AN OPEN LETTER TO LORD McNALLY & THE LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR OF JERSEY

The shameless manipulation of the 'justice' system as a tool of oppression by the Jersey Establishment continues...

I reproduce below an 'open letter' sent yesterday to both UK Justice Minister, Lord McNally (who has done absolutely nothing about the abuses of justice evident in our case - other than to offer to refer us back to the very Bailiff who had allowed it all to happen) and Her Majesty The Queen's representative here on the island, the Lieutenant-Governor, Sir John McColl.

 

It outlines the incredible - and it must be said, deeply disturbing - latest unfoldings of what has been passed off as 'justice' in our case since we we were foolish enough to place our trust in the Jersey judicial system.

 

Indeed, should you be naive or perhaps simply unaware enough to still have even the smallest trace of trust that the Jersey 'justice' system is anything other than a farce; a completely hijacked tool for the Establishment to both avoid the holding to account of those amongst their ranks who merit it; and to try and bury all and any who dare challenge it please simply read this and the attached letter from current Jurat Collette Crill and think again.

 

A fairly long read perhaps, but five minutes of your time well spent. Finally, tempting as it was to deconstruct the shortcomings and attempted re-writing of historical fact within the letter from Jurat Crill readers of the bald Truth Jersey will perhaps understand why I felt this better to leave to others...

 

Keep the Faith                                                             

 

Dear Lord McNally and Lieutenant-Governor 

 

We write to you in the form of this open letter to bring to your attention – in the remote chance that either of you should have any genuine concern for the on-going abuse of the justice system here on Jersey – to highlight the latest episode of the many abuses evident within our attempt to secure justice for ourselves via the courts.  

As you will both be aware due to previous correspondence our present situation arose from us daring to trust that we would be afforded – just like any other person – a fair and ECHR Article 6 compliant court process. Indeed, as is now well documented the reality has been not only that we were instead faced with a Jurat – John Le Breton - who has a proven history of looking the other way on evidence of child abuse against a former friend and colleague; but who also felt quite above accepted global judicial standards to not recuse himself from sitting on our case – even though he is further evidenced to have wined and dined a director of the Jersey Evening Post’s owning company the Guiton Group. 

That all of this was allowed to take place by Jersey’s Bailiff (who we copy in) and has most recently even been rubber-stamped by three Jersey Appeal Court Judges who – quite incredibly – attempted to re-write the findings of the 1999 Stephen Sharp Report into the child abuse cover-up at the island’s Victoria College to claim within their judgement: i.e. that there is apparently nothing in the report which would warrant John Le Breton being viewed as unfit for such a role would suggest that this leaves little more to be said.  

At least until we progress our case to the Privy Council; and more likely, we must accept, if this abuse of justice is so acceptable to those who should be intervening on behalf of the Queen and United Kingdom government, to the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Nevertheless, given the latest developments which we now outline below we will have at least placed upon record yet more evidence of the corruption and inexcusable failings evident in our case – just as this is within the cases of so many others. 

As you may or may not already be aware, having been brought to bankruptcy by our pursuit of justice; following on from the Appeal Court Judges inexplicable ruling on Friday 29^th November 2013 our lawyer (yes, in Jersey you even have to engage a lawyer to become officially bankrupt!) brought to the court a request that we be granted the process of Remise de biens.

Should either of you not know of this ancient Jersey aspect of law what this does is bring about a form of bankruptcy which allows – subject to certain criteria all of which our situation meets – for one’s property and assets to be sold off by the court. The issue here is that there must be enough money available to pay off in full any secured creditor: in our case just our bank as the mortgage lender. Further still, that some surplus must remain to allow some form of dividend to then be shared between the unsecured creditors such as the Jersey Evening Post and Broadlands – the entities who colluded to publish the lies claiming we had increased our income by four times by Trevor entering politics. 

Once accepted by the court and a Remise has been successfully completed with a property being sold and the secured creditor paid in full; and unsecured creditors having received a share of the remaining dividend, the matter is concluded and a discharge from the bankruptcy debt may be obtained allowing people to start again. This is clearly the best route for us to follow, especially given the fact that having been forced to this position by the Jersey Evening Post and Broadlands an additional consequence almost no other individual would face is that we immediately lose our positions and income as States Members. 

Even given the clear UK authorities indifference to the delivery of justice here in the Crown Dependency we would thus hope that to then find the judge hearing our request for a Remise – no less an individual than the Deputy Bailiff, William Bailhache, attempt to wholly mislead our lawyer with false information as to how the process works and it’s benefits and drawbacks; and indeed, to suggest – in our view, we repeat, attempt  to mislead – that the best route for us would instead be to seek to go en desastre is wholly unacceptable. Following this route would actually place us in a far worse position and leave this hanging over us for a full five years 

That the Deputy Bailiff would not know of the damaging misinformation he was suggesting as the better way forward for us is clearly inconceivable. Indeed, the true facts have been verified by lawyers and even the Viscounts Office.  

