Tuesday, March 27, 2012




"June 11th 2009 - Home Affairs Minister Ian Le Marquand writes to Graham Power regarding Operation Blast and informs him that there is now two more possible areas of complaint against him. He also informs Chief Executive Bill Ogley about the new issues regarding Operation Blast"

As we move on with our timeline - and the Acting Chief Officer David Warcup and Home Affairs Minister Ian Le Marquands relentless pursuit of finding something to pin on Graham Power - its starts verging on the ridiculous.

What was the Acting Chief Officer David Warcup being paid to do exactly?

When Graham Power was appointed as the Chief of Police of the States of Jersey Police there can be no doubt that he inherited a mess as the HMI repots confirmed. Mr Power brought a lot of new ideas and modern thinking that brought the policing of the Island forward. This is not my opinion, but those of the HMI.

David Warcup was appointed to carry on the work of Graham Power and continue in taking the Police Force forward. What I cant work out is this. When he found procedures that he felt needed bringing up to date why didn't he just get on with it in a calm professional way? Surely, this is what we, as taxpayers, would expect him to do. Does this happen in every police force in the UK when there is a change over? Why, instead of just making changes, do we find David Warcup running to the Law Office and the Minister for Home Affairs? He should of just sorted it out as he is paid to do.

Why didn't David Warcup understand that the setting up of files happened at a time when the terrorist threat assessment was at a high level and the security of the island depended on a confidential relationship between the Jersey Special Branch and agencies in the UK.

The actions of David Warcup and Ian Le Marquand had the effect of bringing widespread attention to the existence and duties of Special Branch and its role in managing secret intelligence. Surely such things should not be brought out into the public domain. That is why when Ian Le marquand was asked about the files in February 2012 he mumbled his answer.

I reproduce it here;

2.14.3 The Connétable of St. John:

The Minister mentioned Operation Blast; could the Minister confirm that the records of Operation Blast have been destroyed and, if not, what has happened to those files?

Senator B.I. Le Marquand:

I have asked questions on this of the police in the past. I am trying to remember what the answer to that was. They were held for a period obviously in relation to disciplinary matters. There was also advice at one stage that they should be held for further reasons but I am afraid I have lost the details on that. They are certainly not going to be used in any way and I will make further inquiries to see whether they have now been destroyed but there were reasons not to destroy them for quite substantial periods. I will check on the current status.

2.14.4 The Connétable of St. John:

Will the Minister revert back to the House once he has found out the information?


Senator B.I. Le Marquand:

I do not think it warrants my making a statement but I will happily put out information to Members as to what had happened and if there is still an outstanding reason why they should be kept, as to why that is so.

You see. The files are still there. They simply cant get rid of them. Look at the fudged answer. He doesn't just want to come out and say that some of these file cant be destroyed. Warcup and Le Marquand in their blind panic to pin anything on Mr Power were getting out of control. Can you imagine the Disciplinary hearing concerning the reason for setting up these files? No you cant. That is why it didn't happen. They just wanted a backup plan to stop Graham Power returning to work.

In late March early April 2009 David Warcup informs the Solicitor General about the files.

April 4th 2009 - Solicitor General T.le Cocq informs Attorney General William Bailhache about the files.

April 30th 2009 - Solicitor General informs Ian Le Marquand about the files. Senator Le Marquand then writes to David Warcup for a report about the files

2nd June 2009 - David Warcup replies to Senator Le Marquand and informs him about the files. The Circle is complete. It really is as simple as that.


Senator Le Marquand writes to then Chief Executive Bill Ogley about the breaking news. They might just have something to nail Graham Power again. The same Bill Ogley that acted in a criminally and corrupt manner during the original suspension of Graham Power and not forgetting his manipulation of outside Media Consultant Matt Tapp, and among others, Andrew Lewis. This is your/mine government at work here. It is utterly shambolic. Let us not forget this all stems back to the Child Abuse Investigation.

Child Abuse started this chain of events.

