Sunday, February 2, 2014

CHILD SEX GROOMING IN JERSEY - HAVE ANY LESSONS BEEN LEARNT?




"GIRLS GROOMED FOR SEX IN JERSEY"



"12 ALLEGED VICTIMS AND 8 ALLEGED PERPETRATORS "




"THE JERSEY EVENING POST (JEP) BREAK THE STORY"



"LOOK AT THAT HEADLINE - THE REACTION IN JERSEY TO THIS  HEADLINE WAS ZERO INTEREST"



"WHAT ARE WE BECOMING AS A SOCIETY?"



"MOLEST THE CHILDREN BUT DIPPING OUR POCKETS IS A STEP TO FAR - TUITION FEES"



"48 STATES MEMBERS AND ONLY 4 POLITICIANS HAD SOMETHING TO SAY" 



"WHY DIDN'T THE POLICE GO PUBLIC?"


"LISTEN TO OUR HOME AFFAIRS MINISTER, SENATOR IAN LE MARQUAND DURING HIS INTERVIEW WITH BBC JERSEY - AND HIS EVADING ANSWERS DURING QUESTION TIME IN THE JERSEY PARLIMENT"







On Tuesday the 7th January 2014 JEP reporter Richard Heath broke a story on the front page that led with the title:



"Young girls groomed for sex"


"Police arrest eight men as exploitation threat emerges"


By Richard Heath - Jersey Evening Post

A Group of suspected sex abusers who were allegedly grooming Jersey girls as young as 12 was disrupted by the States police last summer, the JEP can reveal.


In an operation which has remained secret until today, eight men aged between 17 and 20 were arrested on charges of grooming and engaging in under-age sexual intercourse in June.

It is alleged that the men picked up the girls in cars and offered them lift and alcoholic drinks in return for sexual acts. A total of 12 alleged victims aged between 12 and 16 were identified during the operation codenamed Operation Vessel.  But despite the serious nature of the alleged crimes. none of the girls was prepared to give evidence against the men -all of whom they knew - and to date none of the suspects have been charged with any offence. However, a number of other alleged 
sex offences were uncovered, some of which were still under investigation.

The States police released the information to the JEP as they announced plans for a major drive to protect Island youngsters from the emerging threat of child sexual exploitation. Tackling the offence, which has hit the headlines in the UK following a number of high profile child abuse cases in towns and cities including Rochdale and Oxford, is to be one of the Key priorities of the states police in 2014. Announcing the plans, Detective Chief Inspector Alison Fossey said: "The tendency is to think that this is something that happens only in inner cities in the UK and that it doesn't exist in Jersey.  However as recently as last summer we disrupted a group of young men who were allegedly picking up girls in cars and putting them in exploitative situations.  'It was a major intelligence gathering multi-agency operation that led to these arrests. 'Ultimately, the alleged victims were unwilling to engage with the police in respect of the males who were arrested.' 

Det Chief Insp Fossey stressed that although the alleged Jersey offences differed from Oxford and Rochdale, as they didn't involve  young girls being passed between sex offenders they did show that child exploitation offences do occur in Jersey.

'It would be naive to think that the problem doesn't exist in jersey.' the officer said. 'It may not involve gangs where gangs pass girls around, but it certainly happens here. 'We have all seen the cases in the UK and we want to get on the front foot here.

Through education and raising awareness , we want to stop children in Jersey becoming victims of child sexual exploitation.'

Working with the Safeguarding Partnership  Board, the police plan to introduce a comprehensive programme to educate children and adults about child sexual exploitation. 

The scheme will include educating children and teenagers about sexual boundaries in an effort to reduce child on child sex abuse which often arises from misunderstanding about what constitutes  consent. Front -line professionals in the police as well as the Health and Education departments and the Youth Service will receive more training on how to deal with child exploitation cases. And the States police are to use media and social media campaigns to raise awareness of the issue and highlight signs that may suggest that a child is being abused, such as receiving gifts, using their mobile phone or computer secretly, playing truant, self harming or going missing from home.

Det Chief Insp Fossey said: 'It is important that we tackle this issue. It is a crime that can affect any child,  at any time and anywhere, regardless of sex or social or ethnic back-ground.'

Anyone who has concerns about child exploitation in Jersey is asked to phone the Multi Agency Safe-guarding Hub on 449213. End






First up, I would like to thank Richard Heath from the Jersey Evening Post (JEP) for breaking this sex grooming story and Matthew Price of BBC Radio Jersey and TheJerseyWay blog site for the interview and audio.

What has really struck me about this story of child sex grooming is the general acceptance of this highly alarming story among the general public of Jersey.  There has been more reaction over school tuition fees than there has to a child sex grooming scandal.  Should we perhaps look at ourselves as a society and ask the real question: Do we really care?  Is it now a case of: If it's not on my doorstep am I really bothered?

We know that at least one of the alleged victims was in care.  Who has legal responsibility for this child?  We have 12 underage girls, the 20 plus parents of whom must have been devastated, and yet the public outcry is zero.  

There are 48 individuals elected to represent us in the States of Jersey.  During the last sitting of the States, Deputy Mike Higgins raised this important issue during question time and only 4 politicians had something to say about it.  It is the same reluctance to dig deeper that allowed so many questions to remain unanswered in respect of the Le Rocquier School starter pistol incident.  

