Pages

Monday, 29 July 2013

SEX, LIES, TROLLS & VIDEOTAPE OR JUST ANOTHER WEEK TRYING TO RESTORE DEMOCRACY & JUSTICE TO THE CROWN DEPENDENCY OF JERSEY..

'Taking on the trolls! Ministers back new law to allow action against on-line bullies.'

So screamed the front page of the Jersey Evening Pravda last Thursday 25th July. What was this all about?  New proposals being brought forward  between Economic Development, Home Affairs and Jersey's 'Law' Office to apparently stamp out what is widely known as 'trolling'.

In essence, for anyone who has been living in a cave this is the cowardly, revolting pastime of socially inadequate thugs who hide behind countless fake avatars to spread lies, hate and bully innocent people - even very young children - on the Internet. Sometimes even bullying them to the point of suicide. Do I support such initiatives? Of course I do.

Though as the States Member who actually made this problem a political issue by raising awareness to it I do have to observe that you would have thought the above trio might have at least consulted me for my insights. After all, not only have I seen the damage this social disease has done to a whole variety of decent, ordinary people in the island - Shona and I have even experienced this to a staggering degree ourselves first hand.

Applauded - but with a note of caution...

But it is because I have had these unpleasant experiences myself that my one reservation to this - on the surface - wholly welcome new law is that it may yet not end up actually being used for what it should be. That it instead might be a thinly disguised vehicle for attacking and suppressing the service provided by the excellent Citizens' Media blogs that have, over the past few years, been putting Jersey's 'mainstream media' to shame in exposing all manner of political cover-ups and general bad practice.

What exactly do I mean? Not just the twisting of 'law' that has already resulted in unprecedented 'secret court' hearings. But concerns like individuals with complaints against them now in double figures - serious allegations at that including threatening to put caustic soda in an ex-girlfriend's face; sending out anonymous,  sickening, hate-filled posters seeking to smear people for no other reason that the psychopath's personal jealousy.

The setting up of  both 'hate' sites like the pro-child abuse cover-up Farce Blog with its hundreds of fake 'comments', and similarly twisted Twitter accounts. Concerns in fact that go all the way to tormenting recently bereaved mothers; and even posting greeting cards with razorblades glued inside of them to people. Concerns incredibly never resulting in prosecution in Jersey even when the police have often been involved and have even sent files to the Law Office.

Should we be concerned at the fears I raise here?

I would obviously have to say most definitely. After all, just consider we have already quite incredibly had senior figures at the local BBC in the island actually both encouraging people to go on to a hate site set up to vilify a US journalist; and re-tweeting a sick and twisted Twitter account run by the very same psychopath to attack and smear Deputy Shona Pitman - a media executive telling his followers that it was 'amusing'!

Almost as bad it must be said we have had the BBC continuing to read out 'comments' from the same, sick and cowardly thug behind this live on air to listeners as if they were from real people: even when members of the public have highlighted the truth behind such avatars as 'James Le Gallais', 'Sue Young', 'Julie Hanning', 'Jane Care' and countless others. 

Last but not least we really mustn't forget we even have a Data Protection Office which has documented proof of the thug and handful of contributors behind the likes of the defunct Farce blog and its equally twisted successor. Documented proof of sickening trolling yet doggedly won't hand that information over so that legal action can be taken against such thugs by authorities - as they could already under existing harassment laws..

Indeed, just using our own experience of being on the receiving end of a sick and deluded social inadequate thug;  I can genuinely say we went through all of the right channels. We approached all of the right agencies/people. Truth was the experience was really little different to what we found with our highlighting of our non ECHR Article 6 compliant court hearings.

Those who should be putting such abuses right really don't want to risk getting their hands dirty and upsetting the Great and the Good by actually doing their job and denting the rose-tinted myth that everything in Jersey is always perfect no matter how bad the true picture is.

OK. So the proof of the pudding as they say will be in the eating. Yet if one sick and twisted individual known to dozens of victims isn't the first to get his collar felt under this new law then we can all be 100% confident the whole thing is indeed nothing more than a wooden horse aimed at closing down anti-Establishment dissension.

In this Council of Ministers lying seems to have spread like a virus...

Jersey politics certainly may not be unique in this problem. Yet in my experience of dealing with all too many of those at the top of  'ministerial' government these past 6 years - and this term in particular - power and lying really do seem to go hand-in-hand all too often.

