THE SECRET REPORT FROM LENNY HARPER:

EXCLUSIVE FULL TEXT!

TELLING IT LIKE IT IS.

Jersey’s Attorney General refuses to prosecute.

Read just what the Police Officer leading the investigation thought.

Any decent, thinking person who has followed this blog will understand just how corrupt, stagnant and deficient the administration of justice in Jersey is.

Well, on Tuesday, we have yet more evidence to that fact.

Jersey’s Attorney General – the brother of the Bailiff, ‘Phil – “the real scandal is the bad publicity” – Bailhache’, – and member of the same golf club as Danny Wherry, another suspect – has decided to not prosecute the two suspects who were arrested a while ago.

You will recollect the immense controversy this caused given that the police had been clearly advised that the evidence to charge was present.

This Tuesday – the Attorney General has issued a press-release in which he attempts to justify his actions.

I have read that press-release – and to describe its assertions as profoundly defective would be an understatement.

It will now follow – as surely as night follows day – that the other well-known and well-evidenced suspects will not now face trial.

Oh sure – a few token scumbags – people from the “lower social orders” will be tried; the kind of people not well-connected – and not able to sing like the proverbial canary.

The Jersey oligarchy obviously needs two or three token culprits – for appearance’s sake.

But in this case, Jersey’s Attorney General has let off the hook another “pillar of society” catholic couple – Mr and Mrs Bonner – whose “devout” and “Godly” philosophy involved battering children in their care – with cricket bats.

Apparently the “evidential” test was not met – because – get this – Mr and Mrs Bonner’s natural children said they were of good character.

Oh well – that’s all right then. No need for a court. No need for the weighing of witness testimony – of the assessing of quality against quantity. The Attorney General can determine guilt or innocence – without all that tiresome “trial” business – on the basis that the accuseds’ relatives say they’re really fine people. Innocent, therefore – I mean, just obviously; if your family members say so.

It’s difficult to know what to make of this madness anymore.

But don’t take my word for that.

Just read below the report written by tough, straight cop Lenny Harper in response to the perversions of justice being engaged in by William Bailhache and his agents.

Which cliché to use? You couldn’t make it up? Read it and weep?

Read Lenny Harper’s confidential memo in full.

Christ – I’m just not paid anything like enough for doing this job.

Stuart.

REPORT TO JERSEY’S ATTORNEY GENERAL FOLLOWING THE POLICE PUBLICLY OBJECTING TO THE OBSTRUCTION OF THE CHARGING OF SUSPECTS AGAINST WHOM SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE WAS PRESENT.

STATES OF JERSEY POLICE REPORT

Submitted by: DCO L. Harper

Submitted to: Chief Officer (For onward transmission to Attorney General.)
MIR Office Manager (For Registration and filing on HOLMES System.)

Chief Officer:

The Attorney General has requested a report into the circumstances and reasons for the issue of the Media Statement following the release from Custody of Mr and Mrs Bonner who were arrested by the Historical Abuse Team for three Grave and Criminal Assaults. The reasons for the release however, do not start with the arrest of the Bonners and are outlined in full below.

On 9th April 2008 I met with the AG in the presence of yourself. This meeting was to discuss the provision of Legal Assistance to the Historical Abuse Enquiry. The Attorney General was keen to appoint an independent lawyer to assist the enquiry “in order to prevent you from barking up the wrong tree at an early stage.” There was some discussion over his wish to have the lawyer placed within the Incident Room. I, ACPO, and others saw this as a highly unusual step, and objected to that situation.

Eventually a compromise was reached and Mr Simon Thomas was appointed and given an office in Police Headquarters. Agreement was reached with him, Cyril Whelan, and Stephen Baker that, in a departure from normal practice, we would not arrest suspects whom we hoped to charge until we had submitted a file of evidence to the lawyers and they would then guide us on what charges could be preferred. This was to prevent us from having to arrest a string of suspects and release them whilst the report was being considered. We were reassured that the turnaround in the files would be very quick in order not to delay the process of arrest and charge.

The service that we have received from the legal team has not been as we were led to believe it would be. Since his arrival in mid April we have given Mr Thomas six files. The file for the Bonner case, which was a straight-forward file containing only a small number of statements was handed to him in early June. There followed a number of meetings between himself, the Deputy SIO, the Detective Sergeant Team Leader, and the two investigators in charge of that particular enquiry. During these meetings the evidence was discussed and on Friday 20th June 2008 the Detective Sergeant and the two investigators met with Mr Thomas. It was agreed that the Bonners should be arrested and charged with three crimes of Grave and Criminal Assault. As always, it was accepted that this was subject to any significant changes in the evidence against them following interview or the arrest process. All three officers are certain of the instructions given to them by Mr Thomas and recall clearly the discussions about the difference between the different types of assault and the directions given in relation to charging.

The Bonners were arrested on Tuesday 24th June 2007. Mr Bonner was interviewed first. He denied the offences but offered nothing which changed the evidence against him or his wife. Mrs Bonner feigned illness but was declared fit by the Doctor.

At 5pm Simon Thomas declared to the investigators that he had revised his view and said he did not want the couple charged. The officers were extremely surprised and not a little frustrated. I spoke to Simon who, it transpired, was between trains and on a railway station platform somewhere in the North of England. Indeed, as we spoke the conversation was frequently interrupted by passing trains. He said he had revised his opinion because of new evidence that had emerged during the day. I asked what that evidence was and he gave me three “developments.”

