd. Could it be that the audience grew as the rally progressed? Also, can I ask if any of the candidates in the upcoming by-election for No 3&4 district showed up? I would have thought Nick Le Cornu might at least.
ReplyDeleteThe by-election will be a huge non-event and certainly of no benefit to those who care about the issues here. I watched the video recording of the recent hustings (why is it that only one of three is being officially videoed?) and I have to say the standard of answers and speeches was truly dire. Even Nick Le Cornu couldn't seem to stop rambling and his drawn out antics regarding his note book to take names was utterly tiresome. Like his politics generally. Lucky for me I don't live in the district so don't have to choose between them. Troy, Jennings, De Faye, Aihier and Baker definitely not. And Gardiner NO!
ReplyDeleteWho controls the decision as to whether a person can make use of microphone technology? Surely the parish and not the Bailiff's office?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous @ 11:14
ReplyDeleteCould someone explain the background here.
Is it permission to use your own microphone/speaker setup that's involved? What are the categories of permission and what are the determining factors for each? And yes, whose decision is it?
Thanks.
Polo.
DeleteI'm not 100% sure but I believe people need to apply to use the electrics and bring their own microphones/speakers. As for the categories of permission/determining factors that is a mystery to me.
As it is the (un-elected/unaccountable) Bailiffs Office who gives permission (or not) It is no more a mystery than the rest of the Bailiff's antics.
You will be aware that this particular Bailiff is the man that withheld evidence from the Napier Review. (The e-mail he sent to Frank Walker and Bill Ogley advising NOT to suspend the Chief Police Officer Graham Power QPM. Interestingly (suspiciously) he didn't send the e-mail to (or copy in ) Andrew Lewis)
The very same Bailiff who looks to have somewhat economical with the truth when giving evidence to the Child Abuse Committee of Inquiry when he said that a suspected pedophile had received consistently good reports when these reports apparently didn't exist.
BailiffWILLIAM BAILHACHE.
So supposing it was William Bailhache who refused Cheyenne O'Connor the use of the electrics perhaps he should/might have declared himself conflicted?
DeleteThanks Voice for the reply. It does answer my questions except for the categories. However, I suppose "at the whim of the Bailiff" could be slotted in there.
ReplyDeleteYes, I am familiar with William's failures and cover ups, and also with the deft hand of his brother at turning off the microphone.
Fortunately, judging from your video, the megaphone appeared to be of good quality.
Imagine having to ask the individual who you were demonstrating against for permission! Remember the demo against William 'Fabricated Mr K evidence' Bayleaf? Only in Jersey! Or North Korea.
ReplyDeleteMr William Bailhache is a man in a range of most very serious difficulties. Those aware of the evidence and history, and of the extensive documented misfeasances and malfeasances of W. Bailhache will understand those difficulties without further elaboration.
DeleteIn the normal run of things in lawfull jurisdictions, someone as compromised and toxic as W. Bailhache would be brought to justice. But strangely enough, the fact that Jersey plainly has no policing, prosecution, or judicial systems lawfully capable of objectively dealing with these matters, no doubt a factor which emboldened individuals such as William and Philip Bailhache, makes their ultimate downfall all the more serious.
All gone surprisingly quiet very early in this post? Has everyone gone off for half-term?
ReplyDelete'Have they gone off for half-term?' Yes many of the regular readers and comment makers here will have done just that. My experience of web traffic on the sites I manage is of a noticeable reduction in traffic, hits and comments during holiday periods.
DeleteIt's also my experience that the more intellectual sites attracting a higher standard of debate and discussion (as VFC does) experience a proportionally larger reduction in traffic during holiday periods when compared to those sites, FaceBook forums etc, where commonly a lower standard of thought & discussion is found.
This is likely a reflection of social stratification in that those with a privileged education background, and consequently greater skill and focus in approaching debates in an informed and fact-based manner, and with a greater capacity to assimilate evidence, and with greater articulacy will also tend to be those who can afford to go on regular family holidays.
Not me mate. I am possibly a bit thick in many ways. But being really rather rich anyway because I work so hard I just go away all the time. Enjoy this blog though. A ripping good read most times.
DeleteAny comments to put up? Can't just be me back from holiday?
DeleteI wonder how many of the Anony-mouses commenting here actually attended the rally? Such cowardice, is it any wonder your government has nothing to fear from its people?
ReplyDeleteGreat to hear from MR Evans again. Another who has left our septic shores but remains a folk legend.
DeleteDitto. A real Mister Man
DeleteYes. But he is still all over the internet. Huh, huh, huh! Read his great blog. It is very, very serious.
Delete
DeleteNot all "conspiracy theories" are equal -some are true, as has been factually demonstrated by VFC, Syvret and others.
It is a cause of great regret that Ian blights his blog with outlandish conspiracy theory ("chemtrails" etc.) because the gems get lost amongst it or dismissed as equal fantasy.
One gem is by a different Ms O'Connor:
https://therightofreply.blogspot.com/2010/12/sinead-oconnor-child-abuse-campaigner.html
"Sir, [His unlolyness Pope Benedict]
Some burning questions arise from the following statement you made in your christmas address to your cardinals on December 20th [2010?] regarding how it came to pass that the house of The Holy Spirit became a haven for criminals of a sexual nature.
