Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Brian Napier QC

So below are the Terms of Reference for the review of the management process that led to the suspension of the Chief of Police.

This is not some light hearted review

There are so many issues that need answering

We are talking about the suspension of the Former Chief of Police Graham Power a man who was suspended in the middle of one of the biggest Police investigations since the 'Beast of Jersey'.

As time passes you can forget the enormity of this single act, you can forget about what the political climate was like at the time, you can forget about Former Chief Minister Walker making an ass of himself on Newsnight, the debacle press conference at St . Martin, Deputy Le Claire overhearing what sounded like someone demanding Lenny but settling for the Chief,you can forget these things.

The year 2008 will live long in Jerseys memory

Who could forget the bailiffs Liberation Day Speech when poor Jersey came before the Abuse Survivors, this again was setting the tone. The date was May 9th 2008.

This was all leading up to a Grand Finale the Big Show the date penciled in was the 12th November 2008. Now why was this date chosen why did they have to do it right then, well the answer is a simple one.

THE CHIEF WAS ON HOLIDAY

'When the Boss is away the mice will play'

This is why we must remember the climate in which the CPO was suspended this is very important.

Remember it wasn't just the 23rd February 2008 that went 'World Wide'

The 12th November 2008 also went ' World Wide'

What have we had so far. Well we have spent 1 million pounds on nothing, a redacted disciplinary report so paper thin that its nothing short of a joke and an insult to anyone with an ounce of intelligence.

If there are any States Members out there who thinks the process was fair and the report was some kind of Guilty Verdict please do not enter the States Building again. You are a danger to me, my Island , and the very lively hood of every person living on this Island. It tells me you do not know right from wrong that makes you a liability and very dangerous.

For me watching what has happened to people like Power,Harper, Syvret and Bellwood is not a shock it was at the time but not now. We just cant seem to get anything right over here.

When they embarked on the Suspension of GP did they just think

"look we just get him suspended no one ever asks questions all will be ok and that Met thing gives it some meat"

So lets hope we find out, here are some of the points.

"Review the manner in which senior officers collated information and presented it to the Minister for Home Affairs that ultimately led to the suspension of the Chief Officer of Police"

So this must be Warcup expressing his concerns to the Chief Executive that the investigation was not following UK guidelines, writing a letter that included a Met Interim Review that had not interviewed any of the main characters plus should never be used in a suspension, the original dates on the suspension drafts having been drawn up before the Met report arrived on the 10th, what would the then Minister for Home Affairs know what is right or wrong.

We know the Judicial Review was very critical of the original suspension

We Know the notes of the suspension meeting had been destroyed before all parties had signed them off

We Know TLS fought like crazy to stop GP getting the dates for the original suspension drafts

We know Scott letters have been sent out so things cant be looking good.

We also have this

3. Report

A Report should be prepared for the Chief Minister. The Commissioner must
be aware that the entire disciplinary process for the Chief Officer of Police is
conducted under his Terms and Conditions of Employment, which include a
Code of Conduct for Disciplinary Process. This Code requires confidentiality
to be maintained by all parties throughout the disciplinary process. As such,
the report should therefore be in 2 parts –

(i) Part I should consist of matters appropriate for immediate publication
to States Members and the Public;

(ii) Part II relating to those matters specific to the Chief Officer of Police
which under his Code of Conduct have to remain confidential until the
disciplinary process has been completed.

So seeing as there are no disciplinary proceedings it looks like the whole Napier Report can be made public with zero redactions what a complete blessing.

So we are going to get a full report where we can see exactly what happened

Why is it taking so long to come out?

Where all procedures followed correctly in suspending the Chief of Police

This is not about Graham Powers role in the Historic Child Abuse investigation this is about whether he got Sacrificed at the Alter of Jerseys Image.

The suspension of Graham Power was a small price to pay for some. The foot stamping head nodding lackeys of the States Motherland would agree with this.

I want a full report from Napier

And I want the Wiltshire report or at least 80% of it

Until we have this no one knows what went on

rs


A review of the management process that led to the suspension of the
Chief Officer of Police

1. Commissioner

The Chief Minister wishes to appoint a Commissioner to undertake a review
of the manner in which the Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police was
suspended from his duties on 12th November 2008. Given the length of time
that has elapsed since the Chief Officer of Police was suspended, and the
concerns raised by States Members particularly following the publication of
the Affidavit from the suspended Chief Officer of Police, the Chief Minister is
proposing to commission an independent review to assure himself and States
Members that the management of the process was conducted correctly.