Decades of Child Abuse

June 11th 2009 - Home Affairs Minister Ian Le Marquand writes to Graham Power regarding Operation Blast and informs him that there is now two more possible areas of complaint against him. He also informs Chief Executive Bill Ogley about the new issues regarding Operation Blast

Mr W Ogley

Chief Executive

Chief Ministers Department

4th Floor

Cyril Le Marquand House

St. Helier

11th June 2009

Dear Mr Ogley,

RE Disciplinary Code In Relation to the Chief Officer of Police

On 2nd June 2009 I received a written report from the Acting Chief Officer of Police in relation to "Operation Blast".

Mr Warcup has discovered that from February 2006 until the suspension of Mr Power that the Police Force was keeping and compiling secret files on each States Member which files contained a photograph of each member, a full criminal record search and other material from various sources including the States of Jersey Police operational/intelligence database. The files have been designated as secret and have apparently not been retained under the standard arrangements for the retention of intelligence data, indeed, apparently there are papers within the files which would suggest that efforts have been made to ensure that this information was maintained outside the normal protocols for the management of information. Although the files were under the heading of Operation Blast they apparently did not relate to any particular investigation. Furthermore, the existence of the files is apparently know only to a small number of senior officers and does not appear to have been disseminated further.

I have come to the conclusion that I now have further potential complaint against Mr Power in relation to his involvement in and/ or responsibility for this matter. I am therefore, now writing to you about this in accordance with paragraph 2.1.1 of the Disciplinary Code for the Chief Officer of Police. Under that code , at your discretion, there may be a meeting between Mr Power and I to determine the requirement for the complaint to be pursued . I would be very happy to meet with Mr Power, should he so wish, in order to hear his side of the matter Alternatively, he may wish to write to me about this. If I decide to pursue the complaint then I will write to you asking for a preliminary investigation to be undertaken in accordance with the paragraph 2.1.2 of the code.

Any such disciplinary investigation would probably need to emcompass;

a) The circumstances in which Operation Blast was started

b) The nature of the information Kept

c) The purpose for which the information was kept

d) Whether Operation Blast was or was not a proper police operation

e) Who was responsible for the setting up of the Operation

f) Who knew about and contributed to the compiling of the files

g) The degree of responsibility of Mr Power for this matter.

I had previously been made aware by Mr Warcup of the existence, in Mr Powers office, of tape recordings of various telephone conversations of Mr Power, including a lengthy conversation with a States Member who was not the Home Affairs Minister of the time.

It appears to me that I shall also need to make a decision as to whether I should proceed with this further complaint and that the general considerations set out above in relation to a decision as to whether to do so will equally apply. Any request for an investigation might need to encompass issues which parallel a)to e)

above although the first issue could be as to whether the individuals involved had consented to the taping of their conversations with Mr Power.

For the sake of completeness, I would mention that if I decide to proceed with a further complaint or complaints then I will need to meet Mr Power, in any event, in order to decide whether or not he should be suspended from office in relation to any of these further matters. I envisage that any such further meeting in relation to possible suspension would follow the pattern previously established . In the meantime, I have again reviewed the existing suspension of Mr Power and have found no material change of circumstance apart from these new issues which, of course, do not operate in his favour

I am sending a copy of this letter to Mr Power and await your response to these matters.

Yours Sincerely

Ian Le Marquand

"The files have been designated as secret and have apparently not been retained under the standard arrangements for the retention of intelligence data, indeed, apparently there are papers within the files which would suggest that efforts have been made to ensure that this information was maintained outside the normal protocols for the management of information"

Why didn't Warcup just work with Special Branch and sort this out?

"I had previously been made aware by Mr Warcup of the existence, in Mr Powers office, of tape recordings of various telephone conversations of Mr Power, including a lengthy conversation with a States Member who was not the Home Affairs Minister of the time.

It appears to me that I shall also need to make a decision as to whether I should proceed with this further complaint"

Why didn't Senator Le Marquand , like most folk, know that when you phone the Police Station your calls are recorded. Im not Joking here. Graham Powers representative even informed the Home Affairs Minister that it even states this in your local telephone directory.

So blind were they in this pursuit that it started becoming plain crazy.

