JERSEY’S “PUBLIC INQUIRY” INTO CHILD-ABUSE

Gets Into the Parallel Universe of Jerseyland –

Where Even the Corruption –

Is Outstripped by the Stupidity.

“We now know – only by the happenstance of the recent disclosure by Google of a letter (copy attached) – that contrary to the lies of the Jersey Attorney General – and the lies of his friend the prosecuting Advocate Stephen Baker – and the perjury of another of his friends, Data Protection Commissioner, the conflicted Emma Martins – that in fact the Jersey oligarchy were desperately attempting to get Google to shut down my blog – the only strong, informed, and challenging journalistic forum in Jersey for victims of child -abuse, and for whistle-blowers at that time – actually get the entire URL removed from the internet – from at least November 2008 – when I was opposing child-abuse cover-ups and questioning the obviously illegal suspension of Police Chief Graham Power.”

The Above From the Application by Stuart Syvret for Legal Funding – to Jersey Public Inquiry – 22nd April 2014.

“Such an interpretation would of course raise the possibility of a “Government within a Government” in which unidentified and unaccountable individuals exercise power outside the parameters of the law. If that was the case then the constitutional implications would be significant. This would be particularly true in the context of a potential impact on the independence of a part of the Criminal Justice System.”

The above from former Police Chief Graham Power – writing to the Jersey parliament Privileges & Procedures Committee in reference to the illegal suspension conducted against him – and quoted by Stuart Syvret in his application for Legal Funding.

“I was oppressed and suppressed in my political work – as the Police Chief was oppressed in his work – by conflicted powerful people with individual and collective interest in covering-up the facts concerning their own corruptions and the breakdown in the rule of law in Jersey.

Those same people then set about oppressing and suppressing me in my journalistic work.

Those people are the “Government within a Government” in which unidentified and unaccountable individuals exercise power outside the parameters of the law.

Those individuals are the Crown Officers: – Bailiffs, Lieutenant Governors, Deputy Bailiffs, Attorney Generals, Solicitor Generals, Magistrates, Data Protection Commissioners.

Central to the oppression, harassment, witness-tampering and suppression directed against me have been four factors:

  • The corrupt abuse of the Data Protection Law by a conflicted Data Protection Commissioner;
  • The corrupt, politicised abuse of prosecutory powers by directly conflicted, corrupt Attorney Generals;
  • Police-state abuse & oppression carried out by a captured, corrupted, politicised policing function following the illegal suspension of Mr Power;
  • Political-oppression via Stalinistic show-trials in front of corrupt, conflicted judges.”

The above From the Application by Stuart Syvret for Legal Funding – to Jersey Public Inquiry – 22nd April 2014.

What Follows is a Commentary on The Parallel Universe – of the Land of Stupid.

When the long and wretched history of the breakdown in the rule of law in the Crown tax-shelter of Jersey comes to be written – when the festering stagnation of the polity of the island is dissected, the overt rot that gripped governance here will be seen to have had certain defining characteristics.

One of those core conditions is stupidity.

Simple stupidity. For example, the kind of stupidity that can even imagine it being possible for William Bailhache to remain in any kind of public office – let alone be promoted to “Bailiff” – without “the system” ultimately cutting its own throat.  The failure of those in “the system” to see the stark fact that the man is simply finished – finished, or “the system” is – is a level of stupidity that only arises when your polity is, in truth, really nothing more than an 800 year old racketeering matrix.

I mean, you know – what follows is a quote from an actual affidavit – published – sworn testimony – from an actual Chief of Police – in which the Chief of Police is referring to the behaviour of the then Attorney General William Bailhache: –

“In any event the outcome was that we could not agree, and the exchange finished with what I took to be an angry email from the Attorney General expressing apparent frustration at my perceived failure to sufficiently oppose the criticism of his brother the Bailiff, and finishing with a phrase something like “so be it,” which I read as having a threatening tone.   So far as I can recall, that was the last email I received from the Attorney General.   Not long afterwards I was suspended.”

Sworn, published testimony – by an actual Chief of Police.

You can see how really stupid the Jersey oligarchy is, in that it continues to think the rest of us are stupid. These people think we’re cretins; they think we can’t read – think we can’t see; they think our cognitive abilities and curiosities go no further than having a few quid to spend down the bingo or on the dogs.

That these people just carry on – and carry on – thinking the rest of us are idiots, is there to be seen in their actions.

They think we’re idiots – because they think they can rescue themselves and their system from their swamp of corruption by performing ever more nutty acts of stupidity. And they think we’re stupid, so we won’t recognise their stupidity when we watch them heaping stupidity – upon stupidity.

