Dark Secrets of a Trillion Dollar Island:Garenne (Lenny Harper)

 

Former SIO/DCO Lenny Harper

Part six of our "Dark Secrets of a "Trillion Dollar Island:Garenne" series, is former Senior Investigating Officer (SIO) and Deputy Chief Officer (DCO) Lenny Harper being interviewed by Jill and George of ONRECORD. This is a MUST WATCH interview showing Mr. Harper at his most relaxed, and watching the reactions of Jill and George as he discusses THE JERSEY SITUATION is just priceless.

One of the most difficult parts of telling people about what goes on in Jersey, how it's run, who runs it, etc is getting them to believe what you're saying. For a section of Jersey people the absolute lunacy is pretty much the norm, it's what makes Jersey "special," or they are not aware (because the media doesn't tell them) just exactly what IS/HAS gone/going on. It's not until you explain it to those who are from off-island and not familiar with THE JERSEY WAY that you see (as in the interview below) just how bonkers/corrupt and almost unbelievable it is.

Mr. Harper talks extensively about the vast amount of firearms/ammunition on the island, how he tried to bring the out of control gun ownership under some kind of control, and what/who he was up against. As mentioned in the interview below, and in Mr. Harper's own AFFIDAVIT, he is/was not just talking about the odd dodgy handgun. Listed in his Affidavit, among other weapons confiscated were an RPG7 Rocket Launcher which was later found to have only "a minor fault." A SEACAT Missile Launcher and much, much more. To include (from Mr. Harper's Affidavit):

"One man applied for a firearm and ammunition for the purpose of ‘pest control.’  The firearm in question is classified as for the purpose of hunting large game such as elk.

Another family in an outlying parish were known to have twenty high powered and semi automatic weapons in a cellar on their property.  They also had thousands of rounds of ammunition.  When visited by SOJ Police officers they were also found to have six months supply of tinned food and bottled water.  They said they were waiting for word from God.  The Connetable refused to revoke the certificate.

One man whom we had found had built up an arsenal of weapons was first granted a certificate in 1985.  In 1992 he was convicted of Possessing a Prohibited weapon, supplying controlled drugs and other crimes.  In 1993 he tried to purchase a shotgun whilst prohibited by the law.  In 1995 intelligence was received that he was supplying controlled drugs.  In 1996 he applied for and was granted a new firearms certificate by the Connetable.  In 2006 he held the following weapons:

1 x .30 semi automatic carbine* 

2 x  7.62 semi automatic rifles*

1 x 7.62 bolt action rifle

1 x  .303 bolt action rifle

1 x  5.56 semi automatic rifle* – as used the British Army

5 x .357 Magnum handguns

2 x  9x21 self loading pistol

1 x 9x19 semi automatic carbine* - similar to that used by the Police

1 x Pump action shotgun

2 x Semi automatic shotguns*

1 x .50 revolver **; and

1 x .50 rifle **

183,000 rounds of ammunition for the above weapons"

VFC tried to make the public aware of of Mr. Harper's Affidavit, through BBC State Radio, but the BBC didn't want to add any balance to its propaganda, and kept the facts hidden from its listener(s) as we reported on HERE. Regular readers will know that the BBC has form in keeping the public ignorant and only telling ONE SIDE of a story and leaving it for Bloggers to tell the OTHER SIDE.

Of course the interview below doesn't just talk of the gun culture and how Parish Constables rule the roost when it comes to issuing gun licences and the like. Further discussed is the honorary system, corrupt cops, good cops, the notorious Attorney General's office, the child's skull that was unearthed at Haut de la Garenne. How he was proud of the Jersey Police Force, all but a few bad apples, and how he was able to start rooting out police corruption only using local officers to investigate. But then he had to deal with the corrupt Attorney General's Office and corrupt politicians!

The difficulties, obstructions, he (and his team) faced, from The Powers That be, when Operation Rectangle became public where he dared to investigate Jersey's Dirty secret(s) involving decades of covered up Child Abuse. How he was able to gain the trust and confidence of Abuse Survivors where close to 200 of them came forward in the hope that their abusers would finally be brought to justice. Again the Attorney General's Office got in the way and after Mr. Harper had retired, Graham Power was (possibly illegally) suspended, a handful of SHOW TRIALS was all we/Survivors got. Out of 121 living suspects 8 of them were charged and only 7 convicted.

Former Bailiff William Bailhache

Also discussed, briefly in the interview, was the vindication by former Bailiff, and former Attorney General, William Bailhache, of Mr. Harper and his police investigation into the decades of concealed Child Abuse. The vindication was made by Mr. Bailhache as part of his retirement SPEECH in the States. The same speech where he attacked the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry and seemingly carried out a VENDETTA on behalf of his brother, Philip Bailhache, who too was Attorney General and Bailiff. Both Bailhache Brothers have QUESTIONS to answer where it comes to their actions/inactions surrounding the investigations (or not) into non-recent Child Abuse in the island. Philip Bailhache has been an outspoken critic of the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry and attempted to get its crucial work Halted. If ever there were two people hiding in plain sight it is they.

Mr. Harper also gives the excellent work carried out by Cadaver dog Eddie and blood dog Keela a mention. He RIGHTLY gives them the full credit they deserve. Both dogs were deployed at Haut de la Garenne and the State Media, and The Powers That Be, did all they could to discredit these amazing animals when both dogs alerted to blood and cadaver up at the home. Their credentials can be witnessed HERE and Eddie alerting to cadaver at Haute de la Garenne HERE. After Keela alerted to blood on the bath at Haut de la Garenne, the entire bath disappeared, under the watch of disgraced former SIO Mick (the leak) Gradwell.

This is possibly the most in-depth, frank, revealing, and relaxed interview Mr. Harper has ever given and full credit must go to George and Jill for making him feel so at ease and giving him the time/space to tell his story. We recommend readers to subscribe to their YOUTUBE CHANNEL where there are many interesting interviews and more interviews to come relating to "The Jersey Situation" and the Dark Secrets of a Trillion Dollar Island:Garenne documentary........................................

Part one of this series (VFC interview with former SIO Lenny Harper) can be viewed HERE.

