So what could be contained in the 'Metropolitan Interim Police Report' well i believe some of the answers are to be found in Graham Powers Judicial Review.
This Interim report was requested by David Warcup so it could be used with his letter to Chief Executive Bill Ogley on the 10th November 2008
So Mistake number 1 is made right there and as far as i understand it is this.
The Metropolitan Police were carrying out a ' Critical' Oversight of Operation Rectangle and what David Warcup allegedly received on the 10th November 2008 from Brian Sweeting was an Interim report. Now what happens next is a bit shocking and seriously need explaining.
Surely Someone of David Warcup's experience would have known that the Metropolitan Police were carrying out a 'Critical' Oversight of Operation Rectangle and so cannot or must not be used in any Disciplinary Matters. Make no mistake and its very public knowledge The Metropolitan Police have been very upset about what has happened, why was it allowed to happen.
This is from Senator Le Marquand
Suspension review 1 ( Voiceforchildren)
Senator B.I. Le Marquand:
There is no issue with those, but we must make sure you get those. This is the sensitive area. The sensitive area is that in his letter which you have not seen Mr. Warcup makes reference partly to the Metropolitan Police report of which you are both aware. I have not seen that report, and indeed the previous Minister did not see that report, and the reason for that is because that report contains highly sensitive information regarding individual cases, naming potential offenders, victims, et cetera et cetera. Now my advisors do not want me to see that report because of that sort of sensitive information but I am aware that because reference has been made to it in Mr. Warcup's letter that it not unreasonable that Mr. Power or yourself or some representatives, which in this case might not include lawyers because of the very sensitive area, be able to see the report and to check that in fact that which has been quoted from it has been accurately quoted. This is sensitive because even my own advisors do not want me to see it, I believe for good reasons, because I am not an operational police officer and I am the Home Affairs Minister. What we have been looking at, and this has again been a reason which has slightly delayed the responses in other matters, is mechanisms for dealing with the difficulty of it containing information which frankly is not relevant directly because only the information which
is referred to by Mr. Warcup in his letter is really relevant. So what we have been looking at is different possibilities which are canvassed for you now to try and get around the difficulty. One of the difficulties is to try and persuade the Metropolitan Police to produce a redacted, reduced version of the report which would only effectively make reference to the matters which related to management structures and so on, and not to individual cases. But I am not sure whether they are going to agree to do that because there is a second difficulty which I will be absolutely open with you about, which is this, and it is a relationship issue in relation to the States of Jersey
Police and the Metropolitan Police who are not entirely happy that a report was produced for a particular purpose and is now going to be involved for a different purpose. But let me see if I can ... if it was not referred to in the letters it would not be in play at all.
Now the question must be asked why didn't David Warcup know that the Met Report couldn't be used in the suspension of Graham Power
Now was the so called Met Interim Report really an official report? The Metropolitan Police have refused to confirm its existence even when requested through the Freedom Of Information. Brian Sweeting when interviewing Lenny Harper on the 18th November 2008 denied its existence and when Andre Baker was interviewed he was told that it didn't exist.
What if it's not an official report?
What if it's not on Metropolitan Police Headed Paper?
What if its just some notes sent over by Brian Sweeting and with no idea what David Warcup and Team Ogley had planned with them?
There is a very good reason that ILM is not seeing that report
Also remember the Met had only been working for 70 odd days and before the 10th November had not even interviewed Lenny Harper
"WHAT THE BLOODY HELL IS IN THAT SAFE"
Brian Napier QC was meant to be a quick investigation into the original suspension of Graham Power, the ones who are investigating this know the complete and utter Farce he has walked into.
So what could be contained in those notes/report from Brian Sweeting. ILM is expecting to find a substantial report. This is some of what he will find
On 9th January 2009 Mr Power applied for leave for judicial review of the decision of the Previous Minister made on 12th November 2008. In the meantime, the new Minister (who had taken office in December 2008) had familiarised himself with the events, taken advice and decided to review the suspension. Mr Power was formally informed of this by the Minister’s letter of 30th January 2009. He expressed the wish to see Mr Power in advance to review the material that he would be considering in deciding whether or not to continue the suspension so that Mr Power could make representations to him about that material. Accepting the principle that leave for judicial review should not be granted if an alternative remedy is available, Mr Power agreed to the adjournment of his application to await the outcome of the Minister’s review.
