Thursday, March 29, 2012

OPERATION END-GAME - 15- OPERATION BLAST- A LETTER TO GRAHAM POWER

Home Affairs Minister Ian Le Marquand




Former Acting Chief Of Police David Warcup










OPERATION END GAME 15




OPERATION BLAST



This is just a quick posting before the main posting on Sunday




The timeline



We have seen how this is progressing. 



In the last  posting we had;


June 2nd 2009 - Acting Chief of Police David Warcup writes to Home Affairs Minister Ian Le Marquand and discloses details of some files held down at Police HQ under the code name 'Operation Blast.' These files contain information relating to States Members and former States Members. David Warcup states that he has brought it to the attention of Ian Le Marquand as it may be relevant to the enquiry currently being conducted by Wiltshire Police. He also informs the Minister for Home Affairs that he has had previous discussions with the Solicitor General about these files.




Now we move on to the next piece. Since Senator Le Marquand took office,he, along with Acting Chief Officer David Warcup, have been looking everywhere to find something to pin on Graham Power and slow down the Wiltshire Disciplinary Investigation. After blowing the doors on Graham Powers secure cabinet and other desperate acts mentioned in the previous posting, they were still struggling.  


David Warcup and Senator Le Marquand was in it up to their eyeballs and getting desperate. Why, when Wiltshire had already missed deadlines concerning the original suspension did Senator Le Marquand go with the second? It doesn't take much working out does it. They just couldn't afford this to go to any type of disciplinary hearing. 



I will be looking at this in a future posting. There is something in the code of the Chief of Police that had them very worried.



Now to the timeline;


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





Home Affairs Department

11 Royal Square


Mr G Power

***** *****

** **** ****

****** **

St Helier



11th June 2009


Dear Mr Power



Operation Blast


I am now enclosing a copy of a letter I have written today to Mr Ogley. You will see from this that there are now two possible areas of complaint which I may have against you. You may wish to contact Mr Ogley or myself in relation to these matters.


You will also see that I have again reviewed your current suspension and decided that  it should continue.  You will also see that if I decided to proceed with any of these possible new complaints then there will be  a further meeting between us at which I can hear either you or your representative with a view to making a decision as to whether or not you should also be suspended by virtue of these new matters.


Yours Sincerely 


Ian Le Marquand



I love the way that Senator Le Marquand says that Graham Power can contact the man that acted in the most disgusting way in getting the then Home Affairs Minister Andrew Lewis to illegally suspend him in the first place. 


The next posting should be up on Sunday. 



Today has been a step forward for the Abuse Survivors getting compensation. This is not as clear cut as it was portrayed in the media today. We, at Team Voice, will be taking a closer look at this over the coming weeks.



So much Abuse went on. 



Not all will be getting anywhere near £60,000 



How was this Abuse allowed to go on year after year without it being investigated or acted upon?



The answer is the triple suspension of Graham Power. This possible Guinness Book of Records entrant shows the world why it happened.



Rico Sorda



Team Voice



Part Time Investigative Journalist 


28 comments:

Anonymous said...

Personally, I think the amounts on offer are nowhere near enough to compensate the sheer horror of what the victims suffered,keep fighting,if they can afford the amount they paid to Ogley,they can surely dig a bit deeper. I am not a victim or relative ,just would like to see fair play.

Anonymous said...

Did Jersey keep its word that abuse survivor payouts would not include a gag order? Some abuse survivors could be in a position to publish their own accounts perhaps in book form, and make a well deserved profit.

Thanks to evidenced investigative reporting like this, when the story of Graham Power, Stuart Syvret, Lenny Harper and the abuse investigation is finally told in its entirety, the survivors' own accounts will be of interest to many.

thejerseyway said...

Hi Rico.

Just put up the Audio from today's Press Conference.
You & your reader's can Listen HERE

TJW.

Zoompad said...

The Jersey abuse survivors would not have been offered anything if it hadn't been for the bloggers, as all the Oligarchy wanted to do was to sweep everything under the carpet. So it is a small victory.