Stupid – because, like, when the very credibility of your entire system of governance is thrown into doubt by the exposure of decades of concealed child-abuse – the thing you really, really need to do to restore confidence is another act of gangsterism – like oppressing the Social Services Minister for trying to protect children. And, so, when that doesn’t get the lid back down on the atrocious mess, just what you need to do is illegally suspend the Police Chief. Then – when that too proves, for some reason, to have just thrown more petrol into the flames – what you need to do is get expressly & directly conflicted judges to throw-out the Police Chief’s judicial review application. And when – for mystifying reasons – you’re faced with quite an inferno by this stage – what you need to do to rescue your edifice of governance from the flames is order a massed illegal police raid against the leading opposition member of the legislature. And when that – inexplicably – has proven only to stoke the fires – you prosecute the bastard for whistle-blowing, that’ll teach him. And when his public-interest disclosure defence not only destroys the prosecution case – but rather inconveniently shows the Jersey polity to have concealed clinical serial-murders – well, then, hey, no worries, you just deem this embarrassing defence-case “no longer admissible”. Three months into the proceedings. And you make sure you don’t have to worry about the court not agreeing with this action because – hey – you chose and appointed the judge – and she’s already a directly conflicted party because of her involvement in the endemic failure of Jersey’s prosecution system to bring child-abusers to justice. But yet – still the flames rage higher – you’re burning – burning – the entire edifice is going up – the flames threaten you – so, what you really, really need to do now is to get some more directly conflicted judges – to stand the entire data protection law on its head – in a way that has no parallel in any democratic state – and make free-speech and investigative journalism actually illegal; criminalised not via legislation, but judge-made-law. Now, all of that could have been a problem – but you were able to bring in even more of your judges – from outside of Jersey – to give you credible cover. Who will ever notice that one of them simply read-out in court a load of crap written by an improperly hired spin-doctor? And the bloody plebs will never see that the extraordinary conduct of the other one now contaminates the UK Supreme Court – rendering it structurally conflicted in any matter touching upon Jersey for as long as he remains in office. Well, that’s no problem, the FACAWS will ensure no case concerning Jersey corruption ever runs up through the London court system. What’s this? Still the inferno grows? Out, damn flames! This will douse the fires of modernity! A public inquiry! There! That’s what we needed! What finer fire-brigade could one call upon – other than that trusty get-out-of-jail-free-card that has so often been the “insurance-policy” of the British establishment – a public inquiry – reliably peopled with Ourchaps? What – what’s this!? The bastard wants legal representation? Tell him to fuck off!!! It’s our public inquiry and it can do whatever the fuck it pleases! Now what? What? The plebs are going on about the “Salmon Principles” now! Who taught this fucking rabble to read – oh it’s getting hot in here – so hot – the smoke – struggling to see! Somebody pass me another can of incendiary stupid – quickly! Before the fucking proles start citing the primacy of Articles 2 and 6 of the Convention – and all of the associated ECtHR case-law….!

In the parallel universe that is Jerseyland – where the criminals run the justice system – and they jail the good guys – where directly conflicted criminals try and coerce the Police Chief into not investigating them – and when he refuses to be coerced, they organise his illegal suspension – where that’s able to happen – without fear of prosecution on the part of the person doing the coercion – because the coercer was actually the Attorney General and sole prosecuting authority – where, conflicted, bent judges – can jail those who try to expose their corruption – where those who occupy the highest public offices are simply thick – a self-perpetuating claque of dopy cretins with the corporate intellectual advantage of a slime-mold – where people of intelligence – and especially of integrity – are pro-actively crushed out of “the system” – where you can stand human civil society and all it values on its head – if you have enough money and silly titles – in the realm of the Jersey oligarchy where 800 years of thoroughbred anarcho-feudal cretinism is colliding with modernity – what passes for a “public inquiry” into decades of concealed child-abuse issued some statements.

One of which was to refuse to provide me any legal representation funding – de facto to refuse to provide me with legal representation – contra all requirements of settled case-law – and of Article 6 of the ECHR.

Apart from that – apart from denying legal representation to a person who is quite feasibly the key witness into the structural breakdown in the rule of law in the Jersey polity that permitted so much concealed child-abuse – the public inquiry has been busying itself – organising an “open-day” at which members of the public can take a look around the offices and room where the inquiry will hold its carefully pre-structured public-hearings.

I’ve been urged to attend. But as I said in response, “what on Earth” – or words to that effect – “for? Do they have especially nice chairs for me to test? Am I to admire the choice of wallpaper? Is the hue of carpet especially soothing? Am I to raise an appreciative artisan eyebrow at the timbered desks? Are they some marvellous blend of Douglas Fir and Indian Rosewood sculptured, as by wakened hands, a la Jim Krenov? I mean – why? Do these people not grasp that I’ve been repeatedly jailed – and will be again – for seeking to protect powerless victims of crime in Jersey? Jailed by the same collection of child-abuse concealing gangsters and bent judges that stand behind the authority of this public inquiry? I’ve seen the inside of courtrooms during the last five years probably more frequently than most of Eversheds lawyers. If these clowns think I’m ‘nervous’ – that a cosy trip to their office might allay my ‘fears’ – then they simply haven’t been paying attention.”

But, those are my circumstances; I guess it could be seen as a reasonable enough assumption that members of the public – those who’ve never been involved in quasi-judicial or judicial proceedings – potential witnesses like many of the victims of child-abuse in Jersey – might have benefited from seeing the arena.

What a pity, then, that the “open-day” consists of 2 hours on a Monday afternoon – when the vast majority of people will be working.

Still, things could be worse I guess. The public inquiry could have employed spin-doctors with a directly relevant history of working for an organisation responsible for concealing abusers who had victims in Jersey, and could thus – in certain ways – be legitimately seen as relevant witnesses themselves.

Or the London legal chambers involved in the public inquiry could be directly conflicted because they already have clients amongst expressly involved organisations.

Well, thank God nothing that crazy has occurred, eh!?!?

Anyway – you can read the Committee of Inquiry’s “ruling” – their rejection of my application for legal funding – on their web site. I publish the link below.

They lay out their “reasons” for rejecting my application in a little over two pages. It’s the predictable “lawyers-guff”, so I’ll have to explain it to you. The “reasons” issued by the public inquiry for refusing to see that I receive unconditional legal funding are – to use the technical term – complete horseshit.

Here are what are known as the “Salmon Principles” – the settled, procedural safeguards that underpin the conduct and methodologies of public inquiries. These are not controversial: –

“The Salmon Principles

1. Before any person becomes involved in an inquiry, the Tribunal must be satisfied that there are circumstances which affect him and which the Tribunal proposes to investigate.

2. Before any person who is involved in an inquiry is called as a witness, he should be informed of any allegations which are made against him and the substance of the evidence in support of them.

3. (a) He should be given an adequate opportunity of preparing his case and of being assisted by his legal advisers. (b) His legal expenses should normally be met out of public funds.

4. He should have the opportunity of being examined by his own solicitor or counsel and of stating his case in public at the inquiry.

5. Any material witness he wishes called at the inquiry should, if reasonably practicable, be heard.

6. He should have the opportunity of testing by cross-examination conducted by his own solicitor or counsel any evidence which may affect him.”

Sometimes legal questions actually don’t require lawyers. Sometimes the facts and the law are starkly plain to any person who can read.