"That meeting took place on 13th February 2009 and was attended by the Minister, the Head of the Employee Relations for the States of Jersey, Mr Power and representing him, Dr T Brain, Chief Constable of Gloucestershire. The meeting was taped and we have a typed transcript. The meeting went on into the afternoon and much of it was taken up with the status of the Disciplinary Code and its relationship to the statutory provisions.. The Minister ultimately determined that he had power under Paragraph 2.3.3 of the Code to suspend the Chief Officer at the outset of the procedure and certainly before any preliminary investigation. There were discussions about the material he would rely on. It was agreed that Mr Power should have the letter from Mr Warcup of 11th November 2008 and the briefing notes for the media presentation. Issues arose in relation to the Metropolitan Police report referred to in Mr Warcup’s letter in that the report contained sensitive material in relation to ongoing inquiries. The Metropolitan Police were not prepared for it to be used for the purposes of disciplinary proceedings. The provisional view at this meeting was that a redacted version would be made available.
The Suspension Review meeting took place on 5th March 2009 with the same attendees. It was also taped and transcribed. Further problems had been encountered with the Metropolitan Police report and the Minister resolved to proceed by ignoring the sections of Mr Warcup’s letter which related to that report, which proposal was ultimately accepted by Dr Brain"
So because of problems encountered with the Met report they would proceed by ignoring those sections in Warcups letter and they are listed as follows
This is part of the now 'INFAMOUS MET REPORT' Below are the points quoted f
““There are no specific terms of reference for Operation Rectangle – given the potential size, complexity and sensitivity of the enquiry, one would have expected a more precise terms of reference.
From a command control perspective, if ex DCO Harper was SIO then it raises the question of who supervised him at a strategic level.
There is no policy book dealing with forensic strategy which is a critical area in this investigation.
A major factor affecting the planning of Operation Rectangle was the decision to limit it to a single agency led investigation, e.g., Police only.”
That is the 'METROPOLITAN INTERIM REPORT'
Why didn't they call Graham Power in and discuss those issues why the big show on the 12th November 2008
Well the reason for the big show is this
The Chief Minister & Home Affairs Minister were both leaving office in November 2008
The Chief Minister had never recovered from his Newsnight humiliation
The Jersey Image had to be protected at all costs " State Sponsored Child Abuse is not good for business"
The Child Abuse Investigation had to be made out to be a total cock up, again i will leave the last word to Dr Brain
Dr. T. Brain:
I think you do have to decide that. I am trying to find a way of being more helpful to enable you to make that decision. I think it is difficult for us and I am not seeking to be obtuse on the issue to envisage what “more serious circumstances” are without further guidance on the issue from the code itself. It is very open-ended, but I think the word we have to concentrate on here is “serious” and that goes back to the issues that are raised in the letter of 12th November, but they do have to be raised in context. While these issues could be serious, we have to then say is it possible still for Mr. Power to have been given the opportunity to consider addressing them because while there are matters that have been raised here they are capable of explanation? Certainly they are capable of being placed in context. I do not wish to put all of the matters of what would properly be the investigation of potentially a hearing, but we do have to consider where some of the things that are fully applicable in a U.K. context relate to the circumstances of Jersey and the investigations which are under consideration. All of these matters here are capable of an explanation had the opportunity been given to provide that explanation and maybe any misunderstandings could have been cleared up at that point. Of course, what we had was a presentation which raised these issues of Mr. Power so in effect what we had was an accusation and a trial without a hearing and that amounts to lack of due process, lack of compliance with the code and I think, more crucially a failure to comply with human rights. Accusations were made; they were not made to Mr. Power and he was given no effective opportunity of answering them. These were management issues. These are not issues of personal misconduct. These are management issues and they are capable of a management explanation which could have been given and for which there was no opportunity to give. Can I just pause for a moment, because I have been talking for a long time? Issues have been raised and we are very happy that you raise these and we explore them in depth, but could I just take the opportunity to pause and just consult with Mr. Power for one moment?
Now by doing what they did with just a letter written by David Warcup would not be enough. No it needed backing up with something that people could relate too, something that people trust so would believe its true, something that would allow them to suspend a Chief of Police, something so powerful that it would never be questioned ( the jersey way-ref local media) so LORDS,LADIES & GENTLEMAN I GIVE YOU
THE METROPOLITAN 'INTERIM' POLICE REPORT?