Thursday, April 4, 2013

SENATOR,BAILHACHE - SERIOUS DATA PROTECTION BREACH? 2 (THE EMAIL)

FORMER BAILIFF AND SENATOR, PHILIP BAILHACHE


"SENATOR, SIR PHILIP BALIHACE"



"A CONCERNED MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC CONTACTS DEPUTY, T PITMAN"


Below is an email sent to Deputy, T Pitman from a concerned member of the public that shared a flight between London and Jersey with Senator, Philip Bailhache.  The person has asked to remain anonymous out of fear of repercussions. 


This is the email that has been redacted by myself.


From: **** ****
Sent:***** *****
To: Trevor Pitman
Subject: Private Information

Hi Trevor


I am writing to you just to welcome your thoughts on a specific matter that arose yesterday afternoon on a flight back from Gatwick.

On taking my seat on the plane I noticed that seated in the aisle seat on the opposite aisle to me was Sir Philip Bailhache to which I certainly commend him being seated in an economy class seat!

What disturbed me greatly was on taking off he produced a large amount of documentation to read regarding the recent issues with the Dean of Jersey.  Now not wanting to be nosey of course when you are open to read such information I spent 35 minutes glancing at the various Police Statements, pages of mobile phone text messages (which has now confirmed for me that the police can in fact trace logs of all text messages), letters to the Bishop and letters from a …… ……(Name Redacted) (signed I will always Love you like a daughter, love …. (Name Redacted) ) just for clarification that I have seen this information!!  Not only was I privy to this information but at one stage an Air Hostess was also glancing at such information while she was waiting for a new pot of tea to be brought to her, she smirked when she noticed I had been watching her read!  At one point he was actually holding parts of the documentation up in full view to the person sat next to him while he reviewed paperwork from his knee!

Obviously certain facts and names are kept strictly confidential from these types of cases but now I for one can name the woman in question and others that have involvement because of this lack of discretion of information being reviewed in a public place.

Correct me if I am wrong but I do strongly think that this is extremely inappropriate? I wasn’t sure how was best to convey this information over so as I know you personally I thought you would be a good point of contact or should I write a letter to the JEP?

I welcome your response.

Regards

……. ……. (Name Redacted) End


Firstly, Deputy, Pitman advised the email author that the JEP will almost certainly ask for a name and address. Seeing as the JEP Is the the establishment mouthpiece the author's identity could then be forwarded onto the very people the author is in fear of.

Deputy, Pitman sought permission of the author to share this information with Jersey only trusted news source (Bloggers).  Not only does the above email demonstrate the climate of fear that is still prevalent, it also highlight a very serious data beach concerning Senator, Balihache and those who provided him with this very serious data. It is abundantly clear that the emails author, as a result of Senator, Bailhache's carelessness and possible arrogance, now knows the name of the churchwarden and alleged victim HG. 


The question that keeps arising from this serious data breach is simple. How, or why, is Senator Bailhache in possession of such sensitive material? 


Who gave it to him, under what authority is he entitled to have this information. It looks like, and this is unconfirmed as going to press, that Bailhache has in his possession, Police Reports relating to the case between the alleged victim HG and the churchwarden (EY)


Are Privileges and Procedures Committee (PPC) going to have a look at this?


Did the Police give this documentation to Senator, Bailhache and was it by legitimate means? One could ask "What are the legitimate means"





DATA PROTECTION COMMISSIONER, EMMA MARTINS

Will the Date Protection Commissioner, Emma Martins, be investigating this apparent breach in data protection? I won't be holding my breath on this one. 


The "Culture of Concealment"  is very much still alive and kicking in Jersey where the victim is seen as less important (by the powers that be & state media) than the welfare of the Dean of Jersey.  In my opinion, I only have to look at the actions of Senator, Bailhache to see how the investigation into decades long child abuse in the Jersey Care System (Operation Rectangle) was discredited and trashed by the powers that be and the state media. The Victims are always forgotten. 

