Another snapshot of the Jersey ‘justice’
system – where ‘the law’ is changeable according to who you are…
Being pleased to receive some assistance from our
cousins across the channel in France relating to our Strasbourg application –
this arising out of complete disbelief on their part at how those who control
Jersey’s ‘justice’ system continue to twist and abuse it at will to secure the
desired Establishment result – the conversation got me on to thinking of how
the Data Protection ‘law’ was infamously manipulated against former Senator
Stuart Syvret.
Indeed, the timing for putting up this post seemed
pretty ideal as I had decided that due to some rather interesting ‘happenings’ I
have set for around the end of September/October I needed to take a break from regular
blogging at least until nearer the election. And secondly, I had just had yet
another experience of what passes for ‘law’ in the Birt and Bailhache epoch Jersey
Twilight Zone via Viscount Michael Wilkins’ collusion with the State media
regarding our politically manipulated ‘Désastre’.
More about this episode in a future post no doubt. Yet
in the meantime please check out this link to my interview on the excellent Voiceforchildren Blog.
Stuart Syvret and the notorious Data
Protection ‘secret court case’ scam
Here, should any readers not be aware, four Establishment
proxies (there was actually meant to be five but one refused to go along with
the ruse having been written to by Data Protection asking him to come in and
join them) including one middle-aged, internet troll and convicted petty
criminal we shall call for the sake of humour and upsetting his sense of
deluded importance, Boozy D’ Eathreat were provided with the better part of
£500,000 of our taxpayers’ money by the Data Protection Commissioner’s Office.
These monies being to cover ‘legal advice’ costs to take former Senator Syvret
to court and prosecute him regarding material on his internet blog.
The actual cost of the whole scam in fact ran in to
millions as I know firsthand from one of those involved in the process. However,
what really needs to be focussed on for the purposes of this particular post is
that Mr D’ Eathreat was allowed access to this taxpayer’s money despite
the fact that what Stuart Syvret had actually written about him being an
abusive and cowardly cyber bully was demonstrably true. As at least nine other
complainants to the police I am now aware of can confirm. Imagine that, readers
– in Jersey such is the break down of law and order that you can now actually
be taken to court for telling the truth! All our judiciary need to do to
succeed is simply ban you from providing the evidence or calling any witnesses.
Yet it must also be flagged up – especially given the
anti-Syvret propaganda pumped out by Establishment Party organs such as the
Jersey Evening Pravda – that whatever one thinks about the former Senator’s decision
to name the secret court case proxies on his blog it remains an undeniable
truth that the former Senator does have a wholly sustainable defence in his
claim to have done so in what he considered to be – rightly or wrongly – the ‘public
interest’. Certainly one hell of a stronger case than Viscount Wilkins’ has in his
pandering to the whims of his mates in the Establishment court and media in our
‘Désastre’ case!
The differing judicial attitude to
Syvret and Boozy D’ Eathreat actually sums up ‘the Jersey Way’ to a T
You see this Establishment proxy – a perma-Stella-ed, work-shy,
scumbag, who has for years viciously attacked not just Syvret himself but many
others including Shona and myself and even victims of child abuse on the
internet using a whole plethora of fake avatars (James Le Gallais, James Pearce,
Sue Young, Julie Hanning, Percy Luce, Monty Man Hunter etcetera) to try and
conceal his sick and cowardly actions can have no such defence whatsoever. NONE!
Boozy D’ Eathreat’s abuse of innocent people is down to pure, twisted maliciousness
and jealousy. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Yet guess what? When approached for the same support
to take this truly horrible bully to court - surprise, surprise - the Data
Protection Commissioner claimed that she ‘could not do so’. Because this
internet troll is apparently – and I quote here: ‘not a data controller like
Syvret is’. In fact according to the Data Protection Commissioner’s very own words
once again our Mr D’ Eathreat ‘is just a kitchen table blogger’. ‘Syvret’ in
contrast she told me ‘even calls himself a journalist.’