But £60,000 max is an insult, considering the huge amount of money that has been squandered on the cover up. Also, what about the whistleblowers who have been persecuted? Will the abuse survivors be begrudgingly awarded this sop and then when all the interest has died down be subjected to vindictive malicious persecution and deliberatly criminalised over trumped up offences, as happened with the Staffordshire Pindown abuse victims? And what about the fleshed bones?

Anonymous said...

Hansard 15/7/2009

http://bit.ly/Hu8Kn6
In answer to question from Deputy Le Herissier
3.1.5

Attorney General

''When I say so far, in the cases where we have decided not to prosecute. So, the absence of any independent evidence is usually a prime difficulty and I put it that way because of the way the Minister for Home Affairs put it to me a moment ago, that you have to persuade 10 out of 12 jurors that they should be sure that the events happens as the prosecution claim because if one is left at the end of the day with a complainant who gives evidence very fluently that the allegations are correct, that the assault or rape or whatever it is took place, and the accused gives evidence just as fluently that it did not, and that is the only evidence which the jury have to face, it is quite difficult at that point to take the view that any reasonable jury could be sure beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had committed the crime. So, that is very often the problem which is faced in deciding whether or not to prosecute.''

Is it not the job of the jury to take a view beyond reasonable doubt upon hearing the facts rather than that of the Home affairs ministers interpretation of what he believes?

rico sorda said...

The tiny Channel Island of Sark has a unique constitutional position: part of Britain, but not the UK, it is still held as a fief on behalf of the Queen. It only became a democracy in 2008 but islanders have told us that that democracy is now under threat.
They say they are being bullied and intimidated by representatives of Sir David and Sir Frederick Barclay, the owners of the Telegraph, in the local newsletter. The two brothers now own a third of the island and local people told us they think they're trying to take control of it.

Sark decides its own laws, sets its own taxes and with only 600 inhabitants is small enough to be taken over. The Today programme's Sarah Montague went to the island to find out what they were complaining about.

The Barclay Brothers declined to be interviewed but their lawyer emailed to say the allegations we put to them were "unsupported by evidence and, indeed, false". The same lawyer said he separately acted for Kevin Delaney, the owner, publisher and editor, of the Sark Newsletter. He also denied the allegations and said people often complained to him that they felt intimidated and unable to speak out against the feudal establishment and the newsletter was the only effective political opposition on the island. The Ministry of Justice also declined to be interviewed and gave us a statement saying: "Sark has its own elected democracy; is not part of the UK and is not represented in the UK Parliament, although the Crown has ultimate responsibility to ensure good governance."

Get in touch with Today via email , Twitter or Facebook or text us on 84844.


The Bailhache Brothers are the Jersey Barclay Brothers.

Wake up.

Listen to this link

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9709000/9709518.stm

RS

Anonymous said...

Up to £60,000 for the worst abused (not counting the many who have killed themselves) and up to £10,000 for the less abused.
After they have gone blue in the face denying that the abuse ever happened, then sacked the police chief who revealed their ugly truth.

With £60,000 in Jersey you can rent a modest family home for about 3 years. £10,000 buys 2 years in a bedsit. - not a lot is it ?

In my opinion £60,000 is poor recompense for being an inmate in that culture of fear, even if you were not actually abused. It is a start but it will probably add up to considerably less than they have paid their lawyer friends to advise and avoid owning up to their responsibilities and failures. This still stinks, but lawyers own this island. They are relying on the victims being desperate -backed up by the threat of getting nothing (which even Gorst buys into with mention of the farcical 5 year rule)

This will absorb all funds at a difficult time but those who caused this waste of money (& lives) were the abusers and the supposed pillars of our community who let it happen and then covered it up time and time again.

It is entities like the JEP who transpose this blame onto the victims, investigators and whistle blowers. Toxic shame on them.

I think what people want is justice, but there are those with a major hand in controlling the regime who will apparently avoid justice at any cost - even UDI. Just watch the Bailaches and their mucky chums doctor the public enquiry as they have doctored the Electoral Commission which was supposed to mend our democracy.

This Island is populated by sheep and the sheepdogs of the JEP and Channel Television make easy meat of them.

The Bailache reputation is manure.
[no actually, manure is wholesome !]