Just think back to the very beginning and Senator Gorst in his 'vote for me to be Chief Minister' election pitch of accountable, inclusive government. Right up to this very summer's appalling affront to the public that  was the 'maliciouos', 'fictitious', 'I will NOT be drawn any further' diatribe of  'Bailhache-Gate'.

Yet in checking out comments on the excellent Voiceforchildren blog yesterday lo and behold but I stumbled upon confirmation of yet another one. This latest one revolves around the answer I was given on March 5th this year to the written question re-published below to the Minister for Home Affairs, Senator Ian Le Marquand; the question being on the issue of the Haut de la Garenne child abuse cover-up.

"Can the Minister inform Members whether, in the early stages of the historic child abuse investigation, both a current States Member and an individual still employed by the States and himself facing a number of allegation relating to abuse, went to Haut de la Garenne and attempted to gain access past the Police cordon stating that they needed to collect/remove personal material?"

Is this a lie or is this a... downright LIE?

"The States of Jersey Police have no formal record of any such visit by either party and with the passage of time, there is no-one still serving within the States of Jersey Police who is able to confirm that any such visit took place. "

So answered the Home Affairs Minister. Okay, so the answer was actually slightly longer - even going on to try and muddy the water a bit by throwing in the red herring that Deputy Kevin Lewis might be the cause of any confusion because of his past involvement with the site through his Bergerac days. The message was clearly: don't bother pursuing this because there is nowhere for you to take it and it is all unsubstantiated rumour.

Maybe even that old Establishment Party favourite dismissal - a conspiracy?

Yet just as I already had pretty good information back in March regarding the true identity of the two people who sought to breach the Police cordon, this week the lie I was spun back in March has now been confirmed. And confirmed by no less an authority than former Senior Investigating Office for Operation Rectangle, Lenny Harper. For I quote:

"On 19th February at 3pm Ann Pryke attended HDLG. I was asked to go to the entrance by officers on security duty there. Pryke was demanding entry and a full update on our activities. She was complaining loudly that we had not pre-informed her of our entry to HDLG. I told her it was police business and she should leave.

The following day the Chief Minister Frank Walker e-mailed Graham Power who passed the e-mail to myself. Walker stated that he wanted Pryke fully updated and told of any discoveries. He was told "no" in firm terms and given a number of reasons why it would not be happening. He was also warned that all approaches such as his would be recorded and would be disclosable.

At 5.30pm that day (20th Feb) Danny Wherry turned up at HDLG and demanded entry to recover some items he had left there previously. He was refused and told to leave as it was a potential crime scene.

I am somewhat surprised at Mr Le Marquand's reply for two reasons. Firstly, both visits are recorded on the official security log for the scene, and the e-mail from Frank Walker will also be logged. Secondly, there are a number of officers still serving with the force who could confirm the visits. The Home Affairs Minister needs to do his homework!"

Another line of investigation for the Committee of Inquiry

How is it I have to ask that these blatant instances of what can only be called lying keep on happening as regularly as clockwork? Is it all some bizarre unfolding of pure chance; coincidence? Frankly I think you could get better odds on Senator Bailhache again topping the polls come 2014. This is undoubtedly deliberate policy. The only two questions arising are: just where is the lying originating from and for what purpose?

If Senator Le Marquand has lied to me deliberately then let me tell him now: I will be pursuing him come September with just the same tenacity that I will be doing with Senator Bailhache (no, it isn't over by a long shot, Sir Philip) until he does the required thing within Standing Orders and resigns from the Council of Ministers.

Of course if it is the Police leadership who has lied to the Home Affairs Minister then I equally expect a full statement on who, why and what disciplinary action is to be implemented. Anything less and one really has to conclude this Council of Ministers really does have something to hide. Something that is beginning to appear increasingly worrying and desperate.

Why did Deputy Anne Pryke feel the need to 'demand' entry; to what purpose and under what authority? Why did Danny Wherry turn up and demand he be allowed to 'recover' some items he had left there previously? Indeed, what were these items? Has he ever been interviewed to explain? The questions are of the sort that really cannot be satisfactorily left unanswered.  I mean, just imagine if either of these individuals were facing hushed up allegations from any of the abuse victims....

