Pages

Friday, 17 February 2012

SO OFTEN A ‘DAMP SQUIB’ LOOK OUT FOR A STATES QUESTION TIME THAT REALLY COULD BE ‘EXPLOSIVE’!

AND I’M NOT TALKING ABOUT LAST YEAR’S POLICE ‘BLITZKREIG ON THE GERMAN CONSUL…

Another post – another apology for being a few days late! C’est la vie! I am a politician first; blogger second as I have said a hundred times. My first duty is helping my constituents and beyond so I can’t sit around all day like some sad maverick internet troll! Is that fair enough ‘Alan’ - or whatever you are calling yourself this week?

As readers will know I had hoped to make this post an in depth one about two of the complaints I am investigating from constituents relating to police cases. Unfortunately, I have had to delay this slightly whilst some important information is confirmed by a contact. But hey…we can still light the ‘touch-paper’ toward getting to the bottom of one of these.

So below I outline my questions – oral and written – for next week’s States Sitting. I don’t feel the need to comment on them all as I think they are straight forward. Indeed, with reference to the first oral one I would remind readers that sometimes saying less for a short while brings more results in the long run.

It is, after all, about getting the full, bald truth that matters! I’ll also be doing a dedicated post relating to my written question about a Jersey casino in a few days. However, I also want to comment briefly on another matter. This being to pay credit to the likes of Rico Sorda and Voiceforchildren for their continued tenacity in seeking that said bald truth no matter how deeply it might have been buried.

MY FIRST ORAL QUESTION IS TO THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS:


“Will the Minister advise what rights, if any, members of the public have to be informed by the police that their neighbours have a large arsenal of weapons in their homes?"

‘Explosive’ it could be and not in a good way if Senator Ian Le Marquand hasn’t got a reassuring answer! Indeed, should he not have I will also be back in two week’s time to grill the Attorney General.

To be quite honest a politician really shouldn’t have to be putting him (or her) self in the position that I am with this. We should be able to rely on the combination of our police and courts to do their job. Sadly, from what I have seen in this case both have failed good, thoroughly genuine people very badly.

Indeed, it does seem, as my constituent states, as if some want this first case hushed up; buried; swept under the carpet. The question has to be: why? The member of the public came to me because of this very feeling. He turned to me because in his words ‘You have the reputation of being a fighter and standing up for people’. Praise indeed and I will do my best to try and ensure that this case is settled with the best interests of everyone involved at the forefront.

So I ask readers for the time being to just consider these simple questions: how would you feel if you had been attacked – quite out of the blue – within what you thought was the safety of your own home? How would you feel to know that your attacker clearly badly needed some help – but discover nothing had been done about this for over a year? How would you like to live in fear for that year and still be doing so now?

Bad enough already. But then, what if you found out that the weapons your attacker possessed were an awful lot worse than you had been led to believe. Not just knives and swords etc but even ‘ready-to-go’ petrol bombs! Not only that but the said individual was now back right next door to you – having incredibly been found ‘not guilty’ of possessing offensive weapons.

Yet the police had not even had the decency to advise you of the risk…

This really shouldn’t happen, should it? If someone needs help they should get it within an affluent society like ours. And innocent people should be able to feel safe in the knowledge that police and courts will take their well being seriously. Your home should not become your prison.

I will leave my observations at that for now though I obviously could say a lot more. I just hope that after fourteen months of misery for my constituent and his family my involvement can finally stir the authorities into ensuring the best outcome for all involved. Then again; as a contact in the police said to me in confidence. Lenny Harper was on about these types of weapon arsenals and worse ages ago – yet was regularly mocked by our Establishment politicians for his concerns.

Now where have we heard that sentiment before?

MY SECOND ORAL QUESTION IS TO THE CHIEF MINISTER:

“Will the Chief Minister advise the Assembly as to whether the former Minister for External Relations was informed about the raid on the German Consul's home last year and, if not, why not?”

Now here’s another truly fascinating matter. What is going on with this?

As you heard at the end of last month Senator Le Marquand really got a bit tetchy about me asking him about this. No, I don’t want to be interfering in ‘live’ police matters for the sake of it. I’ll leave that to my ex-colleagues Ben and Jimmy and current ones like Sean. But this incident didn’t happen just a few days ago. It happened while former Chief Minister Terry Le Sueur was still on the throne”

So why is it taking so long to resolve and for the public be quite rightly informed as to what went down? Because – and I have a chronology of events leading up to this – the way the operation was undertaken was one great big …..

Now, of course, the police have to investigate complaints and concerns. And, as a supporter of good policing I believe that most times they will do a good job in what are often very difficult circumstances. But when mistakes are made they should be acknowledged.

After all, let me assure readers that if this had happened under Graham Power letters would be being typed up on several different computers and cut and pasted together the very next day. More than half-a-dozen of our Establishment Party ‘senior’ political leaders knew about this incident according to my information - but have done nothing to see that it is put right.

Yet I also have it on good authority that one man who very definitely should have known – as it was technically a ‘diplomatic incident’ apparently did not. Why?

As with the first question I know even before the Sitting that the answers that I will get will be ‘economic’ or downright evasive to the point where I will have to be back at the next Sitting. Nevertheless, out of fairness to all involved the pressure has to be kept on so that neither good or bad/justifiable or unjustifiable can be swept under the carpet.

The truth needs to be dragged out into the open on this incident too. The people at the centre want this so what’s stopping us?

MY WRITTEN FIVE QUESTIONS FOR 21ST FEBRUARY


As indicated I will hopefully be doing a post on the casino question early next week. But I list it along with the other written questions for reader’s information.