1. Mrs Bonner was unwell. I explained the situation in respect of her and that the Police Doctor thought she was feigning. I explained that she was obtaining the woman’s medical notes and would further advise at 6.30pm. In the event, the Doctor declared the suspect fit for detention and interview. I questioned however, whether this could be said to be new evidence which affected the decision to charge.
2. Simon then told me that a witness called Drake had rung the Custody Officer and said we had made a mistake, and that we had the wrong people in custody. I pointed out that Drake had made a witness statement which Simon had seen and which he had taken into account when recommending which charges should be preferred. Drake had not added any new evidence to what was in his statement.

3. The Bonners’ children had telephoned and said their parents were good people and that they (the children) were now flying to Jersey. I asked Simon how that was new evidence as opposed to character evidence, and he said that they might have evidence relevant to the allegations as they lived in the same house. I pointed out that he knew that previously and also that they lived in a different part of the house.

Simon then said he needed to speak to Cyril Whelan and Stephen Baker who were in Jersey. He did so and telephoned back. He said they agreed with him and wanted to see the interviews before charging. I pointed out that this made the arrangement we had pretty worthless – what was the point of us sending him the file before arrest if he still had to wait to see the interview notes? The idea was that he told us the charges before we released suspects. He then said that he could not do that as things might change during the interview. He said we arrested on suspicion and then interviewed and he decided on charges afterwards. I made the point that we had all agreed that we would not arrest until we had given him the papers and this was to allow us to be given suitable charges to prevent the process of arrest and release. He said that things could always arise during interview. I accepted that occasionally that could happen but that in the absence of anything dramatic, the agreed charges would normally still be relevant. I pointed out that he had met the officers in this case and the Deputy SIO on several occasions and that just before arrest there had been discussion on the charges and he had agreed three G&C assault charges. He said that was not correct. All four of our staff, DI Fossey, DS Smith, and the two UK detectives were frustrated at this development as their recollection was he had clearly agreed with them this course of action. I told Simon that if these two were not charged I was not having the Enquiry Team officers blamed for it. He finished by saying that operationally he could not tell me whether to charge or not.

In view of that comment, I told the officers to get the Centenier in to PHQ to charge. They did so. Danny Scaife came in, Andy Smith gave him the full facts including the discussion with the lawyer, and Danny went off to read the evidence. He did so for well over an hour and then declared that although there was enough evidence to charge, he was not going to.

At that stage I told Louise Nibbs to put the Press Release out. It avoided comment and stuck to the facts. In answer to the Attorney General’s question, the following are the reasons I put it out.

Simon Thomas commented this week that he was anxious there should be no perception that the decisions to charge or not to charge suspects were being made under improper influence of factors other than evidence. I made the point to him, and make it again, that he and others do not seem able to grasp the fact that this perception is already there among the victims. They feel that the decisions are, and have been made in the past, on many factors other than the evidence. It is the need to avoid this perception that was uppermost in my mind in releasing the factual Media statement that evening.

One of the most heartening features of this enquiry has been the trust placed in the officers by very vulnerable victims and witnesses. This is despite them being on many occasions very badly let down by a number of agencies when they have previously tried to report crimes against them. This trust has been based on a foundation of openness and transparency together with an obvious determination to get to the truth. It is in marked contrast to the total contempt that the victims hold the Attorney General and his office in. So suspicious of that office are they, that many victims remain sceptical about the possibility of ever bringing the people who abused them to justice. The need to overcome the doubts victims had about the States of Jersey Police was one of the reasons why we agreed the policy of not arresting anyone until we had submitted the file to the lawyer working with us. In this way we avoided the scenario, seen so often in the UK, of a succession of suspects being brought into custody and then released without charge.
Such a scenario in this case would have damaged the credibility of the investigation and risked us being placed in the same category as those agencies the victims do not trust. This is illustrated by a briefing I have had from the NSPCC Counsellor working alongside us. He has received a text message from a victim (which he has showed me) to say “It is a joke. Another two walk away. No wonder no one will come forward.” Here is an illustration of the need for us to maintain our distance and our independence from the office of the Attorney General, and a stark reason for the release.

However, the agreement mentioned above has not worked as planned or indeed promised. Files have been submitted, some of them not very complex and indeed, no more complicated than the normal type file dealt with on a daily basis by the PPU. The time to turn them around by the legal team has been frustratingly long. There is no intention to criticise the ability of the “dedicated” lawyer here, but it is obvious that he has a number of commitments in the UK which makes it difficult for him to be here. The debacle over the Bonner case is one example. As stated above, the officers concerned are adamant that they were given the go ahead to charge; subject to the usual conditions that nothing significant occurred during the arrest process or interviews. If this had not been the case, no arrest would have been made. The actions of the UK lawyer himself hardly seem to corroborate the picture of someone giving serious consideration to an evolving investigation with prisoners in custody. Some UK and even Jersey law practitioners may find it rather bizarre that a lawyer found it acceptable to carry out such work on the platform of a busy railway station.

A further example of the poor service given to us is illustrated by the Maguire case. The importance of this case to our enquiry is obvious to all, including the media. The Deputy SIO and I have continually emphasised this to Simon Thomas.

We delivered the file to Simon on the 29th April. The investigators, the Deputy SIO, and I regularly asked him for progress reports. These were not really forthcoming even when he was in Jersey. I had to speak to a Jersey lawyer with experience of extradition to clarify one point. I then spoke to a CPS expert on Extradition to clarify something else in an attempt to speed things up. In mid June I was told by Simon that he and Cyril Whelan had almost finished the work on the charges. Then we were told that the AG had asked for full advice files on the facts and the law. We realised the need for this but were firm in seeking assurances from the lawyers that this would be done quickly. Stephen Baker, after some debate, undertook that the AG would be fully advised within seven days. That period expired last week and the investigating officers e mailed Simon Thomas in the UK and asked if it had been done. The reply from Simon Thomas was “I will answer this question next week.”