We were fortunately tipped off to the above by a concerned person who was in the court on the day and we have now even secured an audio disc of the exchange. We feel that we must ask that you look into this as a matter of urgency as – very co-incidentally – the Jersey Evening Post and Broadlands, having no doubt been failed by their own lawyers, just happen to now suddenly be seeking that the court reject the fully justified Remise and push us down the desastre route suggested by William Bailhache. We repeat: what a strange coincidence. Not only do two of the biggest critics of the Establishment’s failings on matters such as abuses of justice and child protection cover-ups get forced out of public office; we also face manipulation by the court down an even more damaging bankruptcy path than is necessary.  

We would thus hope that you might understand that all of the above cannot do anything, other than fill us with concern as to a likely pre-decided outcome of the Remise hearing set for Thursday 19^th December – just two days hence. After all, should you also not be aware of it this was actually set to be concluded this past Friday. However, any hopes we might have had of some degree of fair play - given that both our lawyer and the two Jurats who compiled the necessary report confirmed we met all criteria to satisfy a successful Remise were quickly stripped away when the lawyer for the Jersey Evening Post, Advocate Nuno Santos-Costa, informed our lawyer just moments before the hearing that he had a close personal friendship with one of the Jurats sitting; this being Jurat Collette Crill. 

Having been made aware that both the Jersey Evening Post and Broadlands were attempting to buy time as they knew they really had very little grounds for argument, the fact that this Advocate – who had at no time appeared for the JEP during the defamation case – suddenly appeared to be followed by this announcement was highly suspicious in itself. Has Jersey really got such an unprofessional and shambolic court-process that a lawyer- any lawyer – would not know beforehand which Jurats were sitting?  

With this conflict raised the court retired for a brief time then returned. Here, quite incredibly, Commissioner Julian Clyde-Smith announced that whilst the court would reconvene with two other Jurats at a later date Jurat Crill, nevertheless, apparently felt that her close friendship with the lawyer for the Jersey Evening Post – and a lawyer whose firm obviously stood to make many thousands of pounds from a decision in his client’s favour did ‘not’ conflict her from ‘administering justice’! 

We must put it to you as representatives of the Queen and UK government respectively that the picture this all paints of the attitude to justice for all within the island, is totally unacceptable. Indeed, once aware of who Jurat Crill was once we returned home a little on line research following further contact from the public revealed matters to be even more disturbing. 

Not only was it quite apparent that we had a Judge in William Bailhache who has no love for us or our politics, attempting to mislead our lawyer to take us down a route far more damaging to us than the requested and merited Remise de biens; it now became apparent we had had a Jurat who was intending to sit on our case in the full knowledge that she had previously written an insulting – many would say malicious – personal attack on Shona within a letter published by no less than the Jersey Evening Post. All, we would point out for the record, because Shona had dared to bring a vote of no confidence in Sir Philip Bailhache whilst he was Bailiff. This being on account of his several well documented serious failings on child abuse. 

That such behaviour could not be seen as a serious conflict of interest is impossible to credit even within a jurisdiction with Jersey’s laissez-faire approach to judicial corruption. That Jurat Crill could not be aware of her resulting conflict; or that her remaining silent on the matter was completely at odds with the principles of justice – certainly as applied by any respectable jurisdiction - are even more inarguable. Indeed, not only does the Jurat’s letter reveal just how little she was aware of the true facts relating to Jersey’s appalling child protection failings arising from those in high office; her choice of insults demonstrate beyond any question her entirely prejudiced attitude to a person upon whom the Jurat wished to now ‘administer justice’. For the record we reproduce the letter from Jurat Crill below.  

As you will both be aware we have little reason to have any faith in the justice system that is allowed to operate under this present Bailiff, Sir Michael Birt, and for very good reason when one considers the evidence of our case alone. A case that is, of course, just one of many destroying the lives of ordinary Jersey people simply because the UK does not fulfil its obligation to step in on ensuring good governance and law and order. As with a growing number of other islanders we will continue to highlight these abuses and fight for them to be rectified no matter what.  

Yet with our hearing set for just two days hence we first urgently ask you: what confidence can we have that a process for which we meet all of the criteria (even with our home having been mysteriously undervalued compared with independent valuations of just a year ago to the tune of some £60 + thousand) will not somehow instead be manipulated to accommodate the wishes of the Jersey Evening Post and Broadlands estate agents? We have, it must be said, been put through hell by the catalogue of appalling failings allowed to go un-rectified during our case. Yet it seems that even having reached the stage when we expected to achieve – at least - some degree of conclusion for ourselves and our families the system was once again manipulated to thwart this with the unfolding of the deeply disturbing events surrounding this past week or so.  

We believe this is what is known locally as ‘The Jersey Way’. 

Yours sincerely 

Shona & Trevor Pitman 

 

17th December 2013

 

The letter published in the JEP from the now Jurat Collette Crill who attempted to sit to 'administer justice' on our case... 

JEP – 2 July 2008.  Collette Crill, Le Solaize, Les Ruisseaux, St Brelade. 

