Saturday, June 19, 2010

BUNGLING MINISTER 4 - 'How do we get out of this one'























We are now going to look at why Graham Power was suspended on the 12th November 2008 



But first we must remember who was in charge at that time. They are


Chief Minister Frank Walker


Chief Executive Bill Ogley


Home Affairs Minister Deputy Andrew Lewis


Deputy Police Chief Dave Warcup


The two most important documents in the original suspension and still the most important documents are 


 The Metropolitan 'Interim' Police Report


The Letter written by David Warcup on the 10th November 2008


So just  how serious are these allegations


These are the allegations contained in the Metropolitan Interim Police Report as taken from GP'S Judicial Review  So there


This Blog will concentrate on the Interim report 


““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.


These are the allegations contained in the David Warcup letter


“There is no evidence of a proper command structure having been put in place in relation to the HDLG investigation, with a designated Gold Commander responsible and accountable for the incident.


There is no recorded evidence of any strategic oversight and approval of tactical plans and enquiry parameters on the HDLG investigation.


Financial controls appear to have been weak with a lack of overall strategy and a lack of day to day control.”


““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.


So there we have it. Are these allegations so serious that the Chief of Police should have been suspended under 2.3.3 of the disciplinary code.


Now the do look impressive when they are written down and fed to the masses, but what i find more interesting is when you look behind the wording as Constable Brain & Lenny Harper will explain.


First up i will let you know the CV of Constable T.Brain who is representing Graham Power this


Dr Brain has received a number of accolades, including the Queen's Police Medal (QPM) in the 2002 Birthday Honours. He was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce (FRSA) in 2004. He was elected a Companion of the Chartered Management Institute (CCMI) in 2007. And in the Birthday Honours of June 2008, Dr Brain became an Officer of the Order of the British Empire (OBE) for his services to the police and community. He also played a major role in shaping police strategy through the 90s and 2000s - a time which saw a watershed in the police service with the introduction of PACE - the police and criminal evidence act - and the creation of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). More recently, Dr Brain received an Honorary Doctorate of Laws at Gloucester Cathedral in recognition of his service in Law Enforcement, and in particular to the county of Gloucestershire



This is no mug as Senator ILM found out in the Suspension Reviews.


 So lets look at the first allegation but i must point out that C.T.Brain & GP had not been given access to the Interim report at that time but does make a comment Just


““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.


Here is what Lenny Harper says on this point. 


 "Criminal investigations are regulated by many different laws and procedural rules.  Formal terms of reference would only be put together where there were doubts or ambiguities that needed to be clarified, such as if there were other circumstances – like another force coming in to investigate aspects of a situation, and there was a need to define their ‘rules of engagement.’  Hence the TOR for the ACPO team and Wiltshire.  However, having said all of that, the exact aims and objectives of Op. Rectangle were set out in detail in the first few pages of the main policy book and clearly stated the aims of the enquiry and its parameters, eg it was not going to investigate the allegations of cover ups by the establishment when the victims first complained.  Gradwell and Warcup could not have missed this as it was in the policy books they said were not kept properly."


Here is what C.T.Brain said concerning the Interim report


"What I will say in respect of that though is that unless there are specific allegations of misconduct, indeed gross misconduct, contained in that report there is no reason why Graham should not have been shown a copy prior to his suspension on 12th November. Furthermore, the Metropolitan Police report is only one point of view. You are fully aware now that there are other reports by a very senior and experienced U.K. investigating officer which offers a different perspective. I repeat that these should have been considered before any action was taken to suspend Graham in November. That  opinion exists should certainly be taken into account now, for to do otherwise is simply to decide the case without the full consideration of all the evidence that is available to us even now and that cannot be right in terms of Graham’s human rights or the principles of natural justice."


Just think about what is being said in the above comments " ALL THE EVIDENCE" remember how ILM wants to cherry pick what he brings to the house. REPORTS WITH DIFFERING VIEWS


Allegation no2


'From a command control perspective, if ex DCO Harper was SIO then it raises the question of who supervised him at a strategic level.'


Here is what Lenny Harper said tTHERE


This is all very well in the UK where there are sometimes more chiefs than Indians, and yet again, shows the ignorance of these people (or maybe just maliciousness) of the difference in the situation in policing Jersey. In the UK there would Assistant Chief Constables by the barrow-load to take charge of the investigation.  Above them would be the Deputy and the Chief.  Not so in Jersey.  That is one of the reasons the ACPO Homicide review team were appointed and why they took such an active role.  You will note in a number of their reports that they give advice on strategic matters.



This is what C.T.BRAIN SAYS


S.I.O. Harper was not effectively supervised. This is simply wrong. There is no issue that S.I.O. Harper was properly supervised by Graham Power and that he did so to the best of his ability, under the guidance of an A.C.P.O. advisory group which formed the function of a Gold support group in a critical incident in the United Kingdom. His evidence of supervision is recorded in notebooks, to which regrettably he does not now have access


 Now it starts to make sense why ACPO had to be discredited and simply not used in the Suspension Reviews and the Judicial Review if they had then there suspension would start falling apart


Remember also Lenny Harper nor Andre Baker head of the ACPO team had been interviewed before they sent it 



Allegation 3


'There is no policy book dealing with forensic strategy which is a critical area in this investigation.'