Did the States of Jersey Police fear a backlash and the Island then facing negative press if they had have gone public with this in June 2013?  Did those in charge fear the same treatment as their predecessors (Operation Rectangle) by actively going public in search of further witnesses and victims?  This may indeed not be the case but the question has still got to be asked due to the significant numbers of people involved.  


What have we learnt since Operation Rectangle?


Do the same problems regarding child protection still exist?


In my view, it seems that we have learnt very little.  


This is the first posting on this issue.  I hope that BBC Radio Jersey and the JEP continue to investigate this case and look at the broader issues of how our society is evolving when sex grooming does not even raise an eyebrow.  So many questions still need asking.



Here we have our Home Affairs Minister, Senator Ian Le Marquand, being interviewed by Matthew Price on BBC Radio Jersey. It really is worth a listen. The Minister, in my opinion, just doesn't seem to get the severity of the topic being discussed.

This interview was conducted on the 8th January 2014.





We then moved on to question time in the States of Jersey. Remember we have 48 States Members and this is Child Sex Grooming that is being discussed.  Look again at how the Minister evades some of the questions  question being asked.  

21-1-2014


4.3 Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier of the Minister for Home Affairs regarding the police investigation of ‘Operation Vessel’:
Would the Minister explain to Members why the police investigation of ‘Operation Vessel’ in which suspected sex abusers who were allegedly grooming young girls were identified, was kept secret since June 2012 and how this benefited the investigation and the people of Jersey?
Senator B.I. Le Marquand (The Minister for Home Affairs):
This investigation took place in summer 2013, not in June 2012.  The States Police do not normally make details of criminal investigations public unless there is a good reason so to do, and a decision as to whether and when to make information public is made on an individual basis.  This was a live covert investigation and the reason for that was that was the best way of maximising opportunities for securing evidence and also for safeguarding the children victims involved.  The operation took place with the support from other key agencies and victims were supported by specially trained staff.  I was aware of the existence of this investigation and as this was a multi-agency investigation so were all the relevant agencies and, where appropriate, parents or guardians.
4.3.1 Deputy M.R. Higgins
I find it amazing that we find out about this investigation through the Jersey Evening Post.  What concerns me is surely if this grooming was going on, and the investigation appears to be at an end because no convictions were brought, why was it not put out into the media so other families, one could be aware of what was going on, and secondly, if there were other victims who could come forward… or was this just a case of again keeping quiet about child abuse in this Island because of fears for the reputation of the Island and not looking after children in the Island?
Senator B.I. Le Marquand:
No, the last insinuations of the Deputy are utterly ridiculous.  The police are very well committed to dealing with matters of investigation [Approbation] and it is quite outrageous that that implication should be put forward.  These matters have to be decided on an individual basis.  Here, the primary concern was to protect the children involved.  This was a highly successful matter.  I am sorry that the Deputy does not seem to be able to recognise a successful matter because here we had detecting that something was happening at an early stage.  We had intervention to stop it happening.  We had potential offenders being arrested and questioned and so on.  But there was not anything to be gained at the early stages of the investigation in going public.  In fact very much the reverse.  You cannot go public with details of the victims’ names for instance.  You cannot go public with details of the alleged perpetrators’ names, particularly as in this case it did not end up… so I am quite satisfied this was most properly handled.
4.3.2 Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
Would the Minister not acknowledge that as exemplified most dramatically in the Savile case, publicity was indeed the way forward and the issue is not either accusing people unfairly or massively embarrassing victims by putting their names in?  The issue is surely to put in the public domain the fact that an investigation is proceeding so that if other people have data and that was, as I said, exemplified in the Savile case, then they can feel that much more confident in coming forward with possibly related allegations.  That was the issue.  Will he tell us therefore (a) does he agree with my statement and (b) under what circumstances would he want to handle these or would he want the police handle to these investigations in a more open fashion?
Senator B.I. Le Marquand:
I do not agree with the statement in this particular case for the reasons I have already said, because you could not go public with details of the names of the alleged victims, nor could you go public with details of the alleged perpetrators.  You simply could not do that in either case.  You create witch hunt territory and all that kind of thing.  There is an appropriate occasion to warn the public, and indeed that happened eventually via the J.E.P. (Jersey Evening Post) article, it is appropriate there is an issue generally.  But frankly, you may call me a cynic if you like, but the issue of young men trying to ply young women with drink in order to get their - if I can go Victorian now - wicked way with them is not a new issue.  This is a permanent risk, a permanent danger and that is a fact.  What has been happening, on the positive side, is some excellent work has been done by the safeguarding board in training work in relation to the whole area of sexual exploitation of young people.  I myself attended a half-day conference on this so the agencies are in a better place to recognise the issues when things are going wrong.  But this was a massive success story and that I hold to.
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
I wonder if the Minister could answer the question under what circumstances would he seek to have much more open investigation.
The Deputy Bailiff:
I think, Deputy Le Hérissier, he has already answered.  He said it depends on the facts of each case.
4.3.3 Deputy M. Tadier:
I do not call the Minister a cynic, I call him blatantly complacent.  The only reason we are aware of this episode is purely by chance that a request was made, and I think possibly some investigative journalism for a change has uncovered this.  For the Minister to stand up and say that everything is dandy simply beggars belief.  Does the Minister acknowledge the fact that the only reason prosecutions were not brought was because the individuals who were very young were unwilling to testify and that were they willing to testify these individuals would probably be locked up at La Moye or certainly on some kind of suspended sentences?
Senator B.I. Le Marquand:
In relation to the second point: yes, that is correct.  This is unusual investigation because there was no evidence coming from the victims themselves.  It was, in fact, coming from other sources, and without a complainant who would give evidence: it is quite impossible to bring a criminal prosecution.  I am not in the least complacent in this area.  There has been excellent work to improve the system.  We are still working on improving the system and awareness so that information is shared.  We have brought in the M.A.S.H. (Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hubs) system within the last few months, which is a data-sharing information system.  The fact is if information has to be obtained, it has to go to the right agencies and then they have to take appropriate action.
4.3.4 Deputy M. Tadier:
Does the Minister not acknowledge there is a problem if the only reason that people who would otherwise be convicted have not been convicted because the very vulnerable people that they were abusing, attempting to rape - because sleeping with a person under 16 is statutory rape - these individuals are still at large and that it should be possible for prosecutions to be brought in a case when these individuals, for whatever reason, do not wish to testify if there is other compelling evidence which is there.  Does the Minister not agree, and if there needs to be a change a law will he bring that?
Senator B.I. Le Marquand:
You could bring a prosecution if you had other evidence.  But the key evidence in such cases is the evidence of the victims themselves.  Clearly, without evidence from victims, there was no possibility of a successful prosecution.  We have a criminal law in which the test is beyond reasonable doubt.  That is a high test.  So the police did their very best and by doing this in a covert way, which part of the reason for that was to try to ensure they got the best evidence possible in relation to the matter.  But at the end of the day they cannot always succeed.
4.3.5 Deputy J.A. Hilton:
Is the Minister able to tell Members whether the alleged victims were in care, being looked after by a government department, or whether they were in the care and control of their parents?
Senator B.I. Le Marquand:
I do not know the answer to that question.  I could find out if the Deputy wants me to but I do not know the answer.
Deputy J.A. Hilton:
Thank you, I would appreciate if the Minister could do that for me.
Deputy R.G. Le Hérissier:
I thank the Minister but it was a point of clarification from the Attorney General, if he could advise us on circumstances where it is possible to proceed.
The Deputy Bailiff:
I am sorry, this is question time, not question time to the Attorney General unless you have put a question to him.
4.3.6 Deputy M.R. Higgins:
I will go further than Deputy Hilton’s request to the Minister.  I would also like to know if any of the perpetrators were in care as well.  In other words, we are looking not only at victims but perpetrators, and I would also like to say that the Minister ... alleged, yes I accept that.  The Minister is also trying to, in a sense, downplay this by saying, for example, it is not right to publish the names of the victims or the offenders.  No one was asking for that.  What we wanted to do was know that this type of activity was going on, it was in the investigation.  If anybody had any information why not come forward and give the information to the police, and maybe some of these people would have been convicted.  Does the Minister believe that the police should be far more transparent in these type of cases, without giving the names of victims and so on, but bringing it to the attention, not only as a warning but also to gather evidence?
Senator B.I. Le Marquand:
I believe the police have to make difficult decisions in these cases on an individual basis, as I said before.  The police have to consider on the one hand issues like obtaining additional evidence, but they did not think that was very likely in this particular case, but they also have to consider on the other hand, causing unnecessary alarm to the general public. 
[11:15]
That is also a factor that has to be considered in balancing any individual decision.
4.3.7 Deputy M.R. Higgins:
If there are 12 people who are alleged victims surely that is not causing alarm, it is informing the public what is going on.
Senator B.I. Le Marquand:
What I am talking about would be if they put out a general and alarming statement to the effect of parents be very careful about your girls because there are people around who are trying to do these sort of things.  You have to keep these things in balance.  It is quite a difficult decision, which they have to make in each individual case.
The Deputy Bailiff:
It is a very good opportunity to say from the Chair to those in the public gallery that you will have heard questions and answers and you can form your own views about it, but do not ever think that States Members do not care about what happens with you.  [Approbation]