Gorst - Your reputation will live or die with the completeness of the public enquiry which MUST include cover up issues etc. like the sacking the police chief.

This is fundamental to our future and reconciliation with our past and will not be "put to bed" like so many crying children.

Money has the capacity to further destroy damaged lives. What I would like is to buy these children's childhoods (& lives) back - But I can't do that - none of us can.

But what we can do is destroy the JEP who provide the smokescreen behind which all this has happened. This will go some way to protecting future generations on this rock. Do not let them choose the outcome of elections.

JEP "the ROTTEN heart of the island". Boycott the JEP ! - Boycott their advertisers !.
H x.

Zoompad said...

I have just had this reply from the Charity Commission about the BFMS. I think this is pretty shocking, that they are resorting to getting legal advice to give me this information, which is clearly in the public interest. I wonder how much that will cost?

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/the_bfms#incoming-269635

Anonymous said...

Hi Rico,

I just listened to your BBC Radio 4 link on Sark:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9709000/9709518.stm

Chilling, and almost a surreal satirisation of our situation in jersey with its more complex franchised Bailache establishment and it's supporting JEP

Possibly a real glimpse of our future with the Bailache hijack of the Electoral Commission and possible future UDI with him or eventually his son at the helm. (& you think I'm kidding ?)

moral_rightness said...

Rico - I have taken a keen interest in what is happening in Sark and although I do not always agree with the way that Kevin Delaney has presented his reports in the Sark Newsletter, he is constantly on the money, highlighting a situation which in essence appears to be far worse than Jersey.

Whether the Barclay brothers have some ulterior motive is not clear to me, but those arguments are just a smokescreen to try and distract people from listening to the truth.

Not long ago, there was a march against the Sark Newsletter, the main protagonists were either part of the government or relatives who hijacked what was supposed to be showing support for a doctor.

There are many people on Sark who dare not speak out, as they fear being isolated and/or losing their jobs, the Chief Pleas is a complete joke at times.



I am surprised they hoodwinked you with that BBC charade!!!

Anonymous said...

Care abuse scheme

Anonymous said...

June 14th 2009 - Graham Power replies to the Home Affairs Ministers letter. In Mr Powers 4,000 word reply he explains to the Minister some of the matters regarding to Operation Blast. This 4,000 word reply was leaked by someone as the media got hold of it and published parts. The leak was not from Mr Power.


Rico, this is next up in your sequence of events.

Will we get to see the 4,000 word memo?

Anonymous said...

Listening to the one oclock news on radio jersey on thursday i think it was, they were saying that the Chief Minister was going to make an announcement at 2.30pm regarding the abuse claims,they then said they had a copy of what was to be said but were unable to tell us before the Minister had made his announcement,in other words they actully knew what he was going to say at least one and a half hours before the abused people or the general public knew, to me that just stinks,and just shows how much the states are up the meadia,s a-se.

Anonymous said...

Nice article in the JEP today about Shipley and Rankine fishing together in florida.

How snug.....

Anonymous said...

Florida Keys, nice if you can afford it eh?

Anonymous said...

They can! and at the expesive of Jersey people who buy the cr*p they print.

The Media You Deserve

Tom Perry said...

A Sobering Thought

The Guardian reported on 5th March that Baby P's father has been awarded GBP75,000 having been wrongfully accused of being a paedophile.

Meanwhile, an abusee living with a lifetime of unerasable memories following abuse by a perpetrator is, we are informed, potentially going to be awarded up to GBP60,000 for which one speculates they have to be assessed as having suffered the worst excesses.

Got it!

The law needs to get a grip because it is sometimes possible to appreciate and sympathise with the emotions expressed in Henry The Sixth, Part 2 Act 4, scene 2, 71–78

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."

Zoompad said...

I think when the scales fall from peoples eyes onto the activities of the secret family courts they will understand why William Shakespeare wrote that passage.

I spoke to a woman in Stafford a few days ago. She was a charity collector, and she stopped me in the street to ask me to contribute. I had a good conversation with her, and told her about the secret family courts, and that there was one in virtually every town in the UK. I saw her eyes pop wide open, as I explained to her that the secret family court sessions are held in the same buildings as the other court sessions, but that they were secret sessions.