2. Terms of Reference

The purpose of the Review is to –

(a) Examine the procedure employed by the Chief Minister’s Department
and the Minister for Home Affairs in the period leading up to the
suspension of the Chief Officer of Police on 12th November 2008.

(b) Review the manner in which senior officers collated the information
and presented it to the Minister for Home Affairs that ultimately led to
the suspension of the Chief Officer of Police.

(c) Investigate whether the procedure for dealing with the original
suspension was correctly followed at all times, including –

(i) the reason for the immediate suspension of the Chief Officer
of Police;

(ii) whether there were any procedural errors in managing the
suspension process.

(d) Review all information relating to the original suspension procedure,
including relevant sections of the published Affidavit from the
suspended Chief Officer of Police.

(e) The Report should highlight any areas where, in the opinion of the
Commissioner, sufficient evidence exists that would support in the
interests of open government a full Committee of Inquiry into the
manner in which the Chief Officer of Police was suspended on
12th November 2008.

3. Report

A Report should be prepared for the Chief Minister. The Commissioner must
be aware that the entire disciplinary process for the Chief Officer of Police is
conducted under his Terms and Conditions of Employment, which include a
Code of Conduct for Disciplinary Process. This Code requires confidentiality
to be maintained by all parties throughout the disciplinary process. As such,
the report should therefore be in 2 parts –

(i) Part I should consist of matters appropriate for immediate publication
to States Members and the Public;

(ii) Part II relating to those matters specific to the Chief Officer of Police
which under his Code of Conduct have to remain confidential until the
disciplinary process has been completed.










This a picture of Robert Stantford Tuck in his Hurricane,he had 30 victories when he was shoot down in 1942 he survived the war ( A real legend)

' One of the Few'

58 comments:

GeeGee said...

I too want a non-redacted Napier report. No reason at all why it should not be in it's entirety. Nothing less will do.

Has anybody any idea why we are still waiting, or when we can expect this to materialise?

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

One can only hope that Napier realises how much his reputation is on the line.

I think it is safe to say, that our government don't have a reputation to lose.

Ole Razzy said...

Rico, the terms of reference state;

(ii) Part II relating to those matters specific to the Chief Officer of Police
which under his Code of Conduct have to remain confidential until the
disciplinary process has been completed.

Whilst I have no idea whether a full version of Napier will be made avaialable for public consumption if I was a COM spin doctor I might seriously consider advising TLS, ILM et al to only release Part I. The reason is that it could be agrued that the diciplinary process was NEVER completed due to lack of time so its no longer in the public interest.

Capiche?

Anonymous said...

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

One can only hope that Napier realises how much his reputation is on the line.

I think it is safe to say, that our government don't have a reputation to lose.

What the hell is Philip Ozouf doing in Rwanda overseeing the elections
Is this some new world order or something

rico sorda said...

Razzy

I hear what your saying but after what they did with Wiltshire not a chance.

In the JEP tonight it explains what Senator Ozouf is up too. Hey if China don't come through for us Rwanda it is

rs

Anonymous said...

[so its no longer in the public interest.]

Its not just about GP, it is in the public interest if it involves any member of the states and or civil service, perhaps leading new disciplinary actions or resignations!!

Anonymous said...

Isn't Ironic, that the same people who are getting critisized in The Napier Report for their unfair and unjustible delaying tactics, are the very same people who are unfairly delaying the publication of this long over due Napier Report.

How and why can they still be getting away with it?...

Because they can!?

rico sorda said...

Remember

Chief Minister Walker- Gone
Home Affairs Minister Lewis-Gone
States HR Mr Critch-Gone
APC Warcup- now running away

One man is left standing and not just any man but 'The one who Destroys Notes' yes Chief Executive Bill Ogley

I believe its taking a while for the report to come out because they cant quite grasp what way they will spin it.

This is the Chief of Police we are talking about

What that bunch did must be so water tight and squeaky clean that there cant even be a sniff of lets say 'Foul Play'

This is not about oh we must learn from this and move on rubbish. If anyone comes out and mentions that rubbish again they should be made to walk the plank into herds deep.

I mean lets call this straight here was the Chief of Police Shafted by the Jersey ruling elite its as simple as that.

Now Andrew Lewis wouldn't have a clue if that happened he just gets shown a nice media presentation and the signs the dotted line.

