A 'LETTER', A LIE & A RAT...OR A VERY CONVENIENT SCAM TO DISTRACT FROM JURAT WHO LOOKED THE OTHER WAY ON EVIDENCE AGAINST A CHILD ABUSER

A quick post tonight but one of grave importance, particularly if you are one of the dwindling number who puts any faith In what you will be told by the Jersey MSM tomorrow - such as the infamous Jersey Evening Pravda. Indeed, with quite remarkable coincidence the story I outline below all raised its head just days after we had lodged our court papers in regard to our November 25th application to appeal against the now infamous ruling which went against us in the '4 x the salary, darling!' defamation case.

 

Court papers, of course, that demonstrate beyond the remotest shadow of a doubt how the absolute right guaranteed under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights i.e. for all people - including even Bolshie 'anti-Establishment' politicians who ask difficult questions - to have a fair trial had been completely disregarded by those at the apex of Jersey's 'justice' system.

 

What happened in this latest unfolding of skulduggery was basically this. 

 

Whilst looking after my mum at the end of last week, I was interrupted by a phone call from one Andy Sibcy - heir apparent to the role of Editor of the JEP. Within this call Sibcy attempted to force me into commenting on what he claimed was a 'letter' threatening a number of individuals with, he said, 'having their homes burnt down' should we lose our home as a result of the above said court case decision we are appealing against.

 

Obviously I informed Sibcy that I knew nothing about this whatsoever;  and also pointed out that it was a bit difficult to comment upon something which I had obviously not seen and consequently could not know the full content of. I further asked Sibcy to tell me exactly what the 'letter' (no 'letter' actually exists but more on that later) said; further still, who were these 'several' individuals who had allegedly received it. Sibcy blankly refused on both counts.

 

Alarm bells to yet more possible dirty tricks were already beginning to ring very loudly.

 

After all, where else would the verdict of just two Jurats - one who had not only been proven to have a history of happily disregarding evidence against a predatory paedophile; but had also been caught out having taken a director of the JEP's owning company to dinner at his own home be allowed to stand once these breaches of the ECHR had been highlighted for the authorities as they had done here in Jersey? The answer of course is nowhere.

 

So how credible really was it now that anyone allegedly receiving a serious threat relating to our case (allegedly) would run to the good old JEP or any media instead of just to the Police? It wasn't I concluded. Not unless there was an ulterior motive here and a very serious one at that.

 

Yet Andy Sibcy was telling me that this 'letter' I wasn't allowed to know the full content of; nor to know how credible the individuals were who had allegedly received it, was 'clearly' emanating from 'our supporters' and by extension Shona and I ourselves. Of course, as with so much of the misrepresented rubbish and  even smears the Jersey Evening Pravda churn out against those who don't toe the Establishment Party line, Sibcy's justification for such a claim was non existent. 

 

Sibcy, it seems, had just decided in time honoured Pravda fashion that this was the case. A little matter which made the fact that his 'newspaper' was apparently planning to run a cover story inferring this the very next day even more concerning. Obviously should any such incident genuinely have arisen from any 'supporter' known to Shona or I we would condemn such an action.

 

Not only would such behaviour be wholly wrong - we simply do not need any such actions: our case is rock solid and try as the Establishment might (and no doubt will) ultimately, whether here or via the Privy Council or Strasbourg, Jersey's  kangaroo 'justice' system will be brought to book for not insuring the ECHR Article 6 court process which was our right. No, the whole thing smelt of a set up.

 

Our biggest concern - and the concern that ultimately informed our decision to seek a temporary injunction on this nonsense being published was that some of those who had allegedly received this threatening 'letter' might be from within the judiciary - a judiciary of course who in just two and a half weeks we would be appealing to for justice!

 

Thus to cut a very long story short (for the present time) with both Pravda and even the Police - who I had contacted straightaway - completely refusing to give me any details ,we made the decision to seek the said temporary injunction to stand just until the day after our appeal hearing would be concluded. Hopefully by which time the Police investigation would also have brought to book the culprits.

 

This initial request for a temporary injunction until we could find out the truth was granted by Mr Pitchers QC, until a court hearing to ascertain more details could take place today at 4pm.

 

Of course, as we were to eventually find out - if only Mr Sibcy would have been a bit more forthcoming with his over-the-top hype to try and make me comment and accept his spin on things as to what had allegedly taken place; and as to the contents of the 'letter' we really wouldn't have bothered. Yes, whilst unpleasant to be sure it really was in truth that much of a non-story. Unless, I suppose, you are a party hoping to damage another without any justification or evidence for some reason?

 

For lo and behold, shortly before going to court I was eventually able to pin down the Police Officers who were investigating the case. It was, even with their understandable inability to tell me everything with an investigation to run, starkly illuminating in comparison with the Sibcy and Pravda version.

 

I wasn't a suspect in being behind this. Shona was not a suspect in being behind this. Indeed, contrary to the JEP claims the Police confirmed there was also absolutely no evidence or credible suggestion that the 'letter' (more on that in a minute, honest!) must have 'clearly' emanated from what Sibcy called 'our supporters' at all! It was just bull. The rat if I may use that term began to smell even more strongly!

 

And yet on going to court for the hearing we were to be in for even more shocks. The alleged 'letter' didn't as I say exist at all. All that did - and suddenly thanks to the judge the JEP had to allow Shona and I to finally see it as they could have done when Sibcy was spinning his story - was nothing more than 5 scrawled and badly written lines in what looks like marker pen. A note of just 16 words. Its content not even a shadow of the abuse Shona and I - as with many others - have complained to the Police, the Data Protection Office, and the Attorney General about on numerous occasions. And guess what else?