This is such a case, which is why the “ruling” of the public inquiry – to refuse to give me unconditional legal funding – in spite of the fact this public inquiry has chosen to use a methodology – to set “protocols” – that plainly defy, and are not in compliance with, the Salmon Principles – merits no greater exposition than the description “complete horseshit”.

My human rights are engaged by these quasi-judicial proceedings.

Indeed – these proceedings could – quite easily and foreseeably – subpoena me before the Committee of Inquiry and demand that I reveal, for example, the identity of certain of my sources over the years. I will not do so.

And when I don’t do so – the Committee and its processes and powers could trigger actual contempt of court proceedings against me – which would – again – involve directly conflicted Offices and directly conflicted individuals – in jailing me – again.

For up to two years.

For two years – this time.

So, you see, I’m not being entirely unreasonable – in wanting a lawyer – when faced with a quasi-judicial body – that has the power to have me jailed for two years – jailed by directly conflicted people – again – but which is not following the settled “Salmon Principles” by which public inquires conduct themselves.

Not unreasonable – in wanting a lawyer who could then advise me on my rights – and the many serious public interest issues that could – very easily – arise should this public inquiry seek to use its dramatic coercive legal powers against me in ways designed to target the numerous witnesses, victims and whistleblowers who have informed me over the years.

Look – if you hold a public inquiry – you axiomatically give centrally involved parties legal representation.

If you’re not going to give centrally involved parties legal representation – then you don’t hold a public inquiry. End of.

What you can’t do, is hold a public inquiry – and refuse to give involved parties legal representation.

Refuse to give them legal representation unless they assign their rights – by agreeing to some fucking “contract” that involves them in surrendering themselves – and their sources – and witnesses – and the public interest – and their liberty – again – to the mercies of an overtly conflicted collection of sleazy and despicable old men who run the 800 year-old feudal racketeering operation that is the Jersey polity and the Potemkin village that masquerades as a Crown judicial system in the island.

Stuart Syvret – 6th June 2014.

What Follows is the text of the application for legal fees & expenses funding made in accordance with human rights standards & the ‘Salmon Principles’, to the Jersey child-abuse public-inquiry by the primary whistle-blower, and key witness, former Health & Social Services Minister Stuart Syvret.

Application made by Stuart Syvret on 22nd April 2014.

Rejected by the Jersey Child-Abuse Public-Inquiry on 14th may 2014.

By rejecting Stuart Syvret’s following application for legal representation,  the so-called ‘public-inquiry’ took the decision & action to constructively exclude the witness Stuart Syvret from the ‘Inquiry’s’ proceedings and to prevent him from giving evidence; this to the profound detriment of abuse survivors and other whistle-blowers.

Dear Ms Garner & Mr Jones

I write as a key witness in the public inquiry into decades of concealed child-abuse in Jersey and the attendant concealment of the systemic and endemic governance failure by the Jersey polity.

As a member of the Jersey parliament, I had political and legal responsibility for child-protection matters from November 1999 until September 2007. From 1999 I was the President of the Health & Social Services Committee. When Jersey changed its system of governance from a Committee system to a Ministerial system in November 2005, I became the Minister for Health & Social Services.

It is plain – already shown on published evidence – that decades of concealed child-abuse – and associated child-protection failure – took place in Jersey. I became the first ever Jersey politician to identify, investigate and make public these matters.

In answer to a Jersey parliamentary question asked of me on the 16th July 2007, I said this: –

“I have serious concerns, to be honest, about the whole child protection, child welfare standards of performance of Jersey, not just within my own department, Social Services and the Children’s Service, but across the board. I am aware of a number of issues, this being one of them, a number of cases, a number of incidents that lead me more and more strongly to the conclusion that we are failing badly in this area. I am probably going to be seeking to initiate a major independent review into the whole sphere of child welfare, child protection in Jersey. So if you are asking me honestly, do I believe the performance of certain senior individuals within this field and of the departments generally is acceptable, no, it is not.”

I had come to those conclusions following months of my own investigations in the face of wilful obstructions from a number of senior civil servants and the Law Officers who were “advising” them but in reality acting as a “Government within a Government”. You will see that I knew then that only an external investigation would stand any chance of addressing the child-protection failures. I went on to propose that a Committee of Inquiry should be established.

Thus it is that the work of this Committee of Inquiry begins six-and-a-half years after I had intended – in my capacity as Minister for Health & Social Services – that there should be such an Inquiry.

A draft press-release, discussed at the Jersey Council of Ministers’ meeting of the 26th July 2007, contained the following: –

“Thirdly, the Council has decided to accept the recommendation of the Health and Social Services Minister, that a Committee of Enquiry should be established. At its next meeting on 6th September, the Council will consider terms of reference for this much wider review of child protection procedures throughout the States.”

However, unbeknown to me, but known to Jersey’s Crown Law Officers, and certain other Ministers, the senior civil servants were already engaged in an illegal conspiracy to engineer my dismissal. We know that to be so, because they made an attempt to suborn the Chief of Police into their plot during a meeting on the 25th July 2007. The Police Chief Graham Power QPM left the meeting and wrote a file-note (copy attached), in which he said this: –

“BO [Bill Ogley] and the others were persistent and I was left with the clear impression that they were attempting to draw me, in my capacity as Chief of Police, into a civil service led attempt to remove a Minister from Office.”

The above illustrates very clearly two points: –

  • I am not opposed to a meaningful, serious, objective public inquiry into Jersey’s decades of child-protection failure and the attendant systemic and endemic failings of the Jersey polity. On the contrary – such an investigation was my idea – I being the first Jersey politician to have indentified and spoken-out concerning our failures to protect the vulnerable.
  • I am a central witness to those issues.

In addition to the political role I played, I have also played a key and historic role in my journalistic capacity. As an independent journalist blogging at http://stuartsyvret.blogspot.com I provided – for the first time in Jersey’s history – a media outlet for the views and concerns of the island’s child-abuse victims – and evidence and testimony from many of them. I also provided – again for the first time in Jersey’s history – a media outlet that was willing and able to publish documentary – public-interest – evidence; evidence of harassment, abuse, violence, battery, rape, attempted murder, murder, the incompetence, ethical bankruptcy & cover-ups that permitted such things and widespread & endemic corruption in the Crown Dependency of Jersey.