QUESTION TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MINISTER:

“Following the decision to proceed with moves to bring in revenues from the online gambling market, will the Minister advise whether or not he and his Department are giving consideration to the possibility of a casino being developed in the island and will he further advise what research, if any, has been undertaken to date on the potential revenue that might be forthcoming in the event of a casino being allowed to operate in the Island; and where any official research/reports may be located by States members?”

QUESTION ONE TO THE HOME AFFAIRS MINISTER:


This is being asked in the light of the completely misleading answer given at the last States Sitting – in the hope that by persistence we can finally put another piece of long-standing spin to bed. Just like the ESC Scrutiny Sub-Panel did with the garbage that everything Power and Harper did was unjustified; the money all ‘wasted’ and 50% of the said £7.5 million actually spent after they had left service apparently down to them.

As I have said so many time spin like this will always get found out in the end. But more on that theme later…


“Will the Minister provide for members a complete account in relation to the retirement date of the former Chief Officer of Police, setting out in particular –

i)    when he was first due to retire;

ii)    what extensions and reductions there were to this initial retirement date, and for each extension/reduction, the date of the request, details of who requested it and the grounds for the request;

iii)    what further retirement dates there were as a result of these extensions or reductions?”

QUESTION TWO TO THE HOME AFFAIRS MINISTER:


Has the Home Affairs Minister bought himself a bottle of Tippex yet? That’s all he needs – I know!

“Will the Minister inform members whether he is planning to publish the following documents and, if so, provide members with the target date for publication in each case –

i)    the statement made to the Wiltshire Police by the former Chief Officer of Police in relation to the handling of the historic abuse enquiry (Operation Haven);

ii)    the report by Matt Tapp Associates;

iii)    the letter from the then Deputy Chief Officer of Police to the then Chief Executive in November 2008;

iv)    the “Interim Report” of the Metropolitan Police into the review of the historic abuse enquiry which arrived in Jersey on 10th November 2008?”

QUESTION ONE TO THE CHIEF MINISTER:

“Further to the answer given on 31st January 2012 by the Minister for Home Affairs that the then Chief Executive “discovered that Mr. Tapp was very concerned in relation to the press aspects of the handling of the [historic abuse] case” and that he became aware that Mr. Tapp was available to do work for the Chief Executive as he had just been advised his services were not required by the Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police, will the Chief Minister outline for Members exactly how this “discovery” by the Chief Executive took place?”

QUESTION TWO TO THE CHIEF MINISTER:

“Further to the answer given by the then Chief Minister on 19th October 2010 (Hansard 2.2.1) in which he stated that he was happy to research the records given to Mr. Napier and to then give ‘chapter and verse’ to the Deputy of St. Mary in relation to the details of any formal meetings with the former Chief Officer of Police by the people involved in his suspension to talk to him about the concerns that had been raised and to elicit his response, would the Chief Minister now undertake to make this information available to all members?”

So there we have it…

Look out for lots of fake posts from Jon, Alan, Dave, Dee, Dozy, Beaky, Mick and Titch (not to mention a hundred other of the troll’s aliases saying the usual guff like “but no one is interested!” I might even let a few through for a laugh, eh ‘Alan’? But the fact is, fortunately, that many decent, ordinary people - people who genuinely care about justice, truth and democracy DO care.

And no amount of abuse from trolls and thugs; or even Senator Sir Philip Bailhache misguidedly trying to scupper the ‘Historic’ Abuse scandal Committee of Enquiry behind the scenes is going to change that. However long it takes.

This is a war for the truth – a fundamental aspect of political democracy.

This is a war of attrition - We are in it for the long haul.

Get used to it.

WHICH BRINGS ME NEATLY TO THIS…

Over recent months in particular, people like Rico Sorda and Team Voice have put compelling and regularly damning evidence in front of politicians. They are not right all of the time, of course, no one is.

But by chipping away they have, inch-by-inch, shown that all too many things relating to both the denigrating of the ‘Historic’ Abuse Enquiry and the suspension of former Chief of Police Graham Power need a whole lot of explaining. And explaining to a far higher power than friends and colleagues scrutinizing themselves.

However, just as the Scrutiny investigation that I undertook with Deputies Le Herissier and Wimberley was to all intents and purposes deliberately buried by establishment figures – politicians, media and others - who did not want to face the unpalatable truth I would imagine Rico Sorda and those at Team Voice perhaps may well be feeling the same sort of frustration that we did.

After all, we knew we had uncovered so much. Yet it seemed that no matter what we uncovered those who really should know better just wouldn’t listen. They didn’t want to listen. They didn’t want the inaccuracies and even downright lies spun to the public over a period of years undermined. Why do I write this now?

For no reason other than to remind those individuals, should they need it, not to be discouraged. The work they have done has been sterling. Indeed, that they have shown ‘professional’ journalists what it truly means to be ‘investigative’ – yet are still laughably barred from filming a Scrutiny now slipping rapidly into the Executive-cuddly and thus completely ineffective secrecy beloved of the Establishment – while the Mainstream Media who have failed to report so much are - should be worn as a badge of honour.

I repeat. They should not get downhearted. But instead remind themselves that the truth will out eventually. It always does no matter how long the wait. As for those ‘senior’ figures who either have something very dark to hide; or those who just haven’t had the political ‘testicular fortitude’ to stand up to those bullying them into an unholy alliance of silence…

They should remember that what goes around comes eventually comes around. When it does for all of those who have taken the threats and insults in trying to do the right thing it will be all the sweeter.

Keep the Faith

Trevor

84 comments:

  1. Trevor.

    Once more, a very informative and researched Blog. As a politician you should not be having to ask the questions that you do, or even exposing what you do. The questions you are forced to ask is just a damming indictment on the "Jersey Way" and the State Media.

    You have seen what happens to politicians who dare question "The Jersey Way" and represent their electorate are you prepared for the consequences?