Here is what Lenny Harper said 


There was indeed a forensic policy book – indeed, I think it was completed and we had to go into a second one whilst I was there.  Simply untrue.  The strategy was laid out in the policy book which ACPO said were kept well.  On their visit on 28 June (which was to discuss the existing forensic strategy) ACPO expressed a preference for doing the document in the UK style, separate from the Police book document, at any further scenes.  This was noted and consideration would have been given to it.  There was no criticism however of the manner in which the forensic strategy had been laid out in the document shown to ACPO.  On the contrary.


This part was not brought up in the Suspension review so i don't have C.T.BRAIN's view on it. Im sure Lenny Harper can add more if he feels the need 


Allegation 4


'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.'


Here is what Lenny Harper said


Yes – those suspects who had been named by victims would have been delighted to have been invited to participate in the enquiry. Again this shows the grasp of reality lacking in the Warcup and Gradwell argument.  The only reason why we had so many victims come forward was that we did not share info with the Jersey “caring services.” Another fact totally ignored here is that it was not “the police only.”  Not only did we work closely with the NSPCC from London but we actually had one of their staff based in the incident room working side by side with our detectives.  Interestingly, the NSPCC told us that they had frequently tried to get a foothold in Jersey but had repeatedly been rebuffed by the Children’s Service.



This is what C.T.BRAIN SAYS


 There were sound operational reasons for not including key partners in the investigation, as suspicion had fallen on a number of senior individuals in both the departments of education and social services. The involvement of the N.S.P.C.C. (National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children) which Graham instigated, was a perfectly valid alternative. (3) The use of an independent advisory group was not effectively managed. It is a matter of record that the Attorney General viewed the involvement of an independent advisory group as dialogue with potential jurors and that he wanted the group disbanded on the basis that it was a U.K. structure with no proper place in a small jurisdiction and that its activities could be seen as prejudicial to a fair trial. I in no way invite a critique of the Attorney General’s decision, but I do ask you to observe that it can hardly be levelled as a reason for suspending or investigating Graham


There is so much more information for me to put up but i believe that is enough for the moment,  i will be blogging again tomorrow because this must be done


What i believe is becoming clear is the importance of ACPO in all of this.


I know there are things going on with the Met Interim Report which should become more clearer in the coming weeks as you can imagine there are some serious questions that need answering things like


How did a non disciplinary report end up being used to suspend a chief of police


How did a non disciplinary report end up being used to suspend a chief of police without first interviewing Lenny Harper who was SIO or Andre Baker head of the ACPO working team


These questions are being asked that i can assure you 


There are answers to ILM'S serious allegations and like i say who is advising him on police procedures well we find out on tuesday 


AGAIN I ASK YOU WHER IS THE 'LOCAL MEDIA'


INVESTIGATE THE ISSUES 


REMEMBER THE JEP TRASHED THE HISTORIC ABUSE INVESTIGATION 


THIS HAS GOT TO STOP AND WHY THIS PLEB AND TEAM VOICE HAS STEPPED INTO THE VOID


THANK YOU FOR READING


RS













11 comments:

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

One very sad aspect of all this is that Home Affairs Minister, Senator Ian (P9-26) Le Marquand no doubt believes he has respect for the way he has dealt with all this.

Ian, take it from me, you are becoming a bl00dy laughing stock.

Rico, I believe it's in suspension review #1 where Ian Le Marquand REFUSES to even consider looking at Andrew Lewis' original, very dodgy, suspension of Graham Power, i'll let your readers draw their own conclusions as to why!

The MET "Interim" Report's (if it exists) function was to be critical that was its purpose. David Warcup would know it is not supposed to be used for disciplinary purposes, and no doubt why Ian Le Marquand had this to say at a Suspension Review.

"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".

I bet the MET Police are p1ssed! And like you said, how can anybody take the MET "Interim" Report (if it exists) seriously on the 10th of November when two of the most crucial players in this - Lenny Harper and Andre Baker - hadn't even been interviewed???

I could go on and on, but for the sake of Ian Le Marquand, are you starting to realise why you are looking like a laughing stock to some of us? I dare say Lenny Harper and Graham Power aren't laughing though..................Yet!

rico sorda said...

VFC

ILM is trying to bring information to the house but is having problems well i bet he is that is why i have called this

" How do we get out of this one"

This became a joke a very long time ago and it is very very serious.

They ridiculed Lenny Harper suspended a Chief of Police and plotted the removal of ex Senator Syvret when he said he had very serious concerns in child protection & removed Simon Bellwood for the same reason

IS anyone seeing a pattern here

Make no mistake i believe ILM should go, his effort in the suspension review hearings is bad enough and where is the sex offenders register

But what of our local media? I bet they are all ready working on a headline saying how guilty lenny & graham are without doing any investigative journalism

im showing you just a little on how these allegation can be refuted and how they are not so very very serious

This Farce has got to end

rs

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

I posted this Blog in November 2009 on VFJ. It really does deserve a look as it explains everything.