“On the day of her election, Deputy Shona Pitman engaged in offensive behaviour in public.  Many would deem that such behaviour rendered her unfit for elected office.  Since then I am unaware that the Deputy has distinguished herself as a States Member.  It seems particularly ironic, therefore, that it is she who sees fit to call for a vote of no confidence in order to vilify and bully the Bailiff.  Mont of the Bailiff’s career has been devoted to serving this Island in Crown Office, instead of pursing a more lucrative path in private practice.  One can’t help wondering whether Deputy Pitman even understands, let alone appreciates, that all our Crown Officers are highly skilled and in many cases brilliant legal practitioners who choose for altruistic reasons, to offer themselves for Crown service instead of using their admirable academic and intellectual skills in far more self-serving ways. 

Given the behaviour and performance of many of our present elected representatives on can’t help feeling that precisely the opposite motivation applies to them.  The list of our current Bailiff’s achievements for this island good is as long as it is impressive, not only as a lawyer and judge, but also in so many other aspects of island life. In common with the reset of humanity, he is not infallible and as humility is one of his many qualities, I believe he would be the first to acknowledge this.  Indeed, he has publicly expressed regret for a possible error of judgement made years ago, long before he became Bailiff, in relation to the Holland case. 

Deputy Pitman, though, would have us believe that along with one sentence in his Liberation Day speech when he spoke about Jersey’s recently maligned reputation, using a turn of phrase not quite up to Deputy Pitman’s exacting standards, this is enough to wipe out years of exemplary service and dedication to the island. 

Deputy Pitman’s use of this form of politics is absurd and risible, yet sadly dangerous and adding to the immense harm that some of our politicians seek to cause by being so obsessive destructive and negative.  She and her cabal would be far better employed in using their position and salary, our money, in trying to rectify the many genuinely important matters of injustice and inequality in this island.  Of course, it’s so much easier to be negative and destructive.  Or could it be that they don’t actually have any positive or constructive ideas to offer?”

 

 

JERSEY JUSTICE & THE SELECT COMMITTEE PART 1: THE ESTABLISHMENT CATCHES A COLD...

In the course of pursuing the latest episode of increasing international interest in Establishment Party abuse of the Jersey 'justice' system on Sunday evening Deputy Mike Higgins and myself found ourselves sipping coffee in the bar of the Atlantic Hotel. To those not aware this an award-winning luxury hotel on the Island's West coast.

Very nice. Very exclusive. And not surprisingly very, very expensive. As was to soon unfold it also just happened to be the venue selected for a slap up dinner by the Four Horsemen of Democratic Apocalypse who mistakenly believe they are Jersey's Chosen Elite: both real and pretend Chief Ministers Bailhache and Gorst; Establishment Party Chief Whip, Senator Ozouf. And the Bailiff.

Don't mention the peasants or anything unsavoury like abuses of justice..

With the Lieutenant-Governor also invited along the purpose of this shindig was to spend the evening wining and dining the three visiting members of the Commons' Justice Select Committee. How nice to have the opportunity to bend the ear of the Committee for a whole evening as to the official propaganda that all within Jersey 'justice' is fine and dandy - a veritable beacon of democracy to quote former Senator, Jim Perchard!

After all, the other 48 States Members were having to make do with a stage-managed solitary hour the following day and not even getting a glass of water let alone a Banana Daiquiri. A solitary hour where States Members had already been warned by Team Feudal that they mustn't mention anything embarrassing like local injustice cases! Okay, so as it happened only 17 of your elected representatives actually cared enough about justice; child abuse cover-ups and the like to turn up the following day - but more on that in Part 2 on Wednesday.

Come and enjoy the wonderfully bracing Jersey air...

Still, to cut a long story short having said a polite 'hello' to two of the Chief Minister's vast army of helpers who were awaiting the arrival of Team Feudal; Deputy Higgins and I found ourselves discussing next week's questions and such forth in the Hotel bar. A very nice and warm retreat from the howling South-Westerly gale blowing across the headland outside.

Indeed, the perfect spot you might think for the UK politicians to be afforded the opportunity for a quick and friendly chat with two real peoples' politicians before the Great and the Good took them off to dinner. Alas it was not to be

Its 'us' and 'them' - but please don't tell Them we said it...

For as soon as Jersey's Finest arrived instead of the convivial warmth of the bar they and their officers whisked the Committee away...out into the elements of the freezing, windswept Hotel terrace! Yes, a terrace on which - for some strange reason I cannot even contemplate the group stayed - sipping equally cold drinks  for the better part of around 40 long minutes.

Whatever could the UK dignitaries have thought of Jersey hospitality, Mike and I wondered? Were the pair of us really so dangerous; so revolutionary in our evidence-based opinions that we needed to be given a very wide birth? We can, of course, only guess.

If this is the broad, cross-section view by which Westminster assesses the state of Jersey democracy no wonder writing to Lord McNally is a total waste of time...

For as we finally watched the windswept Gang of Four and their shivering, and possibly even bemused guests troop back in  once their table was ready; it must be said not a single one would meet our gaze. Not a smile. Not a nod. Not even a polite 'Hello colleagues - fancy seeing you two peasants at a posh joint like this?' We instead found ourselves left with the uncomfortable feeling that perhaps the Great and the Good had something to hide?