Rico Sorda
Part Time investigative Journalist


74 comments:

Anonymous said...

but do not ever think that States Members do not care about what happens with you.

Is this why only 4 of them have "cross examined" Le Marquand?
Bring back wimberley, syvret & the pitmans & get some more members asking forensic questions of this clown. As a parent of a teenage girl I would have wanted to know immediately these incidents happened so I could "educate" my daughter in what to look out for. Mr Le marquand you are a disgrace, don't know whats happened to you as you once were very helpful to me many years ago that is why i voted for you originally but NEVER again.

Anonymous said...

This is outrageous.
" Young men trying to ply young women with drink in order to get their wicked way with them is not a new issue.

These were men who picked up girls-children- not young women. These children are all under the age of consent therefore there was no consent and so this is rape of children- not grooming.
No convictions? How can anybody possibly think this was a successful investigation?
Men are allowed to rape children and get off with it. No wonder you have massive problems with child abuse.
What an abysmal state of affairs.

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

The Deputy Bailiff said to the school children in the public gallery.

"but do not ever think that States Members do not care about what happens with you. [Approbation]"

The key word there being "Approbation." Out of up to 48 members being present only 4 of them asked a question yet, no doubt, every one of them stamped their feet.

Nothing has changed in spite of Operation Rectangle and until our "representatives" start "representing" our children nothing will.

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

Ian Le Marquand said;

"This is unusual investigation because there was no evidence coming from the victims themselves. It was, in fact, coming from other sources, and without a complainant who would give evidence: it is quite impossible to bring a criminal prosecution."