 

• It did not even refer to either Shona or me by name at any point!
• It did not even specifically mention our court case by name!
• Indeed, just as the Police said it did not provide even the remotest justification for Sibcy's claim that it 'clearly' came from 'our supporters'!

 

Odd then how the JEP had managed to contrive such a potentially damaging, for both our case and, indeed, our public reputation interpretation of this note? The undeniable fact was it had all of the suggestions of an attempted stitch up from someone wanting to try and discredit Shona and I and with it undermine our appeal against the failings of the Jersey courts.

 

And yet the stink arising from this stunt was about to reach heights that would even make a Jersey tax avoidance 'sniff test' official suspicious. For we finally got to know the 4 names of the apparent recipients.  

• Lawyer for the Jersey Evening Post, Advocate Danny Le Maistre
•  Lawyer for Broadlands/1st Jersey Limited, Advocate David Steenson
• The individual behind the infamous '4 x the salary, darling!'advert/cartoon Mr Roger Trower

 

And finally....

 

One Deputy Sean Power!

 

Yes, you read that correctly - Deputy Sean Power. A man who hasn't got the remotest link to our court case in any way. But a man who has only recently been afforded the front page of the Jersey Evening Post to spin lies about us relating to a planning application. Lies, of course, for which he has been asked to apologise for by the Minister for the Environment, Deputy Rob Duhamel, after Shona publicly exposed him and requested that the Minister take action. An apology, for which we still await.

 

Deputy Sean Power: a man who you might recall had to resign in shame as Minister for Housing after he was caught out having stolen personal e-mails from Deputy Judy Martin relating to her friend, the Deputy of Grouville. E-mails which then ended up on an sickening Internet hate site. A man who we can only conclude appears to have some kind of warped personal vendetta against Shona and I, of the sort you might usually associate with the likes of a deranged Internet troll perhaps?

 

And that - for now - is where I will leave it. This attempt to link either Shona or myself, or indeed any of 'our supporters' has about as much credibility as a Jurat who refuses to look at evidence against a paedophile. It stinks of set up. And it needs the Police to leave no stone unturned in bringing those behind it to court. Trouble is with our experience of 'justice' in Jersey even if the Police do so, those behind it will likely be referred to just a parish hall inquiry for their sins. Its just 'the Jersey Way'...

 

Meanwhile, the Police have been handed two names by me which really do merit the most rapid and thorough investigation possible.  To this regard I am confident that not even Andy Sibcy or his Pravda employers could sell either one to the public as being 'our supporters'  in a month of Sundays. Of course, when people are desperate they still may well try....

 

Keep the Faith. The Privy Council and if necessary Strasbourg grow ever closer and with this ultimately a Justice system where that justice will at last be guaranteed for all. Truth will always win out in the end.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JERSEY - THREE POSTCARDS FROM THE 'FLYING BANANA' REPUBLIC

A handful of observations from within the best of all places being ruined for the worst of all motives. Forget America where right-wingers would rather risk bankrupting their own country then grant the poorest basic health insurance - when it comes to getting it spectacularly wrong my home island is out there in a league of its own...

Senator Ozouf joins the battle for fair representation - or does he?

It was encouraging to spot in the Jersey Evening Pravda that none other than Senator Philip Ozouf was telling us that we really could not let the unfairness inherent within the over-representation of country over town parishes in the States continue past 2014. Indeed, as I always do whenever he is right - I wholly agree with and even applaud him. Nevertheless there are just two little problems that keep niggling at me over this.

Firstly, if Senator Ozouf really cares about the people of St. Helier at last having voting parity of representation with their country parish cousins (some of whom never even have contested elections at all - just successions) then why doesn't the Senator's proposition attempt to give St. Helier just that instead of something that again sells them short? Secondly, the good Senator has derided the need for changes over more than a decade in government. Whatever can have led to this moment of epiphany after all of these years?

Senator Ozouf really should tell us all about this at once. Otherwise some of our more cynical political watchers might just begin to suspect this change is all down to the Senator believing he wouldn't be able to hang on to his current Senatorial seat. One thing is beyond doubt this week's States debate of 'reform' is likely to be the biggest shambles for years. And that we are in this mess is all down to Senator Philip Bailhache's ego and the lily-livered politicians who allowed him to hijack the independent Electoral Commission

Economic Development to lead clampdown on cyber-bullying

As the politician who forced this on to the political agenda (well, you have to blow your own trumpet sometimes!) this story seemed to be a very welcome one indeed - for cyber-bullying can kill and that should never, ever be forgotten. Welcome that is, until you come to realise that the grim truth is: if you cyber bully someone from outside of the Jersey Establishment fold and/or from a position of power you will remain wholly immune to prosecution no matter what.  

Cyber-bullying and the twisted 21st century social phenomena of the internet 'troll' really is an issue that demands government action. Yet again the sad reality here is that the island's most vicious and cowardly cyber thug has been afforded huge wedges of taxpayers' money by our 'justice' authorities to take another person (one of many) he himself had relentlessly bullied for years to court for....bullying! And this via a secret court circus at that.

Throw in the further facts that police files against the same said cyber-thug get no further than the Attorney General's wastepaper bin; the Managing Editor no less of the local BBC refusing to even apologise for his promotion of a Twitter hate account set up to attack Deputy Shona Pitman; and now yet another staff member of that company being even accused in a national newspaper of involvement in the alleged 'bullying to death' of the late Simon Abbott  and the dire need for genuine government action is loud and clear.

Yet in the cold light of dawn what are we really likely to get? My bet is a cobbled together quasi-legal  'law' to enable the Establishment to try and close down the only independent Jersey news source that is Citizens' Media. You have been warned....

The call for 'Access to Justice' in Jersey isn't just about affordability...