People really need to understand that there are secret courts all over the UK and anyone could find themselves dragged through them. They dont just hold secret courts for children, they also have the Courts of Protection (Corruption more like) for people deemed by self promoted experts too mentally unfit to defend themselves, and old people. Anyone could find themselves being squeezed to death in one of those wicked secret courts.

rico sorda said...

June 14th 2009 - Graham Power replies to the Home Affairs Ministers letter. In Mr Powers 4,000 word reply he explains to the Minister some of the matters regarding to Operation Blast. This 4,000 word reply was leaked by someone as the media got hold of it and published parts. The leak was not from Mr Power.


Graham Powers 4,000 word response to ILM will be posted today.

Im working on the posting but should be soon.

Tom,

The compensation scheme for the survivors of abuse is not up to much. How many will qualify for the 60,000? I just get a bad feeling about it.

The Voice will be having a close look at this.

rs

Zoompad said...

I am curious about this magic figure of £60,000. Who has decided that is the amount of cash that will make up for the abuse?

It is the same amount that my aunty Rose was awarded for the vile way she was treated in the Magdelen laundry.

I also found this:

Consider the case of Babar Ahmad. Basically he was guilty of reading. Yep, we got ourselves a reader. An obvious danger to the public don’t you think? He was arrested in a pre-dawn raid (timing is the key) by the Gestapo Terrorist police in December 2003. They beat him enough to cause bleeding from the ears and in his urine - not just a “few slaps”. They made such a mess of him that they couldn’t charge him on the usual trumped up nonsense.

After they let him out they decided to let Big Brother – literally – have a go. Obligingly the American’s demanded his extradition on the grounds of – wait for it - possession of a tourist brochure. Damn, a reader who might like to travel – hanging is not good enough for these monsters!!

In March 2009 he was awarded £60,000 for his treatment during his initial arrest described as 'grave abuse, tantamount to torture.' Despite that Babar is still in jail. The forces of the state are still doing all in their vindictive power to send him to the US – with all that entails.

In case you think this is a rarity, I know of one case in Ireland where a man (Owen Carron) was locked up for over a year on remand for the possession of “explosive material” – a box of matches.

http://floggingdeadhorses.blogspot.com/2010/07/we-got-ourselves-reader.html

Personally I don't think £60,000 is enough to make up for any of these horrible life destroying abuses. I think £60,000 is insulting. I think someones life is worth a lot more than £60,000. I would like to know who is deciding that £60,000 is what someones life is worth.

Tom Perry said...

Contrast and compare.

Very sadly we heard nothing more of this case, I therefore suspect that any settlement was subject to a gagging clause. The circumstances are interesting, but I choose not to comment.

Not only but also:

This link to the website of Jonathan West who has been, and continues to be instrumental in bringing years of abuse at St Benedict's school Ealing to the attention of the Department for Education and the police, brings us similar numbers once again.

The usual damage limitation is up to £50k per case. How this is arrived at when as you see in my previous posting Baby P's father was awarded £75k, and this amount only because the People newspaper admitted liability. As Justice Bean indicated the complainant could have seen the complainant awarded up to £150k. Don’t even get me started about many of the awards to the Slebs on the Levenson Inquiry with their fits of faux hurt!

With such little downside for abuse of children; almost no one prosecuted, and light damages; there is little motivation to prompt those running institutions to operate and prosecute effective child protection policies on which the culture of child protection is grounded because lets not forget there is no requirement in law to report allegations or actual abuse to anyone.

Administrations of institutions are mistakenly steeped in keeping 'these sordid incidents' under wraps believing this is the best police, completely oblivious to the fact that such actions attract the attention of the very people they do not want in their institution or on their island.

rico sorda said...