Part two of this series (VFC interview with Graham Power QPM) can be viewed Here.

Part three of this series (Jill and George interview VFC) can be viewed HERE.

Part four of this series (Jill and George interview award winning author, and investigative journalist, Leah McGrath Goodman) and be viewed HERE.

Part five of of this series (Jill and George interview former (possibly illegally suspended) Chief Police Graham Power QPM) can be viewed HERE.

 

 

Dark Secrets of a Trillion Dollar Island:Garenne (Graham Power QPM)

 

Former (possibly illegally suspended) Chief Police Officer 

Graham Power QPM

As part of our "Dark Secrets of a Trillion Dollar Island:Garenne" series we bring you the latest instalment from Podcasters/YouTubers Jill and George of ONRECORD who we thoroughly recommend subscribing to on YouTube.

After watching the documentary, which can still be viewed on iplayer HERE, Jill and George took a real interest in "THE JERSEY SITUATION" and have interviewed a number of those who appeared in the documentary and other campaigners, who weren't in the documentary, but campaign against "THE JERSEY WAY."

Their latest interview (below) is with former (possibly illegally suspended) Chief Police Officer Graham Power QPM. Mr. Power will need no introduction to our long time readers who will know that Team Voice has reported extensively on this huge miscarriage of justice that saw Mr. Power suspended, on what looks to be, a pack of lies.

Disgraced Former Home Affairs Minister Andrew Lewis

He was suspended by disgraced former Home Affairs Minister Andrew Lewis who told our parliament he had seen a "damming report" from the MET Police criticising the handling of the Child Abuse investigation under the leadership of Mr. Power. Team Voice (Rico Sorda) exclusively exposed this "variation of truth" from Andrew Lewis when he (Rico Sorda) was leaked, and published, the secret parliament sitting's Hansard HERE.

Andrew Lewis went on to have his pants (metaphorically) pulled down by the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry and we published the transcripts of the evidence given to the Inquiry by Mr. Lewis HERE, HERE and HERE. He later faced, and lost, a vote of CENSURE in the parliament. He was defended by the disgraced former Bailiff, and then Senator, Philip Bailhache which we reported on HERE.

The former Chief Police Officer, Mr. Power did lodge a criminal COMPLAINT against Mr. Lewis which (because, in my opinion, our judiciary is so CORRUPT) didn't see any charges brought against him. We're not even sure if there was any kind of investigation let alone charges. This is, however, something we hope to be returning to in the near future.

We hope for those not familiar with the story that the links provided will help explain some/most of what has gone on and covered up by the local Lamestream MEDIA but exposed by BLOGGERS. For those wanting to learn more please click on the labels at the bottom of this post.

The interview with Jill and George gives a fascinating insight into Mr. Power's credentials, the way Jersey "does things" and if you speak out, how "they" will come after you. 

A huge thanks to Jill and George for taking an interest in "The Jersey Situation" and we look forward to the up-coming interviews with key players from the documentary, and indeed not from the documentary.

Please take the time to subscribe to the OnRecord YouTube CHANNEL.

Part one of this series (VFC interview with former SIO Lenny Harper) can be viewed HERE.

Part two of this series (VFC interview with Graham Power QPM) can be viewed Here.

Part three of this series (Jill and George interview VFC) can be viewed HERE.

Part four of this series (Jill and George interview award winning author, and investigative journalist, Leah McGrath Goodman) and be viewed HERE.

Advocate Philip Sinel Gives his Reaction to the (infamous) Speech of William Bailhache. (Part one)

Advocate Philip Sinel

On Tuesday 8th of October 2019 the retiring Bailiff, WILIAM BAILHACHE, abused his dual position as the Head of Judiciary, and Speaker of Parliament, to launch a political and personal attack on the Chairman (Francis Oldham QC) of the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry. He did this in the now infamous SPEECH and by abusing the "Communications by the presiding Officer" element of the States Sitting he could NOT (like any elected non-conflicted) be questioned on his speech/statement.

We called this speech a personal VENDETTA carried out on behalf of his brother (and former Bailiff) Philip Bailhache. Where William Bailhache used the words of Francis Oldham QC against her where she wrote of Philip Bailhache (about his equally infamous 2008 liberation Day speech) in her 2017 REPORT:

FRANCIS OLDHAM QC:

“We cannot accept that a politician and lawyer (Philip Bailhache) of his experience would inadvertently have made what he told the Inquiry was an “unfortunate juxtaposition” of words. We are sure that the way in which Jersey is perceived internationally matters greatly to him. His linking of Jersey’s reputation to the child abuse investigation was, we are satisfied, a grave political error,”

WILLIAM BAILHACHE:

“I cannot accept that a lawyer of the Chairman’s experience would inadvertently have drafted such an unfortunate juxtaposition of words. I am sure that the way in which Jersey receives her panel’s report matters greatly to her. Her linkage of allegations of lack of fairness and transparency in decision taking, by the Bailiff to historic (sic) Child Abuse was a grave error.”

As readers would expect the William Bailhache statement/speech sent ripples (Tidal Waves) across New and Old Media and we sought the reactions of the Children's Minister Senator Sam Mezec which we published HERE. The former Senior Investigating Officer of the Jersey Police Child Abuse Investigation (Operation Rectangle) Mr. Lenny Harper, who William Bailhache (unbelievably) seemingly couldn't praise enough for his investigation. We published Mr. Harper's response(s) HERE and HERE.

We also sought the reaction from local constitutional expert, and Advocate, Philip Sinel (video below), who in his trademark fashion told it how it is (from his point of view) and he didn't hold back. He made a few interesting observations, not least, that former Bailiff, and Senator, Philip Bailhache, was pushed, and didn't jump, from the role of Bailiff. It does seem a little bizarre that he allegedly "retired" as Bailiff through "ill health" but felt well enough to run an election CAMPAIGN. Not only run an election campaign but once elected becomes External Relations Minister jetting all over the world. But he felt too ill to be the Bailiff?