Meanwhile, maybe I really ought to dust off that 'recall referendum' proposition over the summer and get it lodged after all? Well, there's the trolls and the lies. I guess you'll just have to log on again in a day or two to catch up on the sex and the videotape...

Keep the Faith


 

49 comments:

  1. You are right to ask these questions. That you as a states member have clearly been lied to is simply not acceptable. I trust Chief Minister Gorst will be demanding an explanation from Senator Le Marquand? I also worryingly fear y0u are right about this new anti troll law.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Don't get me wrong I really hope I am wrong on my suspicions about this new law.

    Trouble is when you see the amount of evidence against a troll that I have seen and yet the authorities have done nothing about - even though existing laws are quite adequate - you really do have to wonder.

    When you even have two Establishment Party Senators moaning to me during the last States Sitting that I really mustn't publish material even though if it is correct because it risks 'damaging' Jersey's reputation true intensions here become all the more questionable.

    ReplyDelete
  3. They've been looking for an excuse and a way to shut down the blogs for ages. My feeling is you are dead right. This place gets more like China every day.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Can I just say a quick 'Hello' to Little Danny Le M who always reads this blog - even when he should be working. Hope Little David is ok too!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Clearly any such law will be applied selectively as, it appears, are most other laws in Jersey. You are right to be fearful.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are spot on about 'selectively' applied laws.

      One only has to recall when our Deputy Bailiff selectively prosecuted Deputies shona Pitman and Geoff Southern for breach of the farcical Article 39A yet didn't even prosecute two non-JDA candiates in the very same district making the same breach!

      Indeed, when you actually learn of lawyers trying to argue that the absolute (guaranteed) right to a ECHR compliant fair trial does not have to be adhered to in Jersey you begin to appreciate just how out of control 'justice' and the 'law' in Jersey is.

      Delete
  6. When you look at the length of time the old hate site was up and running, and how the current blog/twitter/facebook troll/hate accounts are allowed to run, it doesn't look that promising that this new Law will be used for what it should be used for.

    At least on the BBC News and CTV, they didn't have this as their main story and read out comments on this from either their sites or their FB pages - there would have been more than a small amount of irony listening to them reading out comments from J le G etc on this story :)

    ReplyDelete
  7. Trevor,

    I have an important point to make about ignored prosecutions, and the ability (or lack of, in Jersey) for a citizen to bring a private prosecution. I recall you have asked questions about this before and been rebuffed.

    What we must ask ourselves is, how come English citizens have the right to bring a private prosecution? The answer is:

    "The right to bring private prosecutions is preserved by section 6(1) Prosecution of Offences Act, 1985 . There are, however, some controls:

    - the DPP has power under section 6(2) Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 to take over private prosecutions;

    - in some cases, the private prosecutor must seek the consent of the Attorney General or of the DPP before the commencement of proceedings."

    http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/private_prosecutions/

    Here is my challenge to you.

    What is stopping you from bringing a proposition to the States Assembly, seeking to give citizens of Jersey the same rights as citizens of England? What is actually stopping you, or other States members for that matter, from bringing that proposition? It could be the finest piece of work you ever do.

    It is really important to note that the English law has a safeguard built in, to prevent malicious private prosecutions from being pursued. The Director of Public Prosecutions can always take over a private prosecution. That is a key safeguard, that no credible democrat could argue against. Any new law in Jersey could give the Attorney General the exact same power, to prevent abuse of a private prosecution system.

    It is not good enough, in the 21st century, to be told that "we don't do things that way". If someone has legitimate cause to bring a private criminal prosecution, and wishes to take the financial risk, then they should be allowed to do so, with the same UK safeguard built in.

    Do it Trevor. Make it happen before the 2014 elections. At least then we will know who is against such a fundamentally positive reform of Jersey's archaic legal system, so that we can choose not to vote for them.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Last but not least we really mustn't forget we even have a Data Protection Office which has documented proof of the thug and handful of contributors behind the likes of the defunct Farce blog and its equally twisted successor. Documented proof of sickening trolling yet doggedly won't hand that information over so that legal action can be taken against such thugs by authorities - as they could already under existing harassment laws.."