This answer to a reasonable and sensible question beggars belief, and is another example of the shoddy and unprofessional service which we are receiving. To return to the question of perception, what sort of perception would this give to the public if they knew of it? Meanwhile, the Maguires remain in France, although we are told by the lawyers that our fear of them absconding is not supported by their information. This is despite that our intelligence comes from those who found them in the first place.

In summary, I issued the Press Release to explain to the public, but mainly the victims, why these two suspects had been released. I feel, as do the investigators, that we were badly let down by the legal advice delivered from afar. The three pieces of “new evidence”, even to a police officer, were transparently no such thing. As the conversation unfurled it became obvious that even Simon Thomas did not truly believe that what he was describing to me was evidence. I could not work out, and am still unable to work out, what really did prompt the change of heart and the revision of the advice. I have refused to speculate on that but was determined that the States of Jersey Police would not be criticised for the decision. Subsequent events proved that this was a justifiable fear with the Deputy Home Affairs Minister describing to me how a number of members of the Council of Ministers were already gleefully talking about another “Police Cock Up” in bringing these suspects in and not charging them.

It is also probably pertinent to include some reference in this report to the expressed view of the Attorney General, and indeed the Minister, that the circulation list for this and other police press releases is “too wide and encourages wider comment.” These comments show a distinct lack of awareness of dealing with the media in this type of situation. The list has evolved from the early days of the enquiry because when the first media releases were made, the Press Officer was immediately deluged with media outlets demanding to know why they had not received the release and asking why we were hiding it from them. Apart from an impression of reluctance to communicate, this heavy demand led to our phone systems being blocked, (at one point the Press Officer had 128 messages waiting), and caused unnecessary stress to our staff. It was also expensive in time and cost to send out a Press Release so many times, not to mention extremely unprofessional. Several weeks ago the Press Officer contacted everyone on the list and asked if she could take them off. Only three agreed and they are now removed.

Another aspect and implication of the Attorney General’s comment which he might like to reflect on is what would happen if we did indeed cut our circulation list. When the inevitable questions arrived from the media all over the world and we told them that we had removed them from out list, they would without doubt ask why. When we gave the truthful answer that the AG thought it a good idea to curtail circulation and a wider coverage they just might, in the light of the many allegations of cover up against his office, think that they had here positive evidence of the “wilful obstruction” which he was recently accused of. No matter how unjust that might be, it would be an obvious outcome.

Submitted for onward transmission to the Attorney General.

Leonard Harper, Deputy Chief OfficerChief OfficerDocument

Reader Major Incident Room (For Registration)
29th June 2008

52 thoughts on “THE SECRET REPORT FROM LENNY HARPER:

  1. Krakow Crapaud

    Tell me if I’ve got this right:

    The Judiciary, fronted by the Attorney General, laid out the rules for the arrest of suspects in a blatant attempt to control the enquiry. He appointed a part time UK lawyer to whom the police would have to submit files on a suspect before they could make an arrest. He would give permission to Lenny Harper. Effectively no-one can be even taken in for questioning before the AG has agreed. In other words the AG has control over whether or not a case is even made against suspects and if it passes that hurdle he then decides if it goes to trial.

    KC

    Reply
  2. Tom Perry

    The default setting of most administrations is concealment of child abuse. With Victoria College the States earned its reputation. But any right thinking individual reading Mr Harper’s memorandum will vomit at the amorality of the States.

    Where is Straw hiding?

    Reply
  3. Res Nullius

    An absolute disgrace.

    Stinks of influence being exerted over Thomas by someone.

    Further, the vision of the coucil of ministers rubbing their hands ‘gleefully’ because they have managed to move the blame is rather telling and another absolute bloody disgrace.

    I hope this report reaches a much wider audience.

    Reply
  4. The Moving Finger

    I hope the UK press run with this.

    Yesterday’s news concerning the arrest of a “SENIOR” policeman on sexual assault charges merely highlights what the people of Jersey have lost in Lenny Harper.

    Lenny’s replacement has been very quiet – WHY?

    It is time that our self imposed leaders relised that we are fed up with the “Jersey Way”.

    We want justice for the victims and prosecutions for all “alleged” offenders.

    All dead offenders should be named, especially those who had responsibility to the public like ‘The Fat Man’

    Let a REAL court of law decide their fate.

    Reply
  5. Derek

    Stuart,
    I dont mean to belittle the investigation but this is starting to take on the appearance of farce (through no fault of the SOJ Police).

    Is it too much to ask that someone might have the authority to take this mess by the scruff of the neck?

    And i truly can’t believe the arrogance of Bailiff and AG…are they taking the p*ss?

    Would also be great to see a sort of “family tree” of connections between the well to do and those that appear to be benefitting from this going away…might be an interesting read….and it would help me as i’m rapidly losing track of who’s who.

    Dont let them off the hook!

    Reply
  6. donchais

    I literally felt ill after reading the Bonners were not to be prosecuted and Bailhache’s follow-up comments to the press.

    I applaud the work you, Lenny, Simon and the dedicated police investigators have done and continue to do, but I have lost all faith that Jersey will do the right thing.

    Why the good folks of Jersey haven’t taken up arms and routed the SOB’s is beyond me!