The below quote is taken from the now infamous day that Senator, Bailhache politically hijacked Liberation day. This is from his speech. It says it all.


May 9th 2008:


 "All child abuse, wherever it happens, is scandalous, but it is the unjustified and remorseless denigration of Jersey and her people that is the real scandal".



Rico Sorda 

Investigative Journalist 





44 comments:

Anonymous said...

The mobile provider who retrieved the text messages Mr Bailhache was in possession of, would of needed the authority of the police to access the messages.

How do they then get from police to politician?

Deputy Trevor Pitman said...

It should be noted here that EY is just a code to conceal the identity of the person who this poor young woman was desperately complaining about.

Complaining, of course, with everyone she turned to turning a deaf ear. Or is that a blind eye? EY are not initials such as RA or some such.

The fact of the matter is though that the true identity of the person behind this horrible story IS now known to many thanks to the sloppy or arrogant actions of this Assistant Minister.

Of course, I'm sure if he had done something REALLY naughty - like email a couple of wholly valid questions on public sector pay; concerns over justice abuses to States employees he might be in for a right telling off. But for this, and for HIM?

Don't be silly. PPC and Data Protection 'holdings to account' are just like Jersey's 'justice' system and election legislation: they operates according to who you are.

Póló said...

The quote reminds me of Frank Walker on Newsnight.

Anonymous said...

In order to get to the bottom of this matter, will Emma Martins request a full out police raid on the home of sitting Senator Bailhache? No warrant necessary, as we all know. He can be detained in a cell and questioned for hours, because there is undeniable legal precedence for this. Meantime, can someone sort through his personal details? Perhaps find an expired drivers permit, or outdated address listing? Don't forget to have them seize his computers and cell phones, deleting the contact info of his MP allies in London. We can be sure the soon-to-be-ex polltopping Senator Bailhache will be picking up rubbish and sweeping the streets soon, after conviction and mandatory service work by the demonstrably fair and upstanding Jersey courts.

Elle

Anonymous said...

To corroborate the identity of RA ,the 'in house' quote is that HG (unknown to me)is'just a troublemaker'. The related name that has been suggested is a correct one but that is not likely to be extended to 'protection'.In fact there could be an argument that 'necessary sacrifice' might apply.
That said, it's a pity that our de facto leader is immune to the rules that apply to the rest of us.

Anonymous said...

A senator might have a sound excuse for leaking officially Protected data, an example being for the public interest in preventing future harm to vulnerable persons. Or, a senator might need to access Protected data to urgently cover up harm to a vulnerable person, and in a rush to do so, recklessly disregard the prying eyes who witness this.

Elle

Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...

Rico, you point out that: -

"that Bailhache has in his possession, Police Reports relating to the case between the alleged victim HG and the churchwarden (EY)"

Presumably, there will now be a massed dawn Police raid on Bailhache?

That he will be arrested, cuffed, and locked-up in a windowless police-cell for 7 and a half hours?

Presumably - his house will be turned over - from top to bottom - and all of his family members computers will be seized?

All without a search-warrant?

Presumably - Tim le Cocq will have him charged and prosecuted?

But then - presumably - Michael Birt will appoint judges he knows - like Bridget Shaw, Christopher Pitchers, Michal Beloff and Charles Gray - to hear the cases against Bailhache? In which case there's about as much chance of Bailhache losing any cases - as I had of winning any.

This is Mrs Windsor's Privateers.

The administration of "justice" in Jersey is a criminal enterprise.

Stuart

Anonymous said...

If, as stated by Bob Hill on his blog ''Nowhere in the Transcript are the names of the alleged victims mentioned nor was any mitigation offered. In his letter Senator Bailhache says that HG admitted a course of harassment over 18 months which involved aggressive, obscene and abusive emails and telephone calls to the Dean and his wife. I do not know where he received that information because it does not appear in the Transcript''

If H G admitted harassment what reason would the police have for acquiring her messages?