In a week that has also seen my colleague, Deputy Montfort Tadier lodging a proposition calling for Chief Minister Gorst to finally publish the TOR for the Access to Justice 'Working Group' I have a question lodged for the Chief Minister asking that he accepts 'backbenchers' being included on this. Why? Well, a fact that Senator Gorst has been strangely silent on is the truth that this whole initiative actually arose out of a meeting Deputy Shona Pitman and I had with him on the abuses of justice we were (and still are)  experiencing.

You remember - just little things such as... individuals proven to be willing to disregard hard evidence against paedophiles then being allowed to sit as jurats and the like. Anyway, the point of my wishing to be involved revolves around this core: 'access' to justice - as can be seen from what I highlight above - is clearly not just about issues such as putting an end to the Closed Shop of Jersey Lawyers that cements their ability to rip the rest of us off by keeping out far cheaper UK lawyers. It is about the 'justice' the average man and woman in the street are able to access also being guaranteed to be just that: JUSTICE. Transparent. Accountable. Affordable. And Human Rights compliant.

For if Chief Minister Gorst is allowed to get away with handing over this review - both its make up and its working mandate - to the very same people whose lucrative gravy train relies upon it - just as it has done for decades - we the ordinary public will get nothing like what is needed at all. We simply must not let that happen.

Keep the Faith

Meanwhile I leave you with the following oral question to be asked of the Minister for Home Affairs:

 

“Would the Minister inform members whether the Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police, in response to allegations made to the Police by former Senator S. Syvret relating to corruption, advised Mr. Syvret that his concerns had been referred to a local legal firm and had been deemed groundless, and, if so, which legal firm was utilised and why?”

The answer - or perhaps even the non-answer - stands to be quite fascinating. Maybe because I know the answer already?

 

JUSTICE SELECT COMMITTEE IN JERSEY PART 2 OR TWO THIRDS OF YOUR POLITICIANS DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT JUSTICE

 

If there is one thing that I have learnt in 5 years 'inside' Jersey politics it is that the more important to democracy and political transparency an issue is then the less likely it is to see most of the Great and the Good turn up to a meeting. This Monday's question and answer session held at the 'Societe Jersiaise' proved this disappointing phenomena to be true once again.

 

The States Assembly has 51 Members. Yet only 17 who had not had the benefit of a rumoured 80-odd pounds-per-head slap up meal at the Atlantic Hotel bothered to come along!

 

That there were no banana daiquiris or prawn cocktails really isn't any excuse...

 

Given that recent times have seen a staggering abuse of justice including manipulation of  the Data Protection Law about which no one could talk about upon threat of arrest - this resulting in 'top secret' court proceedings against a former politician.  The hijacking of the electoral reform process to cement inequality; not to forget exposes of Jurats happy to both disregard evidence against sickening paedophile friends and subsequently flout the rules to sit on cases where other mates were directly involved - when put under the spotlight this really can mean only one thing.

 

Most of  Jersey's elected representatives are either too scared to stand up for what should lie at the very core of every democracy in the world - or simply do not care a jot about justice in the first place So long, it would seem, as it doesn't impact on them personally. Frankly politicians falling into either category should be identified and hounded out of office before it is too late. In the first instance perhaps being forced to study the famous saying of Pastor Neimoller.

 

It would be embarrassing to raise any local justice issues with the Committee...

 

The order highlighted above, passed down from the apex of Gorst and Bailhache's Team Feudal, should have sent alarm bells ringing straightaway. Indeed, I actually sought out the 'ministerial aide' who had come out with this nonsense and pointed out the chances of my complying with this was on a par with Luis Suarez giving up snacking on defenders' arms.

 

Yet for all of these worries  I was still glad that I had gone along. Otherwise I would never have got to learn that, in voicing my concerns about the hard and undeniable facts that those who control Jersey 'justice' continue to sanction appalling abuses against those who are either not sufficiently wealthy; or dare rock the Establishment boat were not supported by the likes of Constables Juliette Gallichan and Phil Rondel.

 

Now no surprise when considering Constable Gallichan.  As she made quite clear only a few short weeks ago she was adamant that I definitely 'did not speak for her' in apologising to the tragic victim of abuse in the Dean suspension case, poor, vulnerable HG. But Constable Rondel? Whatever could have happened here? Only a couple of weeks ago he was telling me how he totally agreed that John Le Breton of Jervis-Dykes abuse case shame should NEVER have been allowed to become a Jurat (lay judge)*

Independence? No thank you!

Interestingly, Constable Rondel did speak at length about what he felt had been the bullying and unfair treatment of Jersey by the UK over the 'last 20 years'. A bit surprised by the 20 years statement many of us were. To most of us interested in justice the worst failing on the part of Westminster has been the policy of just turning a blind eye to abuses of justice and bad governance where they know they actually have an obligation to step in.

However, though having to qualify this with the observation that it was pretty foolish for any to set up and come to rely on an industry which was built on a tax loop-hole I do have some sympathy with Phil's views on Jersey's comparative singling out for action over LVCR.

Nevertheless, when the issue of 'independence' came up in the session the Constable and I part company. He expressed that it would be a good thing. Independence in my view would lead, within a decade or two, to financial and social ruin. It would also lead to political abuse of the 'justice' system on a truly terrifying scale due to the lack of ethics/morals on the part of those Establishment figures at the top who crave this unfettering of power desperately.

Indeed, I must say that I also found the Constable's expression of support for independence somewhat surprising given that both the 'Rondel Twins' in the States have expressed deep concerns about young James increasingly falling under the totalitarian spell of 'The Man Who Would Be King'.

 

Its our report - but you're paying for it all...

 

Another fact that had I not gone along I never would have known was that according to the Chairman, though the Committee was here to follow-up their 2010 report; the cost of everything involved was going to be down to the Jersey taxpayer.