Former SIO Lenny Harper

As readers would expect, The Bailiff's apparent total VINDICATION of former Senior Investigating Officer, Lenny Harper, and indeed Operation Rectangle, does not tally-up with his actions/in-actions during his time as AG (during Rectangle) and Advocate Sinel points a number of these out. Including, apparently, having the former Police Chief, Graham Power QPM unsuccessfully criminally investigated as part of the Curtis Warren "car bugging incident" which we reported on HERE, and HERE. We further Exclusively published the BARTON REPORT which was the disciplinary investigation into the cops involved in the Curtis Warren case. The cops were all exonerated but the Law Offices' Department were left with some very uncomfortable questions to answer.

Quote from Barton Report:

"I do find it odd that having asked the Hampshire Police to 
investigate the matters surrounding the Curtis Warren police operation, the
 authorities in Jersey did not co-operate fully in the way that I would have expected
 given that it was they that asked for the enquiry to be carried out. Mr. Cessford made 
this very clear and I have no reason to doubt it and that caused me some
 considerable surprise. I maintain that this lack of co-operation or, perhaps more 
accurately, lack of complete co-operation, can only have compromised the
 Hampshire enquiry and limited the full facts available to me to make a decision in this
 case..................."

Further discussed in part one of this interview is the burning question as to why no Jersey Law Firm has ever taken up the cause for Abuse Survivors? Advocate Sinel HAS given (pro bono) advice to survivors where he can, but as he says in the interview, this is not his legal expertise and there ARE Law firms/lawyers who do specialise in this field yet Survivors have to rely, pretty much one ONE Lawyer from the UK, Alan Collins.

Current Bailiff Tim Le Cocq

We ask Advocate Philip sinel, among much more, is it the fact that Crown Offices' SG/AG/Deputy Bailiff/Bailiff and the Law Offices Department act they way they do because they are totally unaccountable? Is "THE JERSEY SITUATION" because of The Bailhache Brothers or because of the Office of Bailiff itself? Are things going to be any different under the rein of newly BUGGINSESS TURN SYSTEM OF PROMOTION elected Bailiff Tim Le Cocq? Can the UK legislate for Jersey? Whose "interests" are the Lieutenant Governors looking after? We have previously SUGGESTED that he be called as a witness to the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry. (That never happened)

We hope that readers with an interest in "The Jersey situation" or "The Jersey Way" or local constitutional issues find this interview of interest.

Part two coming soon..........................................

William Bailhache carries out a Vendetta for his Brother?

Bailiff William Bailhache

Yesterday (Tues 8th October 2019) in a (not so) unprecedented POLITICAL speech by the outgoing Bailiff, William Bailhache, he  attacked the report of the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry. He used the "Communications by the Presiding Officer and other announcements" tool to make this attack  knowing he wouldn't, or couldn't, be questioned on his statement like an elected member would. This was a total abuse of his office/position and further demonstrates the need for a separation of powers. The speech can, and should be listened to HERE.

A number (4 out of 49) politicians either objected to contents of the speech or asked that he would take questions on it to which he refused. The four principled politicians were Deputy Mike Higgins, Deputy Montfort Tadier, Constable Simon Crowcroft and Children's Minister senator Sam Mezec.

It is the opinion of VFC that the Bailiff's speech was a vendetta against the IJCI Chair, Francis Oldham QC, for calling his brother (former Bailiff Philip Bailhache) out in her 2017 report. Regular readers will be aware that in 2008 the then Bailiff Philip Bailhache gave the infamous (political) Liberation Day speech which included the words:

"All child abuse, wherever it happens, is scandalous, but it is the unjustified and remorseless denigration of Jersey and her people that is the real scandal"
He tried to tell the IJCI that his terminology was "an “unfortunate juxtaposition” of words." That people might interpret what he was saying was that the real criminals were the journalists challenging Jersey and her people and that is not what he meant.

Francis Oldham QC wrote in her 2017 report:

“We cannot accept that a politician and lawyer (Philip Bailhache) of his experience would inadvertently have made what he told the Inquiry was an “unfortunate juxtaposition” of words. We are sure that the way in which Jersey is perceived internationally matters greatly to him. His linking of Jersey’s reputation to the child abuse investigation was, we are satisfied, a grave political error,”

Then when you compare, and contrast, what William Bailhache said in his anti democratic political speech in the States Chamber yesterday one can see that it is almost identical to what Francis Oldham QC wrote about his brother in her 2017 report:

“I cannot accept that a lawyer of the Chairman’s experience would inadvertently have drafted such an unfortunate juxtaposition of words. I am sure that the way in which Jersey receives her panel’s report matters greatly to her. Her linkage of allegations of lack of fairness and transparency in decision taking, by the Bailiff to historic (sic) Child Abuse was a grave error.”

This, on the face of it, looks like a spiteful, petty, vendetta and an attack on Francis Oldham QC and does William Bailhache no favours at all. Abusing his position to make the speech in the first place also does him, and the office of Bailiff, no favours either and adds more weight to the argument that the dual role of the Bailiff should be abolished.

Readers/viewers really ought to watch the spectacle that was his SPEECH and his refusal to take any questions from States Members. Even those who support the dual role of the Bailiff must have difficulty in defending this. Indeed according to Children's Minister, Senator Sam Mezec, (below) some supporters do concede it is indefensible.

Senator Mezec drafted his own speech, in answer to the Bailiff's speech, but was refused permission to present it in the States by..........................The Bailiff! This just makes even more off a mockery of our so-called "democracy" where an unelected, unaccountable, Member of the parliament can make a political speech, refuse to answer any questions on it and then, not only has the power to, but prevents a democratically elected, and accountable Member of the States making a speech.

We asked the Children's Minister for an interview to discuss yesterday's shenanigans in the States which he agreed to for which we are grateful. What is clear in the interview is that the Bailiff has caused further damage, not only to the office of Bailiff/dual role, but to the reputation of the island as a whole and potentially damaged any hard earned trust the government might have been gaining from Survivors of abuse while attempting to implement the IJCI recommendations.

Among much more the Children's Minister tells us (interview below) that if this wasn't the Bailiff's last States Sitting before he retires then Senator Mezec, rather that drafting his own statement, he would have been drafting a vote of no confidence.

