Monday, January 16, 2012

MATT TAPP FILES - 4



STATES OF JERSEY POLICE








Matt Tapp 4



In Matt Tapp 3 we have seen how Judge Pitchers used Tapps Report in the pre-trial of  Donelly - Wateridge and Aubin.



We also know that it was DCO David Warcup who brought Matt Tapp to the Island in September 2008



Tapps report was disclosed to the Defence council 



Just how credible is Matt Tapps report?



After what came out in the Home Affairs Scrutiny Sub Panels BDO review I have some serious doubts.



What I will be showing in my next postings is how the Jersey Evening Post jumped all over the comments made by Pitchers. These are the same lurid headlines they used when talking about Lenny Harpers expenses. You will be shocked at what happened. Just like the BDO Review it went under the radar.



Is anything done under Warcup & Gradwell credible.



Now back to Matt Tapp. 




I  refer to a question as by the former Deputy of St Mary:


.35   THE DEPUTY OF ST. MARY OF THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS REGARDING THE AUTHOR OF A REPORT ADVISING THE STATES OF JERSEY POLICE ON MEDIA-RELATED MATTERS:


Question

In his reply to a written question from the Deputy of St. Martin on 23rd March 2010, the Minister referred to the lengthy quotation which forms part of the judgement in the matter of the Attorney General v. Aubin and others [2009] J.R.C. 035A. in the following terms “The quotation above which is attributed to an outside expert is a quotation from the report of an independent media expert who was called in to advise the States of Jersey Police on media related matters.” Would the Minister inform members who called for this report, when and why, who conducted it, how were those who undertook the review were selected and what their qualifications were? Will the Minister release the report to members as it has already been used in a public court judgement?


Answer

In September 2008 an external media consultant, experienced in working at ACPO level in the UK, was formally engaged by the then Deputy Chief of Police with the knowledge of the Chief Officer of Police to develop an appropriate external communication strategy regarding Operation Rectangle. This was primarily to ensure:


  • That trials and ongoing investigations were not compromised or challenged on the grounds of an abuse of process, based on the information supplied to the media by the States of Jersey Police.
  • That the public were presented with accurate facts.

 

The external media consultant gave advice on these matters and subsequently resigned from his role. He then produced a written report in relation to his advice. Other issues relating to the report fall both within the ambit of the enquiry being conducted by the Commissioner (Brian Napier.) and the terms of the first Wiltshire Police Report and it is not appropriate for me to express an opinion thereon at this stage.


I will need to take advice as to whether I can properly release this report to Members at this time or at a time in the future and in what form.  My position remains that I am keen to release as much information as possible to Members of the States and as soon as possible.




Why did Matt Tapp resign from his role?




Who was overseeing the work of Matt Tapp?




When did Matt Tapp Resign?




When did Matt Tapp submit his report?




Who did he submit it to?




How much was Matt Tapp paid?





Why wasn't it released alongside Wiltshire & the BDO ALTO report 





How did this Report end up with the Defence council and then quoted as Gospel by Judge Pitchers? 




How credible was it and who  has seen it. 



We must never stop asking the questions. Im following my instinct on this one for the simple reason it doesn't look right. Something stinks. Was it the same procedure they repeated in 2009 with the BDO Review when outside police consultant  Mike Kellett was under the wing of D/Supt Mick Gradwell. 



This will develop but I can only do it in stages. 



Rico Sorda 



Team Voice



This is what Judge Pitchers quoted during the pre-trial;


The legitimate criticisms of him and the potential damage that he did to any inquiry or Court proceedings are best expressed not by me setting out my opinion but by the professional judgment of an outside expert who reviewed this aspect of the case in November 2008.  That report has been disclosed to the defence in the course of these proceedings and I quote from its conclusion:-

