Monthly Archives: December 2008

A CHRISTMAS QUEST FOR THE FACTS:

Some Reading for Those

Who Want to Understand.

The end of the year approaches – and because the Jersey oligarchy continues to disgrace itself in absurd and futile efforts to bury the truth – now seems an opportune time to re-familiarise ourselves with some facts.

What follows is a detailed examination of the assertions by the Jersey Evening Post, and those of odd-ball contrarians such as Mick Hume, who recently wrote an article for The Times.

Both these sources of “information” have just lately been parading themselves as purveyors of the “truth” – and depicting those who do not agree with them as fantasists.

I truly wish I could agree with them.

But I can’t.

As I will explain – ‘the jury is out’ – and none of us yet know what the facts are.

Briefly, let us consider some of the chronology and facts – so that my position is clear.

I first became seriously concerned about child protection failures around early February of 2007. At that time I was the Minister for Health & Social Services, therefore a few people began to approach me with concerns about poor – or extremely poor – practices.

Taking these concerns seriously, I investigated still further – and consequently came in contact with yet more whistle-blowers – and, ultimately, victims.

By around the end of May, 2007, I had been forced to conclude that Jersey had harboured – over a period of decades – a near-complete and catastrophic breakdown in its so-called child “protection” apparatus.

In July, 2007, I gave an honest answer to a question I was asked in the island’s parliament; in essence, saying, ‘if I’m being asked do I have any confidence in the child protection apparatus of Jersey, frankly, I have to say no – and I’m going to commission an independent review.’

Those responsible for the failures to prevent the abuses, and who had concealed the abuses – then set about engineering my dismissal in a desperate attempt to maintain the culture of concealment.

I was sacked from my post on the supposed grounds that, by publicly criticising the service, I was “undermining staff moral”.

This episode was a significant local political controversy during 2007.

Of what relevance is that, brief, history of events?

I give that explanation to show that I have no particular political stake in the outcome of that part of the investigations dealing with potential, unexplained child deaths at HDLG.

Such allegations were never raised with me. Very serious cases of abuse? – Yes; possible child deaths? – No.

I wish it wasn’t so – but the political war I have fought throughout 2007 & 2008 to expose systemic child protection failures in Jersey has been necessary because of a sadly well-evidenced catalogue of abuses, malfeasances, perversions of the course of justice and self-interested concealment on the part of the island’s authorities.

So having learned of many horrifying examples of abuse – and the utterly extraordinary concealment of that abuse – when I heard, early this year – of the possibility of child deaths at Haute de la Garenne – I was not in the least surprised.

Sadly – in the absence of any reassuring evidence – I have had to keep an open mind concerning that grim possibility.

The things I uncovered in 2007 leave me in no doubt of what the Jersey oligarchy is capable of.

Which brings us to the Jersey Evening Post – and certain strange bedfellows, such as Mick Hume.

The JEP, commonly known as The Rag, has always used its stentorian and pompous editorial leader comments to con people into believing its partisan assertions are nothing less than statements of plain fact.

Mr. Hume – along with a very small band of like-minded journalists – heaps derision upon child abuse investigations, such as that concerning Haute de la Garenne.

The Jersey Evening Post and people like Mr. Hume have striven to undermine and trash the investigation.

But of course – The Rag – and its new-found, but somewhat unlikely, allies in the defunct rump of the Revolutionary Communist Party – could not have embarked upon their attempts to spin and manipulate without some raw material to work with.

That raw material was delivered by David Warcup & Mick Gradwell – the “new management” of the States of Jersey Police Force – when they issued a five page press release which had been co-authored by Frank Walker’s spin-doctors.

Those interested in a detailed response to the Warcup & Gradwell spin-doctoring exercise should read my blog post of the 13th November, titled ’37 Questions for Offices Warcup & Gradwell’.

It is worth noting that not one of the 37 questions has been answered.

A fact from which we can draw conclusions.

The only response I received was a 6 paragraph letter from David Warcup, dated 25th November, in which he said this:

“Should you have any doubt in relation to the conclusions which have been drawn by Mr. Gradwell and myself, then I would ask you to consider the fact that the very same conclusions have been reached as a result of an independent review by the Metropolitan Police.”

Fact: – on the date that letter was authored by Mr. Warcup – and so far as I know, to date – no such report by the Metropolitan Police existed, or yet exists.

For such a review of the investigation to be credibly undertaken, the evidence would need to be meticulously re-examined, the methodology reviewed, and an understanding of the modus operandi of the key investigators and other witnesses gained.

Fact: – yet at the time of the infamous press-conference, Mr. Warcup, Mr. Gradwell nor Mr. Brian Sweeting of the Met had, between them, interviewed Lenny Harper – not even once.

Mr. Sweeting of the Met did – eventually – interview Mr. Harper.

Fact: – the first and only interview with Mr. Harper was undertaken as a panicked afterthought; and even then Mr. Sweeting’s questioning exhibited a startling ignorance of child protection issues.

Before we get into examining the leader comment of The Rag – let us remember a few salient points concerning this journal.

For 118 years it has been the implacable mouth-piece of the island’s oligarchy.

At absolutely any and every moment of crises for the Jersey establishment – the JEP distorts, manipulates, lies and conceals.

For example – substantial amounts of important evidence of child abuses and child protection failures has been given to The Rag by me.

Every single piece of it has been buried and suppressed.

Given the overt propaganda function of The Rag, we shouldn’t be surprised at its rabid determination to defend the status quo.

And even less surprised – given that in recent times I have discovered a dark and festering canker in the heart of the JEP leadership – and I’m not talking about Frank Walker.

Let us make no mistake; as even the most cursory examination of its history and conduct shows – the Jersey Evening Post is simply an enemy of this community.

With that thought in mind, let us consider the leader comment The Rag published on Friday 19th December.

It states of Mr. Harper’s opinion that he is being smeared in an attempt to justify the unfolding cover-up:

“As anyone with respect for the facts as they have plainly been revealed will appreciate, this is a distorted view of the present situation and the events leading to it.”

Let us consider a few of the “facts”.

Fact: – officers Warcup & Gradwell have not revealed the ‘facts’; on the contrary – they have refused repeated request to do just that.

Fact: – all that Warcup & Gradwell have “released” is a 5 page press-release – co-written with Frank Walker’s spin-doctors.

Fact: – the aforesaid press-release is riddled with distortions, half-truths, omissions – and outright falsehoods.

Fact: the press-release and associated comments by Warcup & Gradwell sought to convey the impression that a detailed, scientific peer-review had been completed by the Metropolitan Police. It had not. And so far as I’m aware, no such report is yet completed.

By way of example of the falsehoods in the press-release, it is stated of certain of the finds in the voids that, “There is no witness evidence or intelligence which indicates that these should be described as shackles or that shackles resembling this description have been used during the commission of any offences.”

Fact: that assertion is simply a lie.

I know for a stone fact that witness statements and intelligence did indicate that these items may be improvised shackles.