What we need to know is what went on between Ogley and Warcup that led up to the suspension and the Met getting shafted.

We need answers

rs

Anonymous said...

This is from GP's affidavit concerning CE Bill Ogley

“The third example I have chosen relates to a Strategic Planning Workshop held at the St Pauls Centre on Friday 24th October 2008. The Workshop was attended by a number of senior public servants including myself and the Chief Executive. At the commencement of the workshop the Chief Executive asked for silence and said that he had an announcement to make. He named a senior civil servant who was present. The person named is a suspect in the abuse investigation but has not been suspended. The Chief Executive said that the suspect had his total support and that “if anyone wants to get…….(the suspect)…….they would have to get me first”. This announcement was applauded by some but not all of the persons present. I took it as a further indication of the “in crowd” closing ranks against the “threat” of the abuse enquiry. The Chief Executive later played a significant role in my suspension.”

mac said...

The Chief Executive said that the suspect had his total support and that “if anyone wants to get…….(the suspect)…….they would have to get me first”.

And just over two weeks later Graham Power is suspended!

Anonymous said...

That infamous meeting (for Ogley) at St Pauls Centre, on 24th October 2008, was also only 19, no 17 days before Ogley's plan to arrange for G Power to go quitely and without a fuss.

Well that well and truely back fired, didnt it?

rico sorda said...

I believe Napier will do an honest and good report, its what our lot do with it that counts. Surly it cant be another 'Wiltshire Fiasco' it cant be. What we need is full public disclosure and Deputy Bob Hill is meant to have oversight on it like Alan Breckon did with Verita.

I think the delay might be because Chief Executive Ogley is still in position, he is so involved in the suspension good or bad. Surly they didn't mess this suspension up .

rs

Anonymous said...

Missed an important one in that list posted but not put up, Acting Chief of Police.

Rico, Safe to put up no names mentioned just positions they hold and fact. (posted here just after 7pm).

rico sorda said...

I have been looking at Graham Powers Affidavit after a poster pointed it out to me. This bit is interesting and it concerns the destroying of notes. When there was a an in camera debate at the beginning of 2009 ILM said he was shocked at hearing this news obviously that was leaked.


32. On 5th December 2008 I received a further letter on behalf of the Minister (Appendix “I”). This informed me that the original notes of the meeting had been destroyed. It is my belief that, in the sequence of events, this destruction took place at a time when the Minister and his civil servants were on clear notice that I was preparing a legal challenge to my suspension, and may have been done because the notes contained evidence which was in my favour. I have made a separate formal complaint in respect of this.

So I take it from this that the Chief of Police GP didn't sign off the notes taken. Obviously this is a point that Brian Napier will be looking at. Now I don't know what is right or wrong on this but I do find it strange that the notes where destroyed seeing this was the suspension of the Chief of Police and the said notes could be produced as evidence in favor of the Chief Executive.

These are Genuine concerns that must be addressed

rs

Anonymous said...

I see Terry le Sueur, in a letter in tonight's (11/8/10) JEP (which is not present on thisisjersey.com) takes Nick Corbel to task. Amongst other "reasons" Le Sueur mentions his surprise and disappointment that Mr. Corbell states that "meetings have not taken place to brief him and other union representatives on plans to roll out a States wide voluntary redundancy scheme".

Comical Terry claims that the principles of the scheme "were communicated to Unite/TGWU several years ago".

Anyone else smell a rat? It seems he had a States wide voluntary redundancy scheme planned before the zero-ten black hole debacle and the much wider recent financial turmoil in the markets over the last couple of years materialised.

Foresight? or forward planning?

rico sorda said...

This is also interesting as it deals with the Policing of Jersey. Are the Jersey Police by law meant to follow Uk Guidelines?

The reason for asking this is Obvious Wiltshire's terms of reference was based on Guidelines of ACPO/NPIA. Now is the Jersey Police run on these guidelines and if they are what does that now mean for our whole policing structure in Jersey.

Lenny Harper and Graham Power called in ACPO/NPIA for guidance. Did they have to do this or should this have been happening anyway do we know?

