MATT TAPP - 7
METROPOLITAN POLICE SERVICE
Directorate of Professional Standards
Investigation into the public complaint by MR Lenny Harper
Mike Sunman - Detective Inspector - Senior Investigating Officer.
This is in relation to the Met 'interim' Report and final Metropolitan Police Report
Para. 4.36 "In the Heads of Complaint made by Mr Harper he states that the review criticised a number of areas of the investigation. The review does not criticise the investigation. The Review does not criticise any individual involved in Operation Rectangle."
Para 5.2 "Mr Harper claims that DSU Sweeting ignored information given by him regarding ACPO policy reports and criticised his handling of finances, the search, and entry to HDLG, working practices with lawyers, victim support policy, lack of a gold group, and the finding and labelling of human remains. (Mr Harper) also states DSU Sweeting criticised Mr Harper's use of terminology such as 'shackles' and falsifying areas within HDLG such as cellars."
5.3 "Having reviewed the report written by DSU Sweeting and his team, it is clear that no such criticisms are levelled at Mr Harper. The report is a fact based, objective review conducted by a highly experienced SIO that produces recommendations for the now SIO. As in any review, and the purp[ose of conducting one, areas of vulnerability are highlighted for learning and are given to assist the current investigation to move on."
According to the investigating officer Sweeting never criticised Lenny Harper for using the term shackles, nor did he (Sweeting) criticise Lenny Harper for any of the following
Sweeting did not criticise my handling of finances.
He did not criticise the entry into HDLG.
He did not criticise the subsequent search of HDLG.
He did not criticise working practices with lawyers.
Sweeting did not criticise my Victim Support Policy, lack of a Gold Group, or handling of exhibits.
If Sweeting didn't (and Section 5 of the Complaint report makes it clear he did not), then who did?
This is the most important blog posting I have done in relation to Operation Rectangle (Jersey Child Abuse Investigation) and the suspension of former Chief of Police Graham Power QPM.
I will explain to readers the relevance of this Met investigation and how it ties in with the outside Media Consultant Matt Tapp and the suspension of Graham Power on the 12th November 2008.
The Ramifications are huge. Some serious and very awkward questions must now be asked of the former Chief Executive of the States of Jersey Bill Ogley, former Chief Minister Frank Walker, former Deputy Chief Officer and then Acting Chief Officer David Warcup and Home Affairs Minister Ian le Marquand.
I will try and keep this posting short . I must explain to new readers just what happened in the run up to Graham Power being suspended. It goes to the very heart of high level government and also calls into question the advice given by the Law Office.
On the 10th November 2008 DCO David Warcup wrote to Chief Executive Bill Ogley raising significant concerns about the command and control structures of Operation Rectangle. This letter contained extracts from a Metropolitan 'interim' Police Report.
On the 11th of November CEO Bill Ogley on receiving this letter contacted then Home Affairs Minister Andrew Lewis to attend a pre-press briefing for all ministers in advance of the press conference happening on the 12th November 2008.
On the 12th November 2008; Graham Power was asked to attend a meeting at Cyril Le Marquand house on the morning of the 12th. Mr Lewis handed Graham Power a letter dated 12th November 2008 with the heading "Disciplinary Code" in which he had informed him that he had received a letter from the Chief Executive Bill Ogley. This letter contained David Warcup concerns of Operation Rectangle and also extracts from the Metropolitan Interim Report. Considering the re-press briefing on the 11th the overall management of Operation Rectangle would be publicy called into question. In light of Mr Powers accountability under Article9(3) of the Police Force Law. Mr Lewis invoked the Disciplinary action and suspended Graham Power under 2.3.3 of the code.
Mr Power states during his judicial review that Chief Executive Bill Ogley said 'that in view of the letter, he would be allowed 1 hour to consider his position'. The rest as they say is History.
When the big press conference and suspension of Graham Power happened on 12th November 2008 Lenny Harper became very concerned about the use of a Met Report. The reason being Lenny Harper and Andy Baker of ACPO had not yet been interviewed. Lenny Harper put a complaint into the Independent Police Complaints Commission about the Met Interim/ final Report. This report was completed at the end of November 2008 when both Mr Harper & Graham Power had been interviewed.