    Well, when I complained to Stafford Police about the death threat that was left on my blog threatening to burn my house down, Stafford Police treated me like a criminal, accused me of posting the comment myself, I was so astonished that the WPC accused me of doing that, I said to her why would I do such a stupid and pointless thing, and she said because I am a mentally ill attention seeker, and she also forced me to speak to the Stafford mental health crisis team, and she refused to leave my house, she didn't want to investigate the crime but she just wanted to accuse me of being an attention seeking nutter instead.

    Stafford Police are a disgrace - not all the ordinary police officers, I'm sure they're not all bad, its the ones at the top, covering up crime and accusing the victims of being nutters. Its made me very afraid of the police, the way that woman treated me - but she had been briefed - she'd been told lies about me before she came round to my house.

    If the police can trace someone on Twitter for making comments which may or may not be libellous about someone in the House of Lords then they can easily trace the people who are making death threats to victims and whistleblowers of child abuse.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That attitude is a disgrace and if you haven't already made a complaint then do, and keep the complaint up until someone somewhere does something about it!

      Delete
  9. Trevor.

    Since BBC employees have promoted HATE-SITES and regularly read out comments from clearly fake Facebook accounts do you think the powers that be will be looking to close the BBC down as being one of the worst perpetrators of spreading Troll bile?

    On that note, has the BBC, or any of the island's State Media, contacted you concerning your stance on the so-called Troll legislation as published on this Blog Posting, considering yourself and Deputy S. Pitman have both been, and still are, victims of a Troll? Has any of the island's State Media contacted you concerning the revelation of alleged lies being told, knowingly or otherwise, by disgraced Home Affairs Minister, Ian Le Marquand?

    If not, your readers might want to ask why not?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Reading this blog ,one might think that Jersey was drifting into some form of repressed totalitarian state .A state in which many politicians failed to understand the gravity of the situation that they were blissfully drifting into , like the fat purring cat licking the tasty fragments from the bacon slicer. A new State of Jersey on the horizon where only accredited State approved journalists were allowed to disseminate 'corrected' news,and where , in order to safeguard the 'innocent' , secret courts could prosecute ' viscous and bullying 'non-truths' , meanwhile the likes of James Le Gallais can throw metaphorical stones at the shop windows of disbelievers, with impunity (while the liver holds out).
    Then we have 'our saviour', high on white horse, with red herring to hand and 'not on that flight' on his tongue.
    Why did the old Private Eye 'Letters from Kampala' spring to mind with comments about starving Ugandans passed aside Idi Amin is paraphrased saying.." I drove the Presidential Maserati down the Presidential Garage steps and the bloody thing fell apart!, no wonder the wop economy is up de spout!".


    Politicians 'Who'd ave em!' present company excepted of course!


    ReplyDelete
  11. You're a States Member so start getting used to Internet comment.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Always happy to have comment either supportive or otherwise.

      As you well know, however, true comment is not the issue here.

      It is about sad, drunken, woman-beating cowards who need to hide their inadeqquacy behind made up names to say things they would never be brave enough to using their own ID.

      Delete
  12. Trevor.

    You have just over a year to do your truthful best.

    Because you have the power!

    ReplyDelete
  13. A commenter makes a very good point about private prosecutions...but then more or less answers his own question. A law enabling private prosecutions, but which contains provisions for the AG to block such private prosecutions, might as well not exist in Jersey.

    As I am sure is the case with many other islanders, I am personally aware of a number of cases where the AG failed to prosecute, even though provided with irrefutable evidence of breaches of the law by civil servants.

    It is quite remarkable how often the AG claims that such prosecutions are "not in the public interest". For public, read, "my mates and establishment bed-fellows".

    ReplyDelete
  14. All being well tomorrow I will get up the latest installment in the catalogue of legal abuse that I have experienced first-hand.

    Privy Council, European Court of Human Rights - the road may be long but it is one that has to be traveled to restore justice to this island.

    Luckily I am up for the job.

    People who look the other way on child abuse allegations/evidence just CANNOT be allowed to sit as jurats; nor can anyone make even half-plausible excuses for this.

    Battle on...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This posting is fun but....on a more intense note, I have a question for THE CHAMBER OF HORRORS, and the question is this!

      "Are Jersey signed up to AGENDA 21?"

