Pages

Showing posts with label Justice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Justice. Show all posts

Sunday, 3 November 2013

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?

 

Sunday, 24 March 2013

'THE JERSEY WAY' - THE MANTRA OF THOSE INCAPABLE OF ADMITTING WHEN THEY ARE WRONG..


'The Jersey Way'. What is it? I mean... according to the local Establishment it doesn't even exist. Just, co-incidentally, as the Jersey 'Establishment' itself also does not exist...

The reasons for this denial are many fold. Yet perhaps the most telling is the simple fact that if one doggedly denies somethings very existence then it becomes all the more difficult to make any criticism stick. After all how do you begin to engage with or challenge someone when they refuse point-blank to even acknowledge there is an issue to explore?

But for this article rather than focus on the actual people and workings of the local Establishment generally let's just spend a little time considering one intrinsic block within the rotten edifice of how this 'Jersey Way' tends to manifest: the 'Jersey Way' mindset. 

For at the bottom line this is at the heart of everything that is a barrier to finally developing a full and transparent democracy in our island: a democracy where 'equality' and 'justice' does not depend on the depth of your pocket or usefulness to those desperate to hang on to their 'right' of holding power. 

The Dean...

As a beginning let's just consider the current saga of the Dean of Jersey. The fact is that this sorry episode need not ever have happened at all. Indeed, even with what HAS happened we could already be a whole lot further along the road to setting things right.

Most important of all, of course, this would mean locating the poor, badly let down young woman - the victim - at the heart of all of this. Locating her to apologise for what has happened to her; ensuring that she is safe, OK and has the painful barb of being criminalised and driven out of our island so unjustly removed.

Lastly, by then demonstrating to her that all of those involved in her betrayal really are going to learn from what went wrong; learn and where appropriate be held accountable.

We are your betters and our reputation must not be tarnished...

Yet this is where 'the Jersey Way' comes in. Those who adhere to its mantra just cannot ever accept that they are ever wholly in the wrong; even less so that any amongst the proles should be able to hold them to account. To suggest that this pathetic and highly damaging outlook is tied up entirely with the issue of so-called 'class' would risk over simplifying it. It is likewise not even simply about wealth.

That these are regularly both huge contributory factors are, of course, beyond argument. Yet in my opinion analysis suggests that most significant of all in developing this sociological 'illness' in the modern world is the holding of power simply by means of position; and the compounding factor of there being no adequate or easily accessible means  for lesser mortals to hold such people to account.

The Dean - who I have absolutely nothing whatsoever against - is clearly in the wrong. He has, to use the words of one of my constituents, 'screwed up'. let's face it: we all do at times in our life. You might then think that as a 'man of God' he would be all for sticking his hand up, saying sorry and taking the flak.

Maybe to be fair after the past week or two he now genuinely wants to do this? Yet still in kicks 'the Jersey Way' and so all of those other carriers of the  virus in the island have to puff our their chests; dust off their best tweeds, shiny shoes and (probably seldom read) bibles and shout indignantly from the rooftops that the Dean is actually the victim here.

It stinks. It is repulsive. It shouldn't happen. Yet until Jersey finally joins the 21st Century and recognises that accountability must apply to all; and is actually the best way of building and protecting international reputation there is it will continue to happen. And if we have to have this forced upon us from outside because there aren't enough people in Jersey with the Testicular Fortitude to bring this about themselves then so be it.

Examples of 'the Jersey Way' are everywhere...

The Dean is just the latest example. But just look around you and if only you are prepared to look past the spin there are other instances everywhere. Just consider the long and cruel battle to finally batter down resistance to securing a fully independent Committee of Inquiry into the abuse at Haut de la Garenne and other institutions. The Jersey Way - arrogant and complicit people fighting indignantly and viciously not to run the risk of accountability. As to the true victims - some with decades of suffering on their shoulders already - sod them! 'The Jersey Way' doesn't want to know and doesn't care.

Secret courts...

Look at the secret courts being conducted under our very noses - conducted under the threatening spectre of 'super-injunctions' with fines or even imprisonment dare anyone speak out about it - to silence a former 'anti-establishment' politician, Stuart Syvret,  on the Internet. Silenced when push comes to shove primarily because what he was saying was damaging to the Establishment's perception of Jersey's 'image'. 