    Reply
  7. Anonymous

    The abused of Jersey, should now start a World Wide petition relating to the failure of The Judiciary, The Bailiff, in their duty of care relating to the prosecution of those who have been named in Child Abuse, be it mental, physical or sexual. This petition could be made to the UK government to show that abusers, no matter what their colour, creed, or social standing need to be held accountable for their henious crimes.
    The Judiciary system in Jersey is corrupt and needs the intervention of the Crown Prosecutors.

    This petition could be done through an email system. It is time the Judiciary of Jersey were held accountable for their in actions and they themselves should be prosecuted.

    Reply
  8. voiceforchildren

    Stuart.

    You have headlined the Lenny Harper memo as an “exclusive”. Does this mean our local media or “JOURNALISTS” can not put it into the public domain?

    This surely has to be “headline news” doesn’t it? has it been released by any of our local media?

    My heart truly goes out to the victims, how much more of this culture of cover up and concealment can they take? What chance have they got of getting any justice and closure if Jersey is left to it’s own devices?

    My heart also goes out to Lenny Harper and his dedicated team of proffessionals (including yourself and Simon Bellwood) who have worked tirelessly to bring these victims some justice, only to be scuppered by our “ruling elite”

    Surely that memo from Lenny Harper is all the evidence you could ever wish for to convince THE WORLD Jersey needs outside intervention?

    I don’t neccessarily advocate public disorder and the likes of. But I believe with all the outside media connections you now have and the massive support for yourself and the victims, there should be some kind of rally or demonstration organised against this regime that we are all victims of.

    More and more blogsites are springing up from ordinary citizens of Jersey. More and more information is getting into the public domain (no thanks to our media) and still nothing, or very little, has changed. The time must be upon us to take to the streets, what else can we do?

    Reply
  9. Anonymous

    Perhaps I heard the news article with the AG incorrectly. I heard him mention the references given by the Bonners’ children which I agree would be ridiculous to take into account, however I thought that he had also said that a witness statement had been given by a child of one of the victims which also contradicted some of their claims.
    If this was the case, would this also not be relevant to the AG’s decision?

    Reply
  10. Anonymous

    So the Bonners are not to face any charges! This is on the basis that they did not batter all their children (foster or natural) and that their own children say they are good people.This is unbelievable even by Jersey’s standards. I am gutted for their victims, especially as it has been well-researched and documented that a victim may often be the only one selected for abuse in a family. Read Dave Pelzer’s account of his experience in “A Child Called It” and the rest of the trilogy.

    I am sure there were many children and young people like myself in Haut De La Garenne who were not selected for the worst type of abuse although I certainly saw and heard plenty that did not make sense until recently! Some may have even enjoyed their time in there although I find that hard to believe.

    Using the benchmark for evidence that William Bailhache has used with the Bonners, is he then going to decide that because not all the children in Haut De La Garenne were drugged,tortured,raped and intimidated by a number of abusers then these depraved individuals should not face trial?
    This cannot be allowed to happen!

    Thankyou for what you do Stuart. Without you, John Hemming and Lenny Harper, we would be baying at the moon!

    Reply
  11. Anonymous

    Dear Stuart

    To remind your loyal followers, I have re-submitted below my posting placed on your blog of 14 August 2008 giving my response to the three pathetic reasons why Mr Thomas apparently changed his mind as published in the Times of the same date. Last night a police officer and a representative of the NSPCC came to my home to give me the news that the AG had closed this case.

    I am so sorry but there are too many emotions rattling around in my head at the moment to go into any sort of detail but Stuart, I once told you on the telephone that if this were to happen I would go to the press to tell the world what really happened and I think now is that time. I desperately need closure of this bureaucratic mess and would be extremely grateful for any assistance that you can give me.

    My thoughts go out to all the victims out there, please, please don’t give up.

    Carrie

    “Dear Stuart

    Firstly I would like to sincerely thank you for all that you are doing in trying to bring the guilty to justice.

    If you would permit me, as one of the victims of the couple who were released without charge on 24 June 2008 despite clear evidence against them, I would like to clarify a few things as reported in the article from the Times online of today’s date. The article reads “the barrister (Simon Thomas) told detectives he had revised his view, citing as reasons that the wife was unwell, a witness had rung the police to say they were holding the wrong people and the couple’s children said their parents were “good people”.

    Firstly, this women was and always has been a great actress pretending to be ill when she knew she had gone too far, praying for forgiveness. She used to give the performance of a life time by proudly showing off the “perfect family” when visitors came round whether they were family friends or Child Care Officers. She may well have been ill the day she was arrested, the shock of being arrested and finally her evils and brutality coming out into the open was perhaps a bit too much for her to bear. Welcome to the world of being scared and having no control over it! I believe that the Detectives dealing with this case knew that she was acting that day but who can prove it?

    Secondly, the person who phoned the police to say that they were holding the wrong couple, was I believe my younger Brother, a man who some eight or nine years ago told my then Advocate that he was going to kill me. This so called man will do anything to hurt me but in doing so he is hurting himself and his family too. He is no more than a coward who is now scared of being found out that he has been telling lies to the Detectives and Lawyers. News flash baby Brother, they are not stupid. My message to him is clear and simple. You cannot hurt me anymore than the pain that I have suffered all my life. You cannot take away my dignity as that was stolen from me as a child. You cannot take away my confidence as that was stolen from me as a child. You cannot take away the pain and horrendous memories that I suffer now as these were given to me as a child and will stay with me to the day I die.

    Finally, all this happened more than 30 years ago. Their children are no longer children and therefore cannot be made to tell the truth and of course, they are going to say that their parents are good people; after all they are going to want to protect them.