To wich I ask, "how many murder victims have ever given evidence?"

Anonymous said...

What was the deputy Bailiff doing making a political speech to the school children that was false anyway?

Anonymous said...

William Bailhache who let the McGuiers go free and refused to prosecute around a dozen cases of child abuse tells school children do not ever think that States Members do not care about what happens with you.

Anonymous said...

ILM implied that the children or their parents were at fault.
The States of Jersey's warped mind-set in regard to child protection is at fault.
No wonder the children were too frightened to give evidence.
The men who raped them were all able to give evidence had they been questioned by competent police officers.

Anonymous said...

A known and organized pedophile ring is targeting young children and the Home Affairs minister along with the police want to keep it quiet? It's all about Jersey's image.

rico sorda said...

The Questions below have been lodged for next weeks states sitting.


16. The Minister for Home Affairs will table an answer to the following question asked by Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier –


“Further to the Minister’s e-mail on 23rd January 2013, advising that that one of the victims but none of the alleged perpetrators involved the investigation into the grooming of young girls were in care at the time of the relevant time, will the Minister advise how many of the alleged victims and perpetrators interviewed/involved in Operation Vessel had been in care at some previous time in their lives?”

As one of the child victims was in care at the time of the alleged offences, did the police have any discussions with the Children’s Service?”


The.Minister.for.Health.and.Social.Services.will.table.an.answer.to.the.following.question.asked by Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier –

“a) Will the Minister confirm that one of the children involved in Operation Vessel, the sex grooming case was in care at the time?

b)  Why did the Department not lodge a criminal complaint with the police as they were in loco parentis and had lawful authority to do so?

c)  What is the Department’s policy in these circumstances?

Anonymous said...

Grooming: Preparing or training someone for a particular purpose or activity.
These cases went far beyond preparing. Sexual intercourse and other sexual offences took place according to the report.
Calling it grooming is minimising the severity of the offenses.

Anonymous said...

Good to see Deputy Higgins carrying on the questioning but not surprised to see none of the foot stampers have bothered which shows what William Bailhache said to the school children was complete tosh.

Anonymous said...

As a parent of a 13/14 year old (a few years ago) who was exploited for sex/drugs I know exactly what if was like to have no support from the powers that be. Indeed I was warned off v strongly by people in "important positions" . My only choice was to get my daughter off the island, find support to get her head straight, and give up fighting Jersey. I have v vivid memories of giving my two pennies worth in the Royal Court when I had to answer breaching my daughters Probation Order when she left the island. At the same time there were other girls in the same predicament, men were arrested, but because the girls were too scared to press charges, they were released. My experiences of the police(whom sadly I saw on a regular basis) was v good- it's some of the politicians that are blundering, corrupt, self centred idiots !

Anonymous said...

"but do not ever think that States Members do not care about what happens with you."

But this week it is only deputy Higgins who gives a sh*t

Anonymous said...

Both comments made by the same person......ILM.


“So the police did their very best and by doing this in a covert way, which part of the reason for that was to try to ensure they got the best evidence possible in relation to the matter. But at the end of the day they cannot always succeed.”

“But this was a massive success story and that I hold to.”

Anonymous said...

Alison Fossey “Through education and raising awareness , we want to stop children in Jersey becoming victims of child sexual exploitation.” RAISING AWARENESS? YOU KEPT IT A SECRET!

Póló said...

Just to remind people.

You are performing a great service for those of us not in the island, and probably for many who are, by reproducing full JEP articles and extracts from Hansard. We are not really in a position to access these independently or to know what to look for.

In terms of investigative journalism, there is often as much to be said for drawing attention to things as for actually joining up the dots, which, of course, you also do very well.

Le Marquand's interview is another classic which could give rise to pages of analysis and derision. I'll just note that he doesn't seem to be able even to manage "going forward" without tripping over his shoelaces.

There was no evidence as the victims would not testify - so if abusers succeed in scaring their victims witless then nothing can be done.

The police were right not to broadcast the enquiry - but then agrees with Matthew that the revelation can be an eye opener and an opportunity to discuss the matter with one's own children.

I can't say it in Jèrriais, but these quotes from Candide are most apt in this case.

Tout va pour le mieux dans le meillieur des mondes possibles.

Il faut cultiver son jardin.

Meanwhile, back at the JFSC ... ££££

Jersey Wonder said...

The System is not working for the people of Jersey - it is full of corruption. My daughter was exploited for sex and drugs at the age of 13/14 and I was strongly warned off by the people supposed to be looking after us. I was desperate for support and help, but her antisocial behaviour was not seen as her pleas for help. She was not alone and despite plenty of evidence, if the girls were not strong enough to make the formal complaint then nothing could happen apparently. Once you lift the lid off these terrible goings on, then you see some horrific things. I managed to get my daughter off the Island to help her get her head straight, I see her "old friends" who live on the streets now who are on the hard drugs, and cheap alcohol - how in earth can we possibly think that this is all ok?

rico sorda said...


"The System is not working for the people of Jersey - it is full of corruption. My daughter was exploited for sex and drugs at the age of 13/14 and I was strongly warned off by the people supposed to be looking after us."

Hi Jersey Wonder. Who were the people who were meant to be looking after you? I really hope your daughter is doing well. There are so many unanswered questions relating to this grooming case. The Jersey Bloggers will always do what we can to highlight these issues . Lets hope that States Members also pick up on the seriousness of these issues.

rs

Anonymous said...