Ian Evans said...

"Veritas vos liberabit"

Anonymous said...

Following on from Twitter. - If the complainant remains anonymous then there is nothing anybody can do with such allegations and who is to say this is not a story that has been influenced by a hater of the people involved?

Anonymous said...

May 9th 2008:


"All child abuse, wherever it happens, is scandalous, but it is the unjustified and remorseless denigration of Jersey and her people that is the real scandal".

WTF

IS this guy serious?????????

Anonymous said...

To the stunned commenter at 8:14,

Yes, he was quite serious. Now you can understand when someone says, "The Jersey Way." However, please don't think Jersey lacks for good people who know how horrible that comment was. The comment was a scandal in its own right.

Tom Gruchy said...

This is very curious. When Emma Martins appeared before Scrutiny to explain the (then) proposed reform of the Data P Law - one of the most contentious parts referred specifically to third persons who came into possession of information. I blogged on this at the time because even "gossip" was looking to become a criminal offence.
The possession of such sensitive document copies as described here would without doubt amount to serious breaches of the amended law and presumably the law before revision too.

I would be amazed if Emma is not obliged to act on this information because I certainly cannot imagine how the Senator would be classed as an authorised person in this instance regarding such documents.

Obviously there must be some sort of investgiation but I cannot really imagine who might be considered sufficiently impartial in this administration to carry it out.
If I find the time I will look for my Scrutiny notes from the hearing at the time and refresh my mind on the promises that Emma made to the Panel.

Anonymous said...

There must be questions asked in the states about his affair Bailhache should not be allowed to get away with it, but who will take this on?

Anonymous said...

http://is.gd/YqUiRI

Above link to data protection review.

Deputy M.R. Higgins:
So you are saying that this criminal sanction that you have does not apply to these
third parties? It only applies to data controllers or data processors?

Data Protection Commissioner:

Article 55 applies to anybody.

Anonymous said...

Comment at 10.30 should read this affair not his affair, sorry

Anonymous said...

I hope that Trevor Pitman makes a formal written complaint to the Data Protection Commissioner; otherwise, there is no chance of any investigation.

Occam said...

Sorry Rico but here's a few problems

1) This can hardly be compared to Syvret, this seems more like an act of carelessness than openly distributing sensitive data.

2) Warrant? Police do have the power to search without a warrant in Jersey Law

3)"...which has now confirmed for me that the police can in fact trace logs of all text messages" - this person is jumping too large a gap in logic, not to mention the numerous logical problems with police tracing logs of all text messages

4) Without the omitted details their is no way to verify this email is true, even with the details it could still be fabricated.

5) Fair play on the eagle eyed witness for being able to read what is probably size 12 font on someones lap from the other side of a moving plane with someone also sat next to Bailhache potentially obscuring view, you should apply to work at MI6 for your skills.

rico sorda said...

Hi Occam,

Don't be sorry. By saying sorry you make it sound as if what you are saying puts a dampener on what I have posted. This has not happened so don't be sorry.

You said:

5) Fair play on the eagle eyed witness for being able to read what is probably size 12 font on someones lap from the other side of a moving plane with someone also sat next to Bailhache potentially obscuring view, you should apply to work at MI6 for your skills.

I say:

I have never had a problem reading a newspaper or book on a moving plane. Now there are better qualified people to answer why that is. I would imagine it would be hard reading a newspaper on a moving motorbike.

"On taking my seat on the plane I noticed that seated in the aisle seat on the opposite aisle to me was Sir Philip Bailhache to which I certainly commend him being seated in an economy class seat!"

They were basically sitting next to each other. So don't be sorry

I agree with point 1. I for one never said it compared with the Syvret raid. So don't be sorry

4. Yes, it could be fabricated. Why bother.

Don't ever be sorry

rs

rico sorda said...

Thanks Tom Gruchy

Would her scrutiny evidence be online somewhere?

Anonymous said...

