CHILD ABUSE IN JERSEY:

HOW THE LOCAL MEDIA SPIN IT.

Distortions, Lies, Manipulations, Smears

From the Jersey Oligarchy’s Media.

More regurgitated Attacks on Lenny Harper

Designed to Deny the Survivors Justice.

To readers outside Jersey it is almost impossible to accurately describe just how riddled with venality, lies, idiocies, ethical bankruptcy, out-and-out corruption and quite staggering abuses of power this place is.

After all – we’re a British Channel Island – a Crown Dependency, no less. And situated right on the doorstep of France and the UK – as opposed to being some far-flung ex-colony – so, we must be “respectable” – right?

Wrong.

Every component of the Jersey power-apparatus is rotten to the core. Billions of dollars flood through here each year – with Christ knows what malign influences – and in the process, increasing the tax-burden on people in large nation-states.

And every kind of internal rot imaginable infests the local political scene. Certain members of the legislature having their votes and influence bought? No problem.

No construction development permission – unless the politician of the day with the relevant power gets “a suitcase stuffed with cash” – and sex with you wife? “The Jersey Way”.

Predatory serial rapists of young women – occupying positions of great power and influence – and remaining untouched by the police – to this day? Well, that’s just the way it goes.

Rapidly approaching total destruction of the island’s environment – due to more planning authority corruption than every English county combined? Well, it’s not what you know – it’s who you know – and what you know about who you know.

Complete stagnation in the administration of justice – to the extent that I – a defendant in a case of malicious prosecution – can properly issue summonses to require witnesses to attend the court-case as a part of my defence – only for Jersey’s Attorney General, William Bailhache, to secretly contact the department responsible for issuing those summonses – and tell them not to – because he “doesn’t consider the summonses appropriate”?

Even though he is a party to the action – and one of the people to be summoned?

And one-hundred-and-one other, similar corruptions that are routine in Jersey.

And all tolerated – nay – actually pro-actively protected, by this Labour Government – and Mr. Straw in particular.

As you might imagine, I’ve been following with very great interest the situation in the Turks and Caicos Islands. A British Overseas Territory, a designation that brings with it certain subtle differences to Jersey’s designation as a British Crown Dependency.

But nevertheless – ultimately – the British government carries final responsibility for good governance, the proper rule of law and the good administration of justice in all these places.

The British authorities identified compelling evidence for corruption in the Turks and Caicos Islands – and a ‘climate of fear that prevented ordinary, decent local people from speaking out against those in power’.

Remarkably similar to Jersey.

Except that things in Jersey are worse.

Far worse.

And one of the things that make it far worse is the sheer, entrenched invulnerability of the ruling oligarchy here.

So concerned with the situation in the Turks and Caicos Islands – the British government has intervened and taken direct governance for a period of two years – until the proper rule of law and good governance is restored.

So – why doesn’t the British Government do that with Jersey – at least to the extent of taking direct control over all aspect of law enforcement and the good administration of justice?

I can tell you why.

Firstly – a great number of highly placed British establishment figures have made highly lucrative use of Jersey’s off-shore finance industry for many decades; often perhaps in ways which were not entirely legal and tax-compliant.

But, there is a more obvious reason why people like the Labour Party, its Government and Jack Straw won’t do the correct thing and intervene here to restore the proper rule of law. I made this point to Mr. Straw in an e-mail sent a few days ago. This is a quote from that e-mail:

“Your colleague, Foreign Office Minister Chris Bryant, recently took the necessary and proper step of suspending the government of the Turks & Caicos Islands due to – ‘rampant corruption, a break-down in the rule of law and a climate of fear amongst many ordinary people who dared not speak out for fear of being targeted.’

“That description could have been written about Jersey.

“Except that the situation in Jersey is worse.

“I realise the task of restoring Jersey to good governance, the proper rule of law and the good administration of justice will be a more difficult task than in the Turks and Caicos Islands – given that in the Jersey case, you would not be dealing with ‘inconsequential’ – black – descendents of slaves – but instead an entrenched grouping of Oxbridge educated, multi-millionaires who are terribly, terribly well-connected throughout the upper-reaches of the British establishment, including the judiciary, who belong to all ‘the right clubs’, who have “Friends at Court at Whitehall” – and who are all – exclusively – white.