The extensive and damming nature of the evidence I have published is such that the extant Jersey power-apparatus is exposed for being a simply lawless entity – essentially, a thinly disguised feudal “court” in which power is abused by and for the “court”, its courtiers, thanes and vassals – and against anyone who dare oppose them. If you are “of” the “court”, you can commit approved crimes with utter impunity – if you are not “of” the “court” crimes will be committed against you and you will have no remedy or protection.

That broad truth is so plain on a reading of the evidence published on my blog that the Jersey oligarchy have subjected me to political imprisonment for blogging and the “crime” of being a political dissident. When that coercion failed to make me remove evidence for their corruption, they took the step of persuading Google to take-down my entire blog.

Of course – with the assistance of international supporters – the blog has been re-established, and it can now be read here, http://freespeechoffshore.nl/stuartsyvretblog/

We now know – only by the happenstance of the recent disclosure by Google of a letter (copy attached) – that contrary to the lies of the Jersey Attorney General – and the lies of his friend the prosecuting Advocate Stephen Baker – and the perjury of Data Protection Commissioner, the conflicted Emma Martins – that in fact the Jersey oligarchy were desperately attempting to get Google to shut down my blog – actually get the entire URL removed from the internet – from at least November 2008 – when I was opposing child-abuse cover-ups and questioning the obviously illegal suspension of Police Chief Graham Power.

In the course of his battle against that plainly unlawful suspension, Mr Power wrote to the Privileges & Procedures Committee of the Jersey parliament. It is useful to quote from that letter (copy attached): –

“It may be that I have provided sufficient information to enable the Committee to consider a way forward on this issue. However, in the hope that it may be helpful, I will offer some personal thoughts and additional information which may assist.

On a straight reading of the available evidence it may occur to many people that the most likely probability is that the former Minister for Home Affairs [the then Deputy Andrew Lewis] knowingly provided an account which is distant from the truth. That may be the case, but there are other possibilities. One is that he was not the main author of the process. The known facts allow for an alternative explanation. That is, that the decision to suspend was in fact taken by others for motives of their own, and that the then Minister was brought in at the final stages to provide his signature, and thereby appear to legitimise a process which was conceived by others. Such an interpretation would of course raise the possibility of a “Government within a Government” in which unidentified and unaccountable individuals exercise power outside the parameters of the law. If that was the case then the constitutional implications would be significant. This would be particularly true in the context of a potential impact on the independence of a part of the Criminal Justice System.”

I was oppressed and suppressed in my political work – as the Police Chief was oppressed in his work – by conflicted powerful people with individual and collective interest in covering-up the facts concerning their own corruptions and the breakdown in the rule of law in Jersey.

Those same people then set about oppressing and suppressing me in my journalistic work.

Those people are the Government within a Government” in which unidentified and unaccountable individuals exercise power outside the parameters of the law.”

Those individuals are the Crown Officers: – Bailiffs, Lieutenant Governors, Deputy Bailiffs, Attorney Generals, Solicitor Generals, Magistrates, Data Protection Commissioners.

Central to the oppression, harassment, witness-tampering and suppression directed against me have been four factors:

  • The corrupt abuse of the Data Protection Law by a conflicted Data Protection Commissioner;
  • The corrupt, politicised abuse of prosecutory powers by directly conflicted, corrupt Attorney Generals;
  • Police-state abuse & oppression carried out by a captured, corrupted, politicised policing function following the illegal suspension of Mr Power;
  • Political-oppression via Stalinistic show-trials in front of corrupt, conflicted judges.

That oppression has included the politicised perversion of the data protection “law” as a means of state-sponsored suppression of political opposition – illegal massed police-raids – conducted without a search-warrant following the unlawful suspension of Police Chief Graham Power – my arrest, detention in a locked, windowless police-cell for seven-and-a-half hours – the theft of vast quantities of my then constituents’ private data, the theft of my parliamentary-privileged lap-top – my prosecution on the orders of the conflicted, corrupt then Attorney General William Bailhache – coercive show-trials in front of a succession of judges axiomatically conflicted for being chosen and appointed by their friends, conflicted Bailiffs such as Philip Bailhache and Michael Birt – and a succession of on-going political imprisonments.

It is clear – and established on the evidence – that: –

  • I am the victim of a number of criminal acts associated with the improper concealment of child-abuse and the concealment of child-protection failures – and other crimes – in Jersey. Those criminal offences included – for example – conspiracies to pervert the course of justice, and of numerous examples of corruption, and of misconduct in a public office;
  • I am the victim of a catalogue of past and continuing human rights abuses at the hands of a dysfunctional, plainly corrupted and structurally ultra vires Crown apparatus in Jersey.

These are exceptional circumstances.

Having now read the protocols published by the Committee of Inquiry, I am far from assured that this process signals an end to the oppression I have suffered. Instead, I have concerns that it could lead to more of the same.

Not the least amongst my concerns are the range of deeply troubling conditions that are automatically imposed upon anyone who takes up “Interested Party” status.

It seems to me that a number of serious legal issues arise, and that those conditions engage my human rights. I therefore must take independent legal advice. The Inquiry has a mechanism for funding legal representation for witnesses, but that process requires that an applicant must sign-up to Interested Party status first, before legal funding will be granted.

I am not going to sign-up to any conditions until and unless I have been able to take independent legal advice on those conditions first.

Only a fool is coerced into signing a contract, which they can only take legal advice on, after they’ve signed it.

And in addition to the conditions attached to Interested Party status, there are a number of further significant legal issues arising from the methodology and protocols adopted by the Inquiry – issues for which I need legal representation.

Paragraph 2 of the Inquiry protocol on Legal Fees says: –

Applications for an award in respect of legal fees and expenses for someone who is not an Interested Party will only be considered in exceptional circumstances.

These circumstances are exceptional – and I herby apply for legal fees and expenses funding.