This is from GP'S Affidavit


34. On 3rd December 2008 I received a copy of the proposed terms of reference for the Investigating Officer in respect of the allegations against me (Appendix “E”). The Investigation has been given the title of “Operation Haven” and is headed by the Chief Constable of Wiltshire. The Investigating Officer has since made it clear that he does not regard matters relating to my suspension as falling within his remit and consequently he will make no enquiries in respect of what occurred. On my reading, the terms of reference invite an investigation into the extent of my compliance with guidelines applicable to police services in England and Wales. No evidence is offered as to why these guidelines should be deemed to be applicable to Jersey I have made separate representations to the Investigating Officer in respect of this and other aspects of the proposed terms of reference for “Operation Haven.”

This is the bit that sticks out

"No evidence is offered as to why these guidelines should be deemed to be applicable to Jersey"

So has GP been judged on best policing practice in the UK but not applicable in Jersey. The reason for asking this is again obvious concerning Wiltshire and would explain why the Disciplinary case was dropped because if Graham Power could prove they don't they could never ever win the disciplinary procedure and we have just wasted a million Pound.

Slowly but surly this is starting to make sense

The Disciplinary was dragged out for a reason

Now this might just be the reason

rs

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

It's just one big mish mash. Wiltshire's TOR are based on UK and Wales national policing guidelines (ACPO/NPIA). But the "not fit for purpose" disciplinary code is not, it's a "not fit for purpose" JERSEY disciplinary code.

Furthermore, if Jersey is to follow National Policing Guidelines, then it is goodbye to our Honory Police, Centeniers and will obviously bring into question the role of our Constables.

Talk about making it up as they go along!

Anonymous said...

"Furthermore, if Jersey is to follow National Policing Guidelines, then it is goodbye to our Honory Police, Centeniers and will obviously bring into question the role of our Constables"

Are you sure this is true ?

Anonymous said...

Ogley said:They would have to get me first.

That could account for the delay, because when he becomes the first, there certainly will be many others to follow.

Just like a row of dominoes falling

rico sorda said...

1. I, Graham Power, Q.P.M., (address) make oath and say that the contents of this my affidavit are true to the best of my knowledge information and belief.
I am the Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police. I am currently suspended from duty and seek leave to apply to the court for a review of my suspension. My feelings of grievance in this matter are summarised as follows:

Well according to TLS an Affidavit is not worth the paper its printed on. He asked the Chief Executive have you done anything wrong 'NO' came the reply and that was that.

Is it any wonder we are heading down the pan with this kind of leadership.

As for the above I will try and find out

rs

rico sorda said...

And I forgot to add

Is there one person out there who seriously thinks that David Warcup is leaving because of those feeble excuses he released last month.

He might well be leaving because of the utter shambles that is Home Affairs

Look at everything that has gone on

rs

Anonymous said...

New chief 'will improve services'

The States has appointed a new chief executive
Jersey's most senior politician has said islanders can expect to see better public services thanks to a strategic policy which will be overseen by a new civil service head.
Senator Frank Walker, president of the Policy and Resources Committee, said the new States chief executive's brief will be to focus on domestic issues, specifically ensuring better public services.

Bill Ogley is due to start work in May as the new chief executive.

Mr Ogley has said he knows he has a huge task ahead of him and that he will work to ensure the government commands public respect.

"I'm looking forward to the challenge"
Bill Ogley

Mr Ogley said he believed there was a huge distance between the public and the States.

He said one of his first tasks will be to bridge that gap and put the public at the heart of government decisions.

Mr Ogley, who is credited with making Hertfordshire County Council one of the best performing authorities in the UK, said: "I'm aware of the problems and looking forward to the challenge."

He said he wants to make islanders access to services quicker and faster.

Senator Walker said changes will not happen overnight but they will be noticeable.

He hopes that in so doing, they will help Mr Ogley deliver more cost-effective services.

Mr Ogley is due to start work on 12 May.

rico sorda said...

.15 DEPUTY T.M. PITMAN OF ST. HELIER OF THE CHIEF MINISTER REGARDING ALLEGATIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THE SWORN AFFIDAVIT OF THE CHIEF OFFICER OF THE STATES OF JERSEY POLICE:
Question

In the light of the serious and detailed allegations against the Chief Executive to the Council of Ministers outlined in the sworn affidavit, signed by the suspended Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police, recently released into the public domain by the Deputy of St. Martin, will the Chief Minister clarify why he has not, as a ‘neutral act’, suspended the Chief Executive until the allegations of engaging in political activity wholly outside of his remit can be fully investigated?