Yet hang on a minute...isn't it a fact that one of the people being afforded taxpayers money - your and my money and thousands of pounds of it - to silence the former Senator for his Internet writings is actually the island's biggest and most cowardly cyber-thug? A convicted criminal. Someone quite happy to threaten that innocent people will be murdered!

Ah, what champions of righteousness our Establishment are! No double-standards here then, eh Attorney General? Its the crime isn't it - not who did it...

Never mind the pain my failures have caused - I'M important...

Want something a bit less current? Just cast your mind back to a wholly merited vote of no confidence brought by Deputy Shona Pitman against our former Attorney General and Bailiff - now 'poll-topping' Senator Sir Philip Bailhache. Political speeches wholly outside his mandate; the illegal banning from the States of a politician; a truly sickening abuse of his Liberation day speech to belittle the abuse of children in States institutions against some less than fully considered global journalism.

Worst of all, perhaps, his appalling failure when Attorney General in allowing the convicted paedophile, Roger Holland, to be sworn back in to the ranks of the Honorary Police. The direct consequence being more innocent young girls needlessly abused.

Make to mistake about it. Let not history be re-written: for this last failing Sir Philip Bailhache should have been sacked. He should have preempted that in fact and resigned. Yet whilst an Attorney General just a few miles across the water in the Isle of Man has recently been suspended here 'the Jersey Way' ensured that ours was not.

As for the vote of no confidence vote...just 3 brave votes amidst much cowardly and irrelevant waffling about the 'great tradition' of the role of Bailiff. 'The Jersey Way' in action once again.

Shouldn't a Bailiff be capable of acknowledging when he is wrong...

You see the examples of 'the Jersey Way' truly are endless. Yet to conclude this particular article let's jump right back up to the present again. Anyone doubting that 'the Jersey Way' is very much alive and kicking in 2013 really need look no further than the defamation case brought against the Jersey Evening Post and the estate agents Broadlands by Deputy Shona Pitman and I last year.

Judges and Jurats are REQUIRED to recuse themselves if they have any relationships - conflicts of interest - with either a plaintiff or defendant. This isn't a matter of choice or individual discretion to be adhered to or disregarded as individuals see fit. This MUST happen. Human Rights Article 6 enshrines this. The responsibility for ensuring this happens, however, is down to two people. The Jurat and the Bailiff via his Office.

The fact is there can be no excuse whatsoever for Jurat John Le Breton who happily sat on our case. He knew full well that he is an evidenced friend of a director of one of the defendants. He knew that he and this defendant company director even went to dinner at each others homes.

Indeed, as I have pointed out before: even without the deeply concerned people who came forward to advise us of this after the case; even without the dozen prominent Islanders, politicians past and present who wrote to complain of this to the UK Justice Minister Le Breton has been caught in his failings bang-to-rights. There should be some kind of serious sanction available. We should be able to prosecute him.

Yet putting this sickening and in my eyes wholly contemptible individual aside all of this wouldn't matter quite so much if our Bailiff, Sir Michael Birt would only be big enough to put his hands up and acknowledge that he and the Office he oversees got it horribly wrong in not ensuring all was as it should be - for any litigant.

The decision in our case simply cannot stand: it cannot be viewed as safe or just by any stretch of the imagination. Indeed, you really would have to question why any defendant such as a newspaper would still be quite happy to try and benefit from such a evidenced blatant abuse of justice...

Let us just remind ourselves of the cast iron reality of this with the words of the late and legendary Lord Denning:

Conflict of Interest

"The court does not look at the mind of justice itself or at the mind of the chairman of the tribunal, or whoever it may be who sits in a judicial capacity. It does not look to see if there was a real likelihood that he would, or did, in fact favour one side at the expense of the other.

The Court looks at the impression that would be given to other people. Even if he was impartial as could be, nevertheless, if the right minded-persons would think that, in the circumstances there was a real likelihood of bias on his part, then he should not sit. And if he does so, then, his decision cannot stand..."