“From the outset statements released to the media suggested with the language of certainty that crimes had been committed and that there were many victims.  For legal reasons, and in order to manage media coverage and public expectation, more temperate and non-judgmental language would have been more appropriate.  Statements made in relation to the item recovered on February 23rd [JAR6] were not accurate and incited an enormous media coverage which at times was hysterical and sensational and was in turn equally inaccurate and misleading.  The description of cellars, the voids under the flooring, was inaccurate and allowed the media to create a false impression in the public mindset.  The description of an item recovered from Haut de la Garenne as “shackles” was not accurate. The language used to describe the bath could have been more accurate.  The decision to display to the media a tooth recovered from Haut de la Garenne was highly unusual.  The approach taken by the States of Jersey Police to releasing information about the teeth found was unusual, not consistent with normal working practice in the UK and encouraged further media reporting and speculation.  Given the lack of evidence collated to prove that a child’s remains had been found at Haut de la Garenne, the statements made by States of Jersey Police could have been more accurately phrased and could have generated more measured and less prominent media coverage.  The statement made by the States of Jersey Police regarding the two pits excavated at Haut de la Garenne was inappropriate.  The nature and quantity of much of the media coverage was generated and sustained by the Police’s deliberate decision to provide a regular diet of information to the media.  Some, but by no means all, the inaccurate media coverage published was challenged by the Force on a number of occasions the Deputy Chief Officer placed information and allegations into the public domain or responded to issues and allegations in the media which distracted attention from the child abuse investigation and this may have tarnished the reputation of the Force and weakened public confidence in the investigation and its professionalism.”


50 comments:

Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...

Yep - Judge Pitchers has some serious questions to be answering.

Stuart

rico sorda said...

This is from my blog posting May 29th 2010. Its from Lenny Harper

"A couple of days later he rang to tell us that the Bailiff was writing to complain that someone at PHQ was too close to Stuart Syvret. This followed Stuart getting to learn of the fact that we had been refused a warrant to search the Sea Cadet offices for evidence and had to resort to a subterfuge with the aid of the UK Chiefs in the Cadets."


"This followed Stuart getting to learn of the fact that we had been refused a warrant to search the Sea Cadet offices for evidence"

Search warrants are handed out like parking tickets in Jersey yet the Sea Cadets one gets refused.

Next it will be the Yacht Club

rs

Anonymous said...

In September 2008 an external media consultant, experienced in working at ACPO level in the UK, was formally engaged by the then Deputy Chief of Police with the knowledge of the Chief Officer of Police to develop an appropriate external communication strategy regarding Operation Rectangle. This was primarily to ensure:



That trials and ongoing investigations were not compromised or challenged on the grounds of an abuse of process, based on the information supplied to the media by the States of Jersey Police.

That the public were presented with accurate facts.


Oh dear looks like we are back at Image Jersey again. What the Police said and what was reported are completely different things. The public presented with accurate facts?

Anonymous said...

http://bit.ly/zJxFmy

Interviewer Now Minister, we heard you say in the house you've got ample evidence against Mr. Power, if thats the case why haven't you acted on it you've had 20 months.

ILM Well I didn't get it very quickly, that was the problem, I didn't get the first reports in draft form until October of last year, I didn't get full papers in relation to the first set of matters until February
Interviewer You've been a Home Affairs Minister for 18 months.

ILM No, but I'm I have to wait for the Wiltshire Police to do their job ah it's not me that's investigating, it's the Wiltshire Police who are investigating, they're an independent police force, and they did their job most thorughly, though I didn't get the papers until February on the first one, I didn't get the, you will appreciate there is a second disciplinary matter, relating to operation blast, I didn't get the papers on that until May June of this year, June in fact June we got the papers.

Interviewer But we've always known that there's this deadline, if you like, Grahams Powers retirement on the 19th of July of this year, so there was a deadline to stick to, by not sticking to that deadline we've run up a huge bill to the taxpayer a million pounds, I mean that's just hugely incompetent isn't it?

ILM Well that's got nothing to do with the, the, the time scales, ah the issue is that Graham Power actually brought forward his retirement date, he was due to retire at the end of this year, he brought that back ah brought forward for July

Interviewer: But originally he said he was supposed going to retire years ago and he chose to stay on to help you.

ILM He was given a three year extension yeah in relation to that, but sadly it proved to be absolutely disastrous. The issue in relation to expense is this, we have two major areas of investigation, these are serious issues, which the public really must know about, the public really must know what happened in February ah when the Island was frankly put through the mill by international publicity, which blackened our name. The Island also must know why a lot of money has been wasted, on this investigation and the Island must know why it is, that the Police were keeping secret files, on every States Member including a criminal record on each of them, these are very serious issues.

Interviewer So, so what is the evidence? you say, theres ample evidence.