No problem with that at all - so long as the Committee actually don't buy into the Gorst and Bailhache propaganda and do what they are meant to do: i.e. listen to the concerns of Jersey people and those handful of politicians, Shona Pitman, me, Mike Higgins and Montfort Tadier brave enough to tell the truth.

 

And I'm afraid this also means treating the appalling abuse of justice that continues to allow an unelected judge lord it as 'president' of the States with the same commitment to 21st century reform that Westminster has forced upon to Sark. The 'dual role' of the Jersey Bailiff, after all, as has been pointed out by eminent local lawyer, Philip Sinel is far, far worse.

 

What exactly had the Committee been fed at the Atlantic? (no pun intended!)

 

I posit the question because until the above facts were pointed out by Shona, we were initially getting the fob off that discarding the anachronism of the Bailiff was down to the people and the States. Non recognition or understanding seemed apparent of the insidious structuring of the generations old 'Jersey Way.

 

It was even suggested that the Committee had been given no examples where the two conflicting roles overlapped from justice into the political. Fortunately I was able to intervene and  use the recent example of a Bailiff quickly putting on his 'Head of the Legislature' hat to stop a personal statement strongly criticising him in his wearing of his other hat as 'Head of the Judiciary'.

 

The examples given to the Committee flowed after this with the pointing out of how the propaganda they had received from the likes of Gorst, Bailhache and co of there being no problematic overlap was errant and dangerous nonsense. The Chief Judge could stop an elected member speaking; he could block perfectly legitimate questions; he could let Ministers get away with stonewalling and waffling to ride out question time. Et cetera...

 

A light in the darkness...

 

Perhaps most encouraging of all was that eventually the Committee finally conceded that the plethora of hugely varied abuses of justice that Deputy Mike Higgins and I were now working on probably did fall within the UK Justice Select Committee's mandate.

 

Yes, even my and Shona's own attempted shafting via failures within the monitoring of the jurat system of which the Jersey Evening Pravda and Broadlands are keeping so manfully silent about in the hope of getting away with a beneficial ruling that would be laughed out of court in North Korea on Human Rights grounds.

 

The above recognition was actually voiced by the Rt. Hon. Elfyn Llwyd M.P. who a number of us agreed, though not talking as much as his colleagues actually seemed to have a better grasp of the subtle but hugely important issues at stake here. Which was probably just as well.

 

For Deputy Sean Power - though being at great pains to tell us that he totally respected yours truly, Shona, Mike Higgins and Montfort Tadier for the huge amount of work we do on behalf of people told the Committee that he felt in voicing our concerns about injustice we spoke for only 'a small number of people' who shared those views!

 

You can still have a say - make sure that you do!

 

Still, for all of that the session did end on a positive note. Under pressure from Shona the Committee's Chairman, Sir Alan Beith, did agree that submissions which had had a cut off date of the 10th May could now be sent to the Justice Select Committee right up until the 10th of July instead. Send them to this address:

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/justice-committee/inquiries/crown-dependencies-2013/cdd2010/

 

If you care about justice and putting an end to Jersey's 'justice' system and our 'Law' Office instead using the legal apparatus to enforce political and economic oppression please make 30 minutes in your schedule to send them an e-mail. I haven't yet I confess. But busy as I always am, and as so many of you will be PLEASE ensure that you now do. Our future might depend on it...

 

Keep the Faith

 

THE DUAL ROLE OF THE BAILIFF FARCE - STATES PRESIDENT BANS STATEMENT ON THE CHIEF JUDGE I.E. HIMSELF!

Democracy and justice in Jersey working as well as ever...

I publish below the personal statement set to be read by Deputy Shona Pitman on behalf of us both within the States Sitting on Tuesday the 16th April 2013. It complies with Standing Orders in every way. Indeed it relates matters entirely linked to our personal case - highlighting as it does the appalling abuse of the 'justice' system that we have suffered. Even the names of those who have caused this travesty were deliberately omitted for the statement.

 

Of course, though all facts outlined relate to our personal case clearly the unchecked abuse and failings in what is passed off as 'justice' in Jersey obviously cast light on deeply disturbing matters that will impact on anyone else - particularly of 'peasant stock' -daring to stand up against the bullying, elitism and abuse of position on which Jersey's Establishment has been constructed and survived over all these decades. Inconvenient for some this may be, we accept. But it is wholly irrelevant.

 

Yet regardless of this full compliance Jersey's Bailiff Sir Michael Birt banned us from carrying out our right - enshrined in Standing orders - as elected representatives of the people.  He manages to interpret Standing Order 16 (2) in a way that is the equivilent of transforming black into white - or perhaps in this case case white into black.

It is a farce. It is embarrassing. It is yet another sickening abuse of democracy and justice. Of course, we know that the Jersey Evening Pravda and its lawyers are working desperately to suppress the truth of the complete and utter failure of the court case from which they seek to bebefit  from to comply with ECHR Article 6. Indeed, it is even easy to understand their desperartion if not their lack of morals in doing so: they had convenienetly been allowed a Jurat who was the 'mate' of a compmany director to sit on the case!

But should we not be able to expect more from the Pressident of the island's government than using his position to try and keep these facts from the public? How unfortunate it is that the person ultimately responsible for allowing the appalling abuse of an inpossibly conflicted Jurat (one John Le Breton) to preside over our case just happened to be the President of the States himself within his 'other' role as Chief Judge? Yes, the very same jersey Bailiff whose Office had indisputably failed so utterly!

Lord McNally, Justice Minister for the United Kingdom government: when will you finally wake up and smell the coffee. 'Justice' in this beautiful island of ours; just as with the Dual Role itself is a total affront to a modern democracy.

 

 

 

PERSONAL STATEMENT: 16th  APRIL 2013 

 

'This statement has been jointly written by both Deputy Trevor Pitman and I.   

