EXTRACTS FROM ARMAGEDDON: # 4

COMMUNIQUÉS FROM THE APOCALYPSE.

Here’s today’s extracts from Armageddon – Communiqués from the Apocalypse – # 4 – an article from the arguments – a flick through the statements-of-fact.
Some first drops from le deluge – which is arriving somewhat more avant – than the après some had reckoned upon.
Stuart Syvret
EXTRACTS FROM ARMAGEDDON: # 4
“………To understand what follows – it needs to be recognised that Jersey is, essentially, a feudal society; an anachronism that has survived for centuries, no matter the thin veneer of modernity. The Channel Islands were the only European territory occupied by Nazis during WWII whose indigenous power-establishments prospered and survived during – and after – those events, untroubled and unchanged. Much of the manifestly surreal dysfunction – the palpable sense of absolute power and reckless invulnerability enjoyed by the local oligarchy today – can be traced back to Crown and United Kingdom failure to hold to account and clean-up the profiteering and corrupted Jersey media, policing, prosecution and judicial functions in the immediate wake of the Occupation. To this very day – the power-structure and apparatus of Jersey is wholly analogous to a feudal “court” – in which political power, patronage, careers and law-enforcement are in the “gift” of the feudal “court” and its “courtiers”. You are “of” the “court”, or one of its vassals – or you are an enemy of the “court” – and will be ruthlessly crushed……..”
“………Commissioner Julian Clyde-Smith:
Notwithstanding the seriousness of the matters raised above – which represent a transcript-evidenced catalogue of sustained and overt judicial corruption almost certainly without equivalent  in modern British history – the conduct of Commissioner Julian Clyde-Smith – alone and of itself – represents a collapse in the proper and lawful administration of justice in Jersey.
That this state of affairs remains unaddressed by the Crown, Privy Council, and Secretary of State is an unanswerable ultra vires failure of Crown obligations and responsibilities.
One of the most serious and dramatic breakdowns in the rule of law and failure to deliver the protections of the ECHR to have occurred in Jersey is the illegal suspension of the legitimate Police Chief, Graham Power, Queens Police Medal.  A corrupt act undertaken by Jersey’s conflicted and lawless public authorities.
Whilst that illegal action was, and is, an abuse of the rights of Mr. Power himself – it is more significantly an abuse of the human rights of most ordinary members of the population of Jersey, who have various Convention rights that depend – absolutely depend – upon the existence of objective and impartial and fearless policing; that is, as opposed to policing that is under the corrupt control of a narrow claque of partisan politicians, powerful criminals, corrupt public officials, Freemasons, assorted spivs – and rapists.
Just as the illegal suspension of the Police Chief represents unlawful failures, omissions and actions by the Crown, Privy Council, and Secretary of State – so too does the politicisation and corruption of the Jersey judicial apparatus that failed to protect the Police Chief, and in that failure, failed to protect the rights of ordinary people and the very rule of law.
Following the corrupt and illegal suspension of Mr Power, his copy of a written amendment to his contract – one that guaranteed him legal representation – was removed without due process from a locked cabinet in his office. He was then refused access to the document – or, remarkably – even a copy of it.
This corrupt repression forced Mr. Power into the position of having to represent himself in court when he attempted to judicially review the illegal suspension enacted against him.
When Mr Power’s application came before court, it was heard by Commissioner Julian Clyde-Smith – sitting with two “Jurats” – Jill Clapham – and John Le Breton.
Both of the two Jurats were, and are, conflicted.
Jill Clapham is married to a lawyer who worked in the same law firm – Ogier – as Julian Clyde-Smith. The Attorney General Tim Le Cocq, who was representing the Home Affairs Minister against Mr Power’s application is also a close friend of Julian Clyde-Smith – having previously also been a senior partner at Ogier.
John Le Breton is the former deputy headmaster – Vice-Principal – of Victoria College – who had to resign in disgrace from that post for the concealment of many years of child-abuse. Numerous complaints had been made, which were not responded to adequately. Instead, Le Breton and other members of staff went so far as to actually attempt to humiliate and intimidate at least two of the child victims of abuse into withdrawing their complaints. Those matters are detailed and evidenced in the Sharp Report.
