Sunday, June 24, 2012

DEPUTY HIGGINS & P48.2012







STATEMENT MADE ‘IN CAMERA’ ON 8TH DECEMBER 2008: RELEASE OF TRANSCRIPT


STATES GREFFE


STATEMENT MADE ‘IN CAMERA’ ON 8TH DECEMBER 2008: RELEASE OF TRANSCRIPT


page1image2800.jpg






page1image3080.png
page1image3352.png
STATES GREFFE
PROPOSITIONTHE STATES are asked to decide whether they are of opinion
  • (a) to agree, in accordance with the provisions of Standing Order 160(4), that the transcript of the Statement of the Minister for Home Affairs relating to the suspension of the Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police that was made in camera on 2nd December 2008 in accordance with the provisions of Article 9(4) of the Police Force (Jersey) Law 1974 (including the transcript of the questions to the Minister that followed the Statement), should be made public; and
  • (b) to agree , in accordance with the provisions of Standing Order 160(4), that, if any of the debate on this proposition takes place in camera, the transcript of this debate should also be made public.



DEPUTY M.R. HIGGINS OF ST. HELIER


The purpose of this proposition is to right a wrong. Although this debate took place a week before I took my place in the States Assembly on 8th December 2008, I have reviewed the transcript of the debate in the States Greffe and believe, in the light of subsequent information, that States Members were misled by the then Minister for Home Affairs, Deputy Andrew D. Lewis of St. John, into the reasons why the Chief Officer of Police was suspended.
Because of the nature of an in camera debate I cannot set out in the report the reasons why I believe Members were misled – but I will be requesting the States to debate this proposition in camera so that these reasons can be revealed to members.
The purpose of the proposition is not to debate whether or not the Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police should have been suspended later, on the basis of information obtained at great expense to the public purse after his original suspension, but to look purely at the original suspension itself.
Whether the former Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police should have been suspended later and ultimately disciplined is another matter which has never been fully tested before any court or tribunal. Nor has he ever had the opportunity to formally answer the charges made against him. In such circumstances the case against him has not been proven one way or another.

Financial and manpower implications
There are no financial or manpower implications for the States arising from this proposition.
P .48/2012








Former Home Affairs Minister Andrew Lewis


What can you say about this former Minister. It has always been my opinion that Andrew Lewis was nothing but a pawn for the likes of Frank Walker to manipulate and coerce into making one of the biggest decisions in his short ministerial career.

Andrew Lewis suspended the former Chief of Police Graham Power QPM on the 12 November 2008. This disastrous decision, taken alongside the then Chief Executive Bill Ogley, HR consultant Ian Critch and overseen by then Chief Minister Frank Walker is corrupt on every imaginable level.


This all came about because Frank Walker was humiliated on Newsnight. This all came about so they could Cover-Up for alleged Child Abusers. Since the Child Abuse Investigation broke in 2007 look at what we have had;


The Lead Investigator Lenny Harper denigrated by our local media and certain politicians


The then Chief of Police Graham Power suspended - 3 Times


Home Affairs Minister Ian Le Marquand spending £1.5 million pounds on nothing but a vendetta


Acting Chief Officer David Warcup writing letters that helped get his Chief Suspended - also broke into the Chief's safe - then lied to Wiltshire Police under Oath and a lot more


Dep/sup Mick Gradwell trashing the Abuse Investigation and Lenny Harper at any given oppurtunity. Leaking information to the Daily Mail Journalist David Rose who was trashing the Investigation. This was done as he was leading the investigation and it was still live. Refused to give evidence at a Scrutiny Sub Panel - the only one who refused yet gets called a Whistle Blower by our only cover -up paper the "Jersey Evening Paedophile"


The Council of Ministers under the total non leadership of Chief Minister Terry Le Suer try and bypass a Committee of Inquiry by lodging a report and saying all is ok in late 2010.


I could go on and on


The suspension of Graham Power should set a precedent


The first suspension of Graham Power was so bad and illegal that the new Home Affairs Minister Ian Le Marquand refused to touch it.