The fact is our Bailiff failed in his duty. He failed us. he failed justice. If he would only do the right thing and simply apologise for this and set in motion the action to correct this injustice it might yet be possible to see this as a ghastly, if certainly very painful, stressful mistake. But he has not. And so once again we see the 'the Jersey Way' in all of its sickening contempt for right, justice and democracy. 

The message once again...we are the Establishment. We are too big; too important - actually too damned cowardly if truth be told of course - to hold up our hands; admit we made a mistake and accept accountability. Even worse I suppose the further possibility must arise that perhaps he may have been quite happy to collude with Le Breton's breaching of Human Rights Article 6? You really would have to hope not. But what else can one conclude?

No matter how long it takes Justice must win out over 'the Jersey Way'...

And so sickening as that thought certainly is this is also the  essence of why those of us who do believe in justice over 'the Jersey Way' will keep on fighting. In a democracy justice simply must be for all. Those currently haranguing the Church of England for at last putting its house in order in a place that on this occassion just happens to be Jersey; and doing so at the risk of seeing the real female victim of of the Dean saga abandoned and forgotten all over again really ought to wake up and smell the coffee... 

Keep the Faith - Justice will win in the end.


Sunday, 10 March 2013

JERSEY & THE ABUSE OF JUSTICE: WHEN WILL THE LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR FINALLY REIN IN THE COWBOYS?

'Jersey's legal system is, in its entirety, fundamentally incompatible with the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedom ('the Convention'). The attitude of Jersey's authorities, in relation to the non-compliance in the Island with the Convention is one of calculated defiance'.

JERSEY - THE ISLAND  DEMOCRACY & JUSTICE FORGOT...

Powerful words indeed; damning words. Just me again - that bolshie, anti-Establishment rebel rouser taking another shot at Jersey's  powerful elite? Well, no actually. The above quotation is from one of Jersey's finest lawyers: certainly the best and most courageous practising today.

His name is Advocate Philip Sinel. And his words, taken from his submission to the Carswell Inquiry, are 'bang on the money'. I know - with my wife, Deputy Shona Pitman I have experienced both barrels from a system that would be a disgrace to a developing country; let alone one of the half-dozen most affluent jurisdictions on earth.

Justice is meant to be for all within a community, isn't it. Yet in Jersey this just isn't the case. For within a jurisdiction both wholly captured by finance, and long hijacked by a morally bankrupt, clique of individuals with far more more money than ability 'justice' has nothing to do with right and wrong anymore: it is all about manipulating and maintaining power.

Those ordinary people who dare 'rock the Establishment boat' will find the 'justice' system turned on them until they are either silenced, join the club, or are utterly crushed. Of course, these people should be able to turn to the UK Ministry of Justice to protect them from such abuses. The only trouble is the Ministry of Justice evidently couldn't give a damn. It could intervene. It SHOULD intervene. But it doesn't. And so it allows the abuses of process to go on: go on as they have for decade upon decade.

Over the next month or so Deputy Mike Higgins and myself - possibly Deputy Montfort Tadier too - will be endeavouring to collate a catalogue of appalling and hugely diverse cases that show just how out of control Jersey 'justice' is. We then intend to put these to the Lieutenant-Governor.

More about all of this nearer the time. But for now let me just offer a further instalment of my own experience of how even those with the comparative platform of a political voice can fall victim to the failings - some will say 'machinations' of the Jersey Law Office...

JERSEY MIGHT BE SMALL BUT THAT IS NO EXCUSE TO BLATANTLY FLOUT ARTICLE 6 OF OUR HUMAN RIGHTS...

Let's just consider the comparatively straight-forward issue of the essentiality of avoiding Conflicts of Interest when judges and jurats are sitting on court cases i.e. ensuring that no one rules or decides on evidence in a case where they may, or may even be perceived to have a relationship with either plaintiff or defendant. The fundamental importance and clarity of this concept has never been better summed up then by the late and legendary Lord Denning.

"The court does not look at the mind of justice itself or at the mind of the chairman of the tribunal, or whoever it may be who sits in a judicial capacity. It does not look to see if there was a real likelihood that he would, or did, in fact favour one side at the expense of the other.