I'm not surprised some of the victims wouldn't give evidence if Alison Fossey was involved. She hung Lenny Harper and Graham Power out to dry when she could have spoken out over the propaganda being spouted by Gradwell and Warcup. Her career and pension are more important to her than child safety and justice.

rico sorda said...

Senator Le Marquand:

Senator B.I. Le Marquand:
No, the last insinuations of the Deputy are utterly ridiculous. The police are very well committed to dealing with matters of investigation [Approbation] and it is quite outrageous that that implication should be put forward. These matters have to be decided on an individual basis. Here, the primary concern was to protect the children involved. This was a highly successful matter. I am sorry that the Deputy does not seem to be able to recognise a successful matter because here we had detecting that something was happening at an early stage. We had intervention to stop it happening. We had potential offenders being arrested and questioned and so on. But there was not anything to be gained at the early stages of the investigation in going public. In fact very much the reverse. You cannot go public with details of the victims’ names for instance. You cannot go public with details of the alleged perpetrators’ names, particularly as in this case it did not end up… so I am quite satisfied this was most properly handled. End


So what has happened to the 8 alleged perpetrators? Have they all turned a leaf? Given up on this easy way to obtain sex from underage girls?

rs

Paul said...

My daughter was stopped in the street, at night, by young men in a car. When she got home she told me about it. They asked her to get in, that they would give her a lift home, but she could have a drink first. This happened about 200 metres from our front door. I went out to look for them, but no sign. This was in 2012. I convinced myself it was an isolated incident and calmed down, eventually. Guess I was wrong. However, had this info been in the public domain, I would have known about it, been on my guard, not let her walk home, could have picked her up instead.

You get the picture ILM ?

Jersey Wonder said...

"Hi Jersey Wonder. Who were the people who were meant to be looking after you? I really hope your daughter is doing well. There are so many unanswered questions relating to this grooming case. The Jersey Bloggers will always do what we can to highlight these issues . Lets hope that States Members also pick up on the seriousness of these issues. "

The very people in positions who are paid and elected to protect - our politicians. Our CAMHS service was beyond useless and remains so - how many times have I heard stories similar to mine/ours - it would be laughable if it weren't so tragic. I met with politicians who promised help when my daughter came back to the island with a care plan - I'm still waiting - I was told by a local healthcare provider to give up or it will kill you !!

rico sorda said...

Paul said...
My daughter was stopped in the street, at night, by young men in a car. When she got home she told me about it. They asked her to get in, that they would give her a lift home, but she could have a drink first. This happened about 200 metres from our front door. I went out to look for them, but no sign. This was in 2012. I convinced myself it was an isolated incident and calmed down, eventually. Guess I was wrong. However, had this info been in the public domain, I would have known about it, been on my guard, not let her walk home, could have picked her up instead.

You get the picture ILM ?

Paul, thank you for this. This has been our argument about people coming forward if the police had gone public. They could have done this in a sensitive way. If you have a contact and want to discuss more drop in to me in a comment marked NOT FOR PUBLICATION and I will pick it up.

How long has this been going on for? There are more questions than answers.

Anonymous said...

If Paul had of been aware of the covert investigation he could have provided vital evidence for it..........Do you see why it was kept covert now? Jersey's image is Bowron and Fossey's priority.

Anonymous said...

Rico, am I right in saying that Paul and Jersey Wonder are now 2 people who have come forward and could have done if the police had gone public with it.

Anonymous said...

Lots of people might have been able to come forward with evidence which would have helped secure convictions but the police obviously didn't want this. Do you trust Bowron and Fossey Rico in light of Fossey's silence over the trashing of Harper from Gradwell?

Anonymous said...

The mind boggles, someone can get found guilty of committing a psuedocrime being in breach of a piece of legislation and have their name for all to see in the paper. What's with all this secretism, personally I'm still waiting for those in positions of trust who know what went down at Haut de la Garenne to be delt with by the so called LAW. Also all those who came to the Island to enjoy themselves at our youths expence to be named and shamed. P Bailhache and all those who still cover up major REAL crime. Stories like this are not nice but detract from the MAJOR ISSUES NOT YET DELT WITH!!! Real criminals are in possitions of power and why do we have a Corporation as our government. Administering the peoples needs is not a buisness for profit or is it?
Phil Skinner

Anonymous said...

Mike Bowron of the Operation Bohan infamy? You should talk to Ian Puddick about Bowron's policing methods. Then ask Mr. Bowron if he is currently under investigation himself? Then ask him what he knows about Formula 1?

Truth Matters said...

Ah - the Alison Fossey who was seen cosying up to Gradwell at the café in the Parade Gardens when he returned to the Island to 'tidy up some loose ends'.

Showed a great loyalty to Lenny Harper and Graham Power didn't she? As the previous commenter said she was very keen on maintaining her position and pension wasn't she?

Anonymous said...

Deputy Higgins needs support now that the Pitmans have been ousted.

Sam Mazec, and Roy Travert, or Nick Le Cornue will do for their replacements

Anonymous said...

Maintaining their position and keeping their pension is much more important than them....

Whistle blowing!?

Anonymous said...

Exploitation and alcohol / drugs can put young lives in a tailspin but Le Marquand or Bowron's plastic police thought making it public would be bad press !

Why is Jersey on the cover of Newsweek ...... click HERE said...