Indeed – that description was not one invented by the police – it was given to them by witnesses.

The Rag continues in that vein:

“We now know that scientific opinion that would have given the lie to the most lurid accounts of what was supposed to have happened at Haut de la Garenne was withheld in favour of allowing continuing exaggeration.”

Fact: we do not know what the scientific opinion is – nor will we ever – until and unless all forensic evidence, especially the scientific analysis – was published and available for professional peer-review.

Fact: the scientific method depends utterly upon transparency – and the production of testable, demonstrable, repeatable results. Assertions such as the “just trust us” type we see in this episode simply do not constitute science.

And there can be no credible excuse for not publishing the scientific reports – and answering the 37 questions I put to Mr. Warcup & Mr. Gradwell. For if such reports do – as is claimed – scientifically show there to have been no unexplained child deaths at HDLG, there is then no longer any evidential purpose or function to be served by the reports; publication would not affect any prosecution – therefore they can be published.

Indeed, if – as is claimed – the idea of possible child deaths at HDLG has been simply a distraction to the abuse enquiry – then the work of the police, and the cause of justice for the victims, would be greatly helped by the definitive publication of any evidence which closed the book on the possibility of deaths.

But instead – mystifyingly – we encounter a profound reluctance actually publish any such scientific documents – and a complete refusal to answer reasonable questions asked on behalf of many of the survivors.

The JEP leader comment goes on to make this assertion:

“We also know, through the evidence of our own eyes, that objects that Mr Harper was happy to see referred to as ‘restraints’ and ’shackles’ were no more than an uncoiled upholstery spring and the sort of ironmongery that many Jersey people would immediately recognise as old wall fittings for holding pipes and cables.”

I fully understand what old-fashioned guttering down-pipe fixings look like; I’ve even fitted a few when I worked as a carpenter.

Fact: but never – ever – have I seen two such items – joined together with a short length of chain.

Nor could any thinking person be remotely surprised that – after 30 years of laying on the earth in a damp floor-void – the items have become “rusty lumps of metal”.

As I said in an earlier comment, the Jersey Evening Post has taken a profound risk. Having staked so much upon maintaining what may yet prove to be an insupportable fiction – the collateral damage to its credibility could be substantial.

The comment of last Friday actually serves as evidence for the validity of Mr. Harper’s concern – namely that justice won’t be done – and as an excuse, the Jersey oligarchy are trying to frame him.

The Rag says:

“But there is deep tragedy in all this. As a result of the muddying of the waters at Haut de la Garenne, the true extent of the crimes that were without doubt committed there may never emerge.

Far from encouraging more useful witnesses to come forward and building up a web of corroborative evidence, Lenny Harper’s high-profile strategy has produced an investigative mess in which fact and fantasy have melded into each other and which might have severely prejudiced the course of justice as well as dragging Jersey’s good name through the mud.”

The truth is that if any actions have “muddied the waters” – those actions have been undertaken by the Jersey oligarchy, officers Warcup & Gradwell – and the Jersey Evening Post.

For if the aforesaid agents were genuinely interested in clarity – evidence – facts – they would be doing all to ensure that the scientific evidence was published – and that all other questions, such as those I’ve asked on behalf of my constituents, were answered.

Instead we witness spin-doctored press-releases masquerading as “scientific reports”; complete falsehoods peddled as though they were statements of fact – and quite extraordinary banana republic style – unlawful – actions to depose the Chief Constable of Jersey’s police force.

But, should that not be sufficient grounds for according The Rag its just degree of contempt – consider this.

In its comment, the JEP seeks to portray itself as being fully supportive of the investigation and exposing of child abuses which “without doubt” were committed – and how saddened it is that this very important objective may have received less priority because of concerns over child deaths.

How seriously do we take the claims of the Jersey Evening Post to be fully committed to the exposing and punishing of those who have abused children and concealed such abuse?

We cannot take such claims seriously – not for one instant.

Why?

Because The Rag has repeatedly been furnished with important, robust and key evidence of child abuses – and the concealing of such abuses – yet it has flatly refused to use that evidence.

On the contrary – we need only look at the conduct of The Rag during 2007 – when, as far as we knew, we were dealing with abuses – not the possibility of child deaths.

During that period, the JEP engaged in its customarily brazen bias, it refused to print evidence – instead preferring to print the unchallenged vacuous assertions of establishment politicians, it refused to publish substantial numbers of letters in support of those of us who were trying to expose the abuse scandal – and it printed several, frankly deranged, editorial comments which heaped lies and contempt upon people like me.

Fortunately, in this age of citizen media, the power of The Rag is rapidly diminishing.

Such displays of brazen hypocrisy and dishonesty can only accelerate its demise.

The Jersey Evening Post – enemy of this community.

One could not come to such a conclusion in respect of The Times – which recently published Mr. Hume’s article. The Times is a reasonably robust and broad journal – indeed, it has, this year and last, carried a number of important articles concerning institutional child abuses committed by the Jersey authorities.

So, unlike the Jersey Evening Post, we can say of The Times that it carries a broad range of views.

Unfortunately, in the case of Mr. Hume, those views happen to be anti-intellectual, unevidenced – and disturbingly biased.

Why should this be?

I will explain some of the political history of Mr. Hume later, but let us now take a brief look at certain of the assertions he makes.

Probably the only useful observation he reports in the entire article is this:

“Throwing a miniature rugby ball around his cramped office in Broadcasting House, the run-down former BBC centre that now serves as a police HQ in Jersey’s capital, St Helier, Detective Superintendent Mick Gradwell is one policeman whose lot is not a happy one.”

For in this reportage, we gain an all too realistic view of Mr. Gradwell – slouched in his office – throwing a miniature rugby ball around – as though he were fantasising about being some hard-bitten cop in an American crime drama – toying with a baseball whilst he ponders the devilishly clever schemes of the gangster boss.

And it is not an inaccurate picture.

For when we closely analyse the spin-doctored press-release issued by Mr Gradwell & his boss, Mr. Warcup, on the 12th November – we cannot come to any conclusion other than he simply had not read the evidence available to him.

Why else would he issue a press-release – which contained professionally destructive falsehoods?

Mick Hume in his article says:

“When he and the new deputy police chief, David Warcup, reviewed the case of suspected child murder in the former home, they were shocked – not so much by the evidence as by its absence.”

Well – when Mr. Gradwell asserts that ‘there is no intelligence to suggest that the recovered items may have been improvised shackles’ – and he asserts that acts of abuse could not – for a fact – have been committed in the voids – because they’re only around five feet high – we cannot come to any conclusion other than that he simply has not examined the evidence.

Mr. Hume goes on to say this:

“They announced that, contrary to many reports, no children were murdered and no bodies hidden or burnt there. Further, microscopic examination had found no blood in samples detected by sniffer dogs in an old concrete bath, as initially expected; and of the three very small bone fragments found that were possibly – but not definitely – human, two had been dated to between 1470 and 1670, and the third dated from sometime between 1660 and 1950.”