      Delete
  15. Jersey is not the only jurisdiction seeking to control government critics by citing a few disgusting social media abuses but Jersey's elevation of a notorious criminal troll to include official Data Protection Office backing for what really should be termed a "slap suit," render the local State Media/Government comments especially suspicious. The current lawsuit is already a story of vast overreach, worthy of outside exposure in the national mainstream, because it is so blatantly corrupt.

    If Jersey attempts to further stifle free speech, the example should be broadcast as a warning throughout the western world to demonstrate how proposed laws of this nature are more dangerous to us than the problems they claim to address. This situation cries out for serious international attention from free speech organisations, journalists and the wider on-line community.

    Elle

    ReplyDelete
  16. Trevor,

    Senator Ozouf has published a blog to explain how he thinks States reform should proceed -

    Ozouf Reform

    Basically, it is Option B but with one extra Deputy in each St Helier district. Contrasting that with your previous amendment for each St Helier district to get two extra Deputies.

    Astoundingly, he mentions your amendment in his blog and says that it "went too far".

    Went too far?! Your amendment gave equality to St Helier voters! How on Earth can seeking equality be considered going too far?

    His idea of giving just one extra Deputy still leaves St Helier totally under-represented.

    Hope none of the 28 who voted against P.64 are swayed by this silly proposition.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sam.

      I have heard all about the skullduggery going on behind the scenes. Even the Housing Minister told me today how disgraceful he though Deputy Power was in his propaganda on the BBC.

      But guess what? Though Ozouf is trying to con people with this sop from the Option b gang - that as you rightly say does nothing to rectify equality for St. Helier - I have countered this by actually...lodging my proposals to give St. Helier the 4 additional seats it merits.

      Deputy Green and I agreed that this was the version that needed to go forward. Of course, if pPC want to put a version that does the same thing I am happy to defer - as we have already advised them.

      If you would like to contribute some stats relating to Venice for an addendum that I will later be lodging please do. I have used full population figures but a breakdown of eligible voters per district and full population would be of value.

      Delete
    2. Sure thing, have sent them to your States email.

      Delete
  17. How do you do it Deputy Pitman ? a bunch of puppets in the States do as they are commanded and fly off on jollies around the world as a reward, others are more awkward and work hard but ask no questions, but you and a handful of others ask the questions that a good Government that requires accountability would expect.

    Who gave you the right to be such an outstanding politician, your conscience ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not 'outstanding'. I just believe in and am committed to standing up for justice and what is right.

      Probaly why our paedophile apologist 'justice' system and their political and MSM chums want to bury me.

      Maybe they will but a year is a long time and a lot of eyes WILL be opened in that period. I promise.

      Delete
  18. As for the thug who keeps sending me posts from the pro-child abuse cover-up farce blog and related hate sites - don't waste your time. I'm sure the police will finally be calling all in good time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Only when the troll is in prison will I believe in this new law.

      Delete
  19. Of course, the Farce hate site was also the one that featured those stolen e-mails, wasn't it.

    ReplyDelete
  20. So Ozouf has now effectively confirmed that a fair voting system, is a step too far!!

    It appears to me that Bailhache does not accept a majority vote of the States unless they vote the way he wants.

    I must say, my opinion of him is at an all time low, if he is bothered enough to stand for the next election, I guess he will be the next CM, for me it would be like Gotham City with the Joker in control.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Surely Andrew Green proposition is the best for St Helier and enables everyone to vote for the same number of States Members? An extra district, no more uncontested elections in rural parishes, enough members to run the island with scrutiny.

    ReplyDelete
  22. S Power was trying to bully the public with overblown emotion on TV. What we need are cool, level-headed politicians, not ones who spit feathers in a rage and chuck their toys out of their prams.

    A majority of elected members rejected the referendum results, it's not SP's place to whinge about democracy!

    ReplyDelete
  23. Sean is just doing his usual attempt at populist bluster.

    It is after all only 14 months to an election and he likely wants to distract from his voting record i.e. always voting against democracy and fairness in support of the Council of Ministers.

    The question to ask politicians like Sean is this: why are you so frightened and contemptuous of the third of the population in St. helier having equality of weight of vote. Just as with Bailhache, Ozouf and Gorst you will NEVER get a straight answer.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Constables in yes /no

    Super constituencies yes/no

    Senators in yes /no

    These are the correct type of questions required, anything and everything else is a stitch up.