This 'grooming' could have been going on for years and ILM makes no sense

Fair enough not to go public during the covert phase

But the covert phase FAILED - vis. no convictions.

For all the children to refuse to give evidence it strongly suggests that they were too frightened. The authorities FAILED to make the youngsters feel safe
If they were frightened, what was the level of coercion used to obtain the sex.

An appeal to the public might well have procured additional evidence.

Even if no further evidence was obtained at least the public would have been aware and those 8+ potentially dangerous men would have known that underage sex would be more risky and be less likely to ply children with alcohol.

The use of alcohol is disturbing
this is not trivial. this was drug facilitated statutory rape The main drug apparently being alcohol
The exploitative sex could well be injurious either immediately or long term psychologically and giving children significant quantities of alcohol is certainly injurious and risks forming a habit ultimately leading to alcoholism.

Again children's welfare comes second to this long lost notion of Jersey's squeaky clean image.
It is difficult to come up with another rational explanation unless there was truth in the information Mr.Pitman received that one of the young men in teh gang was establishment linked.

Anonymous said...

"But there was not anything to be gained at the early stages of the investigation in going public. In fact very much the reverse. "

Hmm, this sounds more like an excuse for (hoping it would stay generally unknown) being caught out.

From what ILM has stated, it would appear that young underage girls were allowed to potentially become victims whilst the police conducted their covert operation. I assume to catch one/some in the act, as none of the victims wished to give evidence and were already weary, additional victims could have been raped unecessarily!

This was not some kind of drug smuggling gang, this involved young girls being raped.

I's like to know, were there any such incidents after the police were first alerted to these activities and when did the police give up on the pursuit of making a charge stick, as surely as soon as that heppened, they would have warned all parents (and childrens homes etc..) of the possibilty, and whether anyone else had witnessed such activity!


Anonymous said...

Rico,

Excellent posting and blog comments, as usual.

It seems The Powers That Be want to do two opposing things here: They blame parents for somehow "allowing" their children to be groomed, yet as is well argued by Paul and Jersey Wonder, the parents must first be informed of the details to make the wisest safety decisions regarding their children. Obviously, those in charge have not been forthcoming enough to empower the parents who would like to be proactive.

Parents should expect to be given the opportunity to be brought in at an early stage, before preventable harm is done to their child.

The parents who had no idea Island children were in danger just walking near their homes weren't given any indication they should be watching out for this large scale threat. Many parents might have been able to protect not only their own, but also many other children, by collecting evidence to catch and convict potential rapists earlier on.

Ideally, parents should demand cooperative collaboration with police and government on how best to protect children, with parents being the ones in the position to lead that effort. Police advising parents after the fact seem incredibly heartless, when it's too late for many.

By empowering most parents to do their best, police can then concentrate on working to "educate" those parents who are not involved in their children's lives. Surely, that is a minority of parents, but one which places children at grave risk and requires different intervention.

What are these criminals doing now? Good question. Spontaneous reformation is as believable as a tooth fairy at HDLG. In a world where "date-rape" rugs are often available to rapists, we should worry the gang's behaviour is far less likely to reform than to be more hidden.

And yes, the concern about why these children are too afraid to speak out or testify against this gang demonstrates how the problem is not being solved at all. The fear these children have indicates the situation is out of control.

Jersey on the cover of Newsweek ...... click HERE said...

At least some action was taken, but it does seem grossly inadequate and motivated by PR rather than child welfare or actually upholding the law dealing with underage sex and exploitation.

ILM was very evasive and nonsensical when questioned in the states.

The TJW recording of Matthew Price and ILM was interesting.
http://thejerseyway.blogspot.com/2014/01/is-jersey-next-rochdale.html
(Rochdale is warning of what is developing in Jersey if these things are not dealt with properly)

ILM was evasive when Matthew Price showed a little determination but an unusual feature was that both men seemed GENUINELY concerned about this child sex abuse.

The difference I see is that this sexploitation and drawing into a world of alcohol and other drugs is something which could affect their own upper middle class children ......not just disadvantaged or neglected children, or orphans.

Evidently some children are more important to Matthew Price & ILM, and some children are more expendable.

Your past actions say it all. May your god forgive you.

Anonymous said...

If you are so concerned then why don't you join the Police Rico? You seem to think you know better then them, Home Affairs, the Media, God.....

Anonymous said...

I read a letter from Chris (not very) Bright today in the failing filthy Rag Rico. He has proved you right in an earlier blog you wrote where you said it was going down the pan. Have you read it or can you post it?

Anonymous said...

Filthy Rag struggling and going up to 60p you were right again Rico! Covering up child abuse isn't a profitable business!

Who watches the watchers ----Bloggers @Jersey said...

Anon @11:19 "why don't you join the Police Rico?"

Is there any place in in the police for genuine child welfare workers since Police chief power was constructively dismissed?

Anonymous said...

The Jersey blogs going from strength to strength because they have published the evidence of the child abuse. Jersey Evening Propaganda going belly up after smear campaigns against the victims and investigators. It might start printing the truth to save itself?

You were right again Rico!

rico sorda said...

I have heard about the JEP announcement and I believe it is only the beginning for them. 10p on the paper- before we know it - dare I mention it - 4 days a week. I call it how I see it.

rs

Anonymous said...

60p for the JEP ?
£3.60 per week ?
Over £185 per year ?
To be fed adverts & BS ?

It's a no-brainier when there is better information available for free.

Anonymous said...