Just as in the case of the Pitmans – it is almost beyond words, to describe the monstrous illegality of an individual who is fighting for child-protection, such as the Police Chief, to then find themselves in front of a court that has the child-abuse concealing Jurat Le Breton as a member.
Quiet plainly – Le Breton is wholly conflicted from any kind of case that may involve – in any way – any child protection matter. That aside from the even more obvious point that as the man is clearly unfit to hold any kind of public Office, the most serious and pressing questions must be raised concerning the entire function of the “Jurat” system, its standards of “governance” and its failure to apply “fit and proper person” tests.
Commissioner Clyde-Smith himself is a senior partner at Ogiers – where the Attorney General Tim Le Cocq – and Jill Clapham’s husband – worked for many years.
As did former Jersey Attorney General – currently Bailiff – Michael Birt, a close friend of Clyde-Smith’s.
It is also of general and central relevance to these applications that Michael Birt  has been – on evidenced grounds – directly and publically criticised by the applicant for the unlawful interference in police investigations, unlawful failures to bring necessary charges and prosecutions  – and the unlawful abandonment of other prosecutions; for example the corrupt abandonment of the prosecution of the child-abusing Jane and Alan Maguire.
When the unlawfully suspended Police Chief Graham Power, QPM, brought his judicial review application – which was predictably rejected – before court, neither Commissioner Clyde-Smith – nor the two Jurats – declared their conflicts of interest.
In particular – and most seriously – Advocate Clyde-Smith failed to declare the key client-based conflict of interest arising from his private-sector, commercial involvements.
It could be described as laughable – in a grim, Kafkaesque manner – that three such wholly and manifestly conflicted individuals can be permitted to sit as a “court” – to, in truth,  fraudulently pretend to be a court – under the good name of the British Crown – in the 21st century. But to use such words runs the risk of giving the impression that it is a mere figure-of-speech.  Sadly, it is not.
It is a fact that, increasingly, many hundreds of islanders are – actually – laughing at the palpably fake and absurd nature of what passes for a “judicial” function in Jersey.
There is no indication in any available evidence  – at all – that the respondent authorities – the Crown, Privy Council, and Secretary of State – have met even the basic administrative-law requirement of undertaking “sufficient inquiries” in respect of their obligations for the administration of justice in the Crown Dependency of Jersey.
They actually appear not to know that the judicial function in Jersey is in a state of lawless anarchy, which only continues “its functions” in the eyes of the diminishing number of those who “agree” to pretend along with it, in a kind of charade – a game of “make-believe” in which the participants are supposed to keep their fingers crossed behind their backs, and pretend that this overtly politicised posturing claque of mutually elevating and mutually protecting cocktail party friends are a functioning judiciary – rather than a set of multi-conflicted middle-class criminals who have succeeded in raiding a dressing-up box and accessing the Crown’s bank-accounts.
Let there be no illusions about the gravity of these matters – nor the sheer magnitude of the unlawful failures of the respondents – the Secretary of State, Privy Council,  and Crown. For not only have the respondents failed – grossly – to secure to the ordinary people of Jersey a lawful, functioning judiciary as required by Article 6 – the respondents have also unlawfully failed to ensure the protection of that population’s access to objective, impartial policing.
Not least by – as in this case – permitting a “court” of three individuals all conflicted to a point of jaw-dropping absurdity – to deny the unlawfully suspended Police Chief access to justice.
The involvement of members of that “court” with an extremely powerful individual – who was directly under dramatic police investigation for profoundly serious crimes – until shortly after the illegal suspension of the Police Chief under whose leadership the investigation was taking place  – is, in many ways, all that needs to be said about the plain end of the rule of law in Jersey.
If, indeed, Jersey has ever really had the proper rule of law, in truth – as opposed to a fake, feudal, simulacrum?
The respondent authorities – the Privy Council, the Crown, and the Secretary of State – must answer for these matters in London’s courts.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.