COMMUNIQUÉS FROM THE APOCALYPSE.
Welcome to Extracts from Armageddon – Communiqués from the Apocalypse # 2 – a re-mix from the actus reus – a mash-up of the mens rea – a selection of the citings!
A random pick-&-mix selection of The Case Against the Crown.
Extracts from Armageddon # 2
“…….The very fact that Le Breton was able to become a Jurat raises the most dramatic questions concerning the very safety – lawfulness – and Article 6 compliance – of the entire Jurat system.
Any system that is so central to the very administration of justice – but yet which fails to employ basic and effective “fit-and-proper-person” tests – is plainly unsafe.
And if the system can recruit such an evidencedly unfit and wholly compromised individual in Le Breton – who is to say the other Jurats are not similarly unfit – and compromised?
The Jurat system is unlawful on the above-grounds alone – even setting aside the other fatal, structural issues.
But it is nothing less than an outrage – and a grossly unlawful failure by the respondent UK authorities to meet their legal obligations to ensure the good administration of justice, and the application of Article 6 of the ECHR – that Le Breton should have been one of the Jurats involved in the case of the Pitmans.
Further – it is another damming indictment of both the competency – and neutrality – of the presiding judge – Commissioner Sir Charles Gray – that he permitted the tribunal to operate on such a catastrophically conflicted basis.
It is axiomatic, that in a tiny community such as Jersey, any judge presiding over a mixed-tribunal should inquire – at the outset – for possible conflicts of interests of members of the court he or she is about to lead. It requires no great – or frankly even any – legal expertise to be familiar with the basic requirement that the administration of justice must be scrupulously impartial and free of contaminations.
It is difficult to know which is more damning of Sir Charles Gray or illustrative of his incompetence – the fact that he (we must assume) made no such inquiry of his fellow tribunal members at the commencement of the case – or that he has remained silent in the face of the subsequent revelations concerning the gross and ultra vires conflicts of interest on the part of the Jurats?
Deputy Trevor Pitman is one of the very few Jersey politicians to have actively worked to try and combat the wretched history of child-protection failure and child-abuse cover-ups in Jersey.
It is nothing less than staggering – a manifest collapse in the proper objective administration of justice – that the child-abuse concealing Jurat John Le Breton should have had any involvement in the Pitmans’ case whatsoever.
It is even more staggering – and one of the plain necessitating factors in this litigation – that this collapse in the Jersey judicial function has been subsequently drawn to the attention of the respondent authorities – the Secretary of State, Crown, and Privy Council – only to receive a brief, pro-forma ‘brush-off’ in what is plainly a calculated gesture of contempt.
The conduct of the respondent authorities in this matter greatly adds to – and amplifies – and further evidences – the clear and unanswerable grounding of the tort of misfeasance in a public office.”