    God, if there is any justice in the world, please help Stuart to find it.

    Survivor”

    Reply
  12. Advocatus Diaboli

    As predicted the Gabardine Swine have passed by on the other side. Since possession is 90% of the law this was only to be expected. The real action will be the court case against Jack ‘have-a-go-hero’ Straw. I look forward to reading about it here since the meeja have been conspicuously silent.

    Keep going Stuart!

    Reply
  13. Anonymous

    As far as I am aware, the Bonner children were away at boarding school so would not have been aware of a great deal of what thier parents got up to!

    Similarly, I wonder which golf club Mr, and possibly Mrs Bonner belonged to?

    On another note, we have already had testimony from one of the Bonner victims as to why a certain individuel claimed to the police that they had got the wrong people!

    Maybe anyone with any doubts about this should read what she had to say!

    It’s amazing how fire proof social class is!!

    Reply
  14. Anonymous

    How can we celebrate “Liberation Day” as a free and democratic people when no such freedom exists?

    As a Jersey man, I hang my head in shame, thinking of all those who have given their lives in two world wars so we may live our lives in freedom.

    And in doing so, we, the people allow such men to control and crush that which is most precious and worth dying for!

    Jack

    Reply
  15. Anonymous

    If you goto Mr Simon Thomas website you will see why he made the choices as he did. He has worked in Jersey for the Oligachs before! in finances and other things on the channel islands including Jersey.

    The long and short is that he is one of their familiers.

    When I got put into care my brother and sister also said its not my fault and Im a good person but that had nothing to do with it and I still got put into care.

    Mr Simon Thomas you are one of them and should be stripped of your ability to practice law as you obviously you have broken it.

    Reply
  16. Elaine

    Message to Carrie

    I am deeply sorry for what you have been through, and how you have been so terribly let down. I understand that are many emotions rattling round in your head, and I am sure Stuart will help and guide you in what to do. I for one cannot offer any such guidance, for I would be feeling exactly the same as you, had our roles been reversed.
    I just wanted to say that should you decide to go to the press, and I am not advising either way if you should or not, but I have the contact email address and mobile phone number of Mark Stone, who works for Sky News, and will come to you, whereever you live now. He is a good reporter, and I reccommend him if you decide to go public.

    If you wish to have his contact details, please either reply on here to me (Elaine) or drop me an email to gossel2003@hotmail.com and I’ll send to you.

    I hope that you somehow find your way out of the dark tunnel that you have been in, and that you finally find justice and peace of mind. My best wishes to you.

    Elaine

    Reply
  17. Anonymous

    Stuart,

    Some weeks ago I did give the caveat that the ACPO guidelines on historical abuse was dreadfully flawed and that, even though the police investigative team are doing their very best, it won’t be good enough. I have no doubt whatsoever that rape and murder of children occured in an organised way for years, but the police really haven’t the knowledge/ability to prove it, even though such evidence is there within the minds of the survivors. It is still possible to prove the truth, but – as I know for sure: the ACPO is very political, gutless and totally incompetent.

    DT

    Reply
  18. Anonymous

    Claire
    Your journey is long but do not think that you are alone, as a survivor of abuse I suggest that you talk as much of it out as you can, tell your story to anyone who will listen, this time will pass, it may not feel like that now but you will get to the end of your journey and find your peace.

    Reply
  19. Anonymous

    Stuart,

    Just wanted to thank you again for all you are doing. I reckon you probably get down at times, maybe think it’s all a waste of time, and I just want to tell you that no way is what you are doing a waste of time.

    And I also wanted to caution you to beware of moles. There are people who pretend they are against child abuse and pretend to help, but they do the exact opposite, they are like sneaky snakes, their agenda is just to keep the status quo, they don’t want things to change at all. But I don’t think I really have to tell you that because you are very clever. You have to be really on the ball with them.

    But thank you so much for everything you are doing. I don’t know if a person can ever get over the pain of child abuse. It really lifts me to come here though and feel people fighting and rooting for all us abuse survivors. I’m not one of the Jersey survivors but it helps me to come here and read this blog. I get very depressed sometimes, still. I know I might come accross as a strong person, but the pain of abuse is still so terrible, because no-one has ever apologised for it, they have persecuted me instead, it’s hateful how they have treated me. It makes me feel happy to feel that people care.

    And I also think Jack Straw should change his name to Boot. I am very shocked about his attitude to people who have been abused as children, it’s really disgusting.

    Zoompad

    Reply
  20. Anonymous

    Stuart

    The AGs decision based on the information in the memo is barmy even by Jersey standards.
    There has to be more to the AGs decision surely?

    Can somebody explain why the island’s AG is using the media to defend himself?
    Newspaper interviews on a police investigation. Is this normal behaviour from members of the legal profession?

    The barrier to justice remains intact and is orchestrated at the public expense

    Reply
  21. Anonymous

    Stuart

    Dont telll me you are shocked at the way the bonners have been let off, we all knew this would happen.