    Speaking of which, although I've not seen it yet, I ve just been told that State Television have just "done a number" on you and completely misrepresented your question regarding the weapons...............What was I saying about being prepared for the consequences?

    ReplyDelete
  2. The report on the Channel Television site is very misleading and a lot of what you have written was not mentioned. I just do not understand the need for anyone to have firearms in their homes in any case and certainly not big quantities of them. If you are a member of a gun club why cannot the firearms be held securely there?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I will make some comments regarding the casino idea. I used to play a lot of online poker because I like poker and it is easy to do so online than to organise a night of it. You can, these days just book a table online for your mates and dont have to clean up all the beer cans the next day!

    Lately, I am in two minds of the whole Casino idea. At first I thought brilliant, they will be able to host poker tournaments which being as it is still a big thing entice people over for a weekend or something to get involved. I was thinking on the terms that I could enjoy the live tournaments and tourism would enjoy the income when the players come to stay.

    On the otherhand though there is something I have noticed when going to so called casinos in France or even the Isle of Man (I would add its been a long time since i went to Isle of Man Casino so may have changed). The thing I noticed is that many of these casinos are just a couple of black jack tables and a load of fruit machines and that if that is what they stick to operating they turn out a pile of rubbish. Basically, just somewhere to have another drink and maybe pull the arm of a fruit machine. Oh you can also watch sports but you can do that in most pubs here anyway. In respect of what I was hoping might happen regarding poker tournaments well they can be done anywhere providing a license is granted, if it needs to be that is.

    So, whilst a year or two ago I was all up for a Casino I actually dont see the point of one now. I doubt it will ever be a Binions or some other Las Vegas type venue as I cant see it lasting as a business venture. It will be fun to start with then just end up with a few people popping in now and again unless say some tournament is going on, and you cant do a tournamnt every day of the year.

    Yep, my tune has changed and before when I would have said Casino yes, I know find myself agreeing with the CasiNO crowd!

    I dont see a problem with allowing online poker hosting etc sites basing their servers here if it provides jobs because they may as well be hosted somewhere but Jersey has well missed that boat and its embarassing listening to our politicians attempt to entice them now. Utter fools who couldnt see the wood for the trees.

    As for the some of your questions, I give my honest opinion. You will get no proper answers, the people you question will be hoping you will not be elected next time. And, if you do then they will probably do the same again until the elections after that, and if you get eleceted again........I assume you know what I am alluding to. Never the less I am sure all your readers and me included are happy to know lessons have been learned but won't be included in the curriculum!

    ReplyDelete
  4. The Mainstream Media Monitor17 February 2012 at 19:31:00 GMT

    WOW Deputy - have you been shafted by Channel TV on the 6 o'clock news. Nothing about petrol bombs and people being attacked in their own homes.

    The story just made it sound like you were going on about the local gun society. I wouldn't have supported you on that approach myself.

    But on what you have written here - 100%! I hope you get an apology from CTV at the very least. Main Stream Media - don't they make you proud of our lovely little island?

    Not.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hello.Two quick things.

    Firstly, as you can see I am still having problems with the time settings even though these are set correctly.

    Given the other 'issues' I touched on yesterday I am having someone come in especially to look at all of this again tomorrow afternoon. Can't say too much just now due to the nature of what has been going on...

    Secondly, yes - the Channel News story.

    I am indeed fuming. As people have been in touch with me say, both web story and TV totally mislead the ful facts of the story.This is not about responsible, regulated people enjoying their sport of shooting and I made that very clear in what was actually an interview of around FIVE MINUTES!

    This, as people can see from the post above, is about people who are not just a danger to others but a danger to themselves; need help, yet don't get it and are left in a house with weapons as potentially leathal and as wholly unjustified as PETROL BOMBS!

    And just as bad the police kept this information from people living next door!

    Channel used a very brief clip of me talking about a real case where a couple ARE living in fear. But the impression the edited report gave was that this was simply due to a neighbour having a legit firearm. Entirely misleading.

    No mention of the couple having been attacked already and then finding out the person who had attacked them had had weapons far more dangerous and was back at home with them being none the wiser to the extent of the potential risk.

    To say that I am fuming is an understatement. I have told Channel that if this is not corrected I will make both a formal complaint to the TV standards and be making a statement in the House next week. Just tweaking the story and putting it out at 10.35pm when hardly anyone will see it is not good enough.

    The question now is: was this just due to incredibly sloopy editing? Or was it yet another example of the MSM doing the Establishment Party's dirsty work for them? Answers on a postcard please!

    I really hope that I can trust Mr. Blakely who interviewed me but didn't oversee the edit to put this right...

    Keep the Faith

    Trevor

    * A quick final thought.

    With regard to the tip-offs that the sad troll has already been blowing a gasket with cascades of fake posts on Channel On Line slating me in a dozen different names (so what is new?)

    This type of thing would happen whatever someone like me says. The troll is just a very sad, embittered social inadequate as we all know. But the truth is - and I have to say this to readers - I WOULD likely criticise me if the story Channel presented was actually true!

    Fortunately it is not and the story above proves that.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi Deputy Pitman.

    Thank you for the mention. I have added an interview with Constable Crowcroft to my latest posting that he gave on November 12th 2009 it is a must watch. He gets it bang on. Now he has a touch of the Bailhache for which the cure is simply lacking.

    http://ricosorda.blogspot.com/2012/02/operation-end-game-should-i-stop.html

    Good solid questions in for the forthcoming States sitting

    rs

    ReplyDelete
  7. Trevor.

    Not one politician who has been interviewed by VFC have EVER accused us of unfair editing or misrepresenting them.......not one.......never.

    The State Media are regularly accused of this, yet they still get given interviews, and are given preferential treatment when it comes to filming "public" Scrutiny Hearings etc.