Let us look at some of Andre Lewis quotes and replies from Graham Power. This is taken from a Statement issued by Andrew Lewis on the 19th February 2010

Andrew Lewis:

5. Both Mr Power and Deputy Hill claim that the decision to suspend the Chief of Police was somehow rushed, “done on a whim with little consideration and without seeking advise”. I refute this suggestion most strongly. I had been aware for sometime of concerns about the command and control of the Child Abuse enquiry and in my capacity as Minister had been regularly briefed by the Deputy Chief Officer on the progress of an independent review of the case, being carried out by The Metropolitan Police.

Graham Powers reply:

5. In his recent statement Mr Lewis says “I had been aware for some time of concerns about the command and control of the Child Abuse Enquiry.” In his formal statement to Wiltshire Police he states “Until I received the letter from David WARCUP, (on 11th November 2008 – the day before the suspension) I had no reason to believe that they were not managing the investigation well.” (Paragraph 3.) Is Mr Lewis now admitting that his statement to Wiltshire Police is not true? If it helps, it appears that prior to signing his statement to Wiltshire Police, Mr Lewis signed a declaration which among other things (such as page numbers and the like) states “This statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and I make it knowing that, if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have wilfully stated anything in it which I know to be false or do not believe to be true.” If the signed statement to Wiltshire Police is not true then it is a serious matter. On the face of it, his recent public statement, and the statement to Wiltshire cannot both be true. This is something which may require a more formal investigation. I will return to this issue later




Andrew Lewis
9. I am deeply concerned that the subsequent enquiry into this matter conducted by Wiltshire constabulary has taken so long. I was advised that such an investigation would only take until March 2009. The longer such matters are left the more open they are to wild allegations of conspiracy. Such allegations I most strongly refute. The reasons for suspension were compelling; the process was diligent, professional and painstakingly considered in accordance with the disciplinary code. I took full legal and HR advice from highly competent professionals and followed the prescribed procedure of the day.

Graham Power

9. I am grateful for the comments of Andrew Lewis in this paragraph.  He confirms that he and others were apparently misled as to the duration of the disciplinary enquiry, stating that he was told that it would be concluded by March 2009. It is now of course almost March 2010 and the matter is still outstanding. He does not say who misled him or speculate as to their motives.   He says that he is “deeply concerned” about this issue. His concerns, if authentic, are appreciated. During this time he has of course been getting on with his life. I am the one who has been suspended until such time as there is no possibility of a return to work, and I have therefore effectively been dismissed.

Andrew Lewis
10. I had on a number of occasions publicly and privately extolled my respect and admiration for Mr Power as competent manager and Chief Police Officer. Which was why I was deeply shocked by the revelations and allegations presented by other competent independent policing authorities concerning Mr Powers command and control of Jerseys biggest ever criminal investigation.
 
Graham Power

10. In this paragraph Mr Lewis praises my professional virtues.   He then says that he was shocked by the revelations presented by “competent independent policing authorities.”   He does not say who these authorities were. Whoever they were they could not have been the Metropolitan Police whose report he “never saw.” (Witness statement paragraph 14.)



You see the Lie was up and running. It takes a thousand lies to cover a lie. It could have all been so different.


Andrew Lewis told Wiltshire under oath that he never saw the Metropolitan "Interim" Police Report


What did he tell the States Assembly during the "In Camera" debate?


Then in Feb 2010 he says;

Andrew Lewis

10. I had on a number of occasions publicly and privately extolled my respect and admiration for Mr Power as competent manager and Chief Police Officer. Which was why I was deeply shocked by the revelations and allegations presented by other competent independent policing authorities concerning Mr Powers command and control of Jerseys biggest ever criminal investigation. End


The above statement is a complete lie. The man just makes it up as he goes along. He has no other option. No one was ever meant to look at the original suspension or ask any questions.

Senator Le Marquand is no better. The fact that he is still a minister just shows the shocking mess we are in. There was no clamour from the JEP for the removal of this minister was there. The actions of Senator Le Marquand are in my opinion far worse than those of Senator Ozouf


Thank God journalists have picked up the hard work of the Jersey Bloggers


Rico Sorda

Team Voice

21 comments:

Anonymous said...