You would expect the findings of Operation Tuma to be damning on Mr Harper.
Mr Harper now explains why he went to the IPCC
In November 2008 I watched with some astonishment and no little annoyance and frustration as David Warcup and Mick Gradwell told the world that all the work that I had carried out along with a talented and dedicated team in Jersey investigating child abuse in States run institutions had been false and a pack of lies. I watched as they not only blackened my name, but also justified the suspension and character assassination of one of the best, most honest and capable bosses I had worked for in thirty four years in Graham Power. I recoiled at the inferred and explicit statements that the evidence from victims of savage and cruel abuse was all a fiction and the product of sick and criminal minds. My anger and bemusement increased as first Warcup and Gradwell and then Andrew Lewis (only hours before I left the island Lewis had stood at a dinner at the Lt. Gov’s residence with his arm around me and told my wife that he had stood shoulder to shoulder with me in facing down Frank Walker who had wanted to once again “bury” the abuse allegations) and the Chief Minister of the time explained that their actions and the nonsense they told the world’s press were all direct lifts from a report by the Metropolitan Police (the Sweeting Report) which was “critical and damning” of my performance in leading the Abuse enquiry and of Graham Power’s supervision of me. They told how the Met report had severely criticised me for my handling of the financial management of the investigation, the entry and subsequent search in HDLG, working practices with lawyers, victim support policy, lack of a Gold group, and the finding and labelling of human remains. They also related how the Met report had criticised me for my use of terminology such as ‘shackles’ and falsely describing areas where victims had alleged abuse within HDLG as ‘cellars.’ This damning report, they said, was the reason why they had no choice but to suspend Graham Power for his failure to supervise his out of control Deputy.
I could not believe that the local Jersey media could be swallowing this innocently. They must have known that Gradwell and Warcup were wrong when they said that there were no cellars, only eighteen inch floor voids – not only had BBC Panorama’s Robert Hall filmed in there but even JEP journalist Diane Simon, together with others who were later to forget, had been shown around the cellars. Frank Walker and his wife had been taken around and shown the cellar areas where many “fleshed and fresh” bones had been burnt and deliberately hidden. These bones seemed to be conveniently forgotten when Gradwell told the world that no human bones had been found. The statement describing these bones by the expert in Sheffield had obviously disappeared. Diane Simon also conveniently forgot that it was her who first mentioned ‘shackles’ to me and that she had run a story in which she said I had refused to confirm the finding of shackles. Now she was criticising me for whipping up media frenzy about shackles.
In all of this, my anger turned to what I perceived to be the corrupt actions of the Met Superintendent who had carried out the review and who had been so critical of me without even bothering to speak to me or to those who were supervising and mentoring me. (the ACPO Homicide Working Group) Gradwell, Warcup, the Chief Minister, Home Affairs Minister and all of the Jersey media were quoting the Met report as the source for all of the criticism Graham Power and I were facing. I did the only thing I felt I could do and made a formal complaint to the Metropolitan Police against Superintendent Sweeting.
At first the Met refused to accept my complaint. “You left it too long” they said. I appealed to the Independent Police Complaints Commission. (IPCC) They ordered the Met to investigate. Eventually they did and after an investigation (named Operation Tuma) they reported that my complaint was recorded as “no case to answer.”
My first reaction was one of disgust. I knew that what Warcup, Gradwell, Walker, and the rest were saying was out and out rubbish and a total fabrication. How could the Met be endorsing this? Then I read the findings. They were astounding.
My complaint was rejected not because any of the criticisms were true, but because NO SUCH CRITICISMS HAD BEEN CONTAINED WITHIN THE MET REPORT. Paragraph 5.3 of the Sweeting Met report lists the complaints that I had made, i.e.; that the report was “critical and damning of me without ever speaking to me. That it had criticised me for my handling of the financial management of the investigation, my victim support policy, the lack of a Gold Group, the finding and labelling of human remains, my use of the term ‘shackles’ and the use of the term ‘cellars.’ In reality, according to the Met report to the IPCC, “having reviewed the report written by DSU Sweeting and his team, it is clear that no such criticisms are levelled at Mr Harper.” The report goes on to say in Para. 5.4, “The report was neither critical nor damning.”