A Speaker/Bailiff might occasionally request or demand quiet from the public gallery.
!!! The Deputy Bailiff to the public gallery: "....but do not ever think that States Members do not care about what happens with you."

How many times (if ever) has a Bailiff / Deputy provided explanation or reassurance to the public gallery.

Why; were jaws dropping at ILM's definition of a "massive success"?
I'd hate to see what an abject failure looks like !!!

Anonymous said...

Maybe they are trying to recoup the money that the Pitmans cost them. Court cases aren't cheap, even if you win. Next time you want to whine about the price of the JEP maybe you should ask Trev for the extra 10p?

Anonymous said...

There was a letter in a sealed envelope in todays JEP signed by Chris Bright basically harping on about why the price is going up.But there was one paragraph in there that you'll love.Here it is,copied word for word:

In an age of information overload and online gossip and rumour,it is more important than ever that readers can turn to reliable publications whose journalists are trained and proffesionally motivated to distinguish what is true and important and to help make sense of the complexities of modern life.This increase will support the JEP's continuing efforts to fill that role and remain one of the key elements which binds the Jersey community together.

Anonymous said...

"In an age of information overload and online gossip and rumour, it is more important than ever that readers can turn to reliable publications..."

Can't laugh for crying there. You know that's a dig at you evidenced independent investigative journalists, by the hapless and threatened Arm of the State Propaganda Machine.

Elle

Anonymous said...

Elle "Can't laugh for crying" seriously? cheer up hun :-)
Or is that an Americanism meaning utterly hilarious?

Anon @8:14
Blame the Pitmans for the 20% price increase of the JEP.
Anyone who cares about truth and justice is delighted that the rag is going down the pan

So should we THANK the Pitmans?
You made my day and maybe theirs too.

I'm beginning to think that them challenging that un-funny, snide and misleading cartoon wasn't such a bad idea after all.

Anonymous said...

Talking of failing local media. I had to laugh at the ridiculous ex-Jep hack, Ben Queree on the equally hapless BBC radio Jersey presenter on Sunday morning.

He had the gall to criticise the ministers & states scrutiny depts for failing to uncover the Keith Cavele fraud conviction, before & after the £200k gift!

The pair of plonkers failed to point out the bleedin' obvious - Namely that the combined forces of the local professional, intrepid mainstream journos ALSO failed to unearth the story too!!!

I am the person (amateur sleuth) who found the Scottish Herald article with a simple 3 word google search!!!

They are a total joke!

Emma said...

Tee-hee! That is priceless. Couldn't make it up, as Stuart says

Anonymous said...

You ask why people are not concerned. Well of course they are but you are unique Rico in that you are totally obsessed with any local story on child abuse which reaches political level. None of the blogs ever talk about the amount of child abuse pornography cases which seems to show the Police 'care' or the fact that none of you can even produce a single recognised qualification to prove you are worthy enough to be taken seriously over such complex cases. This post like all others goes nowhere in substance, and the responses by Home Affairs on the Police handling of this is satisfactory.

Jersey on the cover of Newsweek ...... click HERE said...

@1:39am
"...and the responses by Home Affairs on the Police handling of this is satisfactory"

HOW DARE YOU !

"Satisfactory" indeed. If I could borrow the great man's own words I'd call it a "massive success"

As was the Deputy Bailiff's bizarre reassurance of the public gallery.

And of course the due diligence in the Keith Cavele £200k gift; as first exposed on this blog.

Can't cry for laughing (or is it the other way round).

TROJAN HORSE said...

I think by putting out in the public eye would help more because their parents would be very graceful so that they could warn their children about it. You can see that they do not give a dam about child abuse. The reason one suspects that this is true is because they are covering up for certain people within the higher members of our society.

Anonymous said...

3:59 "You can see that they do not give a dam about child abuse. The reason one suspects that this is true is because they are covering up for certain people within the higher members of our society."

It is difficult to come up with a pleasant and rational explanation of the 'light touch' of the Jersey authorities and their history of non investigation and cover up.

The kindest explanation is that they are incompetent and have a callous disregard for the rights of victims to safety in the first instance, and than to justice after their failure to provide the safety.
The more unpleasant explanations are that numerous key positions in public service and government have been infiltrated by paedophiles or sympathisers or by corrupt people who protect the guilty for personal gain or betterment.

Anonymous said...

Sorry this is a bit long but there are a few thought I'd like to share.

Obviously (we hope)seduction / semi-rape / statutory rape of children is NOT okay.

Seduction / semi-rape / statutory rape of children using alcohol and other (illegal?) enticement is even worse. It makes the crime easier but it aggravates an already serious crime

Alcohol reduces free will, self control, mental ability and resistance.
This is in addition to it's developmental and long term health risks.
There are reasons why it is illegal to sell alcohol to persons under 18.

No genuine concern for the victims they were 'befriending'.

These men are gutless douche bags in addition to being predatory perverts.
If they are happy to use alcohol in the context of a date-rape drug, is there anything in their arsenal of tricks which they are not prepared to use?

Teenagers need to grow into their sexuality in a safe and healthy environment. This is particularly difficult for girls. Girls have to navigate a precarious path between being labelled frigid and being labelled a 'slut'. "Slut shaming", which is even engaged in with enthusiasm by girls and women, is a covertly sexist and misogynist form of sexual bullying.

Slut shaming is not only ludicrous in a society which allegedly seeks sexual equality but also puts growing up children at risk of bullying, exploitation and even suicide.