 

In April of 2012, Members will recall we unsuccessfully took a defamation action against the Jersey Evening Post and the estate agents, Broadlands; this being for the publication of an advert which we believed portrayed us as standing for election primarily for financial gain. 

 

Individuals will have their own opinion as to the excuses put forward by the defendants as underlying an advert that depicted us smirking with the words ‘4 x the salary, darling!’ Not least because the reality was that our joint annual income had dropped by £5000, with us both now being States Members; nor indeed was 4 x a salary the mortgage lending rate at the time.

 

 

Nevertheless, the fact is that there are very serious Human Rights issues concerning our court hearing and the wider judicial system generally which have either been deliberately misrepresented or even wholly suppressed by the local mainstream media.  

 

We highlight this now within this forum, because they have severely affected not only us and our families and friends but; as the Judiciary is meant to be there to protect and serve the interests of all people, this statement is relevant to all Islanders.  The fact is that these concerns go to the very root of the right of all people to be given a fair and just trial in accordance with European Court of Human Rights Article 6.  

 

Sadly, in spite of the evidenced reality of the failings in the court process underlying our case the greatest concern of all is that those at the apex of the Jersey Justice system refuse to acknowledge these errors.  That this should be so even with such clear breaches regarding the requirement for a Jurat or juror to recuse him or herself due to a conflict of interest, arising from a relationship existing with a plaintiff or defendant must be seen as deeply worrying. Mistakes, of course, are made by all. Yet once highlighted genuine mistakes are then acknowledged and put right. 

 

That such a conflicting relationship i.e. a personal friendship exists between the individual who was the senior Jurat sitting on our case and the longest-standing Director of the Guiton Group, who own the JEP is indisputable.  Indeed, upon this coming to light after the trial had concluded - thanks to members of the public contacting both ourselves and our lawyers – this relationship has been confirmed: the Jurat even admitting socialising with the director including at each other’s homes.  

 

Yet the Jurat; the Bailiff and his Deputy all astonishingly still attempt to play this down.  The question that obviously has to be asked is why?  

 

 

After all, the wholly inappropriate nature of this Jurat ignoring the rules on recusal, to sit, is starkly demonstrated by the correct decision of the Bailiff and Deputy Bailiff - that they themselves were conflicted and thus could not sit on the case due to our purely political relationship.  This is, it is quite obvious, a relationship that is far less personal and intimate than that existing between the Jurat and the company director of the defendant’s newspaper.  Neither of us has ever socialised privately at either Crown Officers’ home or them at our own.  There is no personal relationship whatsoever. 

 

That the Jersey Evening Post has misled their readers by not reporting this reality should be of great concern to all who are committed to justice and transparency. The truth is that the JEP through their lawyers, and Broadlands are currently still attempting to seek in the region of £200,000 from us on the back of proceedings which they are well aware are wholly in conflict with ECHR Article 6. What, both we and our families and friends ask, does this say about the integrity of these organisations and the justice system?  

 

Since our case it is interesting to note that we have seen a move by the Home Affairs Minister, that should there be a perceived conflict with local Jurats sitting on a case, Guernsey Jurats will be able to be seconded to the Island to preside over consideration of evidence and fact in a case.  This is to many aware of the situation a recognition that the current situation cannot be satisfactory in all instances.  

 

Yet the Bailiff, Deputy Bailiff and Chief Minister upon appeals to them, apparently do not view our case as an instance where such modernisation would need to be employed.  Is it any wonder we consequently ask that  a growing number of people - upon becoming aware of our treatment - begin to wonder that there may be some more sinister, perhaps political motive behind all of this?  

 

It is also equally apparent to us that to save the Island money our Jurats, simply should not be permitted to sit on specific bodies such as boards of media groups; as although they may recuse themselves on a case they may still be a friend of a colleague on such a body.  As the late Lord Denning and others have stressed the Judiciary simply must be seen to be unbiased, transparent and highly professional because it is called upon to make decisions that can change, the course of person’s life.  There must be no perception of even potential bias.  

 

The public must be in no doubt that justice in our Island is beyond reproach and guaranteed for all; and is not dependant upon the depth of a person’s wallet or holding a position of influence. Since our highlighting of these concerns via both local Citizens’ Media justice campaigners and international media the fact that so many people are now approaching us and colleagues with justice issues demonstrates that the total confidence that should exist in the Island to this regard does not. As previously announced a portfolio of these separate cases is currently being collated for eventual presentation to the Lieutenant-Governor.  

 

Yet unfortunately there is also a second very serious concern highlighted by what has come to light since the hearing of our own case. Sadly it relates to the very same Jurat and raises serious questions about the whole validity of his tenure; and in particular his capability to make sound judgements that any and all members of the public could have confidence in. It also raises serious questions as to the adequacy of both the appointment and monitoring processes relating to Jurats in Jersey. 

 

The Jurat (now retired) was previously employed as a Vice-Principle at Victoria College. As revealed in the Sharp Report 1999, a document still suppressed by the Education, Sport & Culture Department this individual refused to look at evidence against his then friend and colleague, the convicted paedophile, Andrew Jervis-Dykes. Jervis-Dykes was eventually sentenced to 4 years for the sexual abuse of College pupils. 

 

As reported by Stephen Sharp not only did the Jurat allowed to sit on our case refuse, as Vice-Principle to look at evidence against Jervis-Dykes, he subsequently even wrote to the Board of Governors supporting the Jervis-Dykes.  Amongst other comments he described the paedophile as having served the College with ‘outstanding competence and conscientiousness’.  Further still, that unless the Police pressed charges the matter could be seen as arising from an ‘unsubstantiated allegation’; and that if Jervis-Dykes had to resign he should be allowed to work out his notice still teaching and then ‘resign with some dignity’! 