ILM Yes well I've got a 383 page report, I've got a 100 plus pages, I've got an accountants report.
Interviewer Can you give us the gist of that?

ILM Very quickly ah Yes, once Lenny Harper was appointed as the investigating officer, Graham Power took responsibility, as his, as for oversight in relation to that, therefore he has responsibility for pretty well everything, that went wrong, in relation to this. The details of that are going to come out next week and ah theres lot I'm afraid.

Interviewer So your basically saying, Mr. Power ran bills because he wasn't actually controlling his deputy?

ILM Mr. Power didn't properly exercise oversight. The, the the whole system of operating this investigation was focussed on two men, and two men alone that is Mr. Power and Mr. Harper it went disastrously wrong.

Interviewer: Ok so we're going to have these reports in full next week you say.

tried posting altogether too many characters

Anonymous said...

Continued ILM CTV interview.

ILM No, not in full, you're going to have substantial sections, of this initially, and then the remainder, subsequentely we have additional work to do on that.
Interviewer Ok, but in the meantime, obviously you're going to be presenting this evidence, which you say, will show that Mr. Power was, guilty of wrongdoing in his job, as you heard in Jills report there, Simon Crowcroft is saying its really not fair on Graham Power to bring forward this evidence and not give him an opportunity to defend himself in an open hearing.
ILM But, but he's had every opportunity, he has produced lengthy statements which are being looked at by the Wiltshire Police, those were referred to, in the reports,(3:18) What we've got here is, is the opinion of an experienced police officer, after taking specialist advice, in various different matters as to whether or not his colleague is seriously at fault.
Interviewer OK, Ian Le Marquqand Home Affairs Minister I am sure we have not heard the last of this, but thank you for now.
ILM ?? thank you very much.
END
ILM states the lengthy Power Statements were ''looked'' at by Wiltshire police and these were ''referred'' to in (the reports?) Referred to is a strange.
those were referred to, (Mr. Powers lengthy statements in the reports,(WHAT REPORTS) (3:18) WHAT WE'VE GOT HERE IS, is the OPINION of an EXPERIENCED POLICE OFFICER, after, taking specialist advice, in various different matters as to whether or not HIS COLLEAGUE IS SERIOUSLY at fault.
Is the above an admission that ILM reports are from a police officers report?
Are the reports the OPINION of an experienced police officer,(after taking specialist advise Matt Tapp? against his colleagues serious faults?) in various matter as to whether or not his COLLEAGUE MR. POWER was seriously at fault?
Did the Police office refer to Mr. Powers length statements in the report?

Anonymous said...

ILM No, not in full, you're going to have substantial sections, of this initially, and then the remainder, subsequentely we have additional work to do on that.

Notice ''We'' have additional work to do on that.

Bet they did.

Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...

Very astute questions in the comment above.

The wheels are coming off.

It's going to be interesting to observe how many who have had a hand in carrying out the whole illegal repression are going to have the sense to bail now?

Better start looking for someone honest and reliable to "turn Queen's evidence" to.

Unlikely to found in the Jersey police at this time.

Stuart

Anonymous said...

So let me get this straight.

Matt Tapp, who is hired by Warcup, writes a report that is critical of the way Lenny Harper and Graham Power handled the media in the early stages of the investigation going public.

Then this 'confidential' report is not disclosed to a member of parliament when requested but finds its way to the defence team of men who were charged and later convicted of child sex offences.

And this is done so that defence lawyers can make the claim that a fair trial is now impossible.

WTF?

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

ILM on the Matt Tapp Report.

"I will need to take advice as to whether I can properly release this report to Members at this time or at a time in the future and in what form. My position remains that I am keen to release as much information as possible to Members of the States and as soon as possible."

How long ago was this answer given and why have we still not seen it?

Why won't the BBC publish Graham Power's STATEMENT TO WILTSHIRE?

Anonymous said...

Matt Tapp, who is hired by Warcup, writes a report that is critical of the way Lenny Harper and Graham Power handled the media in the early stages of the investigation going public.

Then this 'confidential' report is not disclosed to a member of parliament when requested but finds its way to the defence team of men who were charged and later convicted of child sex offences.

And this is done so that defence lawyers can make the claim that a fair trial is now impossible.

WTF

"BINGO"

Anonymous said...