I would be grateful if the Inquiry would confirm as a matter of urgency that it agrees to my request, and that it issues to me a formal notice of agreement to fund that I may then use in my negotiations with prospective legal representation.

Thank you for your assistance.

Stuart Syvret.

Attachments:

  • Police Chief Graham Power’s July 2007 file-note re conspiracy against the Health & Social Services Minister;
  • Letter disclosed by Google showing sustained attempts by Jersey oligarchy to get Stuart Syvret’s blog removed from the internet from at least November 2008;
  • Police Chief Graham Power’s letter to Jersey parliament’s Privileges & Procedures Committee.

[ENDS]

The Jersey Public Inquiry Into Concealed Child-Abuse rejected the above application for legal representation funding. The text of that rejection can be read here:

http://www.jerseycareinquiry.org/Key%20Documents/Application%20for%20funding%20of%20legal%20representation%20for%20Stuart%20Syvret.pdf

48 thoughts on “JERSEY’S “PUBLIC INQUIRY” INTO CHILD-ABUSE

  1. VFC.

    Stuart.

    You quoted an extract from a letter written by former Chief Police Officer, Graham Power QPM, to the Privileges and Procedures Committee (PPC);

    “Such an interpretation would of course raise the possibility of a “Government within a Government” in which unidentified and unaccountable individuals exercise power outside the parameters of the law. If that was the case then the constitutional implications would be significant. This would be particularly true in the context of a potential impact on the independence of a part of the Criminal Justice System.”(END)

    It is worth noting that the chairman of PPC did not share the letter with its members. The letter can, and should be, read HERE.

    Worse than the Chairman of PPC not sharing the former Police Chief’s letter with the Panel, the Chairman actually replied to the former Police Chief………Without informing the panel. Indeed the first some of the members heard about the letter/reply was when they read it on VFC.

    The Chairman’s reply can, and should be, read HERE.

    Reply
  2. Not a happy bunny

    I am not sure how you expect to get assistance when your e-mail sounds so bitter and you cannot help but attack many people in it. Your Blog was good until it started personal insults and attacks on people and then your credibility waned.

    This approach of yours had got nowhere for years to date, so when will you learn that it’s the wrong way of doing things and sadly this is perhaps the last opportunity wasted.

    Reply
    1. Stuart Syvret

      God, how tiresome; traditional Jerseyland stupidity.

      “Never mind the fact that child-abusers had been given free-reign to abuse your constituents – never mind the government is wholly corrupted – never mind that the Crown protects violent serial-rapists in high public office – never mind that rogue nurses have been permitted to murder dozens of us – never mind if the Jersey judicial system is openly and starkly corrupt – if only you were POLITE!”

      “You damn LOUT!”

      “You’re so RUDE!”

      “I’ll bet those child-abusers offered the little children some sweets; I’ll wager the serial-rapist asked politely first, at least once; those bent cops? Well, they always returned one-another’s’ favours; and that nurse – well – he was known for his wonderfully polite & soothing bedside manner; charming and attentive – he’s well known for it; I mean, why else would some of his victims who didn’t quite die, later sign references for him when there was all of that unpleasantness over the stolen lethal drugs he’d accumulated and his stash of unlicensed firearms? – you see – GOOD MANNERS! – it costs nothing to be POLITE!”

      “If you weren’t such an ill-mannered and obnoxious thug, Syvret, you too could have been numbered amongst such successful examples of polite Jersey society.”

      Well – you know – bollocks to that.

      Stuart

      Reply
    2. Better Red Than Dead!

      I see the old Jersey Way mentality of never mind the importance of the message shoot the messenger is still alive and well? I am quite happy with a bit of in your face talk if what is being said is serious enough to warrant it. And this post is.

      Reply
    3. cathy

      Seriously you’re an intelligent bloke who is capable of contributing something meaningful for the Island.

      We are all in agreement that people like Saville are scum but your anti- establishment , anti- finance, anti-middle class, anti- you name it stance is very counter productive to Jersey and to yourself , you’re not Nelson Mandela or Gandi , really you’re not.

      Stop drowning in self pity – you’ve brought this on yourself – be a man , pick yourself up and actually contribute something for your island and stop being known as a failed nutter who got voted out when he once had the highest vote-

      Think about that – is everyone really wrong but you ?

      Reply
      1. Stuart Syvret

        There’s a significant problem with your observation.

        Which is that I happen to be right.

        Right on the facts – right on the evidence.

        And the type of spin you offer – “just-forget-about-all-the-crimes-and-cover-ups-you’re-an-intelegent-man-who-could-do-so-much-for the-community-if-you-just-let-all-of-that-old-stuff-be-water-under-the-bridge” – blah, blah, blah – has the same ethical and intellectual bankruptcy today as it had when the criminal Sir Philip Bailhache attempted to coerce me into concealing the criminal actions of his friend and political ally Reg Jeune back in 1996, with very similar words.

        You people just don’t get it, do you?

        After 800 years – it’s black swan time.

        Stuart

        Reply
      2. Outside the microcosm

        @cathy
        Even people in the UK are coming to realise that Mr. Syvret has been SO right all along, (and yes he does have a touch of Mandela and Gandi event to the point of imprisonment)

        http://order-order.com/2014/07/08/watch-former-tory-whip-boasts-about-paedo-mp-cover-up/

        Ted Heath is long dead. I suspect that this will kill Leon Brittan (amongst others). His name just keeps cropping up.

        “Anyone with any sense who was in trouble would come to the whips and tell them the truth, and say now, “I’m in a jam, can you help?” It might be debt, it might be a scandal involving small boys, or any kind of scandal which a member seemed likely to be mixed up in, they’d come and ask if we could help. And if we could, we did. We would do everything we can because we would store up brownie points. That sounds a pretty nasty reason but one of the reasons is, if we can get a chap out of trouble, he’ll do as we ask forever more.”

        It is not just the Jersey power-brokers who love paedophilia.
        Power gives access to money.

        There is no middle ground when it comes to infiltration by paedophiles you are either part of the problem or part of the solution.