And truth be told we doubted it was just the size of the dinner and wine bill - suggested by an individual who shall remain nameless lest the boys be sent 'round - to be up in the region of some £700.

After all, in these times of global economic austerity and government enforced pay-freezes if this £700 figure is anything like accurate I'm sure the likes of Jersey's wonderful, but struggling nurses and their public sector colleagues would all understand. Wouldn't they?

And we can always ask questions about who was making such sterling use of taxpayers' money next week...

Keep the Faith.

*I'll tell you about Monday's meeting and the 17 of your politicians who bothered to turn up to argue for your interests on Wednesday.

A FEW INTERESTING QUESTIONS ON THE MANY FACES OF JERSEY 'JUSTICE'

Oh no - and not a single one on jurats happy to look the other way on evidence against friends and colleagues committing child abuse!

Having not made use of my allocation of written questions over the past two States Sittings; at readers' requests I now list below each of the up-coming questions - both written and oral - that I have lodged for the States Sitting of June 18th. Whilst also obviously not wishing to preempt the fun in any shape or form I nevertheless also give a brief bit of background to a few of the most 'interesting' ones for those who may be unaware...

Written question to Minister for Home Affairs

 

'Can members of the public be arrested by the police for alleged planning infractions and, if so, can such individuals also be legally required by the Police to report to the police station on a daily basis whilst these allegations are investigated?'

Comment

Now this really is a most fascinating question given the Jersey Establishment's increasingly rapid slide toward States indifference to regular abuses of citizen's Human Rights. Human Rights, let us not forget, that would be held as sacrosanct even in many a so-called 'Developing country'.

But in brief do you think it is right that a law-abiding member of the public can be 'arrested' by order of a member of the Planning Department and bundled into a police car - all in full view of a horrified business client? A client who not surprisingly withdrew his offer of a lucrative contract as a consequence! Me neither but perhaps we are just out of step with 'The Jersey Way'? Do you think sanctions for such a person should be more strict than would apply to an alleeged mugger? Hopefully not.

 

Written question to the Attorney General

 

'Would the Attorney General advise whether individuals who are aggrieved by the fact that Option B of the Electoral Commission (which gives greater representation to residents of smaller parishes at the expense of St. Helier) would have any recourse against the States of Jersey via the European Court of Human Rights if this Option is implemented?'

Comment

Now the man behind the despicable strategy to ensure the people of St. Helier can never have a fair and equal say in the running of the States, Senator Bailhache, (not to mention his minions Senators Gorst, Ozouf and the Constables) reckon all in relation to this Master Plan to sabotage democracy by 2014 is beyond challenge from we annoying 'little people'. Are the Far-Right 'right'? Well, I know they are not. But let's see if the Attorney General plays along...

Written question to the Attorney General

'Since police investigations began in 2007 in relation to 'historic' abuse can the Minister advise if there have been any cases investigated by the States of Jersey Police where abuse was alleged by both another perpetrator of abuse and corroborated by a victim yet no prosecution was then brought and, if so, what was the reason for this?'

Comment

Now this really IS a fascinating question! A former Deputy once observed that one should always ensure you ask questions to which you already knew the answer. Rightly or wrongly to this regard it certainly is funny how certain very telling documentation often gets delivered into the hands of a politician not afraid of the Establishment bully boys. But let's not say too much for now other than this.

The law should apply equally to all, shouldn't it?. But of course the fact is that in Establishment Jersey it does not: it depends upon who you are. Any doubters to this need only ook back to the politically motivated prosecution in 2009 of Deputies Shona Pitman and Geoff Southern for the unknown offence (in every other democracy in the WORLD!) of helping the old and disabled amongst their constituents to register a request for a postal vote.

All, of course, whilst the then Attorney General simultaneously did NOT charge those non-JDA candidates who did the same. And in the same St. Helier No. 2 district! Jusstice - its wonderful isn't it!Yet the matters underlying this question are obviously even more serious. Can it really be acceptable that whilst one abuser gets many years in prison another one - fully evidenced - does not even get taken to court? Of course it isn't - and next week sees the beginning of this sickening abuse of those who control Jersey 'justice' finally being exposed.

No wonder they want to try and shaft me with a non-ECHR compliant trial!

Written question to the Minister for Housing

'Would the Minister advise whether, in the case of the owner of a self-catering property who has re-registered the premises as a lodging house yet retained one unit out of ten as a (third party) manager's flat, all of the tenants are still classed as private tenants in law?'

Comment

Nothing that really needs to be said about this question: indeed, its actually not even in the same league as the others. But having been contacted by an elderly member of the public having problems with a dispute with a Fagin-like businessman it is still a question well worth getting an official answer to. 

And by my thus doing so, of course, saving the said constituent from being forced to cross the palms of some slimy lawyer with enough silver to secure twenty minutes 'work' that could instead fund the OAP having a nice and well deserved little holiday in the sun somewhere!