"Sorry Rico but here's a few problems
1) This can hardly be compared to Syvret, this seems more like an act of carelessness than openly distributing sensitive data."

Article 55(1) of the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005: "A person shall not... recklessly... disclose personal information."

The law is the law, and it is clear that intent is not required for disclosure to be unlawful.

But don't worry, I'm sure your man will now demand a private jet for future travel.

Ian Evans said...

THIS is Precious!

Anonymous said...

The 10.40am comment contains a shortened link that redirects to the full link to the scrutiny review. Full link is

http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/ScrutinyReviewTranscripts/2010/Transcript%20-%20Data%20Protection%20(Jersey)%20Law%202005%20-%20Data%20Protection%20Commissioner%20-%2019%20February%202010.pdf

Anonymous said...

Rico

I worry that Emma Martins will find a way to prosecute or persecute the individual who leaked to you the fact that he witness the Data Protection leak.

Anonymous said...

In response to Occam April 5th 2:22pm

3)"...which has now confirmed for me that the police can in fact trace logs of all text messages" - this person is jumping too large a gap in logic, not to mention the numerous logical problems with police tracing logs of all text messages

I noted this in my email as it did confirm for me that text messages can be traced or should I say printed out from the telecom provider, not that the police themselves can trace or track but the telecom provider can provide them to the police.

Indeed given that Bailhache had two A4 pages of txt messages printed on yellow paper that were sent from EY which I could clearly read.

4) Without the omitted details their is no way to verify this email is true, even with the details it could still be fabricated.

The ommited details are obviously omitted for the benfit of the identities not being made more public, Trevor has the original email so he can verify the email is true, I was also travelling with a friend who can confirm this information, I suppose we maybe able to find out for sure what seat Bailhache was sitting in that day to confirm he was next to me if we really need to!!

5) Fair play on the eagle eyed witness for being able to read what is probably size 12 font on someones lap from the other side of a moving plane with someone also sat next to Bailhache potentially obscuring view, you should apply to work at MI6 for your skills.

Can you let me know how to apply to MI6, maybe your suggestion is a good one given my skills seem to be so good at reading documentation that is just over two feet away from me (if that) in clear unobscured view!

With all of these things there will always be people that play Devils Advocate and will refuse to believe certain information, this is fine, we are all entitled to our own opinion, you don't know me and I don't know you, why should you believe it!?? But then why would I make it up? I was on that flight, I was seated in the isle seat next to Bailhache and I was privy to the information I have stated in my email to Trevor, I have no reason to make this up, I contacted Trevor in confidence as I felt strongly that this story had to be told.

rico sorda said...

Hi Anon,

Thanks for the response concerning the email and your flight with Senator, Bailhache.

I will be emailing Senator, Bailhache, all states members and media concerning this incident. I have no doubt there will be questions lodged in the states. Like I keep saying what is he doing with all this information and what has it got to do with him?

Has he acquired it off the churchwarden? or his lawyers? If so, why? Has he acquired it from the Police? If so, why? and what right does he have obtaining it?

These serious questions must be asked in the next sitting.

Anonymous, was he ever aware that someone else could be reading this documentation? He is supposed to be a so called foreign minister.

rs

Anonymous said...

Anon at 8:48.

If you get contacted by anyone who has traced the seating arrangements in that aircraft.

Just play innocent, because there is not a dam thing they can do about it!

Well done by the way.

Anonymous said...

If the name Philip Bailhache was changed to Lenny Harper - Trevor Pitman - Stuart Syvret - Graham Power then arrests would have already been made already and would be headline news. Instead if Emma Martin is forced to look at this case she will - at best - rule it a minor regulatory breach as she did with that email thief Sean Power.

Anonymous said...

If the name Philip Bailhache was changed to Lenny Harper - Trevor Pitman - Stuart Syvret - Graham Power then arrests would have already been made already and would be headline news. Instead if Emma Martin is forced to look at this case she will - at best - rule it a minor regulatory breach as she did with that email thief Sean Power.