What comes out of this is the complete Integrity of Graham Power & Lenny Harper

They searched everywhere for some dirt on them. But they judged them by their own standards and came up with nothing - apart from a prawn cocktail in London that is.

Onwards we go

Rico Sorda

Team Voice

I want to draw my readers to the desperation of Warcup and Le Marquand - In December 2008 it started with allegations of a bullying couture at the SOJP - Graham Power again challenged Senator Le Marquand and look what happens

They were desperate completely and utterly desperate

Graham Power

QPM MA (Oxon)

3rd January 2009.

Urgent by hand.

The Minister for Home Affairs.

11 Royal Square,

St Helier.



Thank you for your letters dated 31st December 2008 and for the personal attention you have given to these matters. One letter, which I shall call the first letter, concerns a letter I sent to you on 15th December 2008. The second raises a new issue of an alleged “culture of bullying.” Attached to the second letter is a copy of a letter to the Chief Executive, Mr Bill Ogley. I will reply in more detail to both letters in the next few days. The purpose of this letter is to make immediate representations regarding the course of action you propose in the attachment to the second letter.

In the same envelope and on the same day I have received from you two letters. The first tells me that as a consequence of information I have provided to you relating to the apparent conduct of Mr Ogley, you have referred the matter to the Law Officers Department with a view to determining whether a criminal investigation is required. For what it is worth I support the action you have taken in respect of that issue. The second letter tells me that an allegedly new matter has arisen, and that you have referred this to Mr Ogley for him to take forward. It may be that in the overall scale of events you have inadvertently overlooked the clear conflict of interest which your second action involves. Assuming that to be the case I now formally draw it to your attention.

My own position is that I regard Mr Ogley as conflicted in this matter and that I do not consider it fair or in any way consistent with the principles of justice that he should have any role whatsoever in matters affecting my interests until such time as he has been exonerated of any misconduct in his handling of my case. I therefore request that arrangements be made for the second issue to be addressed in a way which removes any suggestion that Mr Ogley has been in a position to influence actions in respect of my case.

While I hope that this letter is not seen as unnecessarily robust and inhibitive of future working relationships I nevertheless feel it appropriate to make this representation in the clearest of terms in order that my position cannot be misunderstood.

Thank you again for your attention to this matter.

Yours sincerely,

Graham Power.

Cc. Dr T Brain.

The above letter shows Mr Powers acknowledgement of the Le Marquand allegation of " Culture of Bullying". The letter below explains Graham Powers position on this matter and is quite self explanatory

Graham Power

QPM MA (Oxon)

7th January 2009.

The Minister for Home Affairs.

11 Royal Square,

St Helier.



Thank you for the above correspondence, and for keeping me informed on events relating to my case. You will by now have received my hand-delivered letter dated 3rd January 2009 which makes representations regarding the management of this issue.

I have to confess that this latest matter came as a surprise. This is particularly so, given my undisputed inheritance of a serious bullying culture, and the actions I have taken to resolve this, which have been confirmed and supported by independent assessment. Assuming you have been fully briefed, you will be aware of the critical comments of H.M. Inspectorate of Constabulary prior to my appointment, and of the level of concern on the part of the former committee, which led to a senior female officer from the U.K. being asked to undertake a review. You may also have been told of the significant anti-bullying and harassment measures I have put in place during my tenure, including Jerseys only “off island” reporting line. You might also be aware of some of the high profile disciplinary hearings in which I have addressed this inherited culture. This included at least one case in which the perpetrator made counter-allegations against the former D.C.O. I arranged for allegations to be independently investigated by Devon and Cornwall Police under the supervision of the Jersey Police Complaints Authority. The allegations against the D.C.O. were found to be unsubstantiated and vexatious and his actions were fully supported. In progressing anti-bullying policy I have been much encouraged by feedback from staff focus groups organised by H.M. Inspectorate of Constabulary, which have provided additional evidence of a well motivated workforce, with high levels of morale. Police staff members with experience in other areas of the public sector have often commented in a positive way on the progressive measures introduced under my leadership.