Andrew Lewis has given conflicted accounts and Graham Power hasn't. Not difficult to guess who the liar is here.

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

You said;

"The suspension of Graham Power should set a precedent"

The publishing of the prosecution case against him By Home Affairs Minister Senator Ian Le Marquand DID set a very dangerous PRECEDENT

Anonymous said...

Andrew Lewis Version 1

I had been aware for sometime of concerns about the command and control of the Child Abuse enquiry and in my capacity as Minister had been regularly briefed by the Deputy Chief Officer on the progress of an independent review of the case, being carried out by The Metropolitan Police.

Andrew Lewis Version 2

“Until I received the letter from David WARCUP, (on 11th November 2008 – the day before the suspension) I had no reason to believe that they were not managing the investigation well.”

Anonymous said...

Jersey bloggers have been vital in getting information into the public domain. Information like this is crucial in keeping the record straight because Andrew Lewis has been caught out lying by bloggers with the help of Graham Power and the statemedia keep it covered up. Good work and keep it up!

Anonymous said...

Rico.

You end your posting by saying:

"Thank God journalists have picked up the hard work of the Jersey Bloggers".

Is this why there hasnt been much activity on your blog in the last few days?

Otherwise engaged!?

rico sorda said...

Rico.

You end your posting by saying:

"Thank God journalists have picked up the hard work of the Jersey Bloggers".

Is this why there hasnt been much activity on your blog in the last few days?

Otherwise engaged!?


I would say the past month. Never underestimate the power of the world wide web. Just because our state media / majority of brain dead politicians think it can go away by just ignoring it doesn't mean people haven't been reading it. I still find it amazing that Senator Ozouf has been nailed by the local press and politicians yet Senator Le Marquand just gets away with it.

Look what Le Marquand did to Graham Power. His actions were shambolic yet no one stopped him or asked for his removal.

rs

rico sorda said...

Disciplinary action against the former head of Jersey's police force has been dropped.

Mr Power retires later this month and Home Affairs Minister Ian Le Marquand says there's no time left to complete the inquiry which has so far cost more than £1m.

But Senator Le Marquand told States members there had been 'ample evidence' against Mr Power and he'll be making a further statement next week.

Mr Power said the abandonment of disciplinary proceedings means he can now be regarded as having been exonerated of all allegations.

No specific charges have ever been made against Mr Power, but his suspension is believed to be related to his handling of the historic child abuse investigation.

A number of States members believe to simply drop the charges, because the disciplinary team ran out of time before Graham Power was due to retire, makes a mockery of the States employment board and was by no means a good use of tax payers money.

At more than a million pounds Constable Crowcroft says the Home Affairs Minister should have acted more responsibly.

'I think for a senior member of the States to find somebody guilty, announce that in public before the member of staff has had any chance to defend themselves as part of that process is not far short of incompetent and I think States members, even those who personally think Mr Power was guilty of mishandling the investigation, was quite shocked at the way in which he effectively announced that yesterday'.

rico sorda said...

Senator Le Marquand (Minister for Home Affairs)
Sir in relation to the contribution of the Connétable of St Helier he is, in my view, perpetuating a myth which has also been perpetuated for some time by the Deputy of St Martin both of whom have chosen to be, to nail their colours to the ‘Power’ mast, if I may put it that way, most firmly, perpetuating the myth that somehow Mr Power would have gone away

Greffier of the States (in the Chair)
If we could use his title please Minister

Senator Le Marquand (Minister for Home Affairs)
I’m sorry Sir, somehow the Chief Officer of Police would have gone away. The fact is, that he chose from day 1 to seek to say ‘I have done nothing wrong, I want to come back, in fact I’m going to bring legal proceedings against the Home Affairs Minister so that I can be reinstated. The fact is that there never was the option open to the Home Affairs Minister to simply pay him off – that was not something he was going to accept, that was not something he was ever going to agree to. So this is a complete myth which has been put over that somehow I had some other option open to me – the fact is it will very shortly be demonstrated when I reveal reports – which I hope to do next week – in relation to these matters that the Chief Officer of Police was very seriously at fault in a whole number of different ways, and members will then be able to judge whether my opinion of the matter.