 

We were deeply shocked to discover that in spite of all of this, having opted to take early retirement when the Jervis-Dykes case finally became public this individual was shortly afterward put forward to become a Jurat.  Proposed for this role by people including none other than a former President of the Education Committee; a former States Member who was actually on the Victoria College Board of Governors when the Jervis-Dykes abuse scandal took place.  

 

Although this was unknown to us until after our court case when we managed to get hold of a copy of the Sharp Report the clear and very serious failings apparent in this Jurat’s judgement highlighted by Stephen Sharp were clearly known to many within the hierarchy of Jersey’s Law Office and justice system: including both the present and previous Bailiff (who was actually on the Victoria College Board of Governors himself). The responsibility for monitoring an individual’s appropriateness for the role of Jurat lies with the Bailiff and the Superior Number – the other Jurats – yet no one at any time acted on these concerns. Why?

 

How, we ask Members, can we have any confidence that a Jurat - who had already demonstrated this deeply suspect judgement and attitude to evidence against a paedophile would or could then put aside the clear and serious conflict of interest of his personal relationship with the director of a company owning the Jersey Evening Post who were defendants in our case?  We cannot.  Jurats are, of course, not trained or classed as ‘expert’ in the same way as a Judge. They are lay people and thus subject to the same prejudicial concerns as members of a jury. 

 

It is quite clear that rather than maintaining silence on the failings within the process of our court case, the authorities should have long moved for a mistrial.  It is simply not right or good enough that these serious failings are met with a response of ‘if you don’t like it, simply appeal.’  Not only did the above all come to light after the court case’s conclusion the reality is that we, like the majority of Islanders, do not have the tens of thousands of pounds needed to appeal.  Nor, indeed, should people be left in this position as a direct consequence of what are clear failings by an individual Jurat for not recusing himself as required; and equally by the Bailiff’s Office for not having ensured all was as required for an ECHR compliant trial. 

 

To this regard, we would also express our sincere gratitude to the political colleagues past and present who have been brave enough to write to the UK Justice Minister expressing their support for us in raising these concerns. A further fact that the Jersey Evening Post have conveniently kept from their readers in misrepresenting the realities of a case they know is deeply flawed yet seek to benefit from.  

 

That the UK Justice Minister has thus far failed to intervene in the interests of ensuring justice and good governance in our Crown Dependency is deeply disturbing to many. Indeed, it is surely absurd and indicative of a relationship in need of overhaul that the Minister instead offers to refer the failings to the Island’s Bailiff – the very Office whose failings have allowed this to happen in the first place.  

Justice we repeat should be guaranteed for all irrespective of political leanings.  It cannot be allowed within any true and self-respecting democracy to become a tool of suppressing dissenting voices.  Failure to rectify the wrongs that have been allowed to happen in our case against the JEP and Broadlands can be seen only as evidence that this is the unfortunate and unpalatable reality of the court system in Jersey today. 

 

We shall thus continue our fight until we get the justice that is so rightly ours and that of all Islanders.'

FREEDOM WRITERS - THE JOB OF A CITIZEN IS TO KEEP HIS MOUTH OPEN.

Another week ankle-deep in the cesspit of the Jersey 'justice' system...

Do you ever wonder why reliance on the 'mainstream media' (MSM) is declining the world over? Then just take a few minutes to analyse the political situation here in the UK Crown Dependency of Jersey.

Not just the fact that our MSM are largely quite happy to look the other way and even collude with a democratic deficit in terms of voting equality that would embarrass the average 'Banana Republic' Dictator. But the fact that we have a judicial system and attendant 'legal' industry that is set up to ensure justice is guaranteed only dependent on the depth of an individuals pockets; or according to their social standing i.e. being 'in the Establishment club'.

And that these people keep getting away with it is largely because it is only the victims of these unfit for purpose institutions who get to know the true painful facts. Why? Because those at the apex of our aforesaid mainstream media possess neither the morals nor Testicular Fortitude to expose what is going on. And that in a nutshell is why the audience and respect for so-called citizens' media in the island is growing with each passing year.

We (for I am proud to consider myself one of them) WILL undertake the required research. We WILL risk the illegal visit from the local Stasi. We WILL stand up against the inevitable hatchet job tagging us 'wreckers' and being 'anti-Jersey' that will always follow from the Establishment or its very same media mouthpieces.

By doing so we risk losing everything. A line in a forthcoming book says: 'there are none so bitter as Old Gods almost dead; none so desperate as those who see long years of power finally slipping through their fingers like sand'. Yet huge and draining as the risks are the truth is that to instead do nothing would ultimately lead to us losing a whole lot more: our pride; our integrity - our ability to simply look those who have been made victims and need our strength squarely in the eye.

This is why we 'freedom writers' continue to write and so fight. In the words of the legendary EZLN spokesman Subcommandante Marcos: 'our word is our weapon'. And trust me - we aren't about to cease hostilities until justice in Jersey finally prevails and those who pervert our institutions to their own ends are brought to book.

The examples of abuse within the 'justice' system just grow and grow

In a month or so a couple of us will be presenting a dossier to the Island's Lieutenant-Governor. The examples within are as diverse as they are shocking. That the details are laid out in all their full, appalling glory is essential. But just as an aperitif here's just a couple of recent examples of Jersey 'justice' to consider...

Do you think it is all above board to blackmail a prisoner on remand to the tune of: 'Plead guilty to the charge and we won't implicate your mother in your offence. But plead not guilty...you'll find her facing charges of conspiracy and a guarantee of years in jail'?