The allegation is also inconsistent with the messages which I continue to receive almost daily from within the force, the wider public sector, and concerned islanders. The majority of those who have been in touch do in fact make reference to an oppressive culture characterised by victimisation and bullying. The “culture of bullying” to which they refer is the one emanating from the senior levels of Cyril Le Marquand House, with my own experience being seen as a typical, but not exclusive example of that behaviour.

That said, I await with interest the production of any credible evidence to support what is apparently alleged. You can take it as given that I will be determined and relentless in the defence of my position, and, should any allegations be shown to be false, I naturally reserve all of my options for seeking proper redress against those responsible.

Thank you for your continued attention to these matters. I await a response at the appropriate time.

Yours sincerely.

Graham Power

The above allegations by Home Affairs Minister have been challenged by the then Chief of Police Graham Power.

So what happens next I hear you ask?

Well this is What Happens next

Graham Power

QPM MA (Oxon)

The Minister for Home Affairs,

11 Royal Square,

St Helier.



Thank you for your letter dated 26th January 2009 under the above heading which makes reference to your correspondence dated 31st December 2008 in which you gave notice of a possible further investigation relating to an alleged “culture of bullying.”

I am grateful for your notification that you have decided to take this possible additional matter no further and take this as confirmation that all matters contained in the earlier correspondence in so far as they relate to any allegations concerning any conduct on my part are thereby withdrawn.

Thank you for keeping me informed on this issue.

Yours sincerely

Graham Power.

So, on the 31st December 2008. Senator Ian Le Marquand informs Graham Power of a " Possible further Investigation under the Code" ref "Culture of Bullying.

On the same Date Senator ILM informs the Chief Executive Bill Ogley of the possible further Investigation under the code

Graham Power Acknowledges this on the 3rd January 2009

On the 7th January Graham Power write his reply to the Allegations

On the 26th January 2009 Senator ILM writes to Graham Power and says,

Dear Mr Power

Re: Disciplinary Code in relation to the Chief Officer

Further to my letter to Mr Ogley of the 31st December 2008 ( of which I sent you a copy ) and your subsequent letters of 3rd and 7th January, I write to advise you that I have decided to take this possible additional matter no further

Yours Sincerely

Ian Le Marquand

Minister for Home Affairs

Rico Sorda

Investigative Journalist


rico sorda said...

The full posting I did on the allegations of bullying raised by Senator Le Marquand can be read here



Anonymous said...


What a great investigative time line! Was this the same letter Graham Power's wife attempted to hand deliver to ILM, but couldn't because he was hiding out from her in the toilet?


Anonymous said...

I can only suggest a direct appeal to the Chief Minister to review the huge canon of evidence against the minister for home affairs.

I can only believe that any such open minded review would result in ILM being invited to resign his position.

Anonymous said...

Surely there is a place in the UK media for an account of a blogger uncovering a determined plot to discredit a Police Chief.

Anonymous said...

That is a fascinating read combined with the older January/11 blog you linked to in your comment above. Even the many reader comments are worth reading through again. I wonder what professor Tony would say about ILM now. You have done some amazing work in getting to the truth on all the false allegations they made about Mr Power.

Anonymous said...

"What is truth?".

I'm not religious, but Ian Le Marquand claims to be a Christian (albeit of the hang 'em high and may God have mercy on their souls variety).

I wonder if the uncanny similarity in his behaviour and that of Pontius Pilate has ever occurred to him?

"When Jesus is brought before him, Pontius Pilate has to use his judgement to make a decision - one based on upholding the policies of empire and satisfying the demands of his influential constituents (demonstrated by his resolution of the choice between freeing Barabbas or Jesus) - truth is irrelevant in this equation. Pilate finds little fault in Jesus - but being aware of the local politics and battles for religious influence that pivoted around the person of Jesus, he ultimately makes a choice based upon the "reality" he faces, rather than upon an alien notion of truth. It's a cruder version of political jockeying, lobbyists, and pressure groups - and as a representative of empire, Pilate knew well the importance of playing a bartering game with such groups. Justice is replaced with dealmaking and political expediency."