    Thankfully more politicians are beginning to realise the benefits of Citizen Media where they are not just given a 30 second soundbite to fit the agenda of the editor.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Good questions once again Trevor. I have to say that I also found the report on Channel Television infuriating. You wouldn't even know it was the same story as this.

    An unfortunate error by our esteemed media? I doubt it I'm afraid. They have stitched you up because you are now the Great white hope if you don't mind me using the term. You have more balls then a barrel of lions and you ask the questions 95 per cent of our members would not go near.

    What I'm saying is you are a marked man. Watch your back and hang on in there. If the Rankine Empire does not apologise for their story you really should make a complaint just to flag this up.

    Good luck

    ReplyDelete
  9. Watched CTV and laughed having read this. They stiched you up like a kipper. If it makes you feel better they seem to have tried to make it a bit less obviously a stich up on the late news.

    ReplyDelete
  10. JTM (AKA Jersey Troll Muppet)18 February 2012 at 01:21:00 GMT

    Today I have mainly been making multiple bogus posts to Channel On Line TV attacking a politician I hate......

    Tommorrow I will be drying my used tea bags on the radiator......

    Being a Saturday as a special treat I may later pick my nose......

    Its a busy old life trolling.

    ReplyDelete
  11. deputy having read your blog i still do not see why exposing licence holders names would have any bearing on this case ,the ball bearings probably were fired from a high power catapult not a gun . the petrol bomb how do you police this ? knives swords ? same problem . as a firearm license holder for close to 30 years none of the above would be on ticket anyway . i feel for the couple concerned but cannot see this as a solution to the problem . i will be listening with interest to the question in the states .

    ReplyDelete
  12. Im afraid true to form youll get nothing out of le marquand at the next question time, he will have rehearsed the questions with thoes who pull his strings,he has been briefed to worm his way out as usuall, what a compleat waste of space he is,on the other hand he may well pull a sickie.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Trevor.

    Guernsey has a newspaper that campaigns for victims/survivors of Child Abuse and not the PERPETRATORS OF IT

    ReplyDelete
  14. 'Trev'

    I'm afraid that like Channel TV you miss the point. The whole issue is not about someone owning a single registered gun and keeping it at home.

    The issue, which was made quite clear to Channel, is about this.

    When dangerous incidents have taken place, police and courts have already failed (as they did in this case)that those innocent parties who have suffered should at least be advised that they now have an unstable individual next door to them, clearly not getting the help that they should, and where very deadly weapons have been found upon police search.

    I am sorry but if you do not think that ordinary law-abiding taxpayers deserve this much consideration then we are unlikely to agree on much.

    Of course, the real fault here with this story lies with the sloppy third rate editing of a 'reporter' with a track record of not doing his research.

    Just seek out his interview with me on the extensive findings of the ESC Scrutiny into the BDO review that I Chaired.

    ReplyDelete
  15. sorry but your attitude to respondents on channel was gross , if you think you can warn people about someone having bombs then you need to get in touch with the uk and their anti terrorist div ,i am sure they would love to know how . it still beggars belief why firearms were brought into it ,i suppose because we are licensed .swords, knives,ball bearing and bombs are not . calling us trolls does you no favours either as most were genuine . as for law abiding, so are we thats why we have a license

    ReplyDelete
  16. The way CTV have misrepresented you but more importantly this important issue just shows how useless and/or corrupt our local accredited media really are. You have to ask how complete pish like "should guns be registered" was even connected to what you are concerned about. Deliberate misrepresentation I think so definitely.

    As for some of the alleged comments on Channel's website they are so obviously fake they are laughable. When you see someone who would be commenting on the merits of the story actually trying to bring your wife into this it says it all. Many were also so childish and rude they have jtm written all over them.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Hi

    Thanks to people for the comments and phone calls on this. I am glad people are checking out the very bad piece of reporting on Channel and then comparing it with the story here. Most of all that they can see the difference.

    How did utter guff about me apparently wanting to have a new register for guns get to take over the story? Perhaps people should phone in to Channel and ask them directly?

    Better still ask Mark McQuillam (sorry if I have his surname spelt wrongly) how he managed to butcher a clear and lehgthy interview into what went out.

    Eric Blakley - who I have always had a lot of respect for ddid promise to phone be back and get the whole story corrected by 8.00pm that night. He did not.

    I do know why this story is not appreciated by some in Establishment Party circles. I didn't want to risk the focus being taken away from what my constituents have been going through.

    But what has transpired has left me little choice but to bring this up in the States on Tuesday. I'll leave it at that for now.

    Trolls? Or rather one ridiculous troll? Not worth saying any more at present. People who post or read regularly can spot his work from a 110 paces.

    Don't get annoyed by him just laugh. He is an inadequate. At least attacking me means he isn't threatening vulnerable people who might be deeply upset by his twisted behaviour.

    ReplyDelete
  18. 'Trev'

    Sorry, mate but cannot agree with your first point. Though I respect your right to hold it.Maybe you should answer me one thing though which leaves me curious.

    You say that 'most' comments on Channel were 'genuine'. What I would ask is this.

    I can tell when posts are almost certainly fake and just a certain person out to cause trouble simply due to the hundreds of stupid, badly written and abusive threats that I have on file. This and close study of writing style which has long been a sort of amateur interest.

    But due to the very serious nature of many of these I also took the trouble to bring in a person to examine these. They may well likely be used in the future as sources of posts and emails can also be traced and now have been by this lady who specializes in this field.