Oral question to the Chief Minister

'Following his meeting with the businessmen who raised concern at seeing the Assistant Minister with responsibility for External Affairs reading confidential documents in full view of the public on a flight, does the Chief Minister support the Assistant Minister's views expressed on 14th May 2013 that the allegations were 'inaccurate' and gave a 'fictitious' and 'malicious' account and, if not, will he now be asking his Assistant Minister to resign?'

Comment

Now if you don't know the background to this question and you live in Jersey you really must have been residing in a cave without access to the wonderful Gigabyte Jersey! But should that be you...

Basically Senator Philip Bailhache was caught bang-to-rights by a local busiessman foolishly and with his trademark arrogance reading confidential documents in full view of the public on a flight from Gatwick. These documents being to do with the appallingly typical Jersey Way treatment of abuse victim 'HG' in the Dean suspension case.

Most of us would have simply held our hands up and apologised. But not the never-wrong Senator Bailhache. I was instead accused of presenting a document that only 'purported' to be an e-mail from a member of the public. The contents were called  'malicious' and 'fictitious'. Yes, businessman and yours truly were in effect basically liars. Cheers, Senator.

But then one small problem arose: far from being put off by the bluster and the bullying the businessman demanded to meet the Chief Minister. And he even brought along... another businessman who could verify his version of events! Wow! Whoever will Chief Minister Gorst now chose to believe...

Oral question to the Attorney General

'What powers, if any, does a Court have to ensure that full indemnities awarded to members of the public at the conclusion of a court case are enforced and the injured party is not left thousands of pounds out of pocket?'

Comment

Now here, last but not least, is another gem. Wouldn't you think that if you won a court case and the judge (no les than the current Bailiff!) awarded you full indemnities you would actually get that money back? Wouldn't you think the Court could actually order a lawyer who was refusing to comply to hand it over? Me too. But then this is I repeat, Establishment Jersey.

After all you might also think that our Police are obliged to accept a member of the community filing a complaint for investigation about alleged criminal activity? They are meant to. But once again in reality it all comes down to who you are and who you are complaining about. Ayway, the fact of the matter is that this particular question I am asking is just the tip of the ice-berg in a case that, though dating back some years, is likely to be making headline news very soon.

Keep the Faith & Happy States listening.

With even my old friend and serial fence-sitter Deputy Roy Le Herissier demanding an inquiry into Bailhache-Gate could be a Question Time to even keep young Pravda Lucy away from her cookery books...

 

 

 

 

 



JERSEY 'JUSTICE' SYSTEM CORRUPT - EVEN CROWN ADVOCATES ARE SAYING IT NOW...



So when will the Lieutenant-Governor finally smell the coffee and intervene to restore democracy? 
 

A bit of a catastrophe took place in the Royal Court today. You see suddenly it wasn't just the 'little people' of Jersey; or even Progressive, Leftist politicians that the Establishment beneficiaries of the Finance gravy train wanted to silence shouting about the worst kept secret in Jersey: judicial corruption. No, this time it was actually one of the 'Inner Circle' - a Crown Advocate no less!
 

Yes, the Curtis Warren trial was back in St. Helier town again and this time around he may well have understandably been asking himself: hang on - why is it only me stuck out at La Moye in a cramped little cell? Could it really be, as one man described it so poetically, that the worms are finally starting to turn on each other as a few of us hardy souls digging for answers just keep refusing to roll over at the intimidation and die?
 

The inevitable consequence of an Establishment that is obsessed with crushing people...
 

Now none of this is really news to me, of course. As I have ensured is now well documented for when it seems we have to join the growing trail of islanders to Strasbourg: Deputy Shona Pitman and I have been victims of a sham judicial process that would have seen heads roll in embarrassment even in Mugabe's Zimbabwe so undeniably non-ECHR compliant was it. Its just 'the Jersey Way'.
 

Come on, you recall - Jurat John Lyndon Le Breton who is an evidenced mate and dinner chum of one of the defendant newspaper's senior directors and has been for years allowed by the Bailiff's Office to decide on evidence in our defamation case. Not to mention, of course, Le Breton also being a 'man' put forward by a former Education President to become said Jurat (lay judge) despite having been proven to happily look the other way on evidence against his predatory paedophile friend and Victoria College colleague Andrew Jervis-Dykes.
 

Oh...and at a time, of course, should anyone forget, while former Attorney General, Bailiff and reader of classified documents on planes - Senator Philip Bailhache (yup, the AG who allowed convicted paedophile Roger Holland join the Honorary Police) was also sitting on the very same Victoria College Board of Governors. Yes, the ideal type of character to make quite sure we all get justice!
 

Fact: our 'justice' system is out of control - just how much more evidence does the UK need?
 

But let's put this Warren case revelation into perspective. for its not as if the UK Minister for Justice, Lord Tom McNally hasn't had enough examples to stir him to action already, is it...