Matt Tapp, who is hired by Warcup, writes a report that is critical of the way Lenny Harper and Graham Power handled the media in the early stages of the investigation going public.

Then this 'confidential' report is not disclosed to a member of parliament when requested but finds its way to the defence team of men who were charged and later convicted of child sex offences.

And this is done so that defence lawyers can make the claim that a fair trial is now impossible.

WTF

"BINGO"

Anonymous said...

What we've got here is, is the opinion of an experienced police officer, after taking specialist advice, in various different matters as to whether or not his colleague is seriously at fault.

Interviewer OK, Ian Le Marquqand Home Affairs Minister I am sure we have not heard the last of this, but thank you for now.

Mr. Le Marquand needs to clarify this report.

Anonymous said...

Rico It would be a good idea for someone to download and save the video. YOUTUBE have a way of vanishing videos.

Anonymous said...

So how did the defence lawyers for aubin and wateridge come to learn of this 'critical' report by Matt Tapp? I mean it was a confidential internal police report wasn't it?

Who at the Police station tipped the defence lawyers off about its existence?

Or was it somebody from Home Affairs or worse a politician?

And why would somebody in a position of authority look to try and undermine the work of Harper at the expense of getting child sex offenders off the hook?

I mean if that's true then its shocking.

I think the defence lawyers need to be asked in an open COI how they got to know about Matt Tapps handy work.

Always moving closer rico. Nice one.

Anonymous said...

The interview I typed up needs to be read alongside the video I did not put all the ums and ahs in.

It is to the best of my ability and should be made clear it is not official report.

Anonymous said...

My comment based on what I hear Mr. Le Marquand say at the end of that interview.

Was Matt Tapp a police officer?
If so, would he have taken advice as the whether his colleague, Mr Power was seriously at fault?

was Mr. Power his colleague? From the interview it seems to me as if Warcup is the officer who took advice as to whether his colleague was seriously at fault?

Anonymous said...

Interviewer So, so what is the evidence? you say, theres ample evidence.

ILM Yes well I've got a 383 page report, I've got a 100 plus pages, I've got an accountants report.
Interviewer Can you give us the gist of that?

383 Warcup or Tapp?
100 pages Warcup or Tapp?
accountants report BDO

Anonymous said...

we have two major areas of investigation, these are serious issues, which the public really must know about, the public really must know what happened in February ah when the Island was frankly put through the mill by international publicity, which blackened our name. The Island also must know why a lot of money has been wasted, on this investigation and the Island must know why it is, that the Police were keeping secret files, on every States Member including a criminal record on each of them, these are very serious issues.

The heart of the matter ''put through the mill by international publicity''

Could of saved tax payers 1 million quid and asked Mr. Power rather than suspend him.

Anonymous said...

Why did Matt Tapp resign from his role?

His work was done. He was brought in to do one thing. When GP was suspended it was time to go. Job done.

Who was overseeing the work of Matt Tapp?

Gradwell and inturn Warcup.

When did Matt Tapp Resign?

I guess November 2008. After GP suspended.

When did Matt Tapp submit his report?

I guess no later than October 2008

Who did he submit it to?

Gradwell first. After that I'd guess Warcup, select ministers, the comms unit, the AG and Bailiff.

How much was Matt Tapp paid?

No idea. But this is Jersey to at least a 5 figure sum.

Why wasn't it released alongside Wiltshire & the BDO ALTO report?

I didn't need to be. It's primary purpose had been implemented.

How did this Report end up with the Defence council and then quoted as Gospel by Judge Pitchers?

You probably need to ask the defence team and while your at it the AG's office.

How credible was it and who has seen it?

Its probably fair to say that it was not that credible and that it would have been squarely demolished if it had been made public. Hence the no show.

You see this report could well be the cornerstone of the Establishment's defence. The Bailff at the time made a speech about it on Liberation day. Something to do with Jersey's tarnished image.

Its all about Image.

The Home Affairs minister of the day even owned a company called The Image Group! LOL!

Never underestimate the importance of that Golden Banana.

Anonymous said...

Did the police open files on States members because some of them might have been under suspicion in relation to the abuse enquiry?

If not directly connected with abuse then with concealing vital evidence that would show that the SOJ as a corporate entity was responsible for years of administative and political negligence in respect of child care.

Anonymous said...