The implications of this are profound, and extremely disturbing. David Warcup did not submit the Met report to the Home Affairs Minister but instead wrote him a letter outlining what was allegedly in the report. It was critical and damning enough to launch a brutal smear campaign against me, and by extension, against the victims, and to justify the suspension of Graham Power. According to Ian Le Marquand, what Warcup told him was in the Met report gave him no option but to suspend Graham and to label me an “incompetent maverick.”
So, if there was no such criticism in either the Met interim or the final report, where did David Warcup get it from? Rico Sorda has one theory involving the consultant shown the door by Graham Power for attempting to misrepresent the facts and who was then immediately engaged by Shredder Ogley and Frank Walker. So why did Warcup and Gradwell tell the world that it came from the Sweeting report? Could the gradual unfolding of this be the real reason why Warcup scampered away from the island pleading blog harassment and why the previously media loving Gradwell retired to wedding planning never to be seen again or to give any evidence to Scrutiny or anyone else?
It also raises huge questions about t Ian Le Marquand. Was he duped by Warcup into believing that the criticism was indeed contained within the Metropolitan Police Report? If so, why did he not ask some hard questions? Or, was he fully aware that the whole thing was a charade and a pack of lies intended to discredit the whole child abuse enquiry and so marginalise (once again) the victims of cruel abuse in Jersey’s government run homes?
The truth is getting ever closer. Despite the increasingly desperate attempts of the establishment to prevent it emerging (witness the pathetic attempt to portray a letter in the JEP this week as being from establishment crony Roy Boschat when letters being revealed in a Jersey blog show him as semi- literate) the momentum is unstoppable. Sooner or later the role of a number of Jersey’s so called prominent citizens in supporting the cover up of vile child abuse will be revealed to the world. As someone else has said, the ramifications for them and their way of life will be much more severe than if they had just accepted in the first place it had happened and sought to try and make it better and prevent it from happening again.
Now I will explain where Matt Tapp comes in. I have been informed that Matt Tapp gave an Interview with Wiltshire Police where he explains what happened.
This is what happened. Can politicians find out if this is true.
1. In August 2008 Tapp is contacted by DCO Warcup
2. Came to Jersey on August 5th 2008
3. Was contracted in September 2008
4. started some work
6. Had a meeting with Graham Power on the 8th October. Graham Power disagreed with Matt Tapp - Tapp position as consultant advisor to DCO Warcup was no longer tenable. He informed David Warcup & Mick Gradwell of the fact and made arrangements to leave the Island.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT IS BOTH STAGGERING AND SHOCKING
7. Later that day at the request of Chief Executive Bill Ogley, he attends a meeting with BO and former Chief Minister Frank walker. From the result of that meeting ,and email correspondence,he agrees to produce a report for the STATES OF JERSEY.
8. There is only one MATT TAPP Report. This is the one quoted by Judge Pitchers and commissioned by the STATES OF JERSEY not The STATES OF JERSEY POLICE.
NOW GO BACK AND LOOK AT HOW GRAHAM POWER WAS SUSPENDED
TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THE ANSWERS GIVEN BY THE HOME AFFAIRS MINISTER IAN LE MARQUAND
BEING ECONOMICAL WITH THE TRUTH?
I would also like to thank Former Deputy Daniel Wimberly, Former Deputy Bob Hill and Deputy T Pitman who during 2010 asked many questions concerning the Metropolitan 'Interim' Report. This will be discussed in a future posting.
I will finish this posting by saying im not an Investigative Journalist. Im a member of the public who became very concerned about certain aspects of the Jersey Child Abuse Investigation and decided to do something about it.
I shouldn't have to be doing this.
Why won't our Media do it?
For further in formation and research please click on the link provided