• prisoners left to rot on remand for more than a year then intimidated to plead 'guilty' or their mother will be implicated and charged
• police officer accused of sexual assault not charged but allowed to just leave the Island
• illegal secret court cases against dissident former politician
• taxpayers' money - thousands of pounds of it - given to vicious, cowardly convicted thugs to victimise their own victim
• prime, evidenced suspects in child abuse investigations (who just happen to be Establishment stalwarts and even the odd millionaire) never taken to court
• instead senior police officers trying to bring them to justice smeared or 'suspended' out of a job
• hard-working businessmen arrested, bundled into a police car and forced to report daily to the police station - all for a planning offence that they didn't even commit
• victims of abuse at Haut de la Garenne told they couldn't proceed with their case because they were 'never at the Home' - even though other victims personally remember them

And yet these are just the tip of the iceberg, of course. But now in the unfolding of the latest episode of the Warren case we actually have something different: a Crown Advocate telling the court that if this case was in the UK it would be the biggest story of the year and front page news. Because of, he says, the corruption within the...justice system!
 

Baton down the hatches - this could be the straw that breaks the camel's back...
 

But not in Jersey, of course. Oh no! Our lackey Establishment party MSM media don't want to report on that kind of thing. Bad for the squeaky clean Off-Shore image, old boy! Bad for business! But hang on surely this Warren case news is very, very serious stuff? stuff even the 'repeaters' of the Jersey MSM will struggle to bury.
 

I mean...did several members of the public really hear it correctly? Did Crown Advocate Baker, defending Curtis Warren, really state that the Jersey Attorney General had... lied? Blimey, whatever could happen next? A victim of abuse be pressured by the Law Office into accepting deportation and the Church leader who failed to safeguard against the perpetrator be carried back to the States on a donkey like a martyred hero? All to the accompanied mass foot-stomping of the EDL (Establishment Defence League) of course!
 

Secret court hearings - Jersey's new growth industry...
 

Still, I suppose the members of the public who swear this is what they heard a Crown Advocate say are actually lucky to have heard anything at all? You see Solicitor General Howard Sharp (a man who always wears an expression in the States suggesting he thinks he is far, far too important to be asked questions by mere elected representatives of the people who pay his huge salary) actually argued that all of the important evidence in the case should really be heard in...secret!
 

What? Yes, he didn't want we 'little people'; or any naughty Leftie trouble-makers who might bang on about pinko-commie nonsense like justice. transparency and democracy perhaps from knowing what was really taking place. Now doesn't this make you ever so slightly suspicious as to just what those at the apex of the Jersey 'justice' system could have to hide?
 

So Keep the faith and just maybe we will soon begin to find out and a whole lot more besides that worms really do always turn eventually. Meanwhile, over to you Lieutenant-Governor...

SNAPSHOTS FROM JERSEY - THE ROYSTON VASEY OF GLOBAL POLITICS

   

This is a 'local' democracy...

One of my old University lecturers absolutely loved the old saying that suggests - on occasions - 'less' really can be 'more'. Whilst reflecting upon what single topic I might post about this week; and being pushed for time between a raft of new constituent and corruption cases the truth of this really came home to me for some reason.

 

Of course it would be very easy and quite justified to write a lengthy, detailed post on any one of a half-a-dozen issues that have come to the fore in Jersey politics this past couple of weeks. Yet given the gravity of what some of these happenings reveal, why I thought, not instead just flag up the 'basics' of two or three in a few paragraphs on each for discussion?

 

After all, if the reader can't grasp the seriousness of all of these headings from considering just the fundamental basics of the problems then our island, you have to conclude, may well be beyond saving. Do we want to have things like justice, democracy, transparancy and genuine community as central to our way of life? Or do we just want to be the equivalent of a mad, black comedy where the only thing that matters is keeping the rich powerful and the poor powerless?

The choice as they say is yours. For if you don't DO politics, then politics in the shape of the Jersey Establishment will DO you...

 

Bailhache-Gate. Or liar, liar your pants are on fire? 

 

Now this issue all arose from my daring to bring States questions on serious concerns raised by a member of the public who stated he had been able to see damning confidential documents (revealing both the identity of HG in the Dean suspension case, and her alleged abuser). All of these being allegedly carelessly read in public by Assistant Minister with responsibility for External Relations, Senator Sir Philip Bailhache during a flight from Gatwick on March 21st.

 

As I have said, the details provided by this member of the public in contacting me revealed - beyond any question - details that are not in the public domain and could not have been faked. Yet how did Senator Bailhache respond? Was there an explanation; an apology? No. The claims were 'fictitious' and 'malicious'; the document containing them being described as 'purporting' to be an e-mail from a member of the public. In essence both this gentleman and yours truly were, by extension, liars. Ah..the 'Man who would be King' or at least El Presidente: how dare we mere mortals; we peasants question HIM? It was all a wicked Lefty plot it seems.

But... unfortunately, for both the Senator, Chief Minister Gorst and the MSM who failed to do any investigative journalism on the story whatsoever - it ISN'T. The gentleman, a successful businessman, has thus quite understandably become so disgusted and outraged by the Senator's reaction that he has now written to Chief Minister Gorst giving...even more details of this 'fictitious' event. And guess what else? The whole episode can also all be verified by the man's business partner who was travelling with him. They have even offered to meet with the Chief Minister accompanied by yours truly.