Unprincipled boys and men may use the threat of slut-shaming as leverage for further sexual activity once even the mildest sexual activity (or even a revealing smartphone picture) has been procured.

To fully respect girls and women society must respect their right to their sexuality. Denial of female right to enjoyment and equal expression of their sexuality is one of the relatively unchallenged bastions of sexism and misogynism.

It is worth adding that boys are potentially just as vulnerable to elements of sexual blackmail from revealing photographs.

Children increasingly become sexual beings as they grow into adults. Failure to recognise that probably any healthy growing child can be 'seduced' under the right [wrong] circumstances and especially with the use of pressure or drugs, is the basis of a "victim blaming" culture which protects perpetrators and further damages victims.

A victim blaming society and fears of being subjected to slut-shaming bullying may be just as relevant to these youngster's unwillingness to testify as were any fears for their physical welfare.

A victim is a victim regardless if they did something foolish or engaged with any willingness in any of the unlawful activities. One of the reasons for having an age of consent is to take sexual pressures and risks off youngsters who may not be equipped to deal with them or with unequal situations/relationships.

Anonymous said...

Leah McGrath Goodman : Journalism & finding the truth -How Much Is Too Much to Sacrifice?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leah-mcgrath-goodman/how-much-is-too-much-to-sacrifice_b_3931755.html

Interesting first comment from Daren O'Toole (darenotoole) who seems in this instance to be a particularly rabid child abuse denialist.

Elsewhere Daren O'Toole claims to be election campaign manager for Paul Huelin

Are the views of this slime ball(?) unchanged, and are they shared by Paul Huelin I wonder.

A poor choice of campaign manager and does not bode well for Paul Huelin being a man of the the future, not a man of the past.

I see Paul Huelin is a Centenier. Is he okay or is he a bona fide member of the Parish Mafia?

Anonymous said...

P2 of the JEP Fri 7 Feb 2014 is a must read for you Rico.

Apparently, this week the States voted to allow non-Jersey lawyers (representing victims) to appear before the CoI. They also agreed to allow the committee itself to employ non-Jersey lawyers to assist it if we required.

(For the benefit of foreign readers, Jersey Advocates have a monopoly over the Royal Court - only they are allowed to appear before it and, until this week the same was true for committees of inquiry)

The article says "Some members raised concerns about the change, including former Bailiff Senator Sir Philip Bailhache, who said that he did not see the need for it"

Senator Gorst apparently made a passionate speech to force the change through, arguing that the CoI would be compromised from the beginning if the change were not made. Wow, seems like he's temporarily found his backbone again.

It was even argued that the rules could be changed back after the CoI, if necessary.

The vote on P.167/2013 was taken on a vote per paragraph basis. The motions were approved by all members present apart from St Martin Constable Michel Le Troquer who voted against all 4 changes. Senator Bailhache voted against paragraph 3.

Voting record:

http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/Pages/Votes.aspx?VotingId=3169

http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/Pages/Votes.aspx?VotingId=3170

http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/Pages/Votes.aspx?VotingId=3171

http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/Pages/Votes.aspx?VotingId=3172

Why would anyone vote against such a measure? The Hansard transcript for that will be interesting, for sure.

I see this as a breath of fresh air. There will still be Jersey advocates appearing at the inquiry, but breaking this monopoly and allowing in outsiders who are completely unconflicted can only be for the good.

rico sorda said...

Hi Anon,

I will be doing a blog on this and publishing the Bailhache speech. In fact I will be focusing quite a bit on PB.

rs

Resident Evil said...

@9:19pm. Wow!
So perhaps months of ridicule on the blogs of the lapdog-Chief-Minister has been good for his soul and his character.

Gorst may not yet be ready to undo the mistakes and injustices of the past but at least he is beginning to see the sense of not repeating or compounding them.

At last the Chief Minister has slipped the leash and there is an outside chance he may develop into the 'alpha male', the top dog. He needs to be assertive and bite any trainer who tries to clip the leash back on, and urinate/scent mark wherever (or on whoever) is necessary to mark ownership of his territory.

Good boy!, have a vote -maybe even a few thousand more over time.

No don't be caught trying to hump the sofa (or worse), or they will have that choke-chain back on you for evermore.....

Resident Revived said...

Big Ian is back at his best serving a dish to an ungrateful island.
Click on my name to go to:
http://therightofreply.blogspot.com/2014/02/bailhache-unhappy-that-english-lawyers.html

The inimitable Ian provides a veritable buffet of news and comment to hungry readers.
I gratefully devour the meat and the fresh tit-bits and leave the tripe and all the canned stuff which he wholesales off the internet.

The beef filling on this occasion is the JEP snippet mentioned at 9:19pm re. Gorst's developing vertebrae.
I see the young Jeremy Macon is again proving his worth


The rough diamond is back, and the bad guys .....and also the logicians, are quaking in equal measure.

Welcome back Ian !
So sorry you have had such a bad time recently.

Anonymous said...

My Daughters friends were approached in December 2013 at around 6pm after they had all been ice skating ! she and another girl had gone to the shop to get credit for her phone so they could call to be collected ( it was a birthday outing) and left the rest of the girls waiting age 12/13 , on their way back to join them the girls came running and screaming down the road as a man in a car had stopped and asked if they would like to go and get something to eat ! I was shocked and worried , But as it was not my daughter who was approached I didn't report it and as far as i'm aware neither did any other