“Nevertheless, I put it to you as a Labour Party Cabinet member, that rectifying the Jersey issues are challenges you must accept.”

Just imagine – how more influence and power do dozens and dozens of Oxbridge-educated, multi-millionaire, “clubbable chaps” – who are exclusively white – have than a small grouping of black people – with limited “influence” – and who live a long way away?

And given that rampant abuses of power, derelictions of duty – and levels of banana-republic type-propaganda openly flourish here – one can only remark upon the profound irony that it’s all being protected and propped-up – by a Labour Government.

Which brings me to a key-stone in the Jersey oligarchy’s power – its media.

Our mob could have taught Peter Mandelson a thing or two seven decades ago.

We are just nearing the conclusion of one of the few, token, child abuse prosecutions; one of the bear, de minimous, number the Jersey oligarchy thought they could get away with. The Jury has been sent out and are deliberating upon their verdict.

Obviously, the trial has been followed as it unfolds by what passes for the media in Jersey. And my old friends at the Jersey Evening Post – lapsing back into The Rag mode – have – oh so tastefully – used the defence lawyer’s summing up to mount yet another barking mad, simply dishonest and manipulative all-out assault upon Lenny Harper – producing a vast headline and lead story. The huge headline reading, “Harper Made Up ‘Remains’ Story”!

Those people in this community who are capable of thinking for themselves know full well – simply on the basis of a moment’s calm reflection – what utter cobblers such an assertion must be. Not that one can blame the defence lawyer for trying his luck in running such an argument – it is, after all, his duty to do his best for his client.

Though surely even a lawyer – and even a JEP journalist must know they’re pushing their luck in focusing upon an aspect of the whole saga that simply has no relevance to the actual case being tried – “remains” not being relevant to these charges?

But don’t we get into deeply circular territory when a key assertion in the defence case is, essentially, recycled lies from the Jersey Evening Post – used in court – then recycled in turn – again – by The Rag itself?

But so desperate – and frightened – are the festering Jersey oligarchy that they seized upon this defence assertion – without waiting for a response from Lenny Harper to a load of obsolete questions – of the kind he’s answered dozens of times already.

Perhaps there are some people in Jersey who actually enjoy being lied to by the island’s only “newspaper”; perhaps some islanders enjoy being taken for fools?

I know that most do not – and are increasingly sick of the corrupted power we, sadly, see in Jersey all too often.

So – as there is zero chance of The Rag doing it – here, the Quite Vile Blog brings you Lenny Harper’s response to the questions The Rag put to him – simply as an insurance policy – so they could say they’d asked him for a response – whilst then rushing ahead without his answers – instead printing the regurgitation of their own lies – rather like a dog returning to its vomit.

Stuart.

Lenny Harper’s Response
To the Jersey Evening Post;
A response they didn’t wait for.

From: Lenny Harper
To: Diane Simon dsimon@jerseyeveningpost.com>
Sent: Wednesday, 19 August, 2009 15:46:31
Subject: Re: claims

Diane

Firstly, I was never served a witness order to go to court in Jersey. The Jersey court can order until they are blue in the face but if they do not communicate a request to those concerned it is rather farcical, or more likely, a deliberate ploy to try and suggest that the witness is avoiding something. The nearest I got to a witness order was finding a piece of Strathclyde police message paper through my door on return from holiday asking me to contact them about a court hearing in Jersey. I did. They could only tell me that there was a court case in Jersey the next day. They could not say why I was required and what evidence I was being asked for. As I had made no witness statement I found this rather odd. I contacted the Crown Office in Edinburgh. They told me it had something to do with producing day books. They also told me they had no enforceable witness order. As I had no day books and the Jersey authorities knew this, I reasoned, and still do, that this was not the real reason they wanted me there. It probably had more to do with the false stories they had given the media. I did not trust them and offered to the Crown Office to give evidence in front of any UK court. This was confirmed as an option but Jersey never took it up. One reason is that they knew I had no day books and that was on the advice of Scotland Yard. Jersey sent two officers to the Yard and obtained a statement confirming this. I have no doubt that officers over my time in Jersey have observed me using A4 books. I have described in great detail several times what the one I carried during the enquiry was. As for the book I was photographed holding – who knows? People carry all sorts of books.