Ian Evans said...


Anonymous said...

That was an good comparison of Pontius Pilate and Ian Le Marquand. You don't have to be a Christian to learn from one of the great history lessons in the bible, but if the man professes to be a Christian he should be able to see himself in that example should he dare to not look away from the mirror.

Do any readers know his Church members and what they possibly think of his?

Anonymous said...

Ex centenier on child assault charges.

Would this ex centenier when he was holding his position have been sympathetic to paedophiles at the time he held that position.

Is there any way of checking cases that may have been dropped during his term

Anonymous said...

The Jersey establishment and that encludes it's finance industry, survive on a culture of lies, bullying and down right carractor assination in order to get it's/their way!

They have crucified so many innocent people who would not play the game!

Anonymous said...

Le marquand should not be able to resign and then disapear he should be made to answer for his lies at a full enquiry, chaired by some one like Dep Trevor Pitman,mention is made of le marquand calling himself a christian,I go to church on occasions and would be disgusted to find myself standing alongside him.I am convinced that unlike the good samaritian he would walk on the other side,to think I voted for him.he demonstrated his contempt for his fellow man when he attended a memorial service at fire service head quarters some time ago in honour of the only fireman to be killed in service, the front row was made up of so called dignitary he sat with them, however during the prayers and the sounding of the last post not one of them stood up. they think everyone under them are plebs.

Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...

It's worse - our fate as a community is damaged more - than the mere fact these people are hypocrites.

It's a kind of toxic and dangerous decay - born out of the monopoly of power enjoyed by the Jersey oligarchy - that so many of these senior figures in the island's establishment are so obviously mad.

People like Ian Le Marquand, Philip Bailhache, Tim Le Cocq and William Bailhache - if there's one characteristic they all share - it's that they're all plainly deranged.

Think about it.

Even if really unethical and simply not bothered about the vulnerable in society - no rational person would have behaved as they have done.

They are so out of control - and startlingly lacking in judgment.

The interesting thing - certainly as far as the Crown Officers are concerned - is whether London has met its duties of care in properly vetting and assessing those it has appointed to have absolutely and unchallengeable control over our law enforcement apparatus?

Or have they been negligent?

It's going to be an interesting question.


Anonymous said...

Look forward to you asking that question to London, Stuart.

And by the way.

When will that be?

Within days? Weeks? Or months?

Anonymous said...

Syvret for Torch bearer.Seems a good call considering who he would be replacing.Couldn't think of a better choice.

Zoompad said...

"When will that be?"

You can wipe that smirk off your face because child abuse and the persecution of those who try to help the abused is downright wicked. You have the cheek to come here and mock, well, just be aware that by doing so you are offending God, who detests uneven scales.

Stuart does not have the resources that you have, so its a David and Goliath battle, but if you just open your Bible and read 1 Samuel chapter 17 you will be able to see what the outcome of that uneven battle was, with God's help.

Ian Evans said...


Ian Evans said...


Jill Mandus said...

Jill Mandus: said...

placed on the rag but I don't think they will publish as this is the (Jersey Way)

About time a decent human being gets some notice taken. instead of the corrupt political idiots the pretend they are running a democracy!

This most likely wont get posted (As is the Jersey way) but it will be posted on all other Jersey blogs.

rico sorda said...

Today was a step forward for all the abuse survivors but I'm worried that they have to walk through a legal mine field before they recieve compensation.

We, at the Voice, will be hang a real good look at what came out today.

I hope to have my next posting up tonight concerning the corrupt goings on concerning the Jersey Child Abuse Cover-up and the illegal suspension of Graham Power.

The Bloggers won't stop until this is over

Thank you for the support


Anonymous said...

I am still reeling from the articles misusing the term "alleged" in regard to child abuse today, when covering abuse compensation plans. That is improper use of the word.

Jersey is an alleged democracy. The level of democracy is quite fairly subject to speculation. The State Media should use alleged in describing Jersey as a democracy.

Child abuse took place in Haut de la Garenne and other Jersey Care situations. There is no "alleged" about it. None.