Think Graham Power answers the question on a video posted on VFC

Nothing sinister to keep information out of politians hands.

Those who had it could use against those who didn't it.

If for example, Bailiff had information he could use against minister, thats my understanding

Ask on VFC someone will point you in right direction

Anonymous said...

....ILM But, but he's had every opportunity, he has produced lengthy statements which are being looked at by the Wiltshire Police, those were referred to, in the reports,(3:18) What we've got here is, is the opinion of an experienced police officer, after taking specialist advice, in various different matters as to whether or not his colleague is seriously at fault....


That is just stupid. I agree you are getting there. Just keep on this course as pressure is telling on these muppets and abuse protectors. Why is it ok that Gradwell was out of control under David warcup and no one in cares about it....

Anonymous said...

It seems to me that a complaint to both a) The UK Independent Police Complaints Commission and b) The Operation Elveden team would be entirely in order, in the circumstances.

If you can't make the complaint (there's nothing to stop a Jersey resident reporting a potential UK crime, is there?) then maybe those UK residents Graham Power or Lenny Harper could make the complaint?

In reply to the above comment taken from Your posting headed
The JEP Editorial Tuesday January 10, 2012

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2ImTnFLrnQ&feature=related

According to the video above there is this statement at 2:46
M Gradwell has always been answerable to the Lancashire Police.

Anonymous said...

Why doesn't anyone mention the 4 ACPO Reports. Why is every report the business yet they discredit the 4 ACPO Reports.

How is this being allowed to happen I ask? Well I think we all know the answer to that one....

rico sorda said...

Can I just say a huge thanks to the person who transcribed the ILM CTV interview. That was a brilliant piece of work and will become very handy in the near future.

Also thanks for the comments today. It's nice to know that people are getting it. I will be giving an interview which will go up at the weekend explaining these latest blog postings.

The Matt Tapp sketch is very interesting.

Everything about his time in Jersey is very interesting

rs

Anonymous said...

Rico sometimes things come over much better when you see it in black and white.

Hope it does help you. It was a nightmare to post as you have 4000 character restriction on comments.

I cut loads of my own questions off to get it posted.

Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...

Rico, one of your readers has said:

"So how did the defence lawyers for aubin and wateridge come to learn of this 'critical' report by Matt Tapp? I mean it was a confidential internal police report wasn't it?

Who at the Police station tipped the defence lawyers off about its existence?

Or was it somebody from Home Affairs or worse a politician?"

I'm afraid the reader has not understood how the administration of criminal justice works. The report in question should have been - and I assume it was - disclosed to the defence lawyers by the prosecution side.

The prosecution is legally obliged to disclose any material to the defense that might support the defense arguments or assist the defense case in any way.

That is simply a fundamental requirement of a fair trial - of basic human rights.

If the Matt Tapp report - or any similar such materiel - had not been disclosed to the defence, then that would have been unlawful - and the abusers could have appealed against their convictions on the ground they were denied a fair trial because relevant material was withheld from them.

The big - very big - questions here, are not that the report was disclosed to the defense - but rather, why was this particular report commissioned and produced in the first place?

And how - on Earth - did the judge end up accepting it as uncontested, given fact - even to the extent of deferring his own findings and those of the court - and effectively handing "the stage" to a concoction of vacuous and uncontested assertions written by politically employed spin-doctors?

That is what Judge Pitchers did - be reading out parts of the Matt Tapp report.

Mark those events well; it isn't often we get to see so starkly the public collapse of a court.

Stuart

Anonymous said...

And how - on Earth - did the judge end up accepting it as uncontested, given fact - even to the extent of deferring his own findings and those of the court - and effectively handing "the stage" to a concoction of vacuous and uncontested assertions written by politically employed spin-doctors?


It can't be incompetence. I think it might have been staged managed. How come the disclosures you are asked for Mr Syvret were denied yet a mysterious report gets disclosed?

Anonymous said...

It is looking more and more like Graham Power was suspended based on a report written either by Matt pr man wrote or Mr. Warcup?

Mr. Le Marquand is the one with the answer he has the report.

Anonymous said...

I find it very interesting still why Perchard and Shenton decided not to continue in the states, or at least try to. After all the stuff they peddled and now ILM saying that the news reports were exagerated over money issues and more I get the impression they didnt want to be around to answer members of the publics questions.