    You know have close on 50,000 site users and rising, i have said this before here, your crusade whilst wothwhile is not going to change a thing on the evil that is now jersey, you are a candle in the wind my friend, you are a hero of our times, but you wont change a thing here , you need to, no you must start a new party for the people of jersey you must stand up and fight them where they cant hide and where they cant manipulale , and that is the ballot box. i recall Gemany in 1980 a divided country no one then would have believed the great dividing wall would be ripped down,and the people freed within a few years, what happened? enough people did the right thing. it was easy in the end stuart, and now today 2008 , the corrupt scum who contol Jersy have no shame, have no fear they sleep in thier beds tonight thinking they are safe, no right thinking politian or any one perporting to be a man of justice, would have allowed this evil couple to go scot free, and face a trial, particually given Lenny Haarpers comments and the facts, yet thats what happend,words really do fail to aduqetly express how one feels about this, anger,frustration, rage! , all to no avail, the evil that is Jersey power brokers crap on the suffering of the abused, and wipe thier behinds in the bloodied ,tear filled short lives of the victims and what is worse, they do it in the name of Jersey justice. shame on any one that eats at the table of these monsters, Stuart my brave friend, stand up and form a party to fight these people in the ballot box, and then if the good people of jersey dont vote for you, close down, pack up and leave, along with any remining people with care and love in thier hearts, becuse if jersey vote for much of the same, then yes, all of jersey must then share the blame for the blood of the inocent children,who sufferered, and its only god who will be left to deal with them, for jersey will be the island of the dammed.

    this year 2008, i n the ballot box, test the resolve of the people of jersey who care,

    god bless you

    The Oak

    Reply
  22. Anonymous

    Stuart

    49999 unique users looking at an island 9 by 5. Congratulations

    See we have a new man heading the police inquiry.
    So one man retires two are appointed – any reason why the new deputy of police isn’t getting his hands dirty?

    Reply
  23. Anonymous

    Did you notice the awkward look on the AG’s face right at the end of the BBC TV piece as he assured the victims they’d do all they could? It really looked liked someone who knew he didn’t mean it, to me!

    I have to say, amongst all the disgust I’m feeling, I’m also a little concerned about how this leak has happened? Can we not trust the police to look after their memos? I’m glad we got to see this, but at the same time… concerned, too.

    I was amused by the “it’s alright” propaganda the BBC put out, comparing the kind of UK prosecution rate statistics with what we’ve had over here so far. Very kind of them to inform us that way!

    Reply
  24. TonyTheProf

    It is solid evidence like this memo that we need in the public domain, even if the names were removed, so that we can see the whole picture. Well done.

    Reply
  25. Anonymous

    Stuart

    The memo shows that there is a need for a freedom of information law – we can see the background to decisions

    Did Lenny get a response?

    Reply
  26. Res Nullius

    From the Bedford Row website.

    “Simon has also worked closely with Bakerplatt and the Attorney General’s department in Jersey”

    Other members of the Bedford Row gang now working for the Crown are

    Advocate’s Stephen Baker
    Cyril Whelan (both listed as ‘advisers’ in the enquiry)Stephen Platt
    Matthew Jowitt
    Howard Sharpe

    All the above have been appointed to act for the establishment in various capacities over the last few years.

    Could they honestly not find a lawyer in Jersey or elswehere that has not in the past operated in the interests of the establishment?

    Reply
  27. Stuart Syvret

    The Bonners

    Being publicly associated with a potential crime does not, in fact, confer immunity from charging or prosecution.

    Think about it:

    If it did – there’d be thousands of big-time villains who would just make sure that stories about them and their drug deals or gang-land hits got reported in the tabloids – and Bingo! Total immunity to prosecution.

    The kind of reporting restrictions you refer to only really kick-in once a case becomes sub judice – which is the moment the suspects are charged.

    Of course, it could be argued by defence lawyers that their clients can’t get a fair hearing because of the publicity. This argument is used the length of the nation on a regular basis. 99% of the time it fails.

    In any event, I had refrained from naming the Bonners for some months – not that I needed to, for the reasons described above. But it is plain they will not now be charged – admittedly for manifestly absurd reasons.

    The least I can do for their victims is to name and shame them.

    Stuart.

    Reply
  28. Stuart Syvret

    Lenny, and a response to his memo?

    No, Lenny never got a response.

    Just as I never get responses to questions I ask of these people.

    It is one of their key and central tactics – answer as little as possible – and particularity avoid putting anything in writing.

    That way there is no ‘evidence’ – on which you can later be challenged or held to account.

    That is why these kinds of people just love having “meetings” – because what is said at a meeting isn’t worth the paper it’s not written on.

    I always advise people when dealing with authorities – do not agree to meetings; do not allow yourself to be diverted by a load of verbal blandishments.

    Always insist on dealing with the matter in writing.

    They are terrified of this.

    Which is why Bill Bailhache wouldn’t supply a written response to Lenny’s report. He knows what’s in the report is true – that he could not author any remotely credible arguments against it – so he just doesn’t respond.

    Neither William Bailhache, nor his brother, the Bailiff, Philip Bailhache, will respond to me in writing. Phil actually said in one of his rare written responses, he wouldn’t explain in writing his unlawful and anti-democratic refusal to allow me to table a question to the Constables’ Chairman, because “I would not accept what he said and would argue about it”!

    Well – heaven forefend that man costing taxpayers in excess of £300,000 a year should be required to offer written explanations for his obstructions against democratically elected members.

    William Bailhache has been approaching the Jersey Care Leavers Association, seeking a meeting with them. Obviously, whether they accept or not is a matter for them. But I have advised them against it.

    It would be nothing but a cynical PR move on his part. I believe it would be far more useful to the survivors to demand detailed, written explanations for his extraordinary conduct.

    Always get it in writing – no matter which authority you’re dealing with.

    Always get it in writing.

    Stuart.

    Reply
  29. Stuart Syvret

    “Progress” Report on the Kathy Bull Report.

    Yeah – I read this a while ago.

    Tragic, isn’t it, in a comical fashion?