The Court looks at the impression that would be given to other people. Even if he was impartial as could be, nevertheless, if the right minded-persons would think that, in the circumstances there was a real likelihood of bias on his part, then he should not sit. And if he does so, then, his decision cannot stand..."

All very straight-forward. Yet in Jersey as we were to discover - at best applied only inconsistently; at worst completely ignored. Indeed, our case for defamation against the Jersey Evening Post and the estate agent Broadlands highlight both perfectly.

On the one hand the Bailiff' and Deputy Bailiff 'recused' themselves from presiding over our case simply because of our political 'relationship'. As I have said before - all well and good though the fact is I would not partake of diner with either man if they were the last individuals on earth.

Yet when we came to jurats - and remember only TWO sat on our case with the Jersey syetm denying us an independent jury of ordinary people - having the most crucial role of actually deciding on evidence and fact the senior of the two jurats, John Le Breton failed to recuse himself despite clearly being conflicted beyond all argument.

He had been a personal friend of a senior director of one of the defendants for many years.

Jurat Le Breton socialised with the defendant's director. He even went to diner at the director's home and the director his. He was also even a close personal friend of the director's spouse. And he also knew full well that his friend was a director of this defendant in the case.

All of this is evidenced. The Jurat should have revealed all of this as is required of all judges and jurats, and if not automatically recusing himself voluntarily then be prevented from sitting by the Bailiff's Office. But neither happened. There  are no ifs or buts about this. It is fact.

Sickening enough in itself then. Yet when all of this finally came to light after the court case had finished incredibly both Jurat Le Breton and the Bailiff's Office both tried to play the seriousness of it all down. As they still do to this day. They even try to paint it as acceptable because Jersey is 'small' in size. The question that immediately raises itself in consequence simply has to be: why?

If mistakes are made - and let's be quite clear here we all make them at times - then immediately they are brought to ones attention you put them right. Though such an incredibly lax approach to justice could never really be excused given all of the stress and strain involved it could at lest be accepted once put right.

When such glaring travesties of justice are met with only arrogance and denial, however, the conclusion can only be that the motive for what happened to us - and has no doubt happened to unknown others - can only be suspected to be a whole lot more sinister. Are Shona and I alone in this view? Is it just 'sour grapes'?

Well, the Jersey Evening Post certainly may well want to try and convince its readers of that - after all they have consistently refused to let us tell the true facts. They even edited this rather significant and hugely telling FACT our of the press release article they published (we wonder why?) But alone in our identification of a clear and wholly unacceptable conflict of interest - one that completely renders the decision of the jurats unsafe - we are not.

And to this regard I reproduce a copy of the main letter of support given to the Justice Minister (in tandem with a second letter from us) signed by a sample cross-section of prominent Islanders just as horrified as we ourselves. Including political figures past and present to the 2 x Senators; 6 x Deputies and 1 x Constable who felt compelled to co-sign the below letter or write their own Shona and I again say a heartfelt 'thank you'. Just as we do to our fellow campaigners for justice who also signed in support*.

Your solidarity and recognition that such abuses of justice as outlaid above cannot be allowed to go unchecked a moment longer give us strength. Those who are happy to abuse the legal process may destroy us - indeed they are working flat out to do so. But they will never, ever be able to alter the fact that their actions are as reprehensible as they are incompatible with a democracy.

Eventually justice WILL prevail - both for us and for all the other wronged ordinary working people beginning to come forward. Wouldn't it be great if the Island's Representative of the Queen - the Lieutenant-Governor would now step up to the plate and play his part in doing what is right and just too...

Keep the Faith

Trevor


Letter to the UK Justice Minister


6th December 2012


Reference: Shona & Trevor Pitman’s court case


Dear Lord McNally


We write to you as both current and former Members of the States of Jersey Assembly; and, indeed a small number of ordinary members of the community to express our deep concern as to the flawed application of justice within the case of Deputies Shona and Trevor Pitman; heard by the Royal Court in April of this year.