Oh and lets not forget their assertions that Harper was leaking info that ILM has since admitted was Gradwell.

I expect to see them try to get back in the boys club in a few years when they feel there wont be any questions asked as to their attempts to divert the real questions.

Funniy enough my word verification is Susing, have to put an extra s in there and call it sussing, as in sussing out Perchard and Shenton. Not so sure about Perchard but I think Shenton had such a big axe to grind that nothing would stop him trying to smear Harper and Power. Then some truth finally comes out and nowhere to be seen or heard of. Good riddance.

Anonymous said...

Where did the information come from that Matt Tapp resigned.

Was he paid to write a report which he did once he left the Island, to then forward on, to the person and agenda he dealt with?

Anonymous said...

Its called the standard of legal representation you get from Legal Aid in Jersey.

Yes the defence were given a copy of the Tapp report basically saying that the "unable to get a fair trial" defence because of media wouldn't wash. But the lazy Legal Aid just accepted Tapp's version and didn't try to counter it with a report of their own.

With Legal Aid in Jersey you have 2 choices.
1. Do as Stuart did and represent yourself or
2. (do as I did) and use the Legal Aid to get all the information for you from the Police/AG Office and do all the investigation yourself to generate the defence for you. (I was found not guilty in part due to many things I requested that my "Lawyer" wouldn't have done otherwise.

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

"Oh and lets not forget their assertions that Harper was leaking info that ILM has since admitted was Gradwell."

The difference being that if Mr. Harper had of been found to have leaked ANYTHING then the State Media would have had a field day dragging him through the mud. Gradwell allegedly leaks confidential information during a live Child Abuse Investigation to a disgraced "journalist" with a history of supporting convicted paedophiles and the State Media call him a WHISTLE-BLOWER.......Only in Jersey!!!

Anonymous said...

So the crown officers who were prosecuting aubin were 'legally' responsible for providing the defence team with Matt Taps findings.

Thanks for clearing that up Stuart.

I still find it amazing. But perhaps Stuart could enlighten your readers as to how this actually happens. Who do the prosecution lawyers approach in the first instance? Do they email the AG and cc the Bailiff and say 'hey have you got anything or are aware of any confidential police reports that might help the defence case?'

And this was taking place around the same time that the head of the Judiciary is making political points on Liberation day about the denigration of Jersey's image.

I think its amazing.

rico sorda said...

"Where did the information come from that Matt Tapp resigned"

I will have more on this in a future posting.


"It seems to me that a complaint to both a) The UK Independent Police Complaints Commission and b) The Operation Elveden team would be entirely in order, in the circumstances"

Keep reading

Thats all I'm saying for now

Just keep reading

rs

Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...

A reader says:

"It can't be incompetence. I think it might have been staged managed. How come the disclosures you are asked for Mr Syvret were denied yet a mysterious report gets disclosed?"

Yes - "stage managed" is very much the appropriate term.

It is now plain to even the casual observer, surely, that significant "behind-the-scenes" input goes into certain "judgements" given in Jersey courts.

Certainly, in my case, the magistrate was not the sole author of the judgment. They just wont tell me who else contributed.

I have asked.

And her "judgement" - much like the judgment of Pitchers quoted in this post - appears to have been in large measure the work of spin-doctors and certain other public employees.

And, yes - the reader makes the obvious, stark point.

Every key disclosure that was sought by me, in my defence - was refused.

"Why?"

I think we all see why, don't we?

And it is a remarkable fact - remarkable indeed - that the Matt Tapp report should have been disclosed to me, during the prosecution mounted against me.

The Matt Tapp report - and a variety of closely associated material.

Stuart

Anonymous said...

Matt Tapp pops up in met police expenditure accounts May and June 2011

Anonymous said...

They gave Syvret the goddam Matt Tapp report? And he's had it for ages! PMSL! And they gave him a bunch of other stuff? Hilarious!

You really cant make that sh*t up!

rico sorda said...

"And it is a remarkable fact - remarkable indeed - that the Matt Tapp report should have been disclosed to me, during the prosecution mounted against me.

The Matt Tapp report - and a variety of closely associated material"

I read that as Stuart Syvret 'not' having the Tapp Report

rs

Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...

A reader says:

"They gave Syvret the goddam Matt Tapp report? And he's had it for ages! PMSL! And they gave him a bunch of other stuff? Hilarious!