    The manifest ineptitude, dishonesty, incompetence and ignorance displayed in the “progress” report – its obvious and wilful construction to mislead by omission – is yet further evidence of the complete inability of this shower of liars and clowns to operate effectively.

    Still – what else can we expect of a document which involved people like Marnie Baudians, Phil Dennit, Mario Lundy etc? Proven and demonstrable liars – one and all.

    They just don’t “get it” – that things have changed; that these days we have independent, genuinely expert advice – from a range of people up and down the country – people with ethics.

    They just don’t understand that their latest steaming pile of horse dung is going to be terminated with extreme prejudice – just like the comically inept Williamson report.

    Wake up and smell the coffee guys – whilst the average States member will continue to passively swallow your lies – the people who pay your wages, the public, won’t.

    Stuart

    Reply
  30. Anonymous

    sorry for being a little slow on the uptake (and you may have already explained this on previous blogs)…
    I get the Baudin and Dennet reference, but could you explain Lundy’s role (or is it due to him being head of education?)

    Reply
  31. Anonymous

    hey Stuart looks like you are gradually making progress in so much as the rag is concerned, because (A) They are now seeming to allow criticism of the AG via printing Lenny’s report and whats more crediting you with it. (B) they are telling their readers that you have a blogspot, which can only eventually help the cause, because it is suprising how few people know you have one.
    I wonder if they (the rag) are trying to save face and appear to be bold enough to show they doubt all the AG and his bro and the merry band of sheep spout at us.!!

    Reply
  32. Anonymous

    In response to `the Bonners’ being named’….I was’nt having ago! I’m glad they were named and shamed (but I guess it’s water off a ducks back really).

    No, I was just stateing what Bailhache will offer next as his pathetic defence, as to why he is unwilling to prosocute them!

    I wonder whether Phil, Bill or Ben use what used to be the Bonners’ family pile, before they sold it for millions. You know! The spar behind St Ouens Manner!

    I hear it’s a fab joint! I can’t help but wonder if people will continue to think it’s so fab? Now that they know what took place there?

    Sad world really! You know, according to the experts, statitsically anything between a massive fifty and seventy five percent of abuse and rape goes unreported or detected!

    How many actual victims of abuse are thier? Children who have either been abused physically or sexually or both. Or worse still murdered in Jersey within the period currently under investigation? Makes you think does’nt it!

    I bet that the five unfortunate children unearthed at HDLG are not the only ones lying in an uncared for and an unmarked grave? Statistics alone say they are not!

    Reply
  33. Anonymous

    Bailhache is quoted in tonight’s JEP, countering Harper’s claims as being “simply wrong”. That’s that sorted then!

    I trust the JEP will be offering Mr. Harper a double-page spread this weekend to put forth his own views on the subject, in the same manner the Bailhache family have been given a free voice recently. Oh hang on, I confused the JEP with an impartial news source for a second. Scratch that expectation.

    Reply
  34. Anonymous

    They expect the bobby’s to tug their forelocks and just go away.

    They hope that things will go on the same when this has all died down.

    They think that they are beyond justice because they are the justice. So did most dictators.

    There display of gut wrenching indifference and disassociation from the horrors of children they were and still are responsible for.

    Like some mid sixty’s pop culture devil worshiping movie with men in strange druid type garb with a knife suspended above some young virgin tantalising the camera with its intent.

    Haute De La Garenne becomes a byword for horror and the oligarchs become a strange sect of devils worshipers!!! Oh you just couldn’t make it up scandal on an epic level.

    Newspapers go wild with excitement at the thought (Well some do) and some internally, are shaking in their boots.

    Dark deeds done and dark people doing them!!! Time to let the light in!!! Let it begin!! The elite is now toast, enjoy watching them roast.

    They seek to indulge in the dark side without the price! Sorry boys the walls of hell are waiting for you and it will be, in the end to the betterment of Jersey as a whole.

    The needs of the many out way the needs of the few.

    Reply
  35. Anonymous

    “Progress” Report on the Kathy Bull Report – an absolute load of Bull I’m afraid. It should have read:

    Children absconding regularly from care, professional support agencies not supporting enough, staff bullying (including senior civil servants) and manipulation techniques in full swing, poor consistency of care, tight budget constraints, delay after delay with training and development of staff and resources, abuse of children continuing…

    Reply
  36. Trust no-one

    Interesting story on the news today about the story of Boschat & police officer in trouble for abusing the computer database v. Lenny Harper.

    What has it come to when my first reaction is to wonder if some dodgy and powerful people are supporting the complainant against Lenny in a campaign to attempt to discredit him?

    This island has made me even more of a cynic than I thought possible!

    Reply
  37. Advocatus Diaboli

    ” . . . what is said at a meeting isn’t worth the paper it’s not written on.”

    Yeah, I know that feeling!

    “Always get it in writing”

    Never a truer word written. As management has been deskilled, most of the people involved use rote-learned methods such as verbal communication, which can be repudiated, particularly when there are no minutes or their writing is controlled by the ‘manager’. Another good one is to send a stooge who has to report back to someone, who contradicts the smooth words of the proxy.

    The real management are the people you never see or hear because then they can’t be quoted or noted. The only way to get to them is through the law, after a war of bureaucratic attrition which defeats most people and deters many of the rest.

    When it comes to abuse of children, even plebeian ones get a little bit of compassion from the public. I think that our colonial overlords might be on a loser this time.

    Watch yer back Stuart and don’t get your hopes up too much that many of the Jersey electorate will do the right thing, they’ll probably vote for their wallets. The law’s the thing – much harder to rig.