        The slow wheels of justice will eventually grind even the Jersey Shysters

        Better to be punished in this world than the next…..?

        Reply
  3. Anon

    The COI knows you are possibly one of the most crucial witnesses who could bring this government down with your evidence and they refuse you any legal protection? #Whitewash

    Reply
  4. Constables out

    Could ADvocate Sinel be your representative at the hearing,after the treatment of him by the crown would think you would make a great team to take them on?

    Reply
  5. JJ Nortyperson

    A lot of abusers and peadophiles are polite, well-groomed people, a lot of people driven mad by speaking up and being destroyed for it, can get angry.

    Reply
  6. Freedom of Speech

    Many good Jersey Men and Women died in two world wars so that we may have the freedom to speak; your doing a good job Mr Syvret, keep going and don’t stop!

    Reply
  7. moral-rightness

    Latest News of interest – it appears that you are more likely to obtain better justice in Zimbabwe than Jersey!

    Zimbabwe court scraps defamation law used to curb press

    13 Jun 2014 – 10:39

    HARARE, June 13 (Reuters) – Zimbabwe’s highest court has scrapped a criminal defamation law which local journalists say has been used by the government to restrict the freedom of the press, according to a ruling seen by Reuters on Friday.

    The judgement delivered on Thursday showed that the full bench of the Constitutional Court agreed that criminalising defamation was harsh and excessive.

    “It is not necessary to criminalise defamatory statements,” the ruling said. “Accordingly, it is inconsistent with the freedom of expression guaranteed by (the) constitution.” Dozens of journalists have been arrested in the past on criminal defamation charges or under the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, which can be grounds for banning foreign reporters from working permanently in the country.

    Journalists from privately owned newspaper The Standard challenged the law following their arrest in 2011 for reporting that a hospital owned by a ruling ZANU-PF member of parliament and businessman was bankrupt and was failing to pay its workers.

    The Constitutional Court ruled that any person who felt defamed should approach the civil courts for a resolution and that the criminal defamation law should be struck down.

    The court gave the minister of justice a chance to respond and show cause why the law should not be removed.

    Last year, the Constitutional Court also scrapped a law against insulting the president that has been used to arrest opponents and critics of 90-year-old leader Robert Mugabe.

    Zimbabwe adopted a new constitution last year, which expanded some civil rights as well as freedom of the press, access to information, political choice and activity.

    (Reporting by MacDonald Dzirutwe; Editing by Joe Brock) ((macdonald.dzirutwe@thomsonreuters.com)(+263 4 799 112)(Reuters Messaging: macdonald.dzirutwe.thomsonreuters.com@reuters.net)

    Reply
  8. Frances

    Hello Stuart,

    I am pleased t see you have returned to the cyberworld and resuming your campaign once more. I note you have renewed strength as well!!

    You are right to think the so called, “Public Enquiry” will be fixed to deliver what the Jersey gang have ordered in advance of any evidence being heard. This seems to be a tradition, not only in Jersey but in the UK as a whole. Remember Hutton? I could name many more.

    The Waterhouse Enquiry into child abuse in the North Wales care homes was the biggest whitewash, allowing the perpetrators to escape being named in order to be jailed for decades for vile abuse and worse. This appears to set the precedent for Jersey.

    Those that wield the power can not only succeed in escaping justice for thier crimes and foul deeds, they can also make sure that the truth will remain hidden, an “enquiry” being set up to deliver the version of events they want.

    I suggest you set up an “alternative” enquiry. This could be videoed and put online. No reason why you cannot call witnesses and ask for evidence etc. These days it is DIY as the established system is totally corrupt.

    Frances.

    Reply
  9. Anon

    You can only be given a subpoena if you live within the jurisdiction of the place that issues it. Living outwith that place means you cannot be sent a subpoena that is legally enforceable.

    For example, someone can be sent a subpoena if they live in England and Wales. Should they decide to live in Scotland, then it isn’t enforceable, or vaild legally.

    Think about it.

    Reply
  10. Leigh LaFon

    As of today, there are now 100+ MPs named in support of a fully independent Hillsborough-style national inquiry into organized institutional child abuse in UK. Several of the original cross-party seven MPs, who instigated the call for inquiry, have mentioned Jersey, and ties between organized paedophilia at high levels, Savile, and Haut de la Garenne as essential to investigate as part of an overarching inquiry.

    As far as I have been able to find, there have been no mentions of the current Jersey COI in relation to this wider inquiry effort, as if no one following these investigations expects anything important to come of a local COI, now. The one possible exception is the Prime Minister’s lame mention that ‘several important inquiries’ are currently underway and should be allowed to continue their course without interference. The response of some, even within David Cameron’s party, was to remind him that decades of these same old isolated, local, underfunded and often whitewashed police operations have not been adequate. So called ‘independent inquiries’ were neither independent nor robust in their terms of reference. Cameron will be challenged to defend his preference to continue reliance on the same failed methods of the past.

    The call for the far-reaching national inquiry, led by the original seven MPs, bloggers, the fearless journalists at @ExaroNews, and Twitter activists, has now reached a level of momentum that only the BBC can truly ignore. What it will mean for Jersey and the current COI will be, at the very least, a rapidly increasing public awareness of ties between Jersey and mainland institutional paedophilia and ongoing coverups. Outside Jersey, the view that powerful Jersey forces masterminded a cover-up and smearing of good investigative police work seems to be prevailing. No one involved in the call for the national inquiry appears to have ever been distracted by Jersey’s oligarchy spin or the price of a lead detective’s prawn cocktail in London.

    Despite expectation of setbacks and fierce opposition to exposure of high level cover-ups, the social media activists on Twitter seem to feel the Parliamentary support of 100 MPs is a milestone, and has become a tipping point. The Parliamentary arguments in the days ahead will surely be of relevance to Jersey and the widely presumed deficiencies in the current COI.