Is it all simply par for the course to falsely arrest a person over a planning case so without substance that it wouldn't even stand up in North Korea? Just as bad - to then keep up the sick charade and ruin their reputation and livelihood in the process - incredibly with the collusion of the court simply because backing down would now certainly reveal the truth of what has gone on?

Do we really want to live under a 'justice' system where a magistrate is able to send a woman - a mother of young children - to prison for drink driving even when the States own analyst says she simply could not have been over the limit?

Can it honestly be acceptable that a lawyer can attempt to charge a person in the region of £50,000 worth of fees for work that he quite demonstrably never undertook? Can it really also be satisfactory that any sanctions to be applied for such fraud must be left entirely in the hands of his friends on the Jersey Law Society?

Well, call me a trouble-making Lefty rebel-rouser if you like but the answer to my mind is no, no, no and no!

All of the above is no more acceptable than our Bailiff's Office breaching all rules on conflict of interest by not ensuring a jurat  being an evidenced friend of a company director of a defendant did not sit in judgement of FACT in our defamation case. They are all wrongs; abuses which must be righted. And if doing so is contested and resisted then clearly one must conclude that they cannot even be genuine, if barely credible mistakes.They can only be something a whole lot more sinister...

I began this post with a line from the famous quote by German poet and playwright, Gunter Grass: 'the job of the citizen is to keep is mouth open'. And it is in this great tradition that Jersey's citizen media 'bloggers' are doing just that to expose and oppose such travesties of 'justice' that I highlight above. So to my noble 'comrades in arms' - the Ricos; VFCs; Toms; Stuarts; Sams; Montys and so many more - I say: take a bow. Your work is both brave and important beyond words.

And, just in case you should ever doubt yourselves or waiver under the strain and intimidation I'll end this short post with a literal translation of another that is equally incisive for you to hold on to. They are words from the the famous poet and philosopher Jose Marti - hero of the Cuban revolutionary war for Independence. 'He who uses the office he owes to the people against them is a thief'.'

Those who strut and preen in the regalia of the Jersey justice system - in all of its many guises - yet allow such travesties that I outline above to go un-rectified are nothing less. They are actually a whole lot worse. And we must fight them to the bitter end.

Keep the Faith - The darkness can't last forever...

JERSEY IS PERFECT - A REBUTTAL TO YANK TROUBLE-MAKER LEAH McGRATH GOODMAN

A guest posting by Jersey resident Sir Hilary James Jon Le Gallais-Ecobichon-Pinochet

Now look here. Americans are trouble-makers - always have been, always will be. You only have to consider when they most unreasonably threw my British ancestors out of their country, ungrateful blighters. Wanted 'independence'! Pah - you would never hear we Jersey elites such as our esteemed Foreign Minister, Sir Philip talking about nonsense like that now, would you? Ridiculous notion.

We ARE British - its just that we top people really don't want to risk the said British ever saying 'enough corruption is enough' and finally interfering with a well merited Turks & Caicos style investigation!

Anyway, after all the nonsense of the past few days I would like to thank the owner of this 'blog' Deputy Trevor Pitman (quite nice chap for a damned Lefty - in fact almost a shame to use our courts to stitch this one up really) for giving me the opportunity to talk to you peasants - sorry, ordinary working people - on the Internet about this awful Leah McGrath Goodman woman.

Seems she has been saying some very untrue things about my- sorry, OUR - Island on the television. So to put Johnny Foreigner straight I'm going to do a short rebuttal using the example of just a handful of key headings such as:

• Yachts
• Champagne lounges
• Secrecy 
• Freedom of speech

Trust me. When I have finished you will know without a shadow of a doubt that Ms McGrath Goodman has a whole raft of misconceptions about how we better people run Jersey and - like they say in that advert - none of them are true. So here we go. Goes without saying, of course, that all of the views expressed here are my own. Well, apart from a few suggested by the Communications Unit to 'sex things up' a bit...

Yachts

Now Ms McGrath Goodman goes on about we in Jersey enjoying yachts, champagne lounges and the like. This first one is very  easy to deal with.  Utter poppycock! I mean, have you ever heard such nonsense? If we wanted yachts here we would probably have built an iconic, world-class Waterfront to moor them next to, wouldn't we? But we haven't.

No, our fine, right-wing  and feudal Establishment Party government has sensibly been very careful to ensure we miss that opportunity completely. I.e by only having a bloody ugly shambles of a half-finished building site with a cinema complex and leisure pool that the taxpayer has to subsidise, and a handful of fast food outlets on it! Oh, and a Carbuncle award-winning sea-front hotel without any balconies. Mmmm, until recently we even also paid the chap charged with developing all of this more than the American President himself just to ensure things all 'went to plan'. 

As for the fact that not so long ago our first Chief Minister was posting back a 'travel blog' as he and his lady wife sailed around the world sunning themselves on their own massive luxury yacht this is just pure coincidence. Look - I haven't got a yacht and I'm loaded thanks to the insider knowledge I picked up when we were setting up LVCR! Sold it to buy a couple of waterfront apartments I rent to Jersey people who can't afford to buy. That's right - doing my bit to help the worse off arf, arf! But that's another story...

The fact is our Council of Ministers DON'T want yachts here. Period. Because yachts might mean tourists and we've been trying to kill off our tourist industry for decades. Yes, we're a proud Right-wing monoculture now and contrary to the spin nothing must distract from us being a whiter-than-white Off-shore finance centre. Like that film 'Highlander' when it comes to industries 'there can be only one' and if it just happens to involve tiny little grey areas like cheating developing countries out of tax they desperately need but were too slow to gather - then that's their fault! This is the gospel of Ozouf and Oxera; and Amen - we're sticking to it, brother!