The full details of Mr and Mrs Pitman’s concerns, both in regard to their own case and of a wider nature, are outlined at considerable depth within their own letter. There are indeed in our view many aspects of our island’s justice system, especially within the Jurat system, that need modifying in terms of adequate checks and balances. This being so, we nevertheless believe it sufficient here to state the following relating specifically to the Pitman’s case.

All individuals are entitled to a fair and just trial process; free of all and any perception of possible bias or conflict of interest. Just as both Judges and Jurats should not have any serious questions as to their past judgement or commitment to justice. It is apparent to all of us, however, that given the evidence relating to the Sharp Report into child abuse at Jersey’s Victoria College highlighted by Mr and Mrs Pitman in their letter, there are clearly such question marks relating to the senior Jurat in their case.

A further key aspect of ensuring a fair and just trial, must obviously also be that neither a Judge nor a Jurat should be able to sit on a case if he or she has any demonstrable relationship with any of the parties involved; be this with plaintiff or defendant. Those of us who are, or have been States Members can attest to politicians being very much aware of their obligations as public figures; one of these of course being that such duties are carried out within the realms of public perception.

Yet it is quite apparent from the information laid out by the Pitmans that this crucial process has not been adhered to within the appointment of Jurats to their case. In our collective view, it simply cannot be acceptable or safe that the Jurat in question, Mr John Le Breton, was allowed by the Bailiff’s Office to sit and pass judgement on this case.

It is after all quite clear that the Jurat has a significant relationship over many years - one that has been both working and social - with an individual, who is a long-standing director of a company who own one of the defendants in the case: this being the local newspaper.

In our view, the inappropriateness of this serious conflict of interest is only further amplified by the fact that in stark contrast, both the Bailiff and Deputy Bailiff were ruled to be unable to preside on the grounds of their ‘political’ relationship with the plaintiffs. We are all able to confirm that neither Shona nor Trevor Pitman have, or have had, any social or friendship-based relationship with either Crown Officer whatsoever.

The inconsistency of this ruling set against the relationship with a director of the first defendant on the part of the senior Jurat could not we believe be more pronounced. We thus echo Mr and Mrs Pitman’s contention, that this involvement of Jurat Le Breton in their Royal Court case for defamation cannot be regarded as either safe or acceptable.

We further support the belief that such a miscarriage of justice being corrected must have another possible avenue of redress when individuals, any individuals, do not possess the significant wealth necessary to challenge this by means of a standard appeal. Indeed, the whole issue of the Jurat’s actions in refusing to look at evidence outlined with the Sharp Report only strengthen this deep concern.

As such we fully support Mr and Mrs Pitman’s call for a mistrial and request that you intervene as Justice Minister with regard to ruling this court decision as unsafe.


Note

*Along with publishing further correspondence including that from the Bailiff's Office; upon consent from the individuals I hope to also be able to indicate the identity of those who kindly suggested writing and/or signing the letters of support.

Of course, knowing that not all individuals may want to lay themselves as wide open to targeting by the Establishment as I am prepared to do any request for continued anonymity will be fully respected. The important thing was that these good people were willing to stand up with us to be counted in saying to the Justice Minister 'enough is enough' 

We will be forever grateful to them for that.


Wednesday, 27 February 2013

JERSEY CORRUPTION: UK GOVERNMENT FAILS CONSTITUTIONAL OBLIGATIONS ON 'GOOD GOVERNANCE'

 



 Where else but Jersey would an individual happy to look the other way on evidence against a predatory paedophile then be allowed to sit as a Jurat (lay judge) for 14 years?



Introduction to a betrayal

I publish below for readers a press release from Deputy Shona Pitman and myself. That we have reluctantly taken this step is due to the frightening reality that our island's 'justice' system has become a tool of oppression rather than arbiter of fairness and protection for all ordinary citizens.

The fact is that complaints alleging corruption being brought to a number of politicians can now simply no longer be ignored. The reported abuses are as diverse as the members of the public bringing them to us. Indeed, three of we 'backbenchers' are currently collating these for forthcoming action. Just as with our own experiences of Jersey 'justice' outlined below the facts presented are deeply disturbing.

Justice should not depend on wealth and influence. It should not only be consistent but should be guaranteed for all. Yet in Jersey today the  truth is that it is not.