    Earlier today you Tweeted a phrase about, “A government within government.” Public awareness of that as more than a theoretical concept – in Jersey and nationally – may be within reach. The cover-up agents may be challenged to keep up with all the evidence popping up and being disclosed nationally. Any of your readers who wish to do so can follow @ExaroNews and the hashtag #CSAInquiry for updates on the mainland.

    Elle

    Reply
    1. Heidi

      Hi Elle,

      Thank you so much for your continued interest in our island and in child protection.

      I hope that sweet Kama finds you

      Reply
    1. Elizabeth Batenburg

      The fascists never left Jersey !

      They planted their seed and impregnated the leading families, and then slowly but comprehensively took ownership of the island’s critical institutions, aided and abetted by the “FOCAWs”.

      They try to cleanse these blogs off the internet (including the Ex Health Minister’s) but these quality and evidenced blogs remain a testament to resistance against the New Jersey Reich.

      Reply
    1. The Old boys Club

      Missed it. But check out
      http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/04/cameron-patrick-rock-tip-off

      “David Cameron is under pressure to explain whether his senior aide Patrick Rock was tipped off by Downing Street that he was accused of an offence related to child abuse images hours before his arrest by police.

      Labour accused Number 10 late Tuesday of a “lack of transparency” about the senior adviser’s resignation and subsequent arrest, which took place nearly three weeks ago but only became public after a leak to a newspaper.

      It also emerged that the aide was previously accused of “inappropriate behaviour” by a colleague and this incident was investigated by his line manager, Ed Llewellyn, Cameron’s chief of staff, who is also an old friend of Rock’s.”

      http://order-order.com/2014/06/27/patrick-rock-charged/

      Patrick Rock has now been charged.
      cover up for high ranking paedophiles and abusers is getting more difficult.

      Except in Jersey perhaps, where their transgressions have become their “data” and journalistic or online publication of this data can be deemed a crime under the “Data Protection Law” which has been hijacked in desperation.

      The filthy sewerage in the foundations has made the ‘Bailozouf’ ivory tower unstable and untenable. It will topple causing untold damage. It needs a controlled explosion at it’s base to bring it down so that it does not destroy the island.

      Reply
  11. paulgarnier@rocketmail.com

    R.I.P Charmaine Garnier who died unexpectedly at her home in Jersey this morning 01/07/14 aged 54. Inspite of what you experienced whilst in the `care’ of the States of Jersey you never lost the ability to share your beautiful smile I’m sad that you parted this world without receiving the justice you deserved . With all of my love, your brother XXX

    Reply
    1. 7 up

      Apologies; the Rolf Harris/Leveson comment was meant to go on the main thread.

      So sorry for your loss and all respect to those who have built themselves a life in spite of what has happened to them.

      Reply
  12. Anonymous

    Good article on page 12 of todays (03/07/14) Daily Express, Titled: “Fear of child abuse cover-up at heart of establishment”

    Reply
      1. Jersey gets a mention as a significant paedophile destination

        http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/486431/Fear-of-child-abuse-cover-up-at-the-heart-of-establishment

        In one fascinating illustration of this apparent complacency he said that in 1984 Tory MP Geoffrey Dickens had presented the home secretary of the time, Leon Brittan, with a comprehensive dossier about a paedophile network operating within Westminster.

        It’s not clear what happened to the dossier or if any serious investigations were pursued. Dickens complained that his stance against child abuse meant that he was subjected to a brutal campaign of harassment including two break-ins and the appearance of his name on the hit list of a notorious contract killer.

        In the early 1980s Dickens was regarded as something of a crank. Today, given what we know about abuse, he could be seen as a moral visionary. Yesterday, in response to Danczuk’s intervention, Lord Brittan issued a statement in which he said he had asked his office “to look carefully” at the dossier he had been handed.

        But Brittan did not explain what ultimately happened to it. As a result his declaration will do little to lessen suspicions about complacency. This is not just about a few individual cases it is about a culture that appeared to allow entire institutions to be exploited by paedophiles, with the political class providing a shield to hide abuse.

        The possible extent of the establishment’s links to a paedophile network is horrifying. One of the darkest scandals centres on Elm Guest House in south London, now under police investigation over claims that in the 1980s it acted as an under-age male brothel using boys from a care home.

        Among the alleged visitors were Cyril Smith, as well as a high-ranking policeman, an official from the Royal Household, a Cabinet minister, two pop stars and Anthony Blunt, the Soviet spy.

        Blunt’s name also crops up in the Kincora scandal of the 1970s and 1980s. A boys’ home in Belfast, Kincora became synonymous with predatory abuse after it emerged that staff and visitors had been systematically molesting the residents.

        Among the worst assailants was a housemaster called William McGrath, a hardline loyalist, an ally of Ian Paisley and aggressive paedophile later jailed for four years. But the tentacles of Kincora spread much more widely. It was said to be used heavily by establishment figures such as Blunt who had extensive contacts in Ulster, among them his close friend Sir Knox Cunningham, a Unionist MP, pederast and former parliamentary secretary to Tory prime minister Harold Macmillan.

        Blunt exploited his knowledge of the Kincora’s VIP “client list” to protect himself from prosecution over his treachery for the Soviet Union.

        One subsequent inquiry into Kincora said that the activities in the home “must be recognised as earlier symptoms of a general malaise permeating the United Kingdom”. Those words were absolutely correct. The horror could be found across the British Isles from children’s homes in Jersey and North Wales to Rochdale and London.

        http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/486330/Leon-Brittan-says-he-ordered-paedophile-inquiry

        “THE HOME Office was last night under pressure to explain why a dossier containing allegations about paedophile activities at Westminster has been lost.”

        Reply
  13. Outside the microcosm

    As in Jersey, the first line of defence was ridicule:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10945282/Child-abuse-files-were-dismissed-as-fantasies-of-a-deluded-man.html

    Attorney General, Sir Michael Havers denied there had been a deliberate decision to withhold the diplomat’s name from a trial involving leaders of PIE: “Although Sir Peter Hayman had subscribed to PIE, that is not an offence and there is no evidence that he was ever involved in the management. At the trial, whilst there were general references to members of PIE, including, though not by name, Sir Peter Hayman, there was no reference to any material produced by him or found in his possession.”