Answer

I have not suspended the Chief Executive because he has denied categorically the allegations of the suspended Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police. Further, an internal investigation carried out in November 2008, when the suspended Chief Officer first made this allegation, demonstrated that the weight of evidence suggests that his recollection of what happened at the meeting in July 2007 is not accurate.

So like I said Terry asked and Bill said no

And then an internal Investigation into the allegations concerning Ogley down at st pauls gate. LOL you just cant make this stuff up its mental they treat us all as fools.

rs

GeeGee said...

'Mr Ogley said he believed there was a huge distance between the public and the States.

He said one of his first tasks will be to bridge that gap and put the public at the heart of government decisions'

Well Mr Ogley, you were right on the first count, but you certainly have not delivered on the second!

Anonymous said...

Surely any person at that meeting at St Pauls Gate, 24th October 2008, foot stamping or not would confirm what was said by Ogley?

Anonymous said...

What meeting was held July 2007 where according to Comical Terry G Power's recollection was not accurate?

Anonymous said...

Graham Power could certainly name all present at that meeting 24th Oct. 2008.

rico sorda said...

Hi Anon

Its the dead wood politicians that I call foot stamping. If you ever sit in the states and watch what goes on you will know what i mean.

I have decided to stop going to States Sittings as I find the experience very depressing you realise that your Future and lively hood is in the hands of complete fools who shouldn't even be running a corner shop.

There are some very good states members but not enough

Also regarding the St Pauls Gate surly the Chief of Police wouldn't make up a complete lie in a sworn affidavit against someone who said something in packed room.

What civil servant would drop their boss in it.

Remember Terry held an internal investigation

rs

rico sorda said...

Anonymous said...
What meeting was held July 2007 where according to Comical Terry G Power's recollection was not accurate?

3 comments above yours

rs

Anonymous said...

"Mr Ogley has said he knows he has a huge task ahead of him and that he will work to ensure the government commands public respect"

Now its at Grand Canyon proportions unbelievable.

Keep going guys

rico sorda said...

5. Police Officers of less senior ranks have the protection of the Police (Complaints and Discipline) (Jersey) Law 1999 and the Police (Complaints and Discipline Procedure) (Jersey) order 2000 both of which are held to be compliant with the islands human rights obligations. The interpretation section of the order specifies that it shall not apply to the Chief Officer, and unlike other jurisdictions, Ministers have not created a corresponding set of “Senior Officer Disciplinary Regulations” or similar legislation to provide comparable process and protections for more senior ranks. The document used to justify the suspension was the non-statutory Disciplinary Code for the Chief Officer of Police (appendix “A”.) This document was apparently produced within the hours preceding my suspension and is based on an earlier code approved by the former Home Affairs Committee some time in the years before my appointment in 2000.

This is very interesting and a point that will be looked at by Brian Napier. So there wasn't a disciplinary code for suspending the Chief of Police under the new Ministerial Government but they did have an old one under the committee System. They were so stuck that they drew something together just before the suspension.

Who the hell would want this job. All you have to do is google and check what sort of mess you would be walking into.

rs

Ian Evans said...

What Guaranttee do we have that a full Napier Report disclosure, IS NOT REDACTED???

Do any of you trust anyone in the upper tiers of Jersey Governance???

Anonymous said...

The July 2008 meeting which G Power witnessed was the removal of Senator Stuart Syvret as H&SS Minister. TLS said that GPs recollect of this meeting was not accurate.

Anonymous said...

Sorry the July 2007 meeting

Anonymous said...

Extracts from Stuart Syvret's blog – edited/abbreviated – Part 1

Monday, 31 May 2010

I am given to understand that Mr. Power and his UK-based advisers are strongly of the view that the bribery and corruption involving land-re-zonings for highly profitable developments - which had been researched and reported to him by Deputy Carolyn Labey of Grouville - was an instrumental factor in his suspension.

Monday, 14 June 2010 – {Choices}

...the re-zoning proposition – P.75/2008 – was tabled, debated – and approved – in July 2008.
Deputy Labey, spent months investigating the matter further, and gathered more information. So alarmed, she reported the matter to Graham Power.

He considered the Deputy’s information and agreed it merited a full and thorough investigation.

He handed the case to a senior officer Dave Minty, to carry forward...

Notwithstanding repeated requests from Deputy Labey to know what progress was being made, nothing appeared to happen. Indeed, Minty flatly refused to formally interview certain willing witnesses prepared to make statements.