It is in assertions of this nature that we can see that whatever Mr. Hume’s grounds for writing what he does – an analysis of the science is not amongst them.

Mr. Warcup & Mr. Gradwell state – as though it were proven fact – that there were no unexplained child deaths.

At the time of their infamous press-conference – no robust, scientific peer-review of the evidence existed.

On the contrary – we know that even the so-called review by the Metropolitan police was not completed.

Yet Mr, Hume ends his article by saying:

““We now know that there is no evidence of suspicious deaths at Haut de la Garenne”.

No. On the evidence – we know nothing of the kind.

On the contrary, we have a significant amount of evidence of human origin – fragments of bone – and many children’s teeth – which simply remain wholly unexplained.

Would that we did have evidence that no suspicious deaths occurred at HDLG.

Instead, let us remember – all that Mr. Hume is speaking of amounts to a 5 page press-release – co-written with Frank Walker’s spin-doctors – and which contains many startling omissions – and certain outright falsehoods.

And if Mr. Hume were serious in his claims to be only interested in a sober reflection upon the facts – surely he would have asked what happened to all the other bone fragments? Where is the scientific analysis of them?

Why focus only on the three fragments – and not the substantial remaining number of fragments?

Where does Mr. Hume demand of Warcup & Gradwell answers to the question ‘have they undertaken full radionuclide testing on all of the bone fragments to determine whether they originate after the nuclear weapons era?

Why do we not see Mr. Hume pressing for the radionuclide testing of the substantial – and quite bizarre – quantity of human teeth found in the voids?

Such testing would show us definitively whether the teeth originated from people who were living in the post-war nuclear weapons era.

Mr. Hume goes on:

““Police officers became concerned at the number of people in positions of authority who were being connected with paedophile crimes,” Lenny Harper told The Times. “We don’t yet know how the child came to meet his or her death. We can’t say that it was homicide but have to treat it this way.”

“Walker, who has since retired from office, counter-accuses the former deputy police chief of misleading the administration; in May, Harper sent him a “secret” e-mail revealing that more remains had been found, of recent origin, and that a homicide investigation would probably be necessary. “That e-mail was never retracted.””

Were Mr. Hume remotely interested in the facts, he would know that the e-mail in question has been completely misrepresented by Frank Walker and David Rose, another contrarian journalist who specialises in trawling the country for opportunities to rubbish child abuse investigations.

There are many media accounts of what Mr. Harper actually said – for example, the BBC News website of 31st July under the heading “Jersey murder enquiry unlikely.” In that article Mr. Harper is clearly quoted as saying that in the light of the carbon dating then “should the evidence stay as it is, it is obvious there will be no murder enquiry.”

Why have Gradwell, Warcup, and Hume, like David Rose before them, ignored this?

Elsewhere in his article, Mr. Hume states:

““Police officers became concerned at the number of people in positions of authority who were being connected with paedophile crimes,” Lenny Harper told The Times. “We don’t yet know how the child came to meet his or her death. We can’t say that it was homicide but have to treat it this way.”

Here – taken from an article in The Times itself – we see a plain and unambiguous example of what Mr. Harper was actually saying.

Fact: the remains of a child or children – in the form of many teeth and bone fragments – were recovered from the building.

We do not yet know the age or origin of those remains – nor will we until ALL of the scientific evidence is published. And what Mr. Harper says is entirely, 100%, consistent with those facts.

He said, “we do not know how the child died” – and he went on to say – “we can’t say that it was homicide but have to treat it that way”.

Contrary to the spin and lies of the Jersey oligarchy – Mr. Harper’s words are entirely factual.

Indeed – imagine what people would think if the police had uncovered these artefacts originating from children – and had not conducted the investigation as though the possibility of homicide existed?

The actually quite astonishing failure of Mr. Hume to grasp the difference between science – and politically motivated spin – is revealed in these words of his, when speaking of the media presentation given by Warcup & Gradwell:

“And the critical analysis that it presented of the forensic evidence gathered at Haut de la Garenne looks irrefutable. That analysis, after all, was based largely on the first full public presentation of detailed scientific tests carried out by the very experts that Harper had consulted.”

Once again – there is no scientific, detailed, critical analysis of all the forensic evidence.

It simply does not yet exist.

All that Warcup & Gradwell furnished the media with was a five page political press release – co-authored with Frank Walker’s spin doctors.

A document which, moreover, contained obvious errors of fact, omissions – and outright falsehoods.

Yet Mr. Hume – and those who share his agenda – seek to portray themselves as sticklers for “evidence” – hard facts – over and above sensation.

Such posturing is wholly incompatible with the indecent eagerness displayed to seize upon any old garbage – screeds of vacuous and intellectually feeble spin – rather than engage in a forthright and sober examination of the actual evidence.

Mr. Harper has said recently that he is of the opinion that he and Graham Power, the Chief Constable of the States of Jersey Police, are being set-up as fall-guys for the inevitable “failure” of what passes for judicial process in Jersey to hold the guilty to account.

And we can see the absolute correctness of Mr. Harper’s concerns when reading this from Mr. Hume’s article:

“As one source puts it: “If you’re a defence lawyer with evidence that a senior investigating officer has been misrepresenting the facts, it will be open season, won’t it?” Walker goes so far as to say that, if guilty people now walk free, Harper will have “a hell of a lot to answer for””.

For here we see displayed – quite plainly – the efforts of Frank Walker & Mr. Hume to set the scene for just such an outcome. “If the guilty walk free, Harper will have a hell of a lot to answer for”.

Let there be no mistake.

If any of the guilty walk free – the blame for that fact will lay with people such as Jersey’s Attorney General, William Bailhache – who has rabidly obstructed the charging of the accused people from the very outset of this episode.

And – in particular – it will lay with David Warcup & Mick Gradwell.

Should they be too thick to grasp that fact, let me explain.

If anything is going to provide “open season” for defence lawyers – it is the words and actions of Warcup & Gradwell.

What more could a defence lawyer require – than being able to stand up in court and assert that the prosecution case is garbage – because the police work which underpins it was carried out in an incompetent manner – and “Look! That isn’t just defence opinion – no less figures than Officers Warcup & Gradwell have publicly said the standards and general competency of the police work was rubbish!”

Accused? Home & dry. Case dismissed.

Let me be charitable – and assume that both police officers are simply extremely stupid and ignorant.

Even assuming that to be the case – they will still be largely to blame for the abusers – and those who concealed abuse – getting away with it.

You cannot be a senior police officer – and publicly set about the task of rubbishing your predecessors – and still then expect the cases they were working on to remain credible.

Frankly – if I were in the shoes of Mr. Warcup or Mr. Gradwell – I would already be seeking to salvage my reputation from the utter folly I’d committed – by resigning forthwith, returning to the UK – and explaining how I’d been conned into acting in an utterly insupportable, politically motivated manner.

I said in my previous posting that I would explain the political sub-text of where Mr. Hume is coming from; why he should be ideologically driven to pursue the agenda he does.