Connétable of St Helier
Sir I think I ought to raise a point of order. I think for the Minister to pre-empt the disciplinary process is entirely wrong – the person concerned has no right of reply – this is not a judicial court – I suggest the Minister withdraws his remarks.

Senator Le Marquand (Minister for Home Affairs)
I am not withdrawing the remarks they are absolutely true and I have had to wait a very long time to say it and I will demonstrate that that is absolutely true next week from the reports which I have. I am well aware of the discipline matters, I am able to inform members if they are interested that I have today abandoned the discipline proceedings against the Chief Officer of Police upon the basis that it is impossible to finish them in the time – solely on that basis – there are ample grounds for disciplinary proceedings as will become apparent shortly [Interruption] I am not giving way, but maybe those members who have chosen to nail their colours so firmly to the mast - without actually checking with me as to what the real facts have been - may have to eat humble pie.

rico sorda said...

Mr Power will retire from the Police Service at midnight on 19th July 2010 after completing over 44 years service as a police officer. He is currently on leave prior to his retirement date.
Once he retires he will no longer be subject to the Chief Officer’s Disciplinary Code. Accordingly all disciplinary proceedings will cease.

Background:
Mr Power was suspended from duty on 12th November 2008 by the former Minister for Home Affairs, Andrew Lewis, who claimed that he had evidence relating to the management of the Historic Abuse Enquiry which justified action under the Disciplinary Code. His suspension was subsequently continued by the current Minister for Home Affairs, Senator Ian Le Marquand.

Mr Brian Moore, Chief Constable of Wiltshire, was appointed in December 2008 to carry out a disciplinary investigation and report to the Minister. Senator Le Marquand originally indicated that he expected Mr Moore to report to him by March 2009. Mr Power cooperated fully with the Disciplinary Investigation and at one stage provided a written statement of over 62,000 words.

No disciplinary action was taken in 2008.
No disciplinary action was taken in 2009.
No disciplinary action was taken in 2010.
No disciplinary charges were ever brought.
No disciplinary hearing was ever called.

The costs of the suspension and disciplinary investigation have been officially confirmed as exceeding one million pounds. In a recent written answer in the States the Minister for Home Affairs said that up to the end of May 2010 the cost of the suspension and disciplinary investigation had reached a total of £1,069,776. This figure does not include the costs of the time of the Civil Servants and Law Officers who have assisted the Minister. Costs will continue to rise both in relation to cover for the absence of the Chief Officer, and in connection with the enquiry into the suspension currently being carried out by Mr Brian Napier QC.

rico sorda said...

The suspension was controversial from the onset. In January 2009 the Connétable of St Helier, Simon Crowcroft, brought a Report and Proposition to the States requesting an independent review of the suspension before further expenditure was committed. The proposition was opposed by Ministers and narrowly defeated. In the summer of 2009 the suspension was the subject of a Judicial Review in the Royal Court, and on regular occasions since 2008 there have been questions and exchanges in the States.

In September 2009 Mr Power successfully applied to a Complaints Board hearing for the Chief Minister to be required to disclose information relating to the creation of the original suspension documents. The subsequent disclosure cast doubt on the truthfulness of the previous accounts given by Ministers of the suspension process.

Following a Report and Proposition from Deputy Bob Hill, the Chief Minister recently agreed to an independent review of the manner in which the original suspension was carried out, with terms of reference not dissimilar to those first proposed by the Connétable of St Helier in January 2009. That review is currently being carried out by Mr Brian Napier QC.

There have also been questions in the States regarding the length and cost of the investigation led by the Chief Constable of Wiltshire, with some specific questions focussed on the scale of expenses claimed for hotels, travel and meals.