"In the 1970's paedophilia was theorised [by the church] as something fully in conformity with man and even with children."
Please deign to respond to this letter directly and personally and put aside all the pomp and titles and so- called 'proper channels' all of which belong not in the 21st century but the 12th and are unbecoming of Christ.
Exactly who held the theory that paedophilia was fully in conformity with man and with children? Please give us their names.
Exactly when did they hold this theory?
Exactly when if ever did they cease holding the theory?.
Why was this information not given to victims?
Why was it never given to any commissions of enquiry or civil authorities?
Why in all the years since these scandals broke out was yesterday the first mention of this information?
It is highly disrespectful of the victims that you would throw this out as an aside remark and not present yourself for questioning on such a very serious piece of information which would be key in the potential recovery of the church.
The Holy Spirit requires you to familiarise yourself with honesty and respect if you retain any desire to salvage the remains of the church which has been ruined by its being allowed to live by its own laws and not God's
Sinead. "
Though it is a great letter to the Pope, I fear that Sinead is mistaken.
Delete"God's laws" give us little help or hope.
If the Old Testament or the Quran are to be believed, child sexual abuse is pretty much fine - particularly if it is perpetrated on non believers.
The New Testament is less dire in this regard and as far as I am aware says very little on the subject. A commonly quoted New Testament passage (which appears general and certainly not specific to sex with children) is Matthew 18:6
Translations to the effect of: "If anyone causes one of these little ones--those who believe in me--to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea."
Even this appears to protect only the children "who believe" in Jesus/God(?)
I have sympathy for the suggestion that the more serious child abusers should be drowned but would agree that there are probably more humane methods of dealing with the problem.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elastration
The above commenter has signed in as Anony-mouse AND as Sinead, and has failed to take stock of what it is that I actually said. Neither myself nor chemtrails is relevant here, what is relevant is the fact that a young lady has taken upon herself the duties of the people, the police, the courts, and the government in that she is doing her utmost to put a stop to the abuse of children! My point was simply this, that there are very few like her doing anything at all to stop tiny defenseless children being raped! My personal opinion is that the work above is of a professional troll, the comment has completely changed the subject matter and curtailed futher comments. People in Jersey, and in every other country, really need to stop being in fear of government and take the role of the shepherd instead of bleating like the sheep....When you finally meet your creator, and are asked "What have you done to protect my children". What the hell are you going to say? Well I left an Anony-mouse comment on the VFC Blog a couple of times!!!
DeleteHi Ian,
Delete"The above commenter has signed in as Anony-mouse AND as Sinead"
No I signed in as Anony-mouses (plural) and I did NOT sign in as Sinead.
The 'Sinead' appearing at the end of my 09:00 comment is WITHIN THE QUOTE MARKS and is the last word in the letter cut and pasted from YOUR blog https://therightofreply.blogspot.com/2010/12/sinead-oconnor-child-abuse-campaigner.html
It appears to be you who "has failed to take stock of what it is that I actually said"
I agree that 'chemtrails' are utterly irrelevant.
You Ian have some relevance and you could have had massive relevance if you had not allowed you blog (and yourself) to fall down the rabbit holes of every conceivable fantasy and clichéd conspiracy theory. -That is my opinion FWIW.
As for the Sinead O'Connor who wrote that great letter to the Pope -
I believe this Sinead is the Irish pop singer from the 1980's with the shaved head, a great voice and suspect politics and judgement.
Having quite rightly railed against the wickedness perpetrated by the Catholic Church of her heritage she has changed her name to Shuhada Magda Davitt, converted to Islam and apparently turned into a nasty, hateful and racist piece of work:
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/sinead-oconnor-islam-white-people-shuhada-davitt-muslim-a8620231.html
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/life/2018/11/06/sinead-oconnor-upsets-muslims-calls-white-people-disgusting/1912720002/
Sinead O'Connor is suffering from assorted mental illness (probably partially resulting from her own childhood abuse) and the choice of Islam is unfortunate.
Like I said: "If the Old Testament or the Quran are to be believed, child sexual abuse is pretty much fine - particularly if it is perpetrated on non believers."
The Quran in particular is difficult (impossible even) to sanitise. Accepting it as the "unchangeable word of god" is exactly what ISIL did: Islamic 'marriage' from the age of 11 (?) and rape/sexual enjoyment and slave ownership of non-believers of any age INCLUDING pre-pubescents!!!
Not a great child protection move IMO.
"When you finally meet your creator" -I already did Ian -they are my parents.
I suspect that the maker of the universe is Physics and Maths and I doubt these forces care what I do, or will somehow question me after I am bead. We do what we do for nature, for our ancestors and for the children of humanity. All of humanity.
Time partakers stopped using Troll calling to stifle debate.
ReplyDeleteIf you do not like an opinion or disagree with it then explain why, rather than name calling people Trolls and other silly labels.
New posting of a must watch documentary HERE.
ReplyDelete