Wondering what a ‘kitchen table blogger’
is?
Me too!
Because, even though I asked the Commissioner to kindly explain, her
answers left me largely none the wiser. You see someone writing on the internet
can call him or her self whatever they like – investigative journalist;
reporter; political activist – anything. Most of course use plain and simple
old ‘blogger’. The best are also quite open about who they – we - are.
The key issue here then is that such claims don’t
actually automatically have any legal standing whatsoever. Syvret, after all,
may use the term ‘journalist’ even though – just like other individuals such as
Mr Rico Sorda for example – he is not actually employed or contracted by
anyone. Indeed, such people in truth are ‘employed’ only by their social
conscience; their ‘contract’ being only with their commitment to social justice.
Indeed, it is a similar story with the guff used in
court against Syvret in throwing around the term ‘data controller’. Is Syvret
any more a ‘data controller’ writing his blog than the sick and vicious
internet troll who sets up and controls fake political forums where he uses
avatars to both register it and spout his easily identifiable hatred as if this
was coming from real people?
Or who even sets up bogus blogs - again registered
under fake names - to do the same? Indeed, is Syvret or any other of us who
write in our own name on personal and genuine blogs more of a ‘data controller’
than the sick and twisted troll who undoubtedly ‘controls’ the hateful bile he
pumps out – i.e. the ‘information’ via Twitter of Facebook? Hateful information
we know even pillars of the State media such as BBC Jersey Managing Editor, Jon
Gripton are evidently happy to re-tweet as ‘amusing’.
No - Syvret is not
The truth is this whole ‘data controller’ concept is
actually one originally intended to be utilised in relation to big business and
institutions and was never constructed with the idea of being used
against the likes of Syvret at all. It has simply been seized upon here in the
courts of Jersey – the Hazzard County of the English Channel – as a convenient additional
tool of Establishment oppression. (Who is Jersey’s Boss Hogg? Answers on a
postcard…)
As for an individual like our Mr D’ Eathreat being
able to pump out his cowardly hate to bully people he becomes fixated upon year
after year without fear of falling foul of either Data Protection or the police
because he is a ‘kitchen table blogger’ this also utter garbage. The term’s
legal standing is zero. Both agencies are fully aware of who this creature is
and what he does. They both know there is a huge file of complaints about him.
They also know that he could – as both honest local and UK police
officers have confirmed to me - be charged under the Harassment Law and should
have been.
But charged he isn’t
As for me personally, having pursued all of the
correct complaint procedures following the years of sickening and vicious abuse
from this social inadequate scumbag and yet still seen the authorities do absolutely
nothing I actually can’t wait to be taken to court having decided my last
resort was to stand up to this thug.
You see one little thing the Jersey Establishment
Party may not have realised in deliberately allowing this freak’s reign of
abuse to go on and on is that - finally - there are a great many of his
victims who are now willing to give evidence about the how they have been
abused and then betrayed by the authorities meant to protect them. And unlike James
Pearce, James Le Gallais, Sue Young, Julie Hanning, Alan Gower and Uncle Tom
Cobbley and all – they are all real!
Keep the Faith
PS
In the meantime should you be one of this thug’s
victims yet somehow suddenly find yourself down the police station due to one
of his own bogus complaints (D’ Eathreat has made dozens of them!) please just
remember this.. The police actually need a Centenier to charge you. It
can’t – as it appears happened recently - be attempted by a couple of the mates
the troll is always bragging about. And when you get out of the station if you
haven’t got anyone else to turn to feel free to give me a call so I can add
your name to the list…
So screamed the front page of the Jersey Evening Pravda last Thursday 25th July. What was this all about? New proposals being brought forward between Economic Development, Home Affairs and Jersey's 'Law' Office to apparently stamp out what is widely known as 'trolling'.