    My question to you though would be how do you know that 'most' were genuine? A funny thing to say you have to agree?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hi Trevor perhaps you are right about the number as i am no expert,i know mine was genuine . a little fact i know is and was always told to me is .if a man goes on the street with a replica gun and waves it about he gets done for causing a disturbance ,if a firearm license holder does it he gets done for a firearm offence . not sure how true this is but that is what i have been told . perhaps this is why the person was never charged .as i am retired i will listen on tuesday

      Delete
  19. I meant to add that a lady, Angie, who phoned earlier made a very good suggestion to see just how willing Channel are to correct their story.

    She suggested that I talk to my constituents and see if Channel would like to interview one of them jointly with me to see what this story is really all about.

    A very good idea, Angie, in thinking about it and one I think that I will take up. Thanks.

    It does just show how important it is that media are fair and accurate in their reporting. Earlier I had one of my political colleagues e-mail me. He had totally disagreed with me on the strength of what he had seen in the Channel story. But when I gave him the correct information he completely agreed - even though we are hardly political 'comrades'!

    ReplyDelete
  20. Trevor

    As you are on line tonight and might be able to respond straightaway can I ask that you take up this issue of a casino? I know you only have a question in not a proposition but would you consider this? We should have made this move years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Hello Anonymous.

    Yes, I am on line but planning to go to bed any minute!

    In answer to your question I would say that I need to do a little more research. I have been doing some over the past couple of weeks but want to do more.

    The reasons most people oppose casinos is based on religous beliefs. This and fear of a rise in crime.

    The moral issue is one I respect, however, as I said in another interview done with Channel yesterday (probably be twisted beyond recogition) the fact that we have since committed big time to gambling on line really undermines such objections from a government perspective.

    The rise in crime concern is also one that I have been looking into and actually isn't as clear cut as one might expect.

    I'll leave it at that for now Anonymous but as you may have picked up on above in the original post I do plan to do an at length piece on this fairly soon. Hopefully I can give you more of an answer then.

    Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Looks like Mark Mc Quillan might be going after his own award.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Anonymous

    Thanks for the link on interent trolls. How spot-on. How appropriate. Maybe you could forward it on to all States Members and also the Mainstream Media as well?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Nothing to do with this subject matter, but...

    Noticing that amongst my world-wide audience Dominica is included - much to my surprise - can I ask if one of these readers happens to be 'G' please get in touch!

    And troll - don't bother getting on to your Rick Wakeman array of 110 x IT keyboards for a bit of mischief - there will be a test to pass!

    Trevor

    ReplyDelete
  25. Are you going to be bringing a statement to the house on Tuesday in respect of the abysmal reporting of CTV?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Busy boy again. You were on the dreaded CTV talking about the casino issue. Should have been put in place years ago IMHO.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I thought twice about publishing this and wasn't at first to be honest.

    But upon reflection, as this had been a thought after the shock of seeing a report that bore little resemblance to the true and full picture of what I had spoken about, the answer to your question is:

    quite likley.

    Having been in touch with my constituents I am also going to be giving Channel the opportunity to interview both them and me together on the reality of this problem. One would hope they would take up the opportunity...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ........but will they? Pigs and flying spring to mind. This is just a prime example of how the accredited media misrepresent and misinform the public. Cherry pick and distort.

      This is a very disturbing matter, and I am sure that even if only 10% of the responses are from genuine commenters on the CTV blog, I am damned sure if they were living in such a situation it would be of great concern to them. However, as it seems to be the case so much in Jersey, if it is someone else's problem, why bother about it?

      Are you able to say under whose watch this situation first arose, Mr Bowron (the chosen one) or Mr Warcup (the disgraced one)? Regardless, it should not be ongoing.

      Keep up the good work Trevor.

      Delete
  28. Just a brief message to tell readers that tomorrow I may well reproduce an example of the ill-informed abuse that doing this job sometimes leads to a politician being sent. In this instance via e-mail.

    Indeed, another example of how damaging third rate reporting like Channel's on the issue of the petrol bombs story can be. At least this 'gentleman' (I use the term loosely) had the backbone to put his name to it.

    Having replied and pointed out in no uncertain terms that he was talking out of the seat of his pants I will first wait to see what response I get.

    However, remembering that some years ago this buffoon was also sending rants to Shona I doubt there is much hope of him having the backbone to hold his hands up to his mistake.

    So come on Tony let's see what you are made of...

    ReplyDelete
  29. It is no use sitting there and just ignoring the fact that Senator Bailhache is leading a strong attempt to reduce our elected reps from 51 to 42.
    Reading this blog is not enough.
    This Tuesday at 7pm the Parish of St Clement is called to consider the whole fiasco of the Electoral Commission and the role of the PPC and to vote on Deputy Le Herissier's attempt to save the day. Only voters of St Clement can vote but anybody can attend.

    A similar meeting has been called for St Helier (date to be confirmed) but the whole point is that the public should be able to express their views BEFORE yet another nail is driven into the democracy coffin.

    ReplyDelete
  30. I hope to go along to the meeting at St. Clement and would recommend that anyone else who can also do so.

    If readers want to do somthing else constructive then they should consider phoning Channel TV to further complain about the total misrepresentation of the above story regarding petrol bombs.

    I have been contacted by a number of people today who have told me that their attempted posts calling on Channel to correct the story butchered by Mark McQuillan have been blocked for some reason.

    I can confirm that when I last checked they had even blocked a second post from me clarifying some of their inaccuracies! Why?

    The troll has also obviously been having a great time doing his Rick Wakeman impressions; but as one lady told me it seems very strange that so many posts Channel are allowing through are both so similar and containing abuse that has little or nothing to do with the story.

    I have contacted Channel to pass this on and to ask them to interview my constituen to actually show what the real story was about before sloppy or dodgy journalism made it in to something else.

    We shall see what happens. If a genuine mistake I'm sure that they will correct it. Should they not then as suggested by a number of callers who had seen the real story on here I will make an official complaint to the Standards watch dog.