 

Misleading the States? Testicular Fortitude required I fancy. and a large dose at that. But has our Chief Minister actually got any... 

 

The alternative 'Jersey Way' reality unfolding in Court No.2... 

 

Now I spent this Tuesday morning in court again - and just for a change it didn't have anything - directly - to do with me!

That's right: I wasn't challenging a 'justice' system that had allowed former Jurat John Le Breton to sit on our defamation case against the JEP and the estate agent Broadlands even though he is an evidenced long-standing friend of one of the paper's directors. Not to mention being a man who was allowed to become a Jurat even though proven in the Sharp Report to be quite happy to look the other way on evidence against a friend and colleague who was a predatory paedophile!

Nor was I finding myself in Petty Debts Court because of holding to the ever-so-silly principle that an contract built on fairness wasn't being applied that way! No. I was there simply because of a quite unbelievable, indeed, bizarre example of the 'Jersey Way'. This being a truly staggering case that had seen a good, decent and hardworking local businessman Mr. Martin Kane not only ARRESTED but having to report DAILY to the police station - all because of an alleged breach of a Planning regulation/by-law! 

I really am not making this bizarre case up I assure you. Its true. And, though I make no claim to be an expert in the area, like others who have also now examined the case, I have to say that in my view the pursuit of this individual and his company is the biggest waste of taxpayers' money since... a cowardly, abusive, convicted petty  thug was given our money to take one of the people he himself was abusing to court!

 

Believe me, I would love to say more on this astounding 'court case'. But I won't just now. For without the full details as yet being in the public domain you would probably end up thinking I was just pitching a script for a fantasy film. A 'malicious' prosecution as is being claimed; or just a misguided mess that never should have happened? What certainly can be said even at this stage is the complex web by which it is all being held together to progress just this far goes right to the heart of 'the Jersey Way'...

And one other thing is also certain: it will all cost we the taxpayers an absolute fortune. 

 

BBC Jersey ask: should 'backbenchers' not willing to spout Establishment propaganda be allowed to talk to foreigners...

This truly bonkers issue was incredibly given the bulk of the Beeb's Politics Show recently and arose from that naughty Lefty troublemaker Deputy Montfort Fawkes - sorry, Montfort Tadier giving an interview to the French newspaper Le Parisian. His 'offence'? He didn't have permission from the Establishment Party Fueher Bunker; and he didn't espouse the party line that 'Off-Shore' (or tax havens - you take your pick) must be viewed through rose-tinted spectacles.

Now enough has been said about the damning attitude of arrogance and contempt for differing views that the swivel-eyed reaction of the Treasury Minister and Finance industry 'big-wigs' has revealed here. The angle I want to put up for discussion is just what such a reaction from within our MSM tells us? I mean, can the local BBC really believe that it is in any way compatible with a modern democracy that elected representatives of the public should not be free to speak to international journalists unless they adhere to the majority party whip on tax evasion/avoidence?

Frankly it is both embarrassing and a damning indictment of the mainstream - or State - media itself. The Bald Truth is that such a debate would be laughed out of the boardroom in just about any other jurisdiction in the world - no matter which political philosophy held the majority. It wouldn't even matter if the Deputy's views were right or wrong. true democracy guarantees his right to hold and voice them.

OK. The head-in-the-sand approach might be comforting for the MSM, the Finance industry and even our Neo-Liberal politicians alike I accept. But the cold, hard truth of the matter is that the sun is setting on the view that tax 'dodging' by big business and the super-wealthy is socially acceptable. To contend otherwise is akin to King Canute commanding the tide not to come in and drown him. The sooner the Establishment - both politicians and MSM apologists - wise up to this truth the sooner economic diversification can become more than just pre-election buzz word.

Saying sorry but really not meaning it: part 98...

Meanwhile, isn't is strange how having been exposed by me yet again as a regular purveyor of pathetic and malicious 'anti-Leftist' fake letters the Jersey Evening Pravda have still got the offending missive attacking Montfort Tadier up on their website. Complete of course, with scores of similarly fake comments using avatars of one Mad Jon the Cyber-rash - exponent of drunken death threats and scavenger of takeaway dustbins. All doing exactly, of course, what these fake letters are meant to achieve: trying to negatively mislead wider public perception...

And the moral of this post?

If the above 'snapshots' above conjure up the type of Jersey you want to live in then keep voting for the Establishment. But if such a 'democracy' is really not what you want then let me say quite bluntly here: you had better make sure you aren't one of the apathetics who just sit on their butt and moan. Doing nothing is as sure a way of ensuring this attitude to democracy continues as is putting your 'x' next to the name of an Establishment candidate on an election ballot paper. In fact it is precisely what their bullying, lies and manipulation hopes to achieve...

Keep the Faith

Trevor

 

BOWRON-GATE...

POLICE CHIEF THROWS A TANTRUM BUT FORGETS FIRST RULE OF POLICE WORK - 'FACTS' REPORTED IN THE JEP ARE USUALLY LIES.

 

An extra post just to cheer everyone up in time for the Monday Bank Holiday...