Before I do so, let me refer you to these words taken from his article:

“But more importantly, it fed off a national obsession with child abuse.

Fear of the predatory paedophile has become a morbid symptom of a society where we do not trust one another. As we lose faith in our humanity, the dark side of the human condition comes to the fore in the public imagination – and there is nothing darker than child murder. Haut de la Garenne is perhaps the flipside of the Baby P story: we might seem unable to see brutal abuse before our eyes, yet we seem ready to believe tales of mass murder in a island children’s home.”

“There is a sordid record of abuse in children’s homes. There is also a record of moral panics and false allegations, especially when the police begin trawling for victims.”

Child abuse – a “national obsession” – “a morbid symptom” – dark “imagination” – a record of “moral panics”.

Such phrases give a good indication of Mr. Hume’s thinking.

To understand the strange political views which drive Mr. Hume, what follows is extracted from an e-mail I wrote on the 21st November, concerning a fellow-traveller of Mr. Hume’s – one Richard Webster – and the web site, “Spiked” – of which Mr. Hume is the “Editor-at-Large”.

Spiked is the internet-era reincarnation of a magazine called Living Marxism, or LM, as it later became known. The now defucnt LM was the house-journal of a bizzare political sect called the Revolutionary Communist Party.

LM magazine was bankcrupted when it was sued for defamtion by ITN – who it had accused of fabricating its story and footage of the Serbian massacres of the Boznians during the Balkans war.

The political thinking behind LM and the RCP is well-ilustrated by that crazed attempt to act as applogists for the old commie regime of Serbia.

Mr. Webster and his fellow-travellers and contributors to Spiked would have the world regard them as The One True Voice of factual, honest and straight reporting – and that the mainstream media – and all who may agree with them – are a load of superficial clowns.

I could, actually, find a great deal of sympathy with that view of mainstream media – were there any great countervailing display of intellectual robustness, detailed research, rational argument or responsible ethics in the output of Spiked.

Unfortunately – there isn’t – and I will later give some examples.

But before I do so, I offer Mr. Webster and his fellow Spiked writers a challenge.

Mr. Webster would have the world believe that the HDLG investigation has been a “sorry saga”. He has determinedly sought to damn the credibility of the investigation, its competence, indeed, its very basis.

But when doing so, he, and other contributors to Spiked, are always very careful to assert that they oppose child abuse as much as anyone – that they want “real” abusers brought to justice – and write to the effect that ‘if only a calm, rational, evidence-based approach were brought to bear’ – of the kind they profess to deliver – ‘we would more rapidly and accurately get to the truth’.

So let us take Mr. Webster, and people like Mr. Hume, at their word.

They – purportedly – want the unvarnished facts to emerge; the hard evidence. Very well. Here is the link to my recent blog entry – “37 Questions for Officers Warcup & Gradwell”.

http://stuartsyvret.blogspot.com/2008/11/37-questions-for-officers-warcup.html

If Mr. Webster, Mr. Hume and Spiked wish to see the facts exposed – I challenge them to obtain full, verifiable, answers to these 37 questions from the States of Jersey Police Force.

Were all of these questions to be answered, fully and frankly, I for one would be a good deal more assured, in many respects. When I first discovered, in early 2007, the true breakdown in child protection in Jersey, I had no idea that there may have been a possibility of unexplained child deaths at HDLG. That suggestion only emerged early this year – and my feelings remain today as they were then – I very much hope for actual evidence and robust analysis which shows the concern to have been unfounded.

But sadly – we have no such evidential finding. Instead – all we have been supplied with is a vacuous five-page press-release – written by a spin-doctor in co-operation with the police. Moreover – a press-release which contains some startlingly obvious and deliberate falsehoods.

Many questions remain.

Consider the mysterious 65 teeth. For example, if all of the radionuclide tests I describe are undertaken by accredited, independent laboratories – and the peer-reviewable results published – and a pre-WW II origin for the remains were to be robustly and scientifically established – then we could gain some form of “closure” – so far as possible post-war unexplained child deaths are concerned.

But in the absence of such tests – the issue remains obscure, uncertain and suspicious.

Turning to the Revolutionary Communist Party, its house-journal, the now defunct Living Marxism – and its off-spring, Spiked. Readers can research for themselves the Leninist, Trotskyite history and tactics of this collective – the well-documented belief in sowing the seeds of confusion and contradiction – and in Leninist fashion, adopting policies which hasten the collapse of established societal order – the quicker to established some mass, libertarian utopia in its place.

Given the strangeness and wilful obscurity of their beliefs – this ‘movement’ can only be assessed by considering the sub-text to what they say; reading between the lines, as well as the mere printed words.

We can go to the web site of Spiked – right now – and find it dominated by a set of views and opinions which I advise people to familiarise themselves with – before deciding, metaphorically, to elope with Spiked and it’s miniature band of contrarians.

To give you a flavour of Spiked thinking, you will find the site laden with lame excuses for polemics – which, in fact, are little more than:

Apologist articles for Russia and its renewed militarism.

Apologist articles for Serbian war-crimes.

Significant outpourings of support for the Communist regime of China.

Contemptuous dismissal of the cause of the Tibetan people and endorsement of the Chinese occupation.

A range of articles pouring scorn and contempt upon President-Elect Barak Obama.

And – most disturbingly – a significant number of ultra-libertarian, very thinly disguised defences of child abuse.

Given that Mr. Webster makes such strenuous efforts to distance himself from such views – I’ll quote some of them.

In an article titled – “Time to Tear-Up the Sex-Offenders’ Register” – one Rob Lyons writes a piece in which he makes excuses for teachers and such like – who form abusive relationships with teenagers. I quote:

“In most of these cases, the parties involved regarded themselves as being in a relationship. There is no suggestion of forced sex. While it is quite clear that these people have failed in their responsibilities and probably should not be allowed to teach again, it is far from clear why they should have to be monitored by the police for years to come.”

Ask yourself a question – would you want your 14 or 15 year-old to be the lawful sexual target of 30 year-old teachers? Would you want a 35 year-old teacher who had in the past formed abusive “relationships” with 14 or 15 year-old children to be able to ply their profession – as they could do, in the absence of monitoring?

I didn’t think so, somehow.

That is why those who have displayed such irresponsibility need to be monitored to ensure that every effort is taken to prevent them exploiting children in such ways.

In an article which is a quite startling apologist rant in thinly disguised support of child porn, one ‘Barbara Hewson’ quotes what she describes as a “carefully balanced observation”, this being the comments of a very minority academic, Max Taylor who said this at a conference:

“‘The relationship between adult sexual interest in children and child pornography is complex and poorly understood. Not all convicted child-sex offenders express an interest in child pornography. On the other hand, very many people who have no criminal record, and who seemingly have no known sexual interest in children, demonstrate an interest in child pornography by accessing and downloading images.’

‘The relationship between collecting child pornography and sexual assaults on children is also not clear.’ (4).”