Ian Evans said...

A very informative post Rico, thanks.

rico sorda said...

When i had a chat with Andrew Lewis he said the suspension of Graham Power was to protect him and was shocked about how long it was taking and that ILM was now the corporate parent. This is what lewis said when he suspended GP


" This is a precautionary suspension only and does not imply that any conclusions have been reached about your alleged role in the management of the historic abuse inquiry at this stage"

rs

Anonymous said...

Tuesday 22nd June


15. The Minister for Home Affairs will table an answer to the following question asked by the Deputy of St. Mary –

“Can the Minister confirm that the Interim Report of the Metropolitan Police which was received on 10th November 2008 was used in the original suspension of the Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police by his predecessor, former Deputy Andrew Lewis?”

rico sorda said...

Lets not forget ILM tried to say there was a scandal concerning ACPO this is because they have got to try and rubbish the ACPO team, the reports don't back up that the Historic Abuse Investigation was a bad run mess.

This is from VFC

The time arrived! On the 20th April 2010 the Home Affairs Minster dropped the bombshell, the “scandal” and that was (in the words of the Home Affairs Minister).

“The issue to which I alluded was an issue as to whether there was a conflict of interest on the part of the senior officer involved. That conflict of interest would be in the area of the fact that that officer was about to apply in Jersey for a senior post in the Jersey police force.”

The Home affairs Minister also went on to say -
“The term “scandal” as I understand it from having looked it up in a dictionary is wide enough to cover improper conduct. If a senior officer puts himself into a position where there is a conflict of interest, or potential conflicts of interest, that is, in my view, improper.”

So why did he look up the word “scandal” in the dictionary? If this senior ranking ACPO Officer was found to be involved in any type of real scandal would there be any reason to look the word up in a dictionary? Furthermore couldn’t it be argued that the Home Affairs Minister could equally be describing the role played by acting Chief Police Officer, David Warcup, who was instrumental in the suspension of his Senior Officer and stands to inherit his job?

This is what Deputy Bob Hill asked the Home Affairs Minister.

I will just ask the Minister would he not really agree that the real scandal is the Chief Executive Officer’s role (Bill Ogley)? He was the person who appointed the Deputy Police Chief (David Warcup). He was then involved directly again with the suspension of the Police Chief (Graham Power) with the Deputy Chief Police Officer (David Warcup) and now has come forward with recommending that the Deputy Chief Officer (David Warcup) should have the suspended police officer’s job. Would he not really think that is the real scandal of what is going on at the moment? and the Home affairs Minister’s reply? A simple “No.”

rs

rico sorda said...

Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade will ask the following question of the Minister for Home Affairs –

“Can the Minister inform the Assembly from whom he receives advice on police procedures, in relation to the suspension of the Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police?”

Monty will be asking this question in the states on tuesday

So who is advising the minister on police procedures?

What are the correct procedures?

Are they set procedures or do Police Chiefs adapt to the situations they face?

Seeing as Jersey has a small police force and a different legal system to the uk how does that effect what procedures you use?

Could it be that David Warcup & Mick Gradwell just had a different opinion and there is no right or wrong way?

Is this why the Met lost the plot about their report being used for disciplinary and suspension

Is this why Wiltshire wanted a say in their report being used for and disciplinary action?

rs

Anonymous said...

Well done rico keep up the good work.

Could you explain this a little more please

Allegation no2



'From a command control perspective, if ex DCO Harper was SIO then it raises the question of who supervised him at a strategic level.'



Here is what Lenny Harper said tTHERE



This is all very well in the UK where there are sometimes more chiefs than Indians, and yet again, shows the ignorance of these people (or maybe just maliciousness) of the difference in the situation in policing Jersey. In the UK there would Assistant Chief Constables by the barrow-load to take charge of the investigation. Above them would be the Deputy and the Chief. Not so in Jersey. That is one of the reasons the ACPO Homicide review team were appointed and why they took such an active role. You will note in a number of their reports that they give advice on strategic matters.





This is what C.T.BRAIN SAYS



S.I.O. Harper was not effectively supervised. This is simply wrong. There is no issue that S.I.O. Harper was properly supervised by Graham Power and that he did so to the best of his ability, under the guidance of an A.C.P.O. advisory group which formed the function of a Gold support group in a critical incident in the United Kingdom. His evidence of supervision is recorded in notebooks, to which regrettably he does not now have access

rico sorda said...

Could the problem be that ILM has never had his judgement questioned before.

Can ILM handle being wrong

And now for the amazing bit could ILM be taking advice on police procedures from David Warcup? If this is so we have a whole new can of worms.

RS

rico sorda said...

I should have my next blog up tonight where i will be looking at the points raised in the David Warcup letter.


rs