    I note they did alter the late news version slightly yet their website story remains as inaccurate and misleading as ever. Hopefully in the debaate tomorrow I can get some of this across.

    A final point.

    It seems everbody's least favourite social inadequate troll wants to play hard ball?

    All I can say is: Troll...GAME ON!

    ReplyDelete
  31. I read your question here on the blog and then double-checked on the Order paper for tomorrow on the States Web-site. It doesn't say anything about introducing any kind of "gun register" that neighbours can look at if concerned. It only asks what right people have to information. Where did this nasty and very misleading bit of spin come from Trevor?

    ReplyDelete
  32. Thanks anonymous - that was a quick response! You are quite right of course. My question calls for no such thing.

    Sadly I even had a gentleman from the gun club contact me today still under the false impression you desribe. Where did it come from?

    Sensationalist journalism for sure. Sloppy journalism or rather sloppy editing for sure.

    Deliberate?

    Well, I'll wait and see if this is corrected before I make a final decision on this but I know what I am beginning to think!

    Incidentally, I meant to add that my constituent and I will be giving Channel an interview now on Thursday latest. Unless it gets cancelled for some strange reason...

    ReplyDelete
  33. Message for Ian

    Sorry I forgot to call you about your story. Will do so in the next day or two.

    Trevor

    ReplyDelete
  34. A casino would do no good for Jersey's reputation, it would just solidify opinion that we're all about money, money, money.

    What possible justification would there be for "high class gambling" which would mean another bunch of mafia would just muscle in and fleece the gullible?

    ReplyDelete
  35. But we ARE about money, money, money! At least a casino would give some peasants a chance to make a few bob - or at least form a mafia to oust the rich b*****s!

    ReplyDelete
  36. Deputy Pitman

    I listened to the debate today. Thank you for clarifying that your question was not in any way about responsible, considerate gun owners. I fully support what you are saying about nutters with petrol bombs and the like now I understand the issue. What are the police doing for Heaven's sake? I think Channel television's story was incredibly misleading. Don't worry about the daft comments on Channel either. They have the death threat merchant written all over most of them. Time Channel started checking some iPs.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Today I have mainly been spreading lies on Channelonline....

    Tomorrow I will be pretending to be the agreived party.

    ReplyDelete
  38. How thick is Le Marquand? Surely the clue should have been in reading your question?

    The term 'guns' was not mentioned. Is he and Channel in league or are they both just stupid?

    I'm a gun licence holder all legal and hunky do and I could see that you were not pushing for something that is already there.

    His comments in trying to dismiss petrol bombs in the hands of an ill person left me speechless. The man is a first class idiot and should resign.

    But he won't.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Having listened to Ian Le Marquand's flippant and vague answers to your questions on the subject of the concerns of your constituent regarding the cache of weapons his neighbour seems to be hoarding, I can only say, heaven help us all with this man in charge of Home Affairs, or indeed anything at all!

    ReplyDelete
  40. CTV story still unchanged on the web Trevor and my comment pulling them up for their rotten reporting is still unpublished.

    Can the 'accredited media' ever admit when they are wrong? I bet they would change a story if Bailache or Le Marquand asked them to because it was wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  41. To the sad individual who possted attacking Rico Sorda and Voiceforchildren...

    Do you ever learn?

    Take out the swear words/insults and I'll be happy to consider the post.

    Not difficult really. Is it?

    ReplyDelete
  42. BAILHACHE 'MANDATE' BUBBLE BURSTS ON FIRST TESTING!

    Well, well, so much for Senator Philip Bailhache and his desperate spin that he has a mandate to hijack the Independent Electoral Commission.

    There was a chance to test this nonsense tonight with a Parish Assembly beiing asked to send a message to their Constable, two Deputies and the ten Senators who all in the Parish could vote for in either:

    supporting or rejecting Deputy Roy Le Heriisier's amendment to take it back to the original, fully independent commission voted for by the States last March.

    Guess what?

    Not one voted against. That's right ZERO support for the Bailhache bluster.

    Although there were around 50 interested souls including a few politicians there with the event having been advertised in the JEP and media the St. Clement folk voting went:

    16 x in support of Independence

    11 x abstaining

    0 x voting against or in support of allowing any politicians to be involved.

    Not a huge number, of course, but a stark contrast to the rubbish neing spun by Senator Bailhache and his Establisshment Party supporters at the JEP etc.

    A general feeling of bemusement semed to be the order of the day as to why on earth had the States ever deemed to bow to Bailhache and go back over already covered ground.

    Actually wonder if the JEP will even report it or other mainstream media for that matter? No, they'll probably wait until one can be stacked to rig a vote to achieve the 'message'the anti-democracy lobby want.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Trevor.

    That was a maximum of 10 abstaining, not 11. One person, that we know of (there could have been more) thought he had to abstain as he wasn't a parishioner.

    Interesting our new deputy Pinel never spoke and abstained. One has a feeling she is Ann Dupre mark 2.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Trevor.

    1/If your lucky 3 months.
    2/The Chief Minister is dealing with this one.
    3/No.
    4/No.

    Are you happy with these four unsatifactory answers to your four perfectly reasonable questions?

    ReplyDelete
  45. No wonder Sir Humphrey wouldn't risk showing his smug mug!If this man had any class he would drop this arrogant farce.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Team Voice

    Thanks for correcting me.

    I must admit I had it at 10 and also had the 'fors' at 17 as did Constable Norman at first.

    It just took them so long to ask other people to help count that a few older people were starting to put their hands down out of having had them up for so long.

    Good to see a cross section of politicians turn up too; different political views but all agreeing that politicians should be kept clear of this so that the Commission can do its work without Bailhache's already decided conclusions.