As for defence claims that the abusers would not get a fair trial. Rubbish. None of the trials features any evidence about teeth or bones. Try and find a statement where these are mentioned.

You are right. I do not trust the Jersey authorities. There are many reasons why. Try the lies they told the media about what I had said – try blaming me for unlawful spending when I have an e mail – highlighted by the Sunday Times only a few weeks ago, where I am firmly admonished by Bill Ogley on behalf of the Chief Minister for daring to consider the costs of the enquiry – “Cost is irrelevant” he said. The Sunday Times highlighted this and other untrue assertions made by them. I would trust a fox in a chicken house more than I trust the Jersey authorities.

The book business is rubbish. The conversation you mention never took place. The sum of £200,000 is fantasy and ridiculous. Yes – I did say many times that I could not consider a book until I retired. Is that a wrong thing to say? Would I not have been more wrong to consider it whilst working? You can’t win can you? Who in their right mind would offer £200,000 for a book about Jersey? Like all Jersey public officials I was in the company of journalists many times, and yes I was at a dinner where a NOTW journalist was present. Scotland Yard officers who were also there made a statement to Jersey police in which they categorically stated that nothing untoward was said by me and that I spent most of the time outside on the phone. I think that may have been the night I received the call about the teeth, but as Scotland Yard officers said in a sworn statement that was not mentioned publicly by me. Of course I would have mentioned it to officers in private later but do you not think that this would have been headlines immediately in the papers if we had told the journalist? Ask about the statement by the Scotland Yard officers – unless of course this is another piece of inconvenient evidence which has now been lost.

Read the Sunday Times article about the timing of the Julie Robert’s fragment. Also read her journal. She makes it clear that she never changed her mind but that she could not now be so sure. She did not get it back until, I think, April, and on that date she writes “now that the work on the context is finished.” They did not finish work on the context until well after we sent the fragment off. This is another untruth by those seeking to twist the facts. As I have said, read the Sunday Times article and ask to see the relevant parts of Julie’s journal. Funny how they have kept this bit under wraps. However, the Sunday Times had it and revealed it. Furthermore, see the quotes from the Anthropologist in the UK who told the Sunday Times that he had never heard me say anything contrary to his findings and that he even waived his fee so impressed was he with the professionalism we showed. Where has this all gone?

We are going over old ground here that I have explained to you many times. I am sorry to say I doubt the motivation for this. I told you previously that the fragment was identified at the scene. I also told you that not only did we find a newspaper journalist hiding in the bushes at the same time, but that we knew nothing would stay secret for long. Your paper well knows that with your frequent use of sources to reveal news from within the force. How many times do you have this on record? The infill/rubbish was nonsense. See the report from the Archaeologist which disappeared from the police web site due to “a fault.”

Again, the judgement of the legal establishment seems strangely at odds with how journalists remember it. In the words of the Sunday Times journalists he did not believe the more lurid stories because “Lenny Harper warned me against them.” This is corroborated by a number of BBC and other journalists. However, the Judge can, I suppose, only comment on what is laid (selectively) before him. No wonder the British Government think there is something wrong with Jersey.

Until we entered the building I did not have the evidence to mount a dig. What changed my mind is well documented in the report which was on our web site and which we circulated to the media. I attach a copy of it here.

The overtime at HDLG was for security and was nothing different from the norm at a scene which was a potential major crime scene. The levels of security were endorsed as necessary by the ACPO team present who said we had no choice but to treat the area as a potential major crime scene. Uniform Operations Management supplied the officers who had to be on overtime to avoid removing police officers from protecting the public in Jersey. Martin Grime was not only a dog handler, he was the NPIA search advisor when the major crime search experts were away doing other things. Have you bothered to enquire of the rates we were receiving at the hotels we used? They were rates way below the norm. The Treasury were well aware. Where should we have put him up? In a tent? As for the last nasty little smear about restaurant bills, I was often in London and managed to accumulate many, many, services, reviews, and advice from officers and others there free of charge. Has anyone told you how much that lot was worth? I bet not. Operating as we do on an island, networking and hospitality is an essential part of that. I do not know what is being enquired into – the authorities are so desperate to deprive the victims of justice once again that they will stoop to any level. Nothing surprises me anymore.

Lenny

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.