Stay tuned for the next part of this series where we have an exclusive interview with former Deputy Chief Officer, and Senior Investigating Officer, of the Police Investigation (Operation Rectangle) into the decades of Child Abuse Mr. Lenny Harper. Who himself was unequivocally VINDICATED by the Bailiff. We get Mr. Harper's reaction to this and much more.............

Deputy Mike Higgins. (The Jersey Way)

Deputy Mike Higgins

In the week that the Jersey Independent Care Inquiry (IJCI) PANEL return to the Island to review how its RECOMMENDATIONS have, or haven't, been implemented. We thought it would be a poignant time to reflect on a speech (or two) given at the last States Sitting (Tues 30th April 2019) by Deputy Mike Higgins.

Being debated was the Draft Commissioner for children and Young people (Jersey) LAW. Basically this was putting into (dodgy) legislation the position of the Children's Commissioner. The Commissioner now has little more rights than the man on the street in having access to official documents. Although like everybody else she's not allowed to know what advice is given by the conflicted Attorney General's Office.

Deputy Higgins has been instrumental in bringing about the Jersey Child Abuse Committee of Inquiry, campaigning for Survivors/Abusees and speaking out against judicial and political corruption since he was first elected in 2008. It was Deputy Higgins who managed to copy the transcripts from the in-camera (secret) debate where the then Home Affairs Minister, and Deputy, Andrew Lewis told the States Assembly when giving one of his different "reasons" for (possibly illegally) suspending the then Chief Police Officer Graham Power QPM:

"I HAVE READ AN ALARMING REPORT FROM THE METROPOLITAN POLICE which led me to this decision in the first place."

Regular readers will know that this statement was found to be a lie by the Jersey Independent Care Inquiry. Deputy Lewis was subsequently Censured by the parliamentary watchdog the Privileges and Procedures Committee. Reported by VFC HERE. with proposition lodged HERE. The transcript, copied by Deputy Higgins, was leaked to Bloggers (not by Deputy Higgins) who had the trust/confidence of survivors/Abusees and Whistleblowers and was subsequently published HERE. It's fair to say that without the deputy's diligence this "lie" could have remained un-noticed and never have been discovered.

William Bailhache

During the States debate (Tues 30th April 2019) Deputy Higgins reminded States Members, and the viewing public, of a number of troublesome aspects concerning the cover-up of Child Abuse and alleged abusers still at large. He was able to do this due to his extensive knowledge and campaigning for Survivors over the years and attending many of the IJCI public Hearings.

In the Chair was Bailiff William Bailhache, who has some uncomfortable questions of his own to ANSWER, concerning his time as Attorney General. The Bailiff asked Deputy Higgins to clarify who (which AG) he was talking about during his speech and the Deputy was happy to oblige by reading from the Care Inquiry Report and nailing his brother Philip Bailhache.

The second part of Deputy Higgins's speech deals with (according to the Deputy) alleged abusers who have not faced justice (The Jersey Way) despite evidence given to the Jersey Independent Care Inquiry against them. He made a very compelling and correct statement during this part of his speech when he said:

"We will never put this matter behind us and get the support of the people who have been abused until we address these issues and bring these people to book."

What Deputy Higgins did with his speech was to demonstrate that the Attorney General's office could "credibly" be  accused of cover-up. He showed that there are people who still appear to be above the law or even more people need to come forward to give evidence against them. If all is accurate in Deputy Higgins's speech then he also demonstrated "The Jersey Way."

Interview with Independent Jersey Care Inquiry Panel Member Professor Alexander (Sandy) Cameron.

Professor Sandy Cameron

As a result of continued communications with the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry Panel (IJCI) and of our  PREVIOUS POST. VFC was offered an interview with Panel Member Professor Sandy Cameron to which we gratefully accepted.

Regular readers will be aware that the relationship between the Panel and VFC has not always been as amicable as it is now, not least when were were banned from its MEDIA ROOM and  ITV/CTV,was NOT BANNED.

We are pleased to say that our relationship has come a long way since then as we are working towards the same goal(s) in that we want Survivors, and interested parties, to supply the Panel with evidence/information concerning the "care" of children in the Island since the publication of its (IJCI) REPORT and RECOMMENDATIONS Those who wish to submit evidence/speak with the Panel can do so by visiting its WEBSITE, taking part (anonymously) in its SURVEY or by e-mailing them at info@ijcipanel.org.

The Panel, during its evidence gathering and public hearings stage did some excellent work, not least by giving a voice to the Survivors/Abusees, vindicating them and those of us who have been fighting their corner and attempting to hold the guilty to account.

William Bailhache

As a result of the Panel's Hearings we learnt that former AG and current Bailiff William Bailhache has some very uncomfortable questions to ANSWER in his "reasons" for not prosecuting an alleged paedophile. We also learned that William Bailhache sent an e-mail to the then Chief Minister, Frank Walker and then States Chief Executive, Bill Ogley on the eve of the (possibly illegal) suspension of Chief Police Officer Graham Power advising them not to suspend the Chief Officer. Notably he didn't send the e-mail to (or copy in) the only man who could suspend him, the Home Affairs Minister at the time, Andrew Lewis. We also learned that William Bailhache withheld this evidence from the Napier Review.

Philip Bailhache

We also discovered, as a result of the IJCI, that former AG/Bailiff/Senator and brother of William, Philip Bailhache was accused of withholding, and asking the then Education Chief Executive, John Rodhouse, to withhold evidence from the police concerning a now convicted paedophile.

Excerpt from John Rodhouse statement to Inquiry:

"it concerned a volunteer youth worker. The then Attorney-General, Philip Bailhache, called me to tell me that a named volunteer youth worker had acted improperly with a boy. The boy's father was an (redaction) and did not want to involve the police. Philip Bailhache wanted me to investigate and take action. I protested that it was a matter for the police but Philip Bailhache said that the parents would not co-operate and that if I did not act nothing would happen. I interviewed the man who admitted the offence and with the help of the Youth Officer, the man was effectively removed from all youth work in Jersey. As far as I was concerned I was caught between the legal authority of the island in the person of the Attorney-General and what I believed to be my professional and moral duty. I have since learned that the man was some time later convicted of a similar offence and subsequently faced a further charge."