 

The Bald Truth is that after several years in politics I would be misleading readers if I claimed I was ever really surprised to see what is - to use the technical term - a complete load of old tosh being passed of as journalism in the local Pravda. But whilst cutting this Saturday's edition up into strips ready for the smallest room in the house I have to admit I almost was.

 

You see this particular piece of inaccurate, vitriolic garbage attacking yours truly was not written by one of the usual suspects - it was actually accredited to  none other than Jersey's newest Chief of Police, Mr. Mike Bowron. Yes, under a Letters page heading entitled 'No complaint against me!' Jersey's Chief of Police had launched into an angry rant about how I had 'impugned his integrity' and only done so apparently from 'the safety' of the States Chamber. 

 

Good old JEP - fearlessly highlighting yet another attack on his betters by that bolshie Leftie, Deputy Trevor Pitman...

 

Exciting, controversial stuff this was to be sure. And all arising as it did because of States questions asked of the Home Affairs Minister; this involving an alleged complaint made against the Chief of Police and an external report apparently relating to the matter. Indeed, so agitated and aggrieved was our Mr. Bowron that in attacking me he took the trouble to accuse no fewer than three times. In fact let's spell out for Bald Truth Jersey readers exactly what our top and most experienced policeman actually wrote about me at one one point.

 

'Perhaps Deputy Pitman will check his facts in future before he impugns my, or anyone else's, integrity within the safety of the States Chamber.' Ah, the strong and forthright approach to police work - you can't beat it, can you? Well, yes you can actually. Because unfortunately there is one small but ever so important thing wrong with Mr. Bowron's tirade against me...

 

I wasn't the politician who happened to ask these questions!

 

No - not a one of them. Just as a quick and cursory checking of Hansard or even the audio supplied by the excellent TJW Citizens' Media service would confirm.

 

The questions, and actually, when you know the background very interesting ones they are too, were asked by none other than my excellent colleague, Deputy Mike Higgins. Indeed, having spoken to the Deputy if Mr. Bowron would like to take the trouble I can tell him Mike Higgins will even be only too happy to confirm these facts himself.

 

So whatever can have happened to make the nice Mr. Bowron cast aside his spiffing new white police hat and have a secretary run off this not very nice letter about me for no reason at all? Of course, as you might understand I was deeply worried about potential consequences. Would I be the next one to have the door kicked in and be frog-marched off to a police cell to be left in my underpants and 'Viva Chavez!' tee shirt? Hell, would the Establishment never leave me alone?

 

Would it never end I asked myself? Wasn't it already bad enough that me and Shona had recently learnt that - unlike proper justice systems - the Bailiff's Office had allowed our defamation case against the newspaper to be presided over by a jurat who regulary shared din-dins with a defendant's director? Indeed, a Jurat who the Sharp Report makes quite clear felt it quite normal to have requested Victoria College governors to allow a predatory paedophile friend and colleague to stay on and work out his notice teaching children? Deeply concerned I knew I had to act fast.

 

Evidence - the foundation of all the best police work...

 

Luckily, having a standard policy of going on 'facts' and looking for 'evidence' in only a few minutes research, and without even arming myself with truncheon or high-powered taser (in fact without even having to illegally enter a local foreign Consul and steal someone's laptop or pretend storing sophisticated petrol bombs to attack your neighbours is something occurring in every normal household) I had ascertained just how this bizarre attack on me had come about.

 

Chief of Police Mike Bowron had been stupid enough to accept what was written in a Jersey Evening Pravda report on the States as being based in 'fact'.

 

Foolish beyond words I know you will agree - but there the offending article was when Mike Higgins kindly pointed it out to me. In Wednesday's account of what had apparently taken place during Tuesday's States Sitting the good old JEP, under the watchful eye no doubt of ace editor Chris Bright, was once again telling their readers I had said words and made accusations that never happened. Indeed, as I was to further discover, their report had about as much truth in it as did the equally bizarre column attributed to 'the Fly'.

 

For this piece actually had me apparently 'glaring menacingly' at my States neighbour and good friend, Deputy Richard Rondel in order to prevent him footstomping wildly for the second-coming of the Dean. Quite an achievement actually, as if Lucy Stephenson had only looked down from her eyrie she will have known Deputy Tadier and I had both walked out in protest at the appalling display of Establishment party insensitivity to a shamefully betrayed victim of abuse.

 

Still, 'facts' and the Jersey Eveing Pravda - at least when it comes to left-leaning politicians who have the affrontery to fight for justice and democracy - have been complete strangers for a good 70 years. Why should anyone expect things to be different now? No reason at all. This is a key aspect of 'the Jersey Way'. Indeed, the Establishment simply could  not continue to survive without such '1984' style twisting of events.

 

So look out by all means for the large and heartfelt apologies from both Police Chief Bowron; and Editor Bright too for letting this latest shoody reporting happen in the first place. But please don't hold your breath whilst doing so. It probably wouldn't be too good for your health...

Meanwhile, let's hope there isn't anything in these allegations of some kind of serious complaint: otherwise our Police Chief will look even sillier than he does right now.

 

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.'