    Well done to the St. Clement folk who organised it.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Hi Deputy.

    Just put up the Audio from today's Question time. You & your Reader's can Listen HERE

    ReplyDelete
  48. With reference to the Jersey Way post you have just put up. I can tell readers the Jersey Way is a must listen for antone who wants to know just how much ILM is losing it.

    But what a prat ILM made of himself yesterday all round. Unprepared - unless you count being ready to answer a question on guns that wasn't even being asked - and childishy petulent in his attitude to you. Yet the jep just can't bring themselves to criticise him can they.

    You are also dead right he does have a reputation for being incompetent and it is well merited. He has one for not being intersted in facts and truth either as all the victims of abuse and Power and Harper know.

    To think he genuinely thought that he should be our CM! Sometimes he sounds like his IQ must be almost as low as Jon's Nah, that can't be possible, can it?

    ReplyDelete
  49. A question for readers.

    Where were the JEP, Channel Television, BBC TV & Radio and Radio 103 at last night's Sr. Clement Parish Assembly to debate the Electoral Commission?

    I mean, you would have thought it a 'must attend' if only to see Senator Philip Bailhache's much-spun claim that he has a mandate to hijack the commission confirmed.

    Of course, confirmed it wasn't. And maybe that is the clue to the answer?

    Still, answers in a post or on a postcard. The best, most imaginative one will win a prize.

    Trevor

    ReplyDelete
  50. Jason The Minger aka JTM22 February 2012 at 22:29:00 GMT

    Today I have mainly been crying....

    I have run out of different false names with which to post attacks on Progressive States Members on the internet.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Hi again

    This evening Deputies Roy Le Herissier, Montford Tadier and I had a very pleasant and informative meeting with Professor Adrian Lee from Plymouth University.

    This followed on from an earlier meeting open to all States Members regarding electoral law and the forthcoming Commission.

    I may write a more detailed post about this later but a few very interesting points are worth mentioning here now.

    One was the fact that the real barrier to us ever getting a balanced and fair to all Islanders (wherever they may live) system of representation was the issue of retaining the Constables!

    Wonder if anyone ever told poor old Sir Philip?

    Indeed, so long as we keep trying to fit square pegs into round holes by coming up with a 'new' system that retains the position of Constables (and this has nothing to do with any personalities involved) a fair system will NEVER be forthcoming or achievable.

    When will some ever face up to this?

    The answer, of course, is that some like Sir Philip don't want to recognise this fact: simply because they don't actually want a fair system at all. They want to hang on to power.

    The other issue that came up which I will mention here briefly was regarding the joke law of A39A.

    This was the 'law' that stopped candidates from assisting constituents to complete application forms requesting that they be registered for a postal vote.

    It was also the law that was used to prosecute - I should say persecute really - Deputies Southern and Shona Pitman for this terrible 'crime' whilst being completely ignored when breached by Establishment candidates.

    Indeed, as readers will recall Police documents reveal that two non-JDA individuals breached this A39A in the very SAME St. Helier No. 2 District as Southern and Pitman - but were NOT taken to court. As, indeed, others in different parishes/districts were also not prosecuted.

    The point is, as the Professor confirmed, this morally corrupt, discriminating and non-Human Right compliant piece of 'Law' exists NOWHERE in the known world. Funny that...

    And yet Senator Bailhache tried to get Southern blocked from sitting on a PPC Sub-Committe because of it!

    Pathetic, indeed, anybody would think Southern's 'offence' was of the same serious, sick, cowardly and malicious type that saw Jon Haworth in court and found guilty in March 2011!

    Keep the Faith

    Trevor

    ReplyDelete
  52. Deputies Southern and Shona Pitman were fined £12,000.00 between them and why you keep on bringing this up over and over again can't be doing either of them any favours because many constituents and candidates in Number 2 are still angry about it.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Just put the above up to show an example of how sad the troll is. Still, does not have as many spelling mistakes and inane abuse as most of the troll's posts so perhaps he wasn't quite as drunk as usual?

    Does not really need any comment - other than to say: strange how with all of this 'anger' both Shona and Geoff were easily re-elected with Shona's vote being higher than ever? No doubt because she gave her constituents a detailed breakdown of the truth to counter Bryan's sad and desperate smear campaign.

    With regards to a second post that I couldn't use because of the standard deranged and abusive rant...

    In answer to the question police documents reveal that Deputy Geoff Southern was originally falsely charged with an offence committed by another candidate having a five letter name beginning with an 'A'. The name is quite clearly typed on the witness statement.

    A second individual in St. Helier No. 2 is also revealed in further documentation; this one being desribed as having a three letter name beginning with the letter 'R' and having a beard.

    Neither were in the JDA. Neither were taken to court or prosecuted...

    COLD, HARD FACTS - GET OVER IT!

    ReplyDelete
  54. Good day.

    Can someone remind us of what Jon Haworth's sentence was please? It surely must have been much, much stiffer than that given to Deputies Shona Pitman and Geoff Southern given its horrible, thuggish nature?

    After all even without the hypocrisy of only selected candidates being taken to court while others were not, the Deputies were basically punished for helping constituents who needed that help.

    Mr. Haworth's offence in contrast related to threatening behaviour that was described as sinister and evil.

    Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Protect our women folk from freaks23 February 2012 at 17:25:00 GMT

    Yeah the Haworth case is a very good example of how things are really warped in Jersey. Wasn't there a tape of this truly creepy and horrific incident doing the rounds on youtube a while back? Threats that a family would be killed, wasn't it? Thankfully the thug must have been so tanked up and plain thicko he gave away his identity! How low and disgusting can you get? Surely would have been a prison sentence in a functioning democracy?