So if anybody is considering giving evidence but are not sure, you might see merit in having the historic record documented for current and future researchers. It demonstrates the the Inquiry has done good work in some areas and without witnesses coming forward this, and much more, evidence wouldn't be available. To be clear the Panel want to hear about current practices and how its recommendations have been, are, or not being implemented.

VFC

Regular readers will also be aware that VFC was invited to submit evidence to the Inquiry which we did HERE and further invited to appear as a witness which we did HERE. Despite our many differences, with the IJCI in the past, VFC has always considered the plight of Survivors/Abusees past, present and future, is the primary concern. Rooting out the corruption (either perceived or otherwise) in States Departments, Law Offices Department, Attorney General's Office and the old media (formerly known as Mainstream media). We have been striving for the Care Inquiry's RECOMMENDATION 7 before it existed and we continue to do so. Putting differences aside for the greater good has enabled VFC and the IJCI to hopefully bring more witnesses forward, to document evidence, and give a greater picture of what has been allowed, and possibly continues to be allowed to happen,  that enables children to be abused on the Island and for the abusers to be protected (more about that in an up-coming Blog)

The Panel has further invited VFC to submit evidence, and to appear at a Public Hearing, to discuss the role of the media (as mentioned in the video below) both of which we have humbly agreed to and look forward to the opportunity.

Further discussed in the video below are subjects of who can make contact with/give evidence to the Panel, how to make contact (links above), Do witnesses need to be on-island? what its purpose is of this visit. Will the hearings/meetings be transcribed for the historic record and along with documents provided to the panel, will they be uploaded to the website/given to Jersey Archive? The controversial  taking down of the website, and its alleged reasons, are also (very briefly) discussed.

Donald Bailhache.

Bailiff Donald Bailhache

Before we start; it has to be stressed (while it's still semi legal) that this Blog Posting is an "opinion" from a member of the public and Social Media/mainstream media contributor. It is difficult knowing where to start with this posting/opinion. We could start with that first we had the brother as BORIS BAILHACHE and now we've got Donald Bailhache.

Jersey's unelected and unaccountable Bailiff William Bailhache has reportedly used his speech (17th September 2018 at Assize D’Heritage in the Royal Court) to attack the mainstream media and Social Media. He has attacked free speech and this is yet another reason why the outdated and out of touch (with the modern digital era) position of Bailiff should be consigned to history.

If what has been reported is correct then one can only assume that the Bailiff's speech was written by Donald Trump. According to the BBC:

"Jersey's Bailiff has described irresponsible reporting in the media as a threat to the rule of law.

In a speech to lawyers at the start of the legal year, Sir William Bailhache said that unregulated social media allowed uninformed opinions to be given free rein - even if they aren't based on fact.

He said that could be damaging to the respect people have for the government and the legal process.

And he said a further danger was that mainstream media would try to keep up with social media by putting forward people's opinions as news.

He asked news organisations to keep their output free from uninformed gossip or chatter."

As we said where does one start with this? Let's start with the

first paragraph:

"A threat to the rule of law." Exactly what "rule of law" is he talking about? The rule of law that has political dissidents imprisoned or bankrupted? The rule of law that has an opposition politician's place of residence turned over by a 10 strong police unit without a search warrant? A (possibly illegal) suspension of a Chief Police Officer whose force was investigating DECADES of covered up Child Abuse? An (unaccountable) Attorney General's Office who won't prosecute powerful alleged Child Abusers, paedophiles and rapists? The list could go on, and on, but for brevity let's leave it there and perhaps readers would have other examples.

Second paragraph:

"unregulated social media allowed uninformed opinions to be given free rein - even if they aren't based on fact."

I mean what the flick??? People have opinions, "based on fact"  or otherwise, and what, they shouldn't be allowed to share them??? Words do actually fail me here because I don't think I have come across anything so ridiculous in my life.

Third paragraph:

"could be damaging to the respect people have for the government and the legal process."

Really? exactly what "respect" is he talking about? The last social survey which asked the question(s) reported (if memory serves correct and stand to be corrected) 75% of those surveyed had no confidence in the government and 50% had no confidence in our so-called "justice" system. What kind of respect does he believe the State has? He should probably read more social Media, and indeed comments (from the public who shouldn't have an opinion aired) on MSM online articles. Here is an example of Jersey's "JUSTICE" SYSTEM.

Fourth paragraph:

"mainstream media would try to keep up with social media by putting forward people's opinions as news."

I've got breaking news for the Bailiff. It is the mainstream media's job to be a voice of/for the public. It is not there to be (or shouldn't be) a mouthpiece for the government, nor unelected, unaccountable, outdated Bailiffs/Crown Officers. To quote George Orwell:
“Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.” The Bailiffs and all Crown Officers should learn that in the new digital era people are able to be held to account like never before. Being held to account is an alien concept to Crown Officers and rather than attempting to legislate against free speech they should get with the times and embrace a new, open, digital world. Take onboard the criticisms and adapt accordingly rather than employing "The Jersey Way" tactic of oppression and Kangaroo (secret) Courts to silence critics. Why not work with the critics in order to win over the public's trust and confidence?

Fifth paragraph:

"He asked news organisations to keep their output free from uninformed gossip or chatter."

Who does he think he is asking the media what (not) to report? If he has a problem with the media then he should complain to the relevant authorities. We are forever being told how well regulated the MSM is and Social Media isn't! Why doesn't he make a complaint to the police quoting P.19/2016?

Of course, those of us familiar with the Leveson Inquiry are aware that the MSM is NOT regulated and P.19/2016 was a tool to silence "public opinion" and not the opinion of the great and good.

But what about the media's role in all this? The JEP has reported on the Bailiff's speech as have the Bailiwick Express, CTV and the BBC that I am aware of and yet not one journalist has challenged this unprecedented attack on free speech? How much do these "journalists" respect their profession?