In essence, for anyone who has been living in a cave this is the cowardly, revolting pastime of socially inadequate thugs who hide behind countless fake avatars to spread lies, hate and bully innocent people - even very young children - on the Internet. Sometimes even bullying them to the point of suicide. Do I support such initiatives? Of course I do.
Though as the States Member who actually made this problem a political issue by raising awareness to it I do have to observe that you would have thought the above trio might have at least consulted me for my insights. After all, not only have I seen the damage this social disease has done to a whole variety of decent, ordinary people in the island - Shona and I have even experienced this to a staggering degree ourselves first hand.
Applauded - but with a note of caution...
But it is because I have had these unpleasant experiences myself that my one reservation to this - on the surface - wholly welcome new law is that it may yet not end up actually being used for what it should be. That it instead might be a thinly disguised vehicle for attacking and suppressing the service provided by the excellent Citizens' Media blogs that have, over the past few years, been putting Jersey's 'mainstream media' to shame in exposing all manner of political cover-ups and general bad practice.
What exactly do I mean? Not just the twisting of 'law' that has already resulted in unprecedented 'secret court' hearings. But concerns like individuals with complaints against them now in double figures - serious allegations at that including threatening to put caustic soda in an ex-girlfriend's face; sending out anonymous, sickening, hate-filled posters seeking to smear people for no other reason that the psychopath's personal jealousy.
The setting up of both 'hate' sites like the pro-child abuse cover-up Farce Blog with its hundreds of fake 'comments', and similarly twisted Twitter accounts. Concerns in fact that go all the way to tormenting recently bereaved mothers; and even posting greeting cards with razorblades glued inside of them to people. Concerns incredibly never resulting in prosecution in Jersey even when the police have often been involved and have even sent files to the Law Office.
Should we be concerned at the fears I raise here?
I would obviously have to say most definitely. After all, just consider we have already quite incredibly had senior figures at the local BBC in the island actually both encouraging people to go on to a hate site set up to vilify a US journalist; and re-tweeting a sick and twisted Twitter account run by the very same psychopath to attack and smear Deputy Shona Pitman - a media executive telling his followers that it was 'amusing'!
Almost as bad it must be said we have had the BBC continuing to read out 'comments' from the same, sick and cowardly thug behind this live on air to listeners as if they were from real people: even when members of the public have highlighted the truth behind such avatars as 'James Le Gallais', 'Sue Young', 'Julie Hanning', 'Jane Care' and countless others.
Last but not least we really mustn't forget we even have a Data Protection Office which has documented proof of the thug and handful of contributors behind the likes of the defunct Farce blog and its equally twisted successor. Documented proof of sickening trolling yet doggedly won't hand that information over so that legal action can be taken against such thugs by authorities - as they could already under existing harassment laws..
Indeed, just using our own experience of being on the receiving end of a sick and deluded social inadequate thug; I can genuinely say we went through all of the right channels. We approached all of the right agencies/people. Truth was the experience was really little different to what we found with our highlighting of our non ECHR Article 6 compliant court hearings.
Those who should be putting such abuses right really don't want to risk getting their hands dirty and upsetting the Great and the Good by actually doing their job and denting the rose-tinted myth that everything in Jersey is always perfect no matter how bad the true picture is.
OK. So the proof of the pudding as they say will be in the eating. Yet if one sick and twisted individual known to dozens of victims isn't the first to get his collar felt under this new law then we can all be 100% confident the whole thing is indeed nothing more than a wooden horse aimed at closing down anti-Establishment dissension.
In this Council of Ministers lying seems to have spread like a virus...
Jersey politics certainly may not be unique in this problem. Yet in my experience of dealing with all too many of those at the top of 'ministerial' government these past 6 years - and this term in particular - power and lying really do seem to go hand-in-hand all too often.
Just think back to the very beginning and Senator Gorst in his 'vote for me to be Chief Minister' election pitch of accountable, inclusive government. Right up to this very summer's appalling affront to the public that was the 'maliciouos', 'fictitious', 'I will NOT be drawn any further' diatribe of 'Bailhache-Gate'.