The remarkable sophistry and dangerous – perhaps wilful – ‘naivety’ of that statement can be no better illustrated than by considering a quote of Hewson’s own, taken from the same Spiked article:

“No law-abiding person condones children being raped or abused, on camera or off it. Clearly, in situations where children are sexually assaulted and the assaults are recorded, the photo or film is a record of criminal acts.

But it is misconceived to argue that the record ‘is’ the abuse. It is neutral.

It is bizarre to argue that someone who downloads and views a picture of an assault later on – perhaps 40 years later – is somehow complicit in the original assault. This makes no sense. We do not say that someone watching the destruction of the World Trade Centre on TV is complicit in the hijackers’ acts. Even if that person believed that the Americans got what they deserved and cheered, he could not incur criminal liability for the crimes perpetrated on 9/11.”

The above quote is extremely illustrative of the type intellectually feeble and self-indulgently contrarian garbage which characterises Spiked.

Have you seen footage of the 9/11 atrocity?

By Hewson’s “logic” – you’re complicit with, and allied to, Bin Laden.

Such a conclusion is, of course, garbage. And Hewson knows it – hence her attempt to make the downloading and viewing of child porn analogous to witnessing a terrorist attack.

Perverts down-loading child porn? In Hewson’s world they’re no more harmful or guilty than you are – when you sit down and watch the evening TV news.

The falsity of her argument and that of Max Taylor, who she so favourably quotes, is clear. Children are vulnerable, naive, and unable to protect themselves from adults who have power over them. Therefore any credible and realistic risk to children should be resisted by any civilised society. Even were it true – as Taylor attempts to imply – that most child porn voyeurs do not themselves go onto attack children – they most definitely are complicit in the abuse of children – because their ‘demand’ creates a market for pictures of children being abused – often in the most horrific of ways. It is true that, these days, some child porn images are manufactured using computer technology – but many aren’t – and instead involve the actual abuse of real children – often to death. Whether the images are faked or real – the ‘market’ demand will drive real atrocities.

Do you agree with Hewson that being a punter for such horrific material is harmless – and in no way complicit in the suffering of children?

Then you’ll feel right at home with the festering remnants of the Revolutionary Communist Party – Living Marxism (or simply LM, as it came to be known) – and Spiked.

Should my opinion of this bizarre cult not be sufficient, the respected author and science and environmental journalist, George Monbiot wrote this:

“On one issue after another, there’s a staggering congruence between LM’s agenda and that of the far-right Libertarian Alliance. The two organisations take identical positions, for example, on gun control (it is a misconceived attack on human liberty), child pornography (legal restraint is simply a Trojan horse for the wider censorship of the Internet), alcohol (its dangers have been exaggerated by a new breed of “puritan”), the British National Party (it’s unfair to associate it with the murder of Stephen Lawrence; its activities and publications should not be restricted), the Anti-Nazi League (it is undemocratic and irrelevant)

The two organizations share a strangely one-sided conception of freedom, celebrating and defending the “freedom to” of those with the power to act, while dismissing threats to the “freedom from” of those who might be affected. So, limiting the scope of racist publications insults our humanity, even though they might incite racists to beat up black people, while restricting car use is a fundamental assault on liberty, even though being hit by cars is now the commonest cause of death for children between the ages of one and fourteen. “It is those who have suffered the most,” LM tells us, “who should be listened to the least.”

Both organizations also appear to believe that the weak and vulnerable are best served by being allowed to fend for themselves, without interference from “do-gooders” and “puritans”. Left to their own devices, both adults and children are capable of resisting tobacco advertising, alcopops, paedophiles and pornographers, whatever the imbalance of power between perpetrator and victim may be. Indeed corporations, LM appears to suggest, should be free to do whatever they want, except sueing LM for libel.”

As I said – these are strange days – in which The Rag finds itself allied to a bizarre political sect – a strange and immature libertarian cult – of the kind which produces Spiked – of which Mike Hume is the Editor-at-Large.

None of us involved in this debate yet know what the facts are – we’re simply in no position to have a thorough understanding of the evidence, and what conclusions could be drawn from it.

The only possible way in which the issues, questions and doubts can be resolved is through the transparent and factual analysis of the evidence.

To those who genuinely want to walk that path to a rational understanding of events – let me invite you to write to officers Warcup & Gradwell – and ask them to answer the 37 questions I posed. Whilst by no means definitive – an immense amount of confusion and ambiguity could be readily resolved through such transparency.

Let me leave you with this thought.

We have seen attempt after attempt to rubbish the work of Lenny Harper – and to pour hatred and contempt upon me.

Let it be noted – that both Mr Harper and I am ready and willing to state our case – and be cross-examined on it – under oath in court.

Perjury is a very serious offence – as Jeffrey Archer and Jonathan Aitkin could attest.

Those of us who are on the side of the truth are ready to state our case without fear.

How many people in the Jersey oligarchy do you think could say the same?

Stuart.

THE RECKONING BEGINS ITS ADVANCE.

“If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared.”

Niccolo Machiavelli.

As amoral and ruthless as Machiavelli was – his writings remain, perhaps, the most fundamental work on politics ever produced – because for all the brutality evinced in ‘The Prince’ – it depicts human nature in all its frightening reality.

The quote above is one of my favourites.

Again, because it is so amazingly perspicacious.

I was reminded of this quote whilst contemplating the actions of the Jersey oligarchy – and their UK establishment friends – against Lenny Harper and Graham Power.

The British establishment has striven mightily – moved Heaven & Earth, in fact – in an all-out attempt to destroy both men.

All ‘arms’, as Niccolo would describe them, have been deployed – used in an effort to annihilate Lenny & Graham – in a concentrated attack – like a type of ‘total war’.

In an act of desperation – the Jersey oligarchy – and the British establishment – whose closeted skeletons, as the Jersey crew well know, still carry a substantial degree of “influence” – have staked everything on a desperate last throw of the dice.

And they’ve blown it.

Whilst their smear campaigns and lies will have damaged the reputations of both men in the eyes of some casual observers – the “injury” done to both was nothing like “severe” enough to deliver safety from vengeance.

Both men – having withstood the very worst that the oligarchy could do – remain on their feet – and barely scratched.

The oligarchy – and its allies now stand spent – exhausted – and ‘bear of arms’.

So now – Mr. Harper and Mr. Power stand poised – to deliver their lethal vengeance.

Metaphorically speaking – you understand?

The fight-back begins today.

The Belfast Evening News carries a piece today – available on its website – in which Mr. Harper makes some initial and slight response to the injuries which the oligarchy have attempted to inflict on him – and upon the victims.

It is merely an opening gambit.

There is an awful lot more to come into the public domain yet.

Observe the media during the coming days – yea – even the Jersey media.

But don’t worry if The Rag fails to deliver the goods; if they don’t – I will.

Given the facts which stand implacable – I would like to refer you to an article published today by The Times – written by one Mick Hume.

Forgive me if you have to copy & paste this, but here is the address:

http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article5348502.ece

If that doesn’t work – just go to The Times website and search for ‘No murder at the Mansion’.