You really cant make that sh*t up!"

Oh dear.

Our trolls really are cretins, aren't they?

Or should the be troll, singular?

Shall I explain?

This is what I said:

"And it is a remarkable fact - remarkable indeed - that the Matt Tapp report should have been disclosed to me, during the prosecution mounted against me.

The Matt Tapp report - and a variety of closely associated material."

Now, the operative word there is "should" - that's as in it SHOULD have been disclosed to me.

It wasn't.

The Matt Tapp report - and associated material - SHOULD have been disclosed to me by the prosecution - because it was of relevance to my abuse-of-process case.

All that material was also of great relevance - profound relevance - to the recusal applications I made in respect of Pitchers.

I SHOULD have had that evidence disclosed to me - but it was not disclosed.

Do we understand now?

Have another Stella, Jon.

Stuart

Anonymous said...

"Should have been" can also mean "was" in a different context.

Some people say "Amazing that I should have been chosen" rather than "Amazing that I was chosen"

Don't automatically assume it's always JSH!

Anonymous said...

So why was Graham Power sacked for serious wrong doings.

where are the facts?

Anonymous said...

Would anyone be able to provide the date this broadcast was aired by CTV? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWCc0M2NwMU

Anonymous said...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-527319/Daughter-Jersey-care-home-boss-claims-monster-father-subjected-rape-ordeal.html

Reading this story again I notice they provide quotation to Mr. Shenton

My comments in CAPS

"My wife keeps referring to Lenny Harper as Lenny Henry - I don't think she's far wrong," said the health and social services minister in his extraordinary message.
THE SOURCE of the above COPY OF THE EMAIL?

Mr Shenton questions whether Mr Harper - Jersey's deputy chief police officer - has ever been investigated for "adult abuse".

SOURCES THE ABOVE QUOTE THE EMAIL?

He ridicules the idea that the remains found last week beneath the Haut de la Garenne children's home belonged to a child rather than to animals.
And he attacks Wendy Kinnard, a fellow senator whose home affairs ministry oversees the police in the Crown dependency.

"Wendy, why was it announced to the media that a child's body was found when this was not the case?"
wrote Mr Shenton.

HAVING NOT SEEN THE EMAIL WAS QUOTE ABOVE IN EMAIL? WHY ARE THEY QUOTING IT, IF IT ISN'T


"Why have you allowed your ministry to be run in such an unprofessional and shameful manner?"

AND THE ABOVE QUOTE, EMAIL?

He claims that one sex abuse victim, purportedly interviewed by The Times this week, died last year.

If Mr. Harper has copy of email he can verify if the email is the source if not Daily Mail have a source and are quoting Mr. Shenton

Anonymous said...

"Wendy, why was it announced to the media that a child's body was found when this was not the case?" wrote Mr Shenton.
"Why have you allowed your ministry to be run in such an unprofessional and shameful manner?"

QUOTED. NOT UNNAMED SOURCE
I cannot find these questions on Statesassembly.gov.je

Anonymous said...

Sorry Rico the Journalist for the Daily Mail article I just referred is David Jones.

Anonymous said...

Some of the old tabloid articles do carry some clues as to who was saying what, when.

David Rose article Daily Mail a direct attributaqble quote.

‘I’m angry,’ Mr Perchard said last night. ‘Mr Power told me categorically that the remains were human. Had Lenny not told him the test results, or was he hiding the truth?’

Spn below the man with no name.

The man, who asked not be named, had made a complaint that Mr Harper made his original claim about human remains prematurely, and that this had brought back the trauma of his experience.
‘What I went through was bad enough,’ the man said. ‘Now I was having to deal with the idea that I might have survived the attack of a serial killer, yet there was no real proof that the “skull” was human.’

Anonymous said...

Journalist naming sources yet we have a chief Minister calling Mr. Harper whistleblower?

Mr. Shenton claimed in the States 3.6/2008 Senator B.E. Shenton:
I have not made any public comments apart to apologise to Mr. Harper for a leaked e-mail. I have made no other comments to the press.

Anonymous said...

Error on earlier post re whistleblower I meant Gradwell :)

voiceforchildren said...

It wasn't the Chief Minister who called Gradwell a whistle-blower it was the JEP