The Bailiff attacked ALL media, and thus far, has not been asked to substantiate ANY of his claims or give examples. Donald Trump is regularly challenged (by journalists) when he attacks the media

(predominantly MSM) across America and world-wide. How can our media remain so silent when its profession is under such attack? This isn't just an attack on the MSM and I believe both Social Media and the MSM should be fighting in the same corner here. The fact that it's Social Media challenging this attack on free speech and the MSM, thus far, remaining silent is not a good start (or look for the MSM). Unfortunately there is still an element of the MSM that see responsible, respected, Blogs such as ours as a threat. It is time they started working with us rather than remaining silent when free speech its under attack. We have, and do, work well with some reporters in the MSM but others need to drop their prejudice for the greater good in holding power to account and being a voice for the voiceless.

Ironically the MSM look to have committed the offence William Bailhache has accused them of. They have reported his words/opinion, and thus far, not provided, or asked for, any evidence to back up his wide-sweeping allegations (opinion). Perhaps he, and parts of the MSM, think it's ok for unelected, unaccountable members of the State, to have published any opinion they want and not back it up with evidence and it's just the plebs who can't have their opinions published/broadcast?

I have asked BBC Radio Jersey to invite the Bailiff onto its "hot seat" programme in order to back up his claims and be held to account like mere (elected/accountable) mortals do. I have also expressed that I would relish the opportunity to sit alongside the Bailiff on the programme representing Social Media and hold him to account myself. I've been told by the BBC it would put that invitation to the Bailiff so I will keep readers posted as to whether that happens......................................................or not..............................

Boris Bailhache - Guest Posting.

Boris Bailhache

Political observers cannot help but have noticed that the national mainstream media have recently been (almost wall to wall) covering stories regarding the calls for the sacking/resignation of Boris Johnson. The calls are being made, seemingly, because he has gone "off message," is "ignoring collective responsibility" and "undermining the authority" of his Prime Minster Theresa May regarding Brexit.

Boris Johnson, it is firmly believed, is setting his stall for a leadership challenge against Theresa May by undermining her authority with his publicly made Brexit views and is making the PM into some kind of a laughing stock because she is unwilling, or unable, to reign her foreign Minister in.

But what about the Jersey situation with our Foreign Minister, Senator Philip (Boris) Bailhache, and leader Senator, Ian Abraham ,  (Theresa) Gorst? Senator Bailhache and his constant undermining of Ian Gorst, and the latter's attempts, not only to have a Committee of Inquiry (COI) into decades of Child Abuse, but to implement its recommendations. Not only has Boris Bailhache consistently attempted to derail the COI but is now attempting to derail senator Gorst and his attempts to implement the recommendation of splitting the dual role of the Bailiff. Senator Bailhache playing (as mentioned below) the old "tradition" card. Although he didn't play that card when he wiped out 500 years of tradition with the church. That obviously wasn't "traditional" enough to worry the public with.

While drafting this Blog Posting I was contacted by a reader and asked if I could/would publish a Guest Posting which, coincidentally, mirrored some of the points I was going to make so have incorporated it. Thankfully the reader HAS seen the similarities/comparisons between the Theresa May/Boris Johnson, Ian Gorst/Philip Bailhache sketch but can it be that not ONE of our esteemed professional local journalists have seen these similarities/comparisons? Do they not watch the national news?

Below the Guest Posting is senator Bailhache having yet another dig at Senator Gorst and yet another dig at the Care Inquiry. It came by way of an interview with ITV/CTV (who we credit for the recording).

Readers might recall that Sir Philip, with the help of ITV/CTV, managed to EXONERATE the then Jersey Dean Bob Key.

The Guest Poster has asked to remain anonymous.

Guest Post.

"They say that States Members start behaving strangely a few months before an election - some, who have otherwise been inconspicuous for the past 3 years have even been heard to speak, ask questions and even be critical of Government policy. When you are on a sinking ship, even the most loyal crew member will start eyeing up the life-rafts, knowing there may not be space for everyone.

This is standard practice, but what is going to be different about the May elections is that, for the first time in recent time, the fracture lines are starting to show - and in unusual places. Namely, there is infighting on the right. We saw the early signs of this in the fall-out over the innovation fund. Clearly, it was mismanaged. And whilst in times of success, various Ministers would line up to claim the positives as their own, or to take part in the traditional patting of each other's backs, this time, the knives came out.
The public wanted a scalp. The highly paid civil servants were shrewd enough to leave the scene (and the island) before the 'vraic hit the fields', and they would have been laughing all the way to the bank.

Senator Alan Maclean

Rightly or wrongly, Senator Ozouf was the one in the firing line for the failings of the fund and he had to go. The Chief Minister, on the other hand, strongly suggested that it was not his friend Philip who was to blame, so much as Senators Maclean and Farnham - the traditional right-wing of his council of Minister.

Skip forward a few months, and we see another prominent, canny politician who is fully aware that this Council of Minister's ship is heading firmly for the electoral rocks. The English-man Gorst and Phil'll Fix it have never been so unpopular. With the rise of Reform Jersey, and the decline of the neo-liberals, it is important that Senator Bailhache not only has a life raft (chauffeur-driven no doubt), but a ship of his own to captain when SS Vanity finally goes under. For that he needs a flag and a crew.

The 'flag' is tradition and the cause is the Bailiff. An uninspiring one, you might say and this is where the spin is needed. Remember the 2014 elections, which instead of being dominated by the real political issues and the Council of Ministers being held to account for their failings in Health, Housing, Social Security, electoral reform and Population control, the election was engineered to be little more than a side show about the Constables. Whilst younger people, unimpressed, showed their contempt for the political class by staying at home, the older voters took the bait - swallowing the hook, line and sinker too - believing that parish rates would go up if the constables were not in the States. The right (traditional and business class) were united in their efforts then, and saw off the unaligned independents, whilst the Social Democrats of Reform Jersey made no net gains, but maintained their seats.

This time it is very different. The rift between Gorst/Ozouf on the one hand, the 'progressive'-conservatives on one hand and the feudal-reactionaries on the other is palpable. Philip Bailhache, who never was one to toe the line (on the Child Abuse Inquiry, notably) has sensed the public mood and is making the separation of powers debate about something it is not. He knows it is a very simple matter - that Courts and Legislatures should be separate, and that Judges should stick to judging and politicians to politicking. So he needs a distraction and a bogey-man.