For example, where else would you see the blatant double standards and abuse of process that saw the Bailiff's Office ruling that neither he, Michael Birt nor Deputy Bailiff, William Bailhache could sit on our case due to our political 'relationship' - yet simultaneously allow a Jurat who is a personal friend of a director of a powerful defendant, the owners of the Jersey Evening Post, to do just this? The appalling conflict of interest is clear to all. Yet the Bailiff and his Deputy seek to play this down. Why?

Incompetence? Negligence? Corruption? If two public figures with a comparative platform to protest can be abused in this way then what hope is there, we ask, for the vulnerable victims of decades of child abuse within States institutions? It is time that the UK government fulfilled its obligations and intervened to restore 'justice and good governance'.

Sadly, even with the added voice of other appalled States Members writing in our support thus far it has not. This situation cannot be allowed to continue. In the coming days we will be publishing a number of letters and documents relating to our own case. In the meantime please take a few minutes to watch the above video interview: the true cost of 21st Century 'Jersey justice'.

For the record it should also be noted here that in a move reminiscent of their post WW11 refusal to allow the Jersey Democratic Movement to advertise its manifesto for democratic reform, our island's only newspaper again refused to allow us to publicise our side of what is a deeply disturbing story of an abuse of justice. Just as they have done since the case. Why ever could that be, we ask?


PRESS RELEASE


Two Members of Jersey’s Parliament have today called for the UK government – which has overall responsibility to ensure ‘good governance’ in the Channel Islands - to urgently investigate what they describe as the ‘spiralling evidence of the wide-spread breakdown of law within the island’s justice system.’

Child Abuse Scandal
The Deputies say that ‘justice in the island’ (which came under the global spotlight with the unfolding of the ‘institutional’ child abuse scandal in 2008) ‘is being betrayed by a mixture of top level incompetence, corruption and intimidation. Much of this being a direct reaction from those in the island’s Establishment desperate to bury any dissenting opposition to getting to the truth about decades of child abuse cover-ups.’

‘Far from ensuring justice for the people of Jersey our Law Office has become the tool of choice for the clique at the apex of power to try to silence and, if necessary, drive from office or ruin those who dare challenge the established order; or persist in fighting the cause of the ever-growing number of people coming forward to complain of corruption; whether relating to child abuse or abuse of the legal process.’

This has already seen the former Chief of Police (the initiating officer of the child abuse investigations), Mr. Graham Power QPM forced from office by an illegal suspension that failed to result in any disciplinary charges. It has also seen a former Health Minister, at the centre of revelations about the abuse, ousted; and currently being silenced by a blatant misuse of the Data Protection Law within ‘top secret’ Royal Court hearings – all being paid for out of the tax coffers. Files and records relating to children abused within the Jersey care system have conveniently ‘gone missing’ from within both the Police system and government departments. Evidenced cases against abusers have inexplicably not been pursued by the island’s Law Office.

Banning of US Journalist
This manipulation of justice has even seen the contrived banning of a respected US journalist, Leah McGrath Goodman, from the island once it became apparent she was researching child abuse cover-ups and the island links to Jimmy Savile. A ban only lifted following the intervention of UK MP John Hemming and an international petition campaign initiated by Deputy Trevor Pitman himself.  Trevor Pitman states that along with two other political ‘backbench’ colleagues the number of complaints alleging corruption received from members of the public has reached deeply disturbing proportions in recent months.

Legal System - Corruption
These complaints have included alleged tampering with court transcripts; destruction of and refusal to look at evidence; inconsistency in sentencing; and even perjury and collusion between lawyers. The recently leaked 'Barton Report' of a disciplinary hearing involving police at the centre of the illegal bugging allegations in the ‘Drug Baron’ Curtis Warren case even revealed claims of falsified and unsigned statements being presented instead of original documents.

Yet the Deputies say the cold, hard evidence of the justice system being in desperate need of external investigation; and the depth of the obstacles facing victims of the cover-ups was only brought home to them after they pursued the island’s only, and hugely influential, pro-establishment newspaper, the Jersey Evening Post to court for defamation along with one of its millionaire clients. The newspaper and its estate agent client Broadlands had mocked the couple after Trevor Pitman’s election, falsely claiming they had increased their salary four-fold by entering politics when in reality they had taken a drop in income of thousands.