    In fact, Hayman was referred to by the name of Henderson. To Dickens this was evidence of a deliberate cover-up by the prosecutors and he proposed to take the matter further. He called a news conference at Westminster but was told on its eve that a newspaper was about to publish a story that he was having an affair. His mistress attended the news conference, where Dickens confessed to “a skeleton in my own cupboard” and a predilection for afternoon tea dances. His paedophile campaign ran into the buffers of derision from the press and hostility from fellow parliamentarians, some of whom denounced his use of parliamentary privilege to name Hayman and accused him of grandstanding.

    It is hard to imagine today, as celebrities from that era are brought before the courts for historic sex offences, that this matter was treated so lightly by Parliament. Dickens believed this was because influential people were involved in the abuse and were determined to shut him up.

    ………………..

    For his part, Dickens simply could not understand how an organisation such as PIE was allowed to exist. He wrote to Margaret Thatcher asking for it to be banned and in November 1983 he handed a “massive dossier of evidence” to Leon (now Lord) Brittan, to press the case further. After a 30-minute meeting, Dickens claimed the home secretary “told me he would investigate all the cases in my file”.

    A few months later he produced further material alleging abuse in a children’s home, which the Home Office now says is missing, presumed lost or destroyed. Lord Brittan initially could not recollect the dossier but this week said he handed it to officials and proper action was taken.

    What that was exactly is unclear; and certainly at the time, the home secretary decided against a ban on PIE

    Reply
  14. Anonymous

    Stuart, I see the boy Mezec is getting into bed with Southern to form the Jersey Reform Party (along with le Cornu and Tadier). Do you have any thoughts on this?

    Reply
  15. Just like Dame Heather Steel-the-truth

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10963332/Baroness-Butler-Sloss-hid-claims-of-bishops-sex-abuse.html

    “The retired judge appointed to lead the Government’s major review of child sex abuse allegations kept allegations about a bishop out of a report on a paedophile scandal because she “cared about the Church”, it has emerged.”

    How very accommodating she is. Perhaps this is why the Establishment has chosen Butler-Sloss to investigate Establishment abuse.

    Reply
  16. VFC

    Stuart.

    The Jersey Equality March was a resounding success and congratulations to all who took part.

    You, and your readers, can view a glimpse of today’s event HERE.

    Reply
  17. Maggie. Soft on Paedophilia, soft on the causes on Paedophilia

    So we finally begin to learn what Thatcher meant when she was famously advocating “Victorian values”.

    “Margaret Thatcher personally covered up child abuse ­allegations made against one of her senior ministers,”
    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/margaret-thatcher-personally-covered-up-3848836

    “Senior Tory cabinet ministers were supplied with underage boys for sex parties, …Former Conservative activist Anthony Gilberthorpe said he told Margaret Thatcher 25 years ago about what he had witnessed and gave her names of those involved. His allegations that he saw top Tories having sex with boys…… etc.etc.”
    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-i-3848987

    Keep a stiff upper lip, boys and girls. This is going to hurt like hell.
    A bit more vodka and cocaine will ease the pain and [more importantly] dull your memory.

    The “Iron Bitch”. So much for her moral compass.

    Reply
    1. Stuart Syvret

      I hope not!

      It’s a great cause-of-action; all-out assault by partisan, expressly conflicted political forces against free & fair participation in elections and the choice of the legislature – contra Article 3 of Protocol 1.

      Not to mention it being another example of undisguised gangsterism by jaw-droppingly – a priori – conflicted “judges” – chosen and appointed by centrally conflicted parties.

      An especially juicy scenario – given it constitutes the abuse of power by the Church of England to continue to conceal the many monstrous crimes of C & E clergy in Jersey – for example, child-rape by former Vice-Dean and Senator Peter Manton – and the abuse HG and her consequent oppression by the current Dean, the Bailhache Brothers, Michael Birt and their allies.

      It’ll be another evidenced example of the Potemkin village nature of what passes for a “judiciary” in the Crown tax-shelter of Jersey – a lawless charade.

      Another stark illustration of the de facto executive / government nature of the Queen’s Attorney General in Jersey – as opposed to that Office constituting a lawful prosecution function.

      Another chance to see Her Majesty’s coterie of conflicted clowns performing as “Jurats”.

      A further consequence – and laid upon – the evidenced corruption, misfeasances in a public office, and misconduct in a public office that accumulates against Bailhache LaBesse / Appleby Global – given that legal firm’s on-going fiduciary liability for the wholly and staggeringly corrupt betrayal of the legal-aid clients who were victims of the States of Jersey Blanche Pierre Group Home and the Maguires.

      Another example of the corrupt, racketeering abuse of the Criminal Offences Confiscation Fund.

      Another outbranch of the multi-faceted conspiracies to pervert the course of justice.

      Further hard evidence of the corrupt bias of the Data Protection Office – in favour deranged, psychotic trolls and the theft and trafficking of private data of no public interest consequence.

      Another chance to point out – on the record – that Her Majesty has chosen to appoint an overt – evidenced – criminal – William Bailhache – to lead Her judiciary and Her “parliament” in Jersey.

      A fascinating example of pre-civil-war crushing of dissent by unadulterated, un-modernised pure Monarchical power.

      And who knows where that ends?

      And all of the consequent claims against Google.

      Jersey “bankruptcy”? Bring it on!

      Stuart

      Reply
  18. Anon

    Hi Stuart,

    I saw your tweet “…so some new work taking place – re “The Four [Or Five] Proxies” – so watch this space: http://freespeechoffshore.nl/stuartsyvretblog/ … – that train’s a’ coming.”

    Interesting that you talk of the fifth proxy. Was his identity ever confirmed? If I recall correctly, it was RJ, wasn’t it? Do you concur?

    Keep up the good work. It’s many marathons, not just a sprint.

    Thanks

    Reply
  19. mike freeman

    your case is getting stronger and stronger (as you know) You have been admirable throughout this disgusting tale-admirable behaviour- very best to you
    mike

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.