(1) POPULISM: This is a matter for the people. This is a constitutional matter, and - of course - constitutional matters should be put to the public (when it suits politicians). How dare arrogant politicians think they can make such a monumental decision without consulting you!

(2) BLAME THE IMMIGRANT. Gorst is an Englishman. He is just trying to make us like an overseas county of England. Look at the House of Commons, they are a complete shambles. We don't need an elected speaker like in England. Look at the mess they are in.

And the Jersey media go along with it.

In the recent Channel TV interview, (below) which was cloying in its deference to 'Sir' Philip, the story ran - Jersey could elect its own speaker like in the UK. But of course, it could have said 'like Barbados', 'like the Cayman Islands' or - how's about - 'like France.'

If there is an obvious parallel to be made with the UK it is the sharpening of knives from the likes of Boris Johnson and the would be pretenders for the lame-duck Theresa May's job.

Surely I am not the only one to see the comparison between Sir Philip Johnson and Boris Bailhache (with a little bit of Rees-Mogg thrown in for good measure)?"(END)

PPC Lodges vote of Censure against Deputy Andrew Lewis.

Deputy Andrew Lewis

The Privileges and Procedures Committee (PPC) has lodged a PROPOSITION today asking the island's parliament to censure Deputy Andrew Lewis after he was found to have lied, by the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry (IJCI), to the Inquiry itself and to the States Assembly. PPC has also found that the Deputy breached States Members code of conduct "by failing to maintain the integrity of the States." 

VFC e-mailed the PPC Panel Members (who sat on the case) this morning at 08:16 asking them for an interview regarding PPC's proposition. Little more than thirty minutes later Deputy Simon Bree replied to the e-mail and agreed to an interview. At the time of publication none of the other PPC Members have acknowledged the e-mail.

Deputy Bree makes it quite clear that he is NOT speaking for PPC (in the interview) but is speaking in a personal capacity which is something we would like to reiterate here.

The video/interview below, we hope, should speak for itself and inform readers of the decision making process, what happens next, and much more.

Deputy Scott Wickenden

Team Voice would like to thank Deputy Bree for agreeing to an interview (he is a supporter of our Blogsite) and answering the questions as best he could. Although I'm not sure if the question was answered as to whether Deputy Scott Wickenden or Constable Chris Taylor (PPC Members) agree with the Independent Care Inquiry that Deputy Lewis told lies. May be the question was answered and I didn't understand it? I've tried asking Deputy Wickenden (on Facebook) to confirm with a "yes" or "no" as to whether he agrees with the IJCI, concerning Andrew Lewis' lies, but as with the e-mail I sent this morning he has NOT answered, or acknowledged, the question.

I have also requested an official comment from Deputy Andrew Lewis with regard to the vote of censure lodged against him by PPC. I have also asked him for an interview (as I have on many occasions) but have not yet received a reply/acknowledgement. Deputy Lewis has recently intimated to VFC that an interview ISN'T out of the question and is considering the possibility.

We should also point out (despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary) that Deputy Lewis denies lying to the IJCI and the States.

Should it turn out that ANY of the PPC Members (who sat on the Andrew Lewis hearing) disagree with the IJCI findings in that Andrew Lewis lied to the States and the IJCI then a complaint against PPC for being as guilty as him will be getting submitted..................................

Lenny Harper Discusses Child Abuse Report and local Mainstream Media.

Former DCO/SIO Lenny Harper

A day or so after the Jersey Child Abuse Committee of Inquiry published its damming report VFC interviewed former Deputy Chief Police Officer and Senior Investigating Officer of the police investigation (Operation Rectangle) into decades long concealed Child abuse in Jersey Lenny Harper.

Due to a number of other events having taken place subsequently, namely the former Chief Police Officer, Graham Power lodging a criminal complaint against the politician who (possibly illegally) suspended him in 2008 Deputy Andrew Lewis. Coupled with Privileges and Procedures Committee (PPC) announcing it was investigating Deputy Lewis' apparent breach of Members Code of Conduct (which it found he DID) and the embarrassing debacle that was the appearance of Senator Philip Bailhache and Deputy Lewis at the PPC Hearing and because of some technical issues we have been unable to publish the interview with Mr. Harper.................Until now.

Regular readers will be aware that Mr. Harper, after years of either being ignored, misquoted, and having Operation Rectangle trashed by the local mainstream media has taken the decision to no longer engage with them. A decision fully understood by, among many others, former Chief Police Officer Graham Power QPM. Mr. Harper does however remain committed to getting the truth out there for the Victims and Survivors which is why he engages with  national/outside media and of course Team Voice.

It should be said that we hope the relationship between Mr. Harper, and parts of the local mainstream media can, at some stage, be mended. This will take a strong commitment from the latter to demonstrate that the propaganda, misinformation, burying of vital public interest/news stories is a thing of the past. We believe that parts of the MSM have gone some way to demonstrate this but still have a long way to go. Other parts remain as bad as it ever was.

In our exclusive interview with Mr. Harper we discuss some of his thoughts on the Care Inquiry's report/findings. The (long overdue) vindication of the Victims/Survivors. The (long overdue) vindication of Operation Rectangle. Who has(n't) been held to account. The political interference (or not) with Rectangle and, of course, his decision not to engage with the local MSM and much more.

One of the more poignant points made by Mr. Harper, in the interview, was that the care inquiry "asked the question it didn't answer." The Inquiry's report is very legalistic and stops short of saying what really is being (or should be) said.

From Care Inquiry Report:

"It is clear that there was disquiet among Jersey’s politicians, up to and including the Chief Minister, Frank Walker, about the effect of the publicity being generated by Operation Rectangle. Nevertheless, we find that Frank Walker and the majority of politicians accepted the strong advice of the Attorney General and did not seek actively to interfere. We find that Ministers in general recognised that, however unpalatable the outcome of Operation Rectangle might prove to be, the Police investigation had to be permitted to run its course unhindered."