Jurat Supports Paedophile in Previous Job as Vice-Principle
‘It was shocking enough given the evidence that we then found ourselves losing the case,’ say the Deputies; ‘we subsequently then discovered that the Senior Jurat (lay judge) John Le Breton had been allowed by the Bailiff’s Office to sit in judgement of the case even though he was a personal friend of the newspaper’s longest-serving Director; the two regularly socialising together and even going to dinner at each other’s home. All of this being evidenced’.

An even bigger shock for the Deputies was the subsequent leaking of a government suppressed report (the 1999 Sharp Report) into another horrific child abuse scandal at the island’s Victoria College (an exclusive ‘fee-paying’ secondary school).  The report revealed that John Le Breton, as Vice Principle had refused to look at evidence against a friend and colleague, the predatory paedophile, Andrew Jervis-Dykes. 

He instead wrote in support of him claiming amongst other things that: Jervis-Dykes had served the College in an ‘outstandingly competent and conscientious way’; that unless police decided to prosecute, the abuse would be seen as ‘an unsubstantiated allegation’. Le Breton even appealed for the paedophile to be allowed to stay on at the school and if he had to resign be allowed to do so with ‘some dignity’. Incredibly Le Breton was put forward for the Jurat role by a politician who was both on the College’s Board of Governors at the time and a former president of the government’s Education Committee!’

The Deputies add, ‘when you bring this to the attention of the Chief Minister, Bailiff (Head of Judiciary and Legislature) and Deputy Bailiff, where both Crown Officers just happen to also be friends of the Jurat in question - you are told: ‘if you don’t like it – appeal’.  The Crown Officers know full well, that the above information not only came to light after our case and has implications far beyond this alone; but that it would necessitate at least another £30,000: monies that most ordinary people do not have.

Jurat Le Breton was allowed to sit by two successive Bailiff’s for a period of 14 years – including sitting on some child abuse cases until retiring just after the Pitman’s’ case. ‘This demonstrates just how unfit for purpose Jersey’s system of election and monitoring of Jurats is’, says Deputy Shona Pitman, adding ‘how in the 21st Century can Jurats be elected in secret by only politicians and lawyers – many of whom will regularly be friends of those proposed?’

UK Justice Minister fails obligations of good governance
Yet even with the backing of around a dozen equally appalled fellow politicians and prominent justice campaigners, the Deputies say that the injustice they have been dealt is as yet failing to be adequately dealt with as it should by the UK justice Ministry. ‘The evidence in our case is overwhelming,’ say the Deputies, ‘just as it is in many other cases. Yet even when presented with all of the details (as outlined above) and letters of support from other concerned public figures, the excuse from Lord McNally has been that as “Jersey has its own justice system we can’t really interfere’’ (see enclosed correspondence).

‘Most absurd of all perhaps’, add the Deputies, ‘is that ‘the Justice Minister instead offers to ‘forward our concerns’ to the Bailiff – the very individual who has allowed all of this to happen! What this shows is the deeply troubling attitude to justice from those holding power within the justice system here and the UK Minister responsible for ‘good governance’ in a small and apparently ‘insignificant’ jurisdiction’.

‘At the bottom line’, conclude the Deputies, ‘if these failings are allowed to continue, if successive Bailiffs and other Crown Officers can allow an individual who refused to look at evidence against a predatory paedophile yet supported him – to sit as a Jurat for 14 years; including on subsequent cases of abuse what hope, we ask, have the victims of Jimmy Savile and the Haut de la Garenne child abuse scandal of getting justice here? What hope has any ordinary citizen who rocks the Establishment boat? The answer must be a resounding none. It is time the UK government stepped up to the plate and fulfilled its obligations. Should they not do so then it can only be concluded that Westminster must be complicit in all of this.’ Full story: www.thebaldtruthjerseyblogspot.com

For further information contact: Deputy Trevor Pitman 07797 824243/01534) 863436           Deputy Shona Pitman 07797 778561