    ReplyDelete
  56. Looked up the answer to the Haworth question on the JEP website. These short quotes are the basics of the JEP report of the case. Tuesday 29th March 2011.

    "Jonathan Sharrock Haworth (40)...

    A man who made a 'sinister and evil' phone call to the family housing former Senator Stuart Syvret...

    He was bound over for six months, was fined £200 and was ordered to pay his victim - Mr Syvret's landlord - £200 after admitting making the menacing call on 11 March."

    What a revolting little thug. What a coward. What a joke of a sentence.

    ReplyDelete
  57. I would love to see you say all this to his face!

    Then again I very much doubt Jon could give a flying about you going on about this case because it’s old and irrelevant.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Anonymous. Or can I call you Jon too?

    How many posts is that sent today? 15, 16? More? Is this the first one without a swear word? Think it is.

    Now I can't think why,but your post reminds of that scene in Lord of the Rings when Gollum is arguing with 'himself'.

    But if you are able to persuade 'him' to crawl out from under his stone into the real world I would be most delighted to do so.

    As for the sickening case being 'old and irrelevant'??? A bit of clutching at straws, pathetic denial or very sad delusion I think most decent people would say.

    For what the posters above have written in is perfectly true. Which is why I have let the comments through. Simples.

    Something which, of course, marks this blog as being so very different from the pro-concealment of child abuse disgrace that was the Farce hate blog.

    But wishing to get back to politics and not dwell any longer on this low life I will only add the question:

    what is it that makes the trolls of this world get into an excited frenzy of spreading lies about other people; and trying to bully them - yet cry like a baby theemselves when those people stand up to their thuggish behaviour?

    I guess at the end of the day it is just plain old 'yellow-stripe-down-the-back'syndrome. This and being wholly inadequate.

    Still, if sending these endless, childishly insulting posts to me keep more vulnerable people from being picked on then that is a good thing. With all of the other various evidence now being collated by a number people in the long run it is also actually very, very helpful.

    Yes, the clock is indeed ticking for the troll...

    But enough about the Irrelevant One.

    A new post will be up on Saturday. Interesting meetings today, both with constituents who have been suffering such bullying and intimidation first-hand; and with the PPC Sub-Committee looking into Standing Orders and Internal Procedures.

    Maybe it was because a couple of us were there today who were also at the St. Clement parish Assembly, but Senator Bailhache (who is also on this Sub-Committee) didn't seem to want to talk about his attempt to hijack the independent Electoral Commission at all. I wonder why?

    Roll on March 6th!

    ReplyDelete
  59. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  60. So the troll is even calling himself Alal Marriot now according to an e-mail he sent me.

    Not very quick our troll as we pointed out to him this very fact only ten days ago. Sad, very sad. And making more threats already about smears on what normal people would call the pro-paedophile Farce!

    When will the police and Data Protection do their jobs and sort these petty criminal thugs out?

    Having been contacted by many who have been bullied by this inadequate and the cowards who support him I would simply advise anyone to contact the police and Data Protection BUT also to contact ME in to make sure it isn't swept under the carpet again.

    Regards.

    Trevor

    ReplyDelete
  61. Apologies for anyone taking offence to the language in the above troll threat sent to me.

    I publish it only to show the bottom of the barrel inadequacy evident - and also to see if our Police/Data Protection/Attorney General actually ever do anything about such behaviour.

    Over to you Mike,Emma and Tim. Yes, we are watching...

    ReplyDelete
  62. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Just to say the post I put up to show people the sort of low life trash we are dealing with has now been removed. It has done its job and the original forwarded on to the necessary people.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Look on the bright side Deputy. Having been warned by a Magistrate that if he offended again his whole wretched past activity would be opened up again it can only be a matter of time.

    ReplyDelete
  65. And you believe what that magistrate said???

    Wakey Wakey Sheeple!!!

    ReplyDelete
  66. Shall you and Shona be attending the St Helier special Assembly on Wednesday 29th February to discuss the Electoral Commission and Deputy Le Herissier's Amendment?
    I think that a few words of leadership on this most important matter would be appreciated here and on other blogs and at the meeting on the night.
    Shall all St Helier Deputies be attending? And how about the Senators - they took St Helier votes but shall they be mandated by the voice of the people?

    ReplyDelete
  67. In answer to a question - obviously I did not get around to a new post on Sunday. Sorry, but other things do come first and have to be prioritized accordingly.But I do hope to have it finished for tomorrow.

    In the meantime please check out the interview on Voiceforchildren with one of my constituents; this making clear the truth behind the wholly misleading angles spun by our 'professional' media with regard to my question last week relating to petrol bombs and arsenals of weapons etc.

    Nothing like a bit of 'exaggeration' eh Senator Le Marquand?

    ReplyDelete
  68. In answer to Tom Gruchy - yes of course we will be going, Tom.

    Odd how the media gave little or no coverage to how at your St. Clement Assembly not a single soul supported Senator Bailhache's hijacking of the Electoral Commission...

    ReplyDelete
  69. The interview you have given to VFC with a constituent may as well be a completely different story to what I have seen on Channel and in the Post. Can people really get things so wrong without trying very hard? You really also have to give people like VFC their due. A proper interview that is long enough to ensure the viewer fully understands instead of just snippets, and not trying to stick an angle on to what has happened by seeking to misrepresent it either. I think I know who is more professional when it comes to reporting fact!

    ReplyDelete
  70. You make it so easy to write a well evidenced paper on the relationship between media and truth. Thank you again, Jersey.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Today I have been squirting plastic jiffy lemon juice at my front door bell.

    In the morning I'm going to put my daffodils in milk.

    ReplyDelete
  72. We just couldn't leave your website before saying that we really enjoyed the quality information you offer to your visitors… Will be back often to check up on new stuff you post!

    ReplyDelete