Ian Evans said...

"The Maleficent Seven"....RIDE AGAIN

Anonymous said...

Rico,

Was he aware that I could have been or anyone else could have been reading this information? I doubt it, remember we are all plebs that can't read, we dont have brains, we just follow all of the other lemings into economy class and are told where to sit! :)

I don't think for a minute that he had any care of what or whom was around him, he is the one who has the control remember, even if he was aware or if he did care clearly he just assumed none but him could read plain english or would recognise the States Of Jersey Police logo on the top of an official States Of Jersey Police Statement to take any notice! :)

Anonymous said...

Paragraph 11 of the Ministerial Code of Conduct, which applies to Assistant Ministers:

"Ministers must bear in mind that confidential information which they receive in the course of their duties should only be used in connection with those duties, and that such information must never be used for the purpose of financial gain nor should it be used in their own personal interest or that of their families or friends. In addition, members should not disclose publicly, or to any third party, personal information about named individuals which they receive in the course of their duties unless it is clearly in the wider public interest to do so. Ministers must at all times have regard to all relevant data protection, human rights and privacy legislation when dealing with confidential information and be aware of the consequences of breaching confidentiality."

http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/AssemblyReports/2006/37251-16065-1022006.pdf

Was the flight on Ministerial business? Who booked and paid for it? Or was the trip made in some other capacity? For example, as legal advisor, member of the Ecclesiastical Court, ordinary private citizen. Follow the money - who booked and paid for the flight, and what meetings were attended that day?

A person can of course act in many capacities although such multiple hat wearing cannot of course trump any overriding principles of Data Protection.

I note that the letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury is written as "a Senator in the States Assembly" not as an Assistant Minister.

Page 97 of the Standing Orders (i.e. the rules) of the States of Jersey, which governs the conduct of all members, states much the same as the Ministerial code:

"8 Access to confidential information
Elected members must bear in mind that confidential information which they receive in the course of their duties should only be used in connection with those duties, and that such information must never be used for the purpose of financial gain nor should it be used in their own personal interest or that of their families or friends. In addition, members should not disclose publicly, or to any third party, personal information about named individuals which they receive in the course of their duties unless it is clearly in the wider public interest to do so. Elected members must at all times have regard to all relevant data protection, human rights and privacy legislation when dealing with confidential information and be aware of the consequences of breaching confidentiality. Elected members must not disclose publicly, or to any third party, things said, or information produced, in a meeting of the States that is conducted in camera, unless the States have permitted such disclosure."

http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocuments/States%20Assembly/Standing%20Orders%20of%20the%20States%20of%20Jersey.pdf

Note that on p82 of the same document it says that ANY person can make a complaint to PPC under the code of conduct.

Anonymous said...

It would seem that The Cannon Rule/Law, was discreetly passed in Jersey, to deal with situations like this (the Jersey Deans suspension).

On local radio this morning a Dean supporter was heard saying that The Bishop Of Winchester fails to understand the importants of The Cannon Rule/Law.

Rico, has anyone, or can anyone look into the relationship between the Cannon Rule/Law and The Jersey Way?

Anonymous said...

8 April 2013 Last updated at 15:09 Share this pageEmailPrint
6
ShareFacebookTwitter
Plans for new homes on Jersey's West View Hotel site
Continue reading the main story
Related Stories

Jersey hotel extension approved
Flats plan for ex-hotel rejected
Flats to be built on hotel site
The West View Hotel in St Mary, Jersey, could be knocked down to build five houses.

According to a report submitted with the planning application, the hotel is reaching an age where it needs substantial refurbishment.

The owners, who have run the business for more than 30 years, have decided to retire from the industry.

If plans are approved, one five-bedroom home and four four-bedroom homes would be built.

In the planning application, the developers said they would reduce the amount of building on the land, which forms the corner of a road junction.

The developers also said they were planning to work with St Mary's School to provide an art feature for the site.