Champagne lounges

Now this one really does show what a damned sensationalist this American journalist is! Okay, so it is certainly true that throughout the life of the last States Assembly the small bunch of elite politicians who made up what Deputy Mike Higgins (another Lefty trouble-maker) calls the 'Kitchen Cabinet' and their 'advisors' did use to meet and make key policy decisions via their weekly meeting at the Champagne Lounge at the lovely Grand Hotel. I don't deny this at all.

Well, I can't - because Deputy Pitman has told me he used to see them there every week whilst attending the hotel's gym. But the links to what Ms McGrath Goodman is saying are as tenuous as they are coincidental. Yes, this venue is called 'the Champagne Lounge'. Yes it is in a beautiful, luxury hotel where a bottle of wine can cost hundreds of pounds. Yes, alright so these meetings did also only have the inner circle of those politicians at the very apex of power and some 'business people'. But does that mean secrecy or that there was something to hide? 

Let's be practical - you can't have 51 democratically elected representatives of the people (States Members) all crowding in to a meeting in a champagne lounge. Not only would the public start to notice but some of the poorer people who have sadly managed to infiltrate local politics based on hard work, intellect and ability - rather than the traditional way of inheriting loads of cash; or having had an ancestor who once grew a prize-winning cabbage in the Trinity Parish fayre would likely not even be able to afford to buy a drink! Really, we're just thinking of their feelings by this exclusion.

Yes, if pushed I'll concede that some people might find some of this a bit worrying. But let's face facts: in the 21st Century even Lefty scum like Deputy Pitman are sometimes allowed to walk through such establishments to make use of money-making facilities like hotel gyms. We must surely give the appearance of being a democracy? And as for some of the non-political figures at these secret meetings I'm sure people like Mr Rankin Riantz and other 'movers and shakers'  had just popped in for a drink by chance. If they were not to sit down for a chat, a drink and to red biro the paperwork it would surely appear just rude.

Secrecy 

In my opinion this secrecy claim by Ms McGrath Goodman must quite possibly be the silliest and most far-fetched of all. I ask you: is Jersey the sort of place where our government elite abuse the 'justice' system to silence, generally intimidate and if at all possible try and ruin people? Well, yes okay it is. But we do this only for the greater good.

If we didn't who knows what might transpire. Hells bells, we might even find ourselves with a real democracy on our hands! Before long people in the island all might even acquire equally weighted votes to use at elections. Think about it - all Senator Bailhache and his Electoral Commission's efforts in coming up with Option B to take us back to the Dark Ages could be wasted!

Honestly, after hundreds of years of feudalism and a good seven decades of time consuming, co-ordinated oppression involving the law office, the State media and the wealthy one could hardly expect us to risk that type of thing, surely? Does Ms McGrath Goodman really think that having gone to such lengths as to have the local newspaper refuse to allow the democratic movement after the war to promote its manifesto - even as a paid advert; and in tandem with we feudal overlords carrying out character assassinations on every left-wing politician to put his head above the parapet in the years since we could stand for that? Of course not!

Ms McGrath Goodman really needs to take a reality check. It takes a lot of time and effort to create a 'justice' system where only the rich and powerful can hope to obtain justice. Whether this is by means of allowing totally inappropriate, disgraced school teachers happy to look the other way on horrifying child abuse to become Jurats; employing 'independent' lawyers who have actually been working in the system for seven years to review bizarre Attorney General decisions; or even establish 'investigative' journalism of a quality on a par with the Sunday Sport, or the political prejudice of a modern 1930s Volkisher Beobachter.

Even fake letters attacking Left-wing politicians don't just write themselves, you know!

Freedom of speech

Now this final criticism is just too laughable for words. Dear international readers - and potential Off-shore clients - tempted to take Ms McGrath Goodman's concerns seriously here just because of trivialities such as her being an acclaimed and highly respected international journalist and best-selling author. Simply ask yourself these questions: is Jersey the kind of place where we do things like send ten police officers around to illegally raid a politicians' home; even for some strange reason going through a teenage girl's underwear drawer?

Are we the kind of secretive, utterly corrupt jurisdiction that would allow a close friend of a powerful defendant to sit in judgement on their case as a Jurat (local lay judge)? Pah - I've never heard of John Le Breton or the Jersey Evening Pravda! Are we, indeed,  the kind of island where we would make selected Left-wing politicians 'criminals' for helping a few elderly or disabled people to complete an application form requesting they might be 'registered' to eventually receive a postal vote? Worse still, whilst letting Establishment candidates do the same but without prosecution?

Is Jersey really the sort of place where the government Speaker might illegally throw an elected representative out of the Assembly for six months; knowing his only route of Appeal would be to the island's Chief Judge - who just happened to be the same man?

Come on now - is Jersey really the sort of place where we would hand over hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money to four individuals - including at least one convicted petty thug - to drive a former local politician from the internet and even refuse to answer current States Members' questions as to how much taxpayers' money was being utilised -

Oh bugger! The truth of the matter is that... we are!

Crush a grape! Never mind my joining hate sites created on Facebook by internet trolls - just because of a slip of the journalist's grammatical tongue my then confusing the banning of 'a' book with all books - perhaps we had finally better start looking into why some of our senior Senators and local media don't want an in depth, independent inquiry into the institutional child abuse at Haut de la Garenne? How it is that so many of the records from this hell hole have vanished? Maybe we should even start asking who looked after Jimmy Saville and the political owner of a lovely big yacht that regularly used to be moored at Bouley Bay a couple of decades ago?

Maybe we actually need the services of a determined and internationally respected international journalist...

And I didn't even mention how in my younger days we were not allowed to dance on a Sunday thanks to the Bailiff! or how we banned classic, award-wing comedy 'the Life of Brian'! Perhaps we aren't quite perfect after all?

But who cares - these little eccentricities have made jersey a very good place for we 'better people' to live for generations. Democracy? File it in the bin with justice and equality...