    Reply
  38. Stuart Syvret

    Sharp Report

    Great Link! Not being a computer nerd (just an ordinary nerd) I could never get the bloody thing in postable form.

    However – we now have a good link to it on another site.

    Excellent work, thanks.

    Stuart

    Reply
  39. Anonymous

    I would like to inform “spud-you-like” from Planet Jersey. To get the facts from the case before making assumptions about the family members involved in this case. I would like to reiterate that there were 3 cases of abuse by three different children…whom were unrelated!!!!! Consequently it is not her word against his!!! If there is a grievance between the siblings there is obviously a reason and unless you know what that is I suggest you KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT!!!! Everyone is entitled to an option but to state information that is not true is slanderous.

    In my opinion is it is outrageous that you can use character witness from blood relations to “get you off the hook” for crimes of such multitude when you can not use blood relations as references for job interviews or to rent property…..HAS THIS ISLAND GONE COMPLETELY MAD?!?!!??!!?!??!?!!?

    Reply
  40. Anonymous

    Stuart, I don’t expect you to post this but, I must tell you that I am not so sure that some form of satanic abuse was not involved!

    Why I think this is because as a former resident at HDLG during the years 1970 to 1975, I clearly recal seeing satanic emblems drawn in chalk within the enclosed centre court yard of the building (I have given the police a statement to the fact).

    Similarly, these emblems were often to be seen on the doleman (and on the walls of the bunker) along with other discarde stuff like candles etc.

    I was born and raised in St Martin, and can clearly remember the comments made by adults of the time, as to what took place up there (the doleman).

    Knowing that Paisnel was a frequent visitor to the home and, also knowing that he was a self aclaimed satanist, leads me to suspect that there is more truth to this than first meets the eye.

    I don’t think that those involved in the cult wear on a daily basis black habits or always offer up thier sacrafices on an alta.

    For example, as a child, I knew Paisnel, and went to school with his son. On the outside he seemed like any other father. Similarly, when he did what he did to children, he was not wearing the sterio type Hollywood costume!

    But one cannot deny that he was a self aclaimed satanist. Similarly there are many well respected commentators on the subject who argue that he did not work alone, that many influential people were either aiding him or in the know. And, that these people were possibly members of the same satanic cult.

    All just history and theory I know. But it does make one think!

    Perhaps the term `old boy’s club’ has an alternative meaning other then `masonoic’? Stranger things have happened!

    Reply
  41. Stuart Syvret

    Ritualistic or Satanic Abuse.

    I’m posting this response under my last two blogs, as I’m not sure which one was the target of a comment I’ve received.

    Early today I did a response comment in which I said I’d had no evidence of ritualistic or satanic abuse.

    In response, I have received a plausible comment which says that such perversions were a real possibility.

    However, the commenter said they didn’t expect me to publish the comment, so I haven’t.

    But if the person who submitted it could respond by saying they were happy for it to be posted – or if they wish, to submit a revised version – I’m happy to publish.

    Let me know what you think? The person concerned will know what they wrote, so I won’t have any difficulty in knowing it to be a genuine response if it deals with the same specifics.

    Stuart.

    Reply
  42. Anonymous

    Stuart,

    I have no idea how much access you have to the papers concerning the Bonners. However, in legal circles it is not uncommon for a second opinion to be obtained from another, unconnected lawyer on a matter.

    It is often the case that this second opinion is sought from English QC’s (pretty much how the Bedford Row gang got set up in Jersey)

    It would be very interesting to see whether the papers could be delivered to an experienced CPS lawyer in England for a second opinion on the merits of the case and whether it would pass the ‘evidential test’ in the UK.

    Wouldn’t that be a kick in the face for the AG to learn that the CPS would have been prepared to prosecute it on the basis that it did pass such a test!!

    Furhermore, I understand that the police have their own team of legal advisers such as Laurence O’Donnell who came from the UK and may well have CPS experience.

    I wonder what his opinion was and whether he was overuled by the AG.

    Do you know if it is possible for such a review to be undertaken?

    Reply
  43. Anonymous

    The Bailiff and his brother AG are both and succeeding in running Jersey the same way that the Kennedy brothers, JFK and Bobby and using the Catholic church as a shield to hide behind i.e. Camelot. It only lasted five years but the cycle was then broken because of both of their assassinations. How long has the cycle been running in Jersey? Generations??
    And how long do we have to wait for a new messiah? (Stuart)!!

    Reply
  44. Stuart Syvret

    I am no ‘messiah’. With all due respect, such comments – as well as being ridiculous – do not help to take Jersey politics forward.

    ‘Personality’ politics – the cult of the personality – has been proven to be extremely dangerous over the centuries. And in Jersey – the ‘great man’ approach to politics has been nothing but a disaster for the people of the island.

    This because it takes political debate away from issue, policies – some kind of intellectual debate – of the kind one would find in policy competition between political parties.

    Never rely on a figurehead. The person may end up being very dangerous – and then be very difficult to check if some kind of personality cult has taken hold of the public’s view of that person.

    But even if you had a good leader – that person could get run over by a bus tomorrow. If your political “movement” is built around the image of that one person – then what?

    What happens when the do something human and fallible – like dying, for example?

    Ideas, intellectual analysis, policies, philosophies – political parties. That is what we must depend on.

    That is what we in Jersey must look to. The cult of the personality has let us down so often.

    Stuart.

    Reply
  45. Anonymous

    How about publishing their home addresses and an internet shop for cricket supplies??

    F*#k them all.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.