Sorry bit off topic but let's see how long this takes to get passed

I believe it's Gorsts in laws that own this little gem lol

Anonymous said...

Come on Emma Martin, do you job, Philip Bailhache breached Data protection laws, you were so swift to send Syvret to prison but seemed to have a lapse of determination when it came to Le Main, Powel (Shaun) and a few others, the blue eyes and cute looks simply don't cut it anymore and we the (ordinary) people of Jersey have had enough of this selective crap.

Anonymous said...

Have the so called Main stream media contacted you / Trevor yet for more information on this story?

Also any word / comment from Bailhache, has he confirmed he was on the flight and had that 'file' with him + what was he doing in possession of such confidential material?

Anonymous said...

Oral question 11 this coming Tuesday:

Deputy T.M. Pitman of St. Helier will ask the following question of the Chairman of the Privileges and Procedures Committee –

“Will the Chairman clarify whether the Committee has had any contact or complaints from the public relating to alleged Data Protection breaches involving the Assistant Chief Minister reading documents identifying the victim and alleged abuser in the Dean of Jersey suspension of Commission case?”


http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/AssemblyOrderPapers/2013/2013.04.16%20Order%20Paper.pdf

Anonymous said...

“I doubt it, remember we are all plebs that can't read, we dont have brains, we just follow all of the other lemmings into economy class and are told where to sit!”

Rico, I think you do yourself a disservice by making such a big deal of the “plebs” factor in this story. There are plenty of “professional “people who are as concerned about this sort of data protection breach as you are, without clouding the issue with class overtones.
Despite all the warnings, it is amazing how many such incidents (some involving national security) have occurred in the UK over the years, with confidential papers being left on train or taxis.
Of course there was the well-known incident (in certain circles anyway) a few years ago, when a briefcase belonging to a Minister was found in a popular hostelry at the Weighbridge. It was returned to the owner, but not before at least a dozen people had noted its politically sensitive and controversial contents regarding the Waterfront plans.

Anonymous said...

To the commentor 6:41.

I dont think Rico mentions 'plebs' nor makes an issue of it.

The comment was posted by a reader to the blog.

Ian Evans said...

That's really a COMPUTER QUESTION

Anonymous said...

At the forthcoming hijacked referendum PLEASE use BOTH votes.

e.g. A #1 ......... AND ........ C #2


Voting C as 2nd choice is NOT a vote against A because your 2nd vote does not count unless your first choice is knocked out in the first count,

Your 2nd choice vote ONLY counts if your first is knocked out ...... USE IT !

Do you want B to win because you didn't use your backup vote?

The current system (i.e. "C") is bad and undemocratic but least it is not "B", which is worse !!!!!!

I will vote A & C and hope that our politicians do the right and fair thing and adapt the result into something that respects
democratic principles like "A" but retains enough members for the much needed scrutiny function.
Perhaps have 7 Deputies per district (totalling 48) or maybe keep the Senators.
(keeping the island wide mandate is essential if the Chief Minister is going to get more powers)

The hijacked electoral commission has given us hijacked choices.
No change, or an elected dictatorship - a crass and immoral plan.

If "B" wins on the 24th our feeble democracy dies. Jersey's equivalent of Germany's 1933 enabling act, giving us a semi-elected dictatorship.

Anonymous said...

" ...briefcase belonging to a Minister was found in a popular hostelry at the Weighbridge.

Rico - what was this about?


Anonymous said...

Oral question 11 this coming Tuesday:

Rico,

is there any update to this, what was the response?

Anonymous said...

ISLANDERS who lost their life savings in a US property scam say they will battle to get their money back after the fraudsters responsible lost their appeal.

The Jersey Court of Appeal yesterday rejected former Magistrate-designate Ian Christmas’s appeal against his conviction and 15-month sentence for fraudulently inducing Marie Cotrel to invest £100,000 of her money through his company in 2004.


2004?? Is that a mistake