    Bailhache and his cronies know it and you all know it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Constables = Yes

      Super constituencies = Yes

      Senators = No

      Delete
    2. Sorry anonymous but these questions are flawed.

      How can someone vote to each question before knowing the results to the rest are?

      What if someone wants to keep the Constables, but only on the condition that the Senators are kept too? They vote yes to Constables, and then yes to Senators, but if the Senators are voted against by the rest of the island, they have inadvertently voted for keeping the Constables even though they only support them if the Senators are there too.

      Or what if someone does not want the Constables to be in the States but also does not want super-constituencies? They vote no to Constables, but what if they vote no to super-constituencies but the island votes yes? They have inadvertently voted to get rid of the Constables, their only Parish link, even though they want them in if there are to be super-constituencies.

      There are too many ifs and buts so it's too flawed to work like that.

      The only question that will work is a simple yes/ no on a whole package of reforms.

      I.e. - "Do you agree with the recommendations set out in the Clothier report?" Yes or no.

      Or a question referencing another report.

      Delete
  25. Be publishing a blog soon entitled: Jersey Evening Pravda - at the centre of island lies?' This will outline the truth behind what the JEP won't tell their plummeting readership about 'friendly' paedophile apologist former Jurat John Le Breton. Why I just can't imagine...

    ReplyDelete
  26. Constables in yes /no
    Super constituencies yes/no
    Senators in yes /no

    That isn't a referendum, that's a questionnaire. For several months before the referendum, they ran a well-publicised consultancy process, through which these sort of suggestions could (and should) have been made. A couple of hundred people did bother to make submissions, most of them extremely well thought out and put forward in great detail.

    From this consultation process, the Electoral Commission came up with their three preferred options for a referendum. Where they fell down is by not giving the option D "none of the above" option. It's inclusion would have given any winning option greater credibility.

    If you didn't make a submission you can't really moan that better ideas were not considered.

    ReplyDelete
  27. The Council of Europe publish some human rights handbooks. Hopefully you'll find these useful

    http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/cooperation/capacitybuilding/Source/documentation/hb12_fairtrial_en.pdf

    http://www.echr.coe.int/library/DIGDOC/DG2/HRHAND/DG2-EN-HRHAND-03(2006).pdf

    ReplyDelete
  28. Ill health, Cancer, and the f***ing lies of Government & Big Pharma!!!

    Can you cure yourself of every ailment?

    HERE'S HOW

    Introducing the "Suppa Duppa" machine, "Hemp oil", and a healthy "Gerson" diet....

    ReplyDelete
  29. lost your appeal case my love !you gotta be Jersey's biggest mugs !the same with any further so called appeals to Privy Council, Europe etc etc not a chance in hell, just bankruptcy and on the bones of your backsides being encouraged by a few stupid followers, wake up my love no one is listening to you !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stella o 'clock again, eh? Duh...our application to appeal - when I will have the chance in an open court to highlight the true facts with a public audience - will be heard on November 23rd.

      But just for you (not really!) I will be publishing a blog next week highlighting the 'facts' that actually are not facts at all.

      The best thing? Now try and keep up - this application to appeal wasn't about the outcome it was about the non-ECHR compliance of the court. You could have read that in the notice of appeal, lame brain. But difficult stuff, obviously?

      Of course the point of all of this is that after November 23rd - even if the Jersey wants to pretend they sit outside of guarateed 'absolute Human Rights' we can then go off to the Privy Council and even, if necessary Strasboug.

      Lots of love.

      PS As no one is listening 'my love' I must say a big thanks that you ALWAYS do. Cheers Jonnie!

      Delete
  30. Trevor, the CTV news tonight said you want to keep the constables? do you mean they have to get in the same way as Politicians? You can't be agreeing that they get in on the present voting system surely, please can you make this point clear, it was not clear on CTV tonight. I am a great follower of yours and would like this point confirmed, please.

    ReplyDelete
  31. The Constables can stay IF St. Helier gets fairness and IF they get elected the same way as the rest of States Members do. Hope that clears that one up.

    ReplyDelete
  32. " I guess you'll just have to log on again in a day or two to catch up on the sex and the videotape..."

    Looking forward to that posting. From what I hear, it would explain a lot about the cover up.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Trevor.

    Exclusive interview with former Health Minister, Stuart Syvret, on political/judicial corruption and much MUCH MORE.

    ReplyDelete