This (above) paragraph is one of the subjects mentioned by Mr. Harper (interview below). The Inquiry found that "the majority of politicians accepted the strong advice of the Attorney General and did not seek actively to interfere."(With Rectangle)

So what about the "minority" is the question that is on Mr. Harper's lips. If the "majority" didn't seek to interfere then that would/should mean that the "minority" DID seek to interfere?

Further; from the same paragraph:

"We find that Ministers in general recognised that, however unpalatable the outcome of Operation Rectangle might prove to be, the Police investigation had to be permitted to run its course unhindered."

The Inquiry found Ministers "in general" recognised "the Police investigation had to be permitted to run its course unhindered."

Not the Ministers "unanimously" and "unequivocally" recognised  "the Police investigation had to be permitted to run its course unhindered." They (possibly not all) "generally" "recognised" it but didn't "accept" it?

Former Police Chief lodges Criminal Complaint Against Sitting Politician.

Former Chief Police Officer Graham Power QPM

Following the publication of the Jersey Child Abuse Committee of Inquiry (COI) Report and the revelation of the legal opinion from the island's Attorney General that Deputy Andrew Lewis, after being branded a liar by the COI, will NOT face prosecution for perjury (like you and I would) as he was allegedly covered by Parliamentary Privilege when giving evidence to the COI.

Team Voice has interviewed former Chief Police Officer Graham Power QPM and asked him his thoughts on the COI's findings and recommendations and indeed his thoughts on Deputy Lewis apparently (legal "opinion") being protected by privilege or not as the case may be. Mr. Power's observations (as one would expect) are far ranging/reaching on this and all subjects discussed in the exclusive interview.

Deputy Andrew Lewis.

He tells us that the public were duped into believing Deputy Lewis and all States Members who gave evidence to the COI were doing so under the same circumstances as everybody else giving evidence. Why was he asked to swear an oath before giving evidence? Why didn't the  Panel ask him to just be truthful as there was no point in swearing an oath? Victims/Survivors and witnesses (who weren't politicians) gave evidence under the threat of prison for perjury. Andrew Lewis didn't.

There are other opinions on the definition of Parliamentary Privilege that don't sit alongside that of the Jersey Attorney General. Mr. Power, for instance told us:

"It has been suggested to me that there is no known precedent for the use of privilege to escape prosecution for perjury and that the AG is quoting the law out of context in that the overall purpose of the immunity is to allow members to speak openly and honestly without fear of legal reprisals. Not to lie through their back teeth."

The former Chief Police Officer asks what implications this might have further afield (Grenfell Tower Inquiry) and much more. By referring Deputy Lewis's apparent lies to PPC isn't this already going against the COI's recommendations and in particular recommendation 7 (Below)?

Regular readers will be aware that PPC has already looked at the evidence against Andrew Lewis when VFC made a complaint about his apparent lies but PPC did NOT act on my complaint and further denied me a properly constituted (PPC) Hearing where I would have been granted the protection (which I need(ed)) of privilege enjoyed by Deputy Lewis. my complaint to PPC can, and should, be read HERE and HERE.

Recommendation 7 features heavily in this interview which is why we have published it below so readers can make themselves aware of it when considering the action/inactions of the government in the coming weeks/months or even years. It has to be said that it doesn't look like the best of starts after spending £23m on an "independent" judge-led Inquiry which found that one of our politicians lied and our politicians want politicians (PPC) to look into it.

Chief Minister Ian Gorst.

Team Voice can also exclusively reveal that the former Chief Police Officer has lodged a formal criminal complaint against Deputy Lewis with the Chief Minister Senator Ian Gorst. Mr. Power is asking that the Chief Minister put into place an "independent" criminal investigation into the actions of Deputy Andrew Lewis. At time of publication the Chief Minister had not responded to Mr. Power and we hope to keep readers updated as we are.

Readers are encouraged to watch this interview (below) in its entirety as it is full of thought provoking revelations few might have thought about. One thing readers/viewers can be certain of  Mr. Power is not going away any time soon. In fact VFC has been liaising with Mr. Power for not far off a decade now and we have to say we have never seen him as animated, and determined, as he is now. He looks to have the bit between his teeth and so he should. He, and his family, have been badly wronged. This needs to be put right and he is determined for this to happen.

Recommendation 7: The “Jersey Way”

13.41 Throughout the course of the Inquiry, we heard reference to the “Jersey Way” notwithstanding that there did not seem to be any set definition of the term. On some occasions it was used in a positive way, to describe a strong culture of community and voluntary involvement across the island, and this is something we recognise as a strength of the island, from the many contacts we had with voluntary organisations and individuals who give generously of their time to serve the interests of others. On most occasions, however, the “Jersey Way” was used in a pejorative way, to describe a perceived system whereby serious issues are swept under the carpet and people escape being held to account for abuses perpetrated. A Phase 3 witness told us: “we [also] have the impossible situation of the non-separation of powers between the judiciary and political and there is a lot of secrecy, non-transparency and a lack of openness. This brings with it the lack of trust, the fear factor that many have spoken about and contributes greatly to the Jersey Way”. 

It is this strongly held perception by many of those who experienced abuse that will continue to undermine any attempts to move the island forward from the matters into which we have inquired. We therefore recommend that open consideration involving the whole community is given to how this negative perception of the “Jersey Way” can be countered on a lasting basis.

13.42 Jersey has a long and proudly held tradition of governance, but that is not to say that steps should not be taken to reflect the modern world in which the island exists. As with many long-established jurisdictions, there can be a resistance to change, which is something that seems to be acknowledged. We are of the opinion that this serious matter cannot be addressed without further consideration being given, in the light of our findings, to recommendations contained in the Clothier and Carswell Reports.

13.43 While these involve constitutional matters, we are firmly of the view that the progress that must be made in relation to future care and safety of children in Jersey will be undermined if they are not dealt with such that all perceptions of there being a negative “Jersey Way” are eradicated once and for all. Achieving this would, in our opinion, provide a very strong visible marker that there was a deep determination in the island to use the conclusion of the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry as a platform to ensure that the island’s children and young people will be looked after in a caring and compassionate system that is underpinned by a system of governance in which there is the utmost confidence among all of the island’s citizens.(END.)