I would like to invite my readers to read Mr. Hume’s article – read it closely and carefully; turn it over in your mind – absorb it – contemplate it.

Indeed – give it the benefit of the doubt.

Once you have done so – consider: this is the very best that a bizarre and perverse alliance between the British establishment and a load of old commie apologists for genocide can come up with. (All will be explained.)

Then in a couple of days I will write a post which dissects Mr. Hume’s article.

And whilst you’re waiting – spare a thought for the poor, deluded Jersey oligarchy.

If only they had read old Niccolo – perhaps they would not now be left contemplating a ruinous – but self-inflicted and indefensible – last stand.

“Men ought either to be indulged or utterly destroyed, for if you merely offend them they take vengeance, but if you injure them greatly they are unable to retaliate, so that the injury done to a man ought to be such that vengeance cannot be feared.”

Niccolo Machiavelli.

I sense vengeance upon the air.

Stuart.

OF CHRISTMAS SPEECHES, CRONYISM & COVER-UPS

SOME BRIEF REPORTAGE FROM THE FRONT-LINE.

Readying The Speech;

Preparing for the Raid;

Laughing at the Jersey Media.

Before I get going – I should inform loyal readers that the States assembly finishes tomorrow (Tuesday) for the Christmas break – and we all know what that means – don’t we!

Yes – it’s infamous speech time again.

Another occasion upon which I will incur the wrath of my “esteemed” colleagues, cause the Bailiff to halt proceedings and cut my microphone, reduce the assembly to a boiling tumult of bellowing fury and chaos, have other members come up to my desk and scream abuse in my face until I’m on the cusp of actually punching them, cause democracy to break-down, threaten the very foundations of civil-society, engender mayhem and bloodshed – by –

Oh, you know – giving a reflective Christmas speech which expresses empathy and recognition to child abuse survivors.

I know – it’s an atrocity upon the face of democracy – a treasonous act – for which the death-sentence should be re-introduced – but I just can’t help myself.

Actually – I don’t have a clue right now what I’m going to attempt to say.

But don’t worry – I’ll think of something!

I’m sorry I can’t give you precise times, as the Christmas speeches are delivered at the end of proceedings – all I can do is speculate that it will be at some point before lunch-time – so listen in, or better still, come down to the public gallery. And don’t worry if I’m prevented from giving the speech, I’ll just come and do it outside in the Square.

So – let’s round-up a few more tragi-comic facets of the ever-continuing farce of the Jersey polity – as it struggles under the novel burden of reality – much as an ant might, beneath a steam-roller.

Firstly, let’s take a look at my very good friends – the “new management” of the States of Jersey Police Force.

As you may recollect – imagining that policing is as unaccountable as it was in London in the 1960s – Warcup & Gradwell have – following instruction from that other very good friend of mine, Bill Bailhache – got some of their UK-based mates to harass and intimidate me.

Yep – they really are that stupid.

If you’ve read an earlier posting, you will recollect my formal e-mailed response to the UK police, which was – “you’ll never take me alive, copper!”

Apparently – and please bear with me as I know this stretches the bounds of credibility – I merit legal threat, intimidation by the authorities, having my home raided, my files seized, this blog shut down – and being arrested and prosecuted – all because I – allegedly – have been in receipt of leaked information.

All this whilst the perpetrators of a huge number of child abuse atrocities – and the concealment of abuse – remain happily ensconced in highly-paid jobs – in which, in some cases, they’re receiving £200,000 of tax-payers’ money – per annum.

Funny old world, innit?

So, in all seriousness, I’m actually expecting police raids and arrest any day now. Hell – it could even happen now – as I sit typing these words.

I know it’s coming – because the establishment politicians know all about the impending raid – and have been rushing around excitedly blathering about it in anticipation – rather like the mother of a bride, just before her wedding.

One can’t help but observe – it seems somewhat ironic that these politicians can be in receipt of this unlawfully leaked knowledge concerning an imminent operational policing activity – and that’s just fine.

But if I’m in possession of allegedly leaked public interest disclosure information – I have to get dragged away like an east-end gangster in an episode of The Sweeney.

Strange days; I hope some social psychologists read this blog – as the parallel universe Groupthink displayed by the Jersey authorities would, I’m sure, make a fascinating case-study.

As I said – a polity engaged in a futile struggle against reality.

Rumour has it the raid has been held over until the States assembly has finished for the year – at least.

Or that policing and legal actions against me are being held in abeyance until the UK parliament has finished for Christmas, so the MPs I’m in touch with won’t be able to make a fuss about it for a month or so.

We shall see.

In the mean time, someone ought to explain to the plod that so telegraphed have these putative actions been that – guess what?

All of my records – a most fascinating collection accumulated stray examples of the truth – are all safely stashed in a very – very – safe place. Essentially – nowhere in Jersey.

Oh well – maybe they’ll just be content with sending around an armed response team – so they can shoot me through the head. That seems to be a preferred modus operandi of the Met – who have been roped in by Warcup & Gradwell in an effort to stitch-up Lenny Harper & Graham Power.

I can see it now:

“I had to ventilate the bastard sarge, he was goin’ for his piece.”

Incidentally, although space does not allow me to elaborate at present, I can inform you that Warcup & Gradwell have got themselves into a really rather foolish hole.

Trying to do me for disclosing information in the public interest – whilst themselves rampantly leaking classified police data to national journalists, and, moreover, doing so in a way calculatedly designed to mislead.

Don’t ever think these issues are going away, guys. Like I said in an e-mail to you – you are both in a situation in which you are completely out of your depth.

Merry Christmas.

Speaking of which – let us spare a few reflections upon the striding titans of Jersey’s Fourth Estate.

For the very first time – at least as far as I can remember – Rankine Television did an investigative piece of reportage!

Channel Television, the local collection of social-climbing air-head TV hacks – who are controlled and operated by Glenn Rankine and his wife. This delightful couple being very close friends of Big Frank & Phil Ozouf and the rest of the gang. Indeed – Glenn – half-brain – Rankine is Ozouf’s and MacLean’s spin-doctor.

Yes – for the first time ever – they got heavy – and exposed Nelliegate!

Never mind corruption! Child abuse! Graft! Lies! Cronyism and decadence!

Rankine Television goes right to the heart of the real issues!

Jersey’s youngest States member, Jeremy Macon – taking advice from his mother!

As revealed in a leaked e-mail!

Quick – hold the front page! – Err – well, whatever you call it in TV news.

The words pathetic and contemptible barely do justice to this collection of utter clowns.

Look – Jeremy at least has an excuse – he has just got elected – at the tender age of 21.

Jimmy Perchard – by way of contrast – must be knocking on the door of his bus pass around now. And he takes his mother’s advice on all kinds of issues.

She even came to look upon him, in a proprietorial manner, from the public gallery as he made his pitch for the Health Ministry the other day.

I trust CTV will now be door-stepping him – and trying to sell the syndicated rights to the story. I’m sure the New York Times will want to run it.

And what of The Rag?