Nevertheless, unable to simply ignore the complaints totally, they were instead referred to the Controller and Auditor General.

Earlier in this process – with rumours of investigation beginning to circulate – Le Main is known to have had a meeting with the then Bailiff, Sir Philip Bailhache. It was shortly after this meeting that the investigative process seemed to come to a virtual halt.

Deputy Labey e-mailed Mr. Power, to express concern that the powers-that-be might be slowing the investigation in order to protect Le Main, and/or avoid a major scandal for the States. Mr. Power, added the e-mail correspondence to the case-file.

By now, the date was early November, 2008. It was around this time that Mr. Power - before leaving the island for a short break – was in communication one evening with the then Attorney General, William Bailhache. Mr. Bailhache raised the issue of the Deputy’s complaint with Mr. Power – and strongly expressed to him the view that it should not be taken seriously. He said “the Deputy’s judgment couldn’t be trusted; one only had to look at who her partner was.”

Anonymous said...

Extracts from Stuart Syvret's blog – edited/abbreviated – Part 2

Monday, 14 June 2010 – {Choices}

Mr. Power grew angry at this, and informed the Attorney General that his remarks were wholly inappropriate; that the Deputy’s complaint to the police was the proper thing to have done, and that the matter did need inquiring into.

On the 5th November, 2008, the Deputy received an angry message from the Bailiff’s chambers – demanding that she attend his office that day, as there was an issue he wanted to speak with her about.

Although intimidated by this, the Deputy refused to attend that day, as she had other commitments, but did agree to go to his office the next day – the 6th November. As soon as the door was closed and she was alone with Philip Bailhache – “he threw across the desk” at her, “a copy of one of her e-mails to Graham Power, and demanded that she explain her actions in making the complaint, and demanded that she write a letter of ‘apology’ to Graham Power ‘for having “misled” him with her e-mails’”.

The actions of Philip Bailhache were unlawful in many respects. Not only was he in breach of the Data Protection Law – he was also breaking Article 47 of the States of Jersey Law – by attempting to intimidate and harass a States member.

Shocked, intimidated and very upset at these events, Deputy Labey – with reluctance – wrote an e-mail to Mr. Power, but not one of ‘apology’; instead it, essentially, just informed him that the meeting had occurred, and what had been said to her.

Mr. Power, by this stage, was on leave in the UK for a few days. No doubt – once preliminary investigations, and the work of the Controller and Auditor General had been completed, the Police Chief would have then ensured a full investigation did take place.

However – he was unable to see that this happened.

At 8.44 a.m on the morning of Saturday the 8th November – William Bailhache wrote the first draft of the letter of suspension that was to be served on Graham Power – without warning – by Bill Ogley and Andrew Lewis - on the morning of the 12th November 2008.

Anonymous said...

Brian Napier QC, has witnessed evidence and facts to prove that he has uncovered a conspiracy. He knows that there is no getting away from it!

Anonymous said...

Do we have any more information about Carolyn Labeys complaint? Does the complaint still stand.

Anonymous said...

"Brian Napier QC, has witnessed evidence and facts to prove that he has uncovered a conspiracy."

Where is the link to this? Otherwise why post such baseless and unfounded crap?

rico sorda said...

Can someone drop the farce blog a line or when they read this can they please remove my link from their page.

Thats the last thing need so please remove

Thank you

rs

Anonymous said...

Rico, That farce blog with the likes of gazza, bruno, playing the same moron, just ignor, you should not have even displayed that last one of theirs.
Followers of your (getting better by the day)blog, donot want to hear from those sad morons.
They know that the truth is getting out and they [the sad sad moron/s] have now no place to turn, but to try to upset yours and your followers contributions.

P**s off you sad sad moron/s!!

Anonymous said...

The farce blog is not really a farce, more of a damp squid!

rico sorda said...

The reason i published that comment was to show some of the rubbish I have to put up with. I do this in search of the truth I spend a lot of my free time doing this.