At every stage Mr Power has denied any wrong-doing whatsoever in relation to the management of the Historic Abuse Enquiry or any other issue, and said that he would defend himself against any disciplinary action that was brought against him.
Mr Power has made the following statement in relation to the imminent abandonment of disciplinary proceedings:

rico sorda said...

On the question of his retirement Mr Power has said:

“While I considered retiring in 2007 I felt at the time that it was right I should work beyond my retirement age in order to provide continuity of management for the Force. Since November 2008 I have further postponed my retirement in order to give the Minister for Home Affairs a fair opportunity to resolve the outstanding issues under the Disciplinary Code. I did however become frustrated at the continuing delays, and on a number of occasions in 2009 I issued public statements confirming that if matters were not resolved by 2010, I would delay my retirement no further. In January 2010 I effectively set a deadline by giving the Minister written notice that, come what may, I would retire in July of this year. This allowed the Minister a further 6 months to bring matters to a conclusion. For whatever reason, the Minister did not make effective use of that opportunity and in consequence I will retire on the date notified to the Minister at the start of this year.”


And nothing gets done about the Home Affairs Minister. The man is a disgrace to his office. He is just another pawn used by those in power. He gave up his job as a magistrate to take care of the Power issue. Then we have another one by the name of Philip Bailhache who gives up his role as a commissioner so he can hijack the electoral commission and put the scuppers on a Committee of Enquiry..

Jurassic Jersey

rs

Anonymous said...

Far from being a disgrace to his office Ian Le Marquand is an asset to it. He continues to defend the indefensible in the face of overwhelming evidence against him in good old Jersey tradition. To any right thinking person he is a disgrace who should be in prison to the Jersey judiciary and council of ministers he's a good boy who does what he is told.

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

Former Deputy Bob Hill, in an e-mail to all States Members said;

"One should also note that over £3.7 million pounds has spent on the historic abuse investigation since the retirement of Mr Harper, plus near on a million pounds to cover the suspension of Mr Power yet no one at the Chief Minister's Department or at Home Affairs seems to be concerned."

HERE

How Ian Le Marquand is still in office and why Warcup and Gradwell have never been asked to justify their spending is something people from outside Jersey will never be able to understand.

For those of us stuck here we know it as "The Jersey Way."

Anonymous said...

ILM

Anonymous said...

The police investigated the complaints, but say that there was insufficient evidence to mount a prosecution.

jep monday
the police or one of the infamous crown officers decided!!

Zoompad said...

http://zoompad.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/george-wiskin.html

Very interesting link between Lancashire Police Neil Esseen, the George Wiskin death on Fleetwood beach case and the murder of baby Ollie McBride.

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

Will we see the EVIDENCE?

Ian Evans said...

"Utter Malfeasance"

rico sorda said...

SIX women made complaints to the police during the historical child abuse inquiry about alleged abuse they suffered when children at the former Grouville Girls’ Home.

One of them, Jean Neil (formerly Parker) has included details of alleged abuse she suffered while she was at the home between 1941 and 1951 in a book she has written.

She is among those seeking compensation from the States for what she allegedly suffered.

The police investigated the complaints, but say that there was insufficient evidence to mount a prosecution.



The above is taken from the JEP online. I have no idea how good the main article is but I'm worried as I've heard it was written by Diane Simon.

I had the pleasure of meeting Jean when she was in Jersey and found her to be a remarkable lady. I hope the article is ok. Has anybody rest it?

rs

Anonymous said...

@Rico at 9:25

The article reviews her life and a little bit of her time at the girls home. What stood out to me (apart from the States Police ignoring the pleas of the abused children ...fume) was that she didn't even mention the name of the home in her book. It was just called the "home".

Was that a subconscious self preservation mode taking over to try and 'remove' herself from her situation? I don't know.

A brave lady who tried to protect others including her husband who had no idea.

And yes I admit that I have just outed myself at buying the Rag...

The Beano is not the Rag.

Ian Evans said...

Rico

When are you going to adjust your blog settings to something other than a thin strip down the middle of the screen?