It trundles along – rolling inevitably to the cliff-edge of its demise.

They were clearly stung somewhat at our exposing of their habit of publishing fake, manufactured letters. Having temporarily given up on the outrightly fictitious – they’re reduced to printing the equally customary tranche of spin-doctored letters – to which real people have been persuaded to add their names.

And amongst this North-Korean plethora of brain-washing tripe – some real examples of utter cretinism creep in.

Take, for example, a recent letter from one Terry Gallichan, of St. Mary.

A truly bizarre and incoherent rant concerning the Christmas speech. He states – with apparent approval – that “tradition is more representative than democracy”.

Hmmm……..

Would that be traditions like tribal warfare? Infanticide, perhaps, as “traditionally” practised by some chthonic peoples? Lynching, maybe? A strong “tradition” in certain southern States of the USA. Perhaps he means the “tradition” of unquestioning deference to one’s feudal lords and masters?

I guess we’ll never know. Let’s face it – a man who writes such a cracker-barrel letter to The Rag – and is forgetful enough to neglect mentioning the fact that he is a Freemason – and the husband of Deputy Juliette Gallichan – just can’t be expected to grasp such notions as coherence.

And what of our old friend Anna Plunkett-Cole?

Those with a longer memory will recollect that Ms. Plunkett-Cole – around this time last year – wrote a truly moronic screed in her Saturday column – which ranted on about just how frightfully, frightfully dreadful I was – for committing the heinous offence of attempting to express some empathy for abuse survivors in my Christmas speech; an article in which she devoted an entire – whole – 13 words of reference to the victims of abuse.

I was reminded of those 13 little words – grudgingly shoehorned into her vacuous ramblings – when reading her column last Saturday.

Think of all the terrible things going on in the world? Hell – think of all the terrible things which have gone on in Jersey? Contemplate the vast array of serious challenges this community faces in an utterly changed world.

What, do we imagine, Ms. Plunkett-Cole devoted the majority of her privileged little stage to?

War and Wars’ alarums? Impending economic bankruptcy? President elect Obama’s avowed aim to shut down tax-havens?

Nope. Apparently – the fact that I was rude to a political colleague in an e-mail supplants all such piffling crisies.

Poor Anna never was terribly bright. Oh, and by the way, Anna – do please tell you friend Whaleman to stop stalking my partner.

It’s becoming extremely tiresome.

So – there you go – a few brief reflections from the front line. Basically – it’s business as usual.

And the struggles of decent people against the stagnant and putrid midden of power in Jersey continue.

I hope I can think of something suitable for the speech tomorrow – I simply wouldn’t wish to let my colleagues down. Especially after all this anticipation.

I’ll write again soon – provided I’m not in the nick by then.

Stuart.

WRITTEN FROM THE INSIDE.

A COVERT MESSAGE

SNEAKED OUT TO THE FREE WORLD.

(Nah – only kidding.)

Really sorry, dear readers, for the silence on these pages; I’ve been cuffed n’ stuffed by the forces of darkness – and have had to spend days undergoing interrogation, sensory deprivation, psychological torture and water boarding. OK – I made that last one up – but it oh so easily could come to pass.

So many worried people have left comments, sent me e-mails and left telephone messages – asking, ‘are you OK, Stuart? Have they had you in the slammer? Have they threatened you into silence?’

Oh so many people – with a disturbingly accurate take on the true nature of power in Jersey.

Since I last blogged – it seems like years ago – I’ve been put through the ringer – and no mistake.

Cross-examination, duplicitous interrogation, deliberately misleading information fed to me, cross and double-cross, scheming, plots and dummy moves – all designed to sow the seeds of confusion, doubt and chaos.

Actually – it was the build-up to the States assembly electing the Ministers who will form the cabinet for the next three years.

But look – it felt like torture, OK?

Phone calls from politicians X & Y & Z – saying they were – then were not – then were again – and then not again – seeking this – or that position. Or they were supporting A or B politician – but only if they were offered an Assistant Minister post by said individuals – but even then intended to secretly vote for someone else.

Day – and night. Changing from hour to hour – just when you thought you were orientated – when they had lulled you into a false sense of security – suddenly everyone’s’ position would shift again; is it day? Is it night? Who do I trust? Everyone? No one? When will it all end?

This psychological torture culminated today – in me having to undergo the appalling ordeal of being a candidate for the position of Home Affairs Minister – with an hour and a half’s notice so my lunch time was spent vaguely trying to think of something moderately cogent to say in my speech, and in answer to the questions.

I pleaded with several other States members to challenge for the post – but after all kinds of wrangling and horse-trading – suddenly – there was no one to challenge Ian Le Marquand.

So faced with the prospect of him becoming Home Affairs Minister – with his appalling attitude to jailing children – and just walking into the position without challenge – I had no choice other than to oppose him.

Actually, to my astonishment, I got 18 votes out of the 53 – having predicted I’d get 8 votes. When contesting these positions, each candidate makes their opening 10 minute speech, and is then questioned for 20 minutes – whilst your opponents wait in a room in the precincts, where they can’t hear what you’ve said; this to avoid an unfair advantage to those who are last to make their pitch.

I didn’t hear, therefore, any of Senator Le Marquand’s speech or his answers – but I’m informed by other members and many of the listening public, that his performance was extraordinarily lame.

I’ll have to check out Hansard once it’s published.

So – there you go.

I could, hypothetically, have suddenly become the politician responsible for policing and law enforcement.

As I said in my introductory speech – when I’m arrested for the – supposed and alleged – breaches of the Official Secrets Act – or whatever the nonsense is – I promise I won’t issues a Ministerial order to let me go.

No – I would just have got one of my esteemed colleagues to go and have private, secret meeting with Attorney General Bill Bailhache – and bingo! I’d be free!

Err – well, maybe not – in my particular case.

But you get the idea.

I have to say, It’s very touching to get so many messages – enquiring after my welfare – and asking me to hurry up and write some more of “this vile blog” (c. Frank Walker).

But contrary to the oligarchy propaganda – generating these effusions is something I only do in spare time. And as explained – things have been somewhat chaotic and demanding this last week or so.

So thanks for your support – and don’t worry about me. I’ll only be silenced when the Jersey oligarchy have me sleeping with the fishes.

Which could be tomorrow night.

Only joking.

(I hope)

Stuart

JERSEY: CHILD ABUSERS REMAIN FREE

AND WORKING IN WELL-PAID PUBLIC JOBS;

THOSE WHO CONCEALED ABUSE FACE NO JUSTICE

AND CONTINUE TO BE EMPLOYED BY TAXPAYERS.

BY WAY OF CONTRAST –

I’M THREATENED WITH ARREST

UNDER THE DATA PROTECTION LAW.

A Threatening E-mail From the Cops

And my Considered Reply;

This is Getting Serious.

As readers of the previous posting will understand – a great deal of extremely serious events are taking place in the ever increasing Kafkaesque nightmare of the Jersey Child Abuse Disaster.