Some times I ask myself what the hell am i doing

Speaking out using my name

But it comes down to who you are as a person. How were you brought up.. What is right What is wrong . Child Abuse Is Wrong

My fight continues

rs

Anonymous said...

the 'Napier' report as the 'Wiltshire' report
remains the property (albeit paid for with our money)of STATES OF JERSEY INC.

as a private for profit limited liability company
they have no obligation to make any or all of those reports public

a court order could change that..........Doh!

the fact is we are governed by a private company/artifical person/legal fiction

how does a private company get to legally, use our money as they see fit?

i continue after a years searching to be disturbed at how difficult it is for a member of the public to discover certain facts,i doubt i will find the names of the shareholders of SOJ Inc.

take a look at INTERPRETATIONS (JERSEY) LAW 1954
it has some interesting definitions of words in the schedule.

the (JERSEY) in the above refers to something,
any guesses? come on you corporate/legal types
you should know!

there are those who will say it doesnt matter that our government is a private company

i disagree

rico sorda said...

I have received a comment asking for the Filth one to be removed as my point has been made

I have no problem with that and I have removed it

rs

Anonymous said...

How does the pecking order of the establishment look. Who sits at the top?

rico sorda said...

Philip Ozouf sits at the top and has done for some time. TLS as Chief Minister has been very very poor and I think its one thing all the blogs would agree with.

I often wonder how our local media will spin TLS'S term of office as Chief Minister

Next October after the election Philip Ozouf will have to make a decision. Does he run for Chief Minister and leave the treasury, if he does who replaces him there. Now looking at the present chamber the only person i see is Deputy Gorst or maybe a Ferguson the ED minister can go no further.

This is such an important time and next year will be worse. So will ozouf even risk leaving the Treasury, im not so sure. We are coming to a crossroads with this present government, this shambles cant continue.

rs

Anonymous said...

Dont forget ILM. He will have his mind firmly set on becoming the next Chief Minister.
In his mind he thinks that this suspension saga will have faided away by then.
And you have got to remember he will not be up for a public vote.

Safe for another four years!

So he thinks?!

rico sorda said...

In not sure ILM will ever recover from this debacle. He took the General Public for complete fools. Now its one thing convincing the foot stamping lackeys of the motherland who are a complete danger to you and me that what he did was correct but the public is a different matter.

He held a Kangaroo Court

There is no getting away from what he did. Now the fact that he could do it should be a worry to all of us and any future Chief of Police.

If we lived in an Island where the media had balls and the majority of politicians had a backbone the above would never have been allowed to happen simple as that.

To be honest it doesn't even matter what side of the fence you come down on concerning GP, but, its the fact that we as an Island have allowed something resembling North Korea to happen

In any normal democracy this would have cost ILM his seat

rs

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

ILM has cemented his place in history for his handling of the suspension of our most Senior Police Officer. He will forever be written about and remembered for his actions in this horrible dark period in Jersey's History.

Anonymous said...

Rico,

Is there any indication yet as to when and even if the long over due The Napier Report will be let loose?

Anonymous said...

re: who sits at the top

there is no doubt left in my mind that none of our elected representatives are 'at the top'

the people in charge are the bailiff- L.G.
some crown officers and maybe some old money

go to graydon.co.uk, for your email address you get a free company report 'states of jersey' is interesting if a little out of date.

at best states members are short contract middle management casual employees.

for sure some with legal/banking/corporate/'good family' backgrounds lead the charge in the house,
but one of the bosses will be in attendance to ensure nothing too contentious takes place

our 'bosses' use the 'law' to keep control,
the media/threats/examples and all manner of techniques are used when necessary

elections give the illusion of democracy, but we never get to vote on the real power brokers,
do we?

it is a very sophisticated system and not one of
the current 'bosses' could have devised it,

lucky for them they only have to apply it.

rico sorda said...

Anon

I agree with you but our elected representatives need to step up and some need to just speak up

rs

Anonymous said...

Brian Napier QC, should have sent Scott letters to the Ex-Bailiff, The Bailiff and the Ex-Bailiffs Brother.

But who could be stopping/blocking him?

The Ex-Bailiff, The Bailiff and the Ex-Bailiffs Brother....

Think about it?!

Anonymous said...

The sight of Ogley mincing around like he is bullet proof is nauseating....

Anonymous said...

It can only be in their best interest not to release the report otherwise the public would be able to read in full

Anonymous said...

Assuming P Ozouf is an accountant by trade I hope that if he does step down as treasury minister for the Chief Minister role that only a qualified accountant is able to take up his vacant position. In fact, even if P Ozouf is not a qualified accountant then I think the role should still only be available to one.

I know Terry Le Sueur and his minions messed up the Euro hedging but I dread to think how many more mistakes would be made if it were given to just anyone.

Do you know if there is a criteria out of interest?

Cheers.

rico sorda said...

lol not over here

rs