Damages claim: Patrick Raggett outside the High Court today
A former City lawyer who claims being abused at school by a Jesuit priest ruined his career has won the right to pursue a £5million bid for damages.
Patrick Raggett, 50, says years of 'insidious' abuse at the hands of Father Michael Spencer, a teacher at his all-boys Roman Catholic school, blighted his adult life.
Today at London's High Court, the businessman was successful in the first stage of his fight for compensation from the former governors of the school, which closed in 1978.
One of the country's top judges agreed that there was 'entirely compelling' evidence that he was the victim of a 'sustained course of sexual abuse and assaults by Father Spencer'.
There will now be another hearing to determine the impact the abuse had on Mr Raggett's career, and the extent of any damages he should be awarded.
It is by far the biggest claim of its kind seen in Britain, and comes despite the fact that 35 years have passed since the abuse ended - and nine years since the priest died.
Lawyers for the college's governors had argued the case was impossible to prove and that the action should be 'time-barred' because Mr Raggett should have filed a claim much earlier.
But Mrs Justice Swift ruled that Mr Raggett's 'state of denial' was such that it was not until April 2005 that he recognised the abuse for what it was.
Legal experts predict the victory could provoke a flood of similar claims.
The former altar boy had wept as he told the court in March how he was abused at the Jesuit-run Preston Catholic College, in Lancashire, between 1969 and 1976.
He told how Father Spencer, who taught French and coached football, made him strip and measured his genitals, filmed him performing exercises, photographed him and touched him inappropriately.
After leaving school Mr Raggett blocked out what happened, even inviting the priest to officiate at his wedding in 1991.
He qualified as a solicitor, but was dismissed as a litigation partner at top City law firm Pinsent Masons after gaining a reputation for reckless, alcohol-fuelled behaviour.

rico sorda said...

In 2005, he had a mental breakdown and subsequent therapy helped him connect the abuse with his problems at work, failed marriage and binge-drinking.
Mr Raggett, who now runs his own business consultancy in Fulham, West London, said: 'The most important aspect of this trial is that the people who allowed this to happen - and who were quite happy to see it swept under the carpet - have been held responsible at last.
'For all the warm words from the Jesuit Order about co-operating in this case, the reality is they fought it tooth and nail without regard for my feelings.
'I want to urge others who are being or who were similarly mistreated to come forward.
'The Jesuit Order, the Catholic Church generally, is still not accepting legal and moral responsibility for the dark virus of abuse in the way it should.'
A further hearing is not expected until next year.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1177549/Former-lawyer-wins-right-sue-Jesuit-school-5m-sex-abuse-33-years-ago.html#ixzz1qn4rj3VY

Nick Palmer said...

Anon wrote:

"Listening to the one oclock news on radio jersey on thursday i think it was, they were saying that the Chief Minister was going to make an announcement at 2.30pm regarding the abuse claims,they then said they had a copy of what was to be said but were unable to tell us before the Minister had made his announcement,in other words they actully knew what he was going to say at least one and a half hours before the abused people or the general public knew, to me that just stinks,and just shows how much the states are up the meadia,s a-se."

This does not stink at all. Embargoing of information is a standard way that the media operates.

Obviously in this case a press release was issued with an embargo - this means a time was specified before which the information in the release could not be reported on. This is so that the media can prepare their reporting in advance but would not release information before the person, who is due to "offically" state the case, speaks.

Anonymous said...

Re `the Jesuit Order'.

I remember the Jesuits at Highlands college very well! Especially the little walks they used to take me on after Mass on a sunday around the apple orchard, in order to sexually assault me!

Anonymous said...

More fool BBC Radio Jersey.

An embargo at that time of day - ridiculous btw - is to suit one media outlet and one media outlet alone, that's right folks, The Rag.

Anonymous said...

hisbola@Anon at 5:20

I cannot empathise with you as I haven't been through the same experiences as you. I don't think that by offering ones sympathies will be enough either.

But my god, I wish to try and help people like yourself. It is amazing the number people whom I converse with who were so unclear about what the establishment have attempted to cover up. "Were" being the operative word here.

As a born again atheist I revile at what people do to wrap up their perversions in the name of religion. I rented a property that had drawings of naked young girls on the wall. However, these girls had wings on, carrying harps so they weren't girls at all but 'angels'. So that makes it all right then ....

The Beano is not the Rag

Advocatus Diaboli said...

Greetings Rico, is Stuart all right?