Yet in checking out comments on the excellent Voiceforchildren blog yesterday lo and behold but I stumbled upon confirmation of yet another one. This latest one revolves around the answer I was given on March 5th this year to the written question re-published below to the Minister for Home Affairs, Senator Ian Le Marquand; the question being on the issue of the Haut de la Garenne child abuse cover-up.
"Can the Minister inform Members whether, in the early stages of the historic child abuse investigation, both a current States Member and an individual still employed by the States and himself facing a number of allegation relating to abuse, went to Haut de la Garenne and attempted to gain access past the Police cordon stating that they needed to collect/remove personal material?"
Is this a lie or is this a... downright LIE?
"The States of Jersey Police have no formal record of any such visit by either party and with the passage of time, there is no-one still serving within the States of Jersey Police who is able to confirm that any such visit took place. "
So answered the Home Affairs Minister. Okay, so the answer was actually slightly longer - even going on to try and muddy the water a bit by throwing in the red herring that Deputy Kevin Lewis might be the cause of any confusion because of his past involvement with the site through his Bergerac days. The message was clearly: don't bother pursuing this because there is nowhere for you to take it and it is all unsubstantiated rumour.
Maybe even that old Establishment Party favourite dismissal - a conspiracy?
Yet just as I already had pretty good information back in March regarding the true identity of the two people who sought to breach the Police cordon, this week the lie I was spun back in March has now been confirmed. And confirmed by no less an authority than former Senior Investigating Office for Operation Rectangle, Lenny Harper. For I quote:
The following day the Chief Minister Frank Walker e-mailed Graham Power who passed the e-mail to myself. Walker stated that he wanted Pryke fully updated and told of any discoveries. He was told "no" in firm terms and given a number of reasons why it would not be happening. He was also warned that all approaches such as his would be recorded and would be disclosable.
At 5.30pm that day (20th Feb) Danny Wherry turned up at HDLG and demanded entry to recover some items he had left there previously. He was refused and told to leave as it was a potential crime scene.
I am somewhat surprised at Mr Le Marquand's reply for two reasons. Firstly, both visits are recorded on the official security log for the scene, and the e-mail from Frank Walker will also be logged. Secondly, there are a number of officers still serving with the force who could confirm the visits. The Home Affairs Minister needs to do his homework!"
Another line of investigation for the Committee of Inquiry
How is it I have to ask that these blatant instances of what can only be called lying keep on happening as regularly as clockwork? Is it all some bizarre unfolding of pure chance; coincidence? Frankly I think you could get better odds on Senator Bailhache again topping the polls come 2014. This is undoubtedly deliberate policy. The only two questions arising are: just where is the lying originating from and for what purpose?
If Senator Le Marquand has lied to me deliberately then let me tell him now: I will be pursuing him come September with just the same tenacity that I will be doing with Senator Bailhache (no, it isn't over by a long shot, Sir Philip) until he does the required thing within Standing Orders and resigns from the Council of Ministers.
Of course if it is the Police leadership who has lied to the Home Affairs Minister then I equally expect a full statement on who, why and what disciplinary action is to be implemented. Anything less and one really has to conclude this Council of Ministers really does have something to hide. Something that is beginning to appear increasingly worrying and desperate.
Why did Deputy Anne Pryke feel the need to 'demand' entry; to what purpose and under what authority? Why did Danny Wherry turn up and demand he be allowed to 'recover' some items he had left there previously? Indeed, what were these items? Has he ever been interviewed to explain? The questions are of the sort that really cannot be satisfactorily left unanswered. I mean, just imagine if either of these individuals were facing hushed up allegations from any of the abuse victims....
Meanwhile, maybe I really ought to dust off that 'recall referendum' proposition over the summer and get it lodged after all? Well, there's the trolls and the lies. I guess you'll just have to log on again in a day or two to catch up on the sex and the videotape...
Keep the Faith