Freshly recruited UK cops are out to smear Lenny Harper. So much so, they’re refusing to interview key witnesses who may supply testimony which thwarts their objective.

Some of these cops have – with the full support and encouragement of the Jersey oligarchy – mounted an unlawful coup against the incumbent Chief Constable of the States of Jersey Police Force, Graham Power – a man of impeccable record and an outstanding professional.

In a manifestly illegal and overtly political manoeuvre, Mr. Power has been “suspended” by Jersey politicians – who don’t like the historic child abuse enquiry – not one little bit.

This political intervention against the police occurring as though the Crown Dependency of Jersey were some south American banana republic.

The head of Jersey’s civil service – who facilitated the coup against Graham Power – is himself a key suspect in the perversion of the course of justice involved in attempting to conceal the criminally abusive use of coercive and punitive solitary confinement against vulnerable children in custody.

The “new management” of the States of Jersey Police Force have engaged in an overtly political spin-doctoring campaign – mounted in a feeble attempt to rubbish the HDLG investigation.

And I am being threatened with investigation and prosecution for handling leaked information.

UK readers will be familiar with the immense and current controversy surrounding the police raid on the offices of Damian Green, MP – who, it is alleged, may have committed misconduct in a public office – by receiving leaked information.

The action against Mr. Green is madness – and the fact that the raid included his office in the Palace of Westminster has – rightly – caused outrage amongst other MPs, of all parties.

Whilst it may seem an arcane subject to many people – a policing interference with one of your elected representatives is actually an assault upon your rights to be effectively represented.

If such practices were ever to be regarded as acceptable – your chosen politicians – regardless of which party you support – will find themselves fearful, circumspect and intimidated in discharging their duties to the public good; for example – when attempting to hold those in power to account and subject them to scrutiny.

The raid on Mr. Green’s Westminster office has – plainly – transgressed the sanctuary of parliamentary privilege.

Jersey politicians aren’t supplied with such facilities as offices – so I work from home.

Therefore the impending raid on my office won’t be deterred by any consideration of parliamentary privilege.

But the essential point remains – if your elected representatives can be threatened, molested and intimidated by the police – especially when such police intimidation is carried out at the behest of other politicians – your freedom – indeed, the very foundations of democracy – are put in jeopardy.

This fact being widely and instantly recognised by 90% of democratically minded people – Mr. Green is in the fortunate position of having the support of the massed, cross-party ranks of MP’s – and of 95% of the media. And rightly so.

But in my case – down here in the crypto-feudal oligarchic environment of Jersey politics – I cannot look to such powerful support.

But I do have some support – a load from the good people of Jersey – and from MPs – like John Hemming who spoke of me and my situation today in parliament.

The Jersey Establishment Party have at least three, key aims:

1: Intimidate and silence me.

2: Intimidate and frighten my constituents who whistle-blow to me.

3: Force me into revealing my sources.

1 and 3 of those objectives are simply unattainable. I don’t “do” intimidated.

And – without exaggeration – I would sooner be jailed than betray my sources.

My constituents need not, therefore, succumb to that second Jersey establishment objective. On the contrary – the Jersey oligarchy – in behaving in such ways – are displaying just how frightened, weak and desperate they are.

So – I face the very real prospect of raids on my home, arrest, questioning under caution, prosecution – and jail.

I will write a good deal more about these issues in the coming days.

This is a very grave and serious situation – so I want you to read very carefully the top-secret threatening e-mail from the police to me – which I reproduce below.

And then pay particular attention to my considered reply, which follows it.

Like I said – these are very serious times.

Stuart.

THREATENING E-MAIL MESSAGE, FORWARDED TO ME IN THE NAME OF DCI TIM NUNN OF SUSSEX CONSTABULARY:

—–Original Message—–
From: Newman, Mark [mailto:M.Newman@jersey.pnn.police.uk]
Sent: 03 December 2008 16:55
To: Stuart Syvret
Cc: Timothy.Nunn@sussex.pnn.police.uk
Subject: Independent Investigation

Hi Stuart,

I am leaving the enquiry and returning to my UK Force tomorrow. I have been asked to pass onto you the following message from DCI NUNN of Sussex Police.

I am no longer going to be part of The Operation Rectangle Enquiry but should you wish to contact me my email back in force is [E-MAIL AND MOBILE DETAILS EXCISED]

Many Thanks
Mark

FROM DCI TIM NUNN:

Mr Syvret, Having spoken with Mark, I have asked him to pass on this rather unusual introduction in the hope that we can establish a dialogue. A few weeks ago, I was asked by the Deputy Chief Officer (DCO) David Warcup to conduct an investigation on behalf of the States Of Jersey Police (SOJP). This is standard practice when there is a need to illustrate ‘independence’ in an investigation where the police themselves might be considered to have a ‘conflict of interests’.

The remit of my investigation was to establish how the report from the then DCO Lenny Harper dated the 29th June was disclosed and is now in the public domain. You are more than aware of that report as it appears on your Blog. Clearly, in publishing it, potentially you commit offences under the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005 and these are the subject of a separate investigation by the Data Protection Commissioners Office. I want to speak with you as a witness.

In simple terms, I want to ask you about the circumstances in which you came into possession of that report. My favoured way of doing this [EMPHASIS ADDED] would be to meet you in person. Please can you let me know, either by E mail or using the mobile number below, whether you are prepared to meet me to discuss this further. Thanks in anticipation, Tim.

Detective Chief Inspector Tim Nunn Staff Officer to Deputy Chief Constable Giles York

[telephone number excised]

RESPONSE BY SENATOR STUART SYVRET:

—–Original Message—–
From: Stuart Syvret [mailto:S.Syvret@gov.je]
Sent: Wednesday 03 December 2008 23:13
To: NunnTimothy CN800
Cc: Newman, Mark
Subject: RE: Independent Investigation

You’ll never take me alive, copper.

Senator Stuart Syvret
States of Jersey.

ROCK N’ ROLL!

THINGS JUST GET EVER MORE EXCITING.

Limbering up for Battle.

You Thought Things Were Kafkaesque?

Just Wait and See What’s Coming.

Hello, Dear Readers (well, some of you, anyway) and welcome to a very brief post.

Never mind Nelliegate (local story, don’t worry about it) and Big Frank’s retirement.

There is a lot of really important stuff going down – none of which, of course, the local hack clowns will touch – even if any of them were smart enough to grasp the gravity of the issues.

Oh – do I have some fascinating subjects to serve up for your edification and entertainment?

(Yes, I do.)

But – you’ll have to contain your excitement – for a while, anyway.

These are delicate and heavy – if that isn’t an oxymoron – subjects – which involve other people – so I can’t just splurge the info out here – as much as I would like to.

At least – not yet.

Sorry to be such a tease – but it should be worth waiting for; issues and evidence that you just won’t find in any of the local traditional media.

Not even if I told them about it – and gave them the evidence – in hard-copy triplicate, PDF and DVD – as we know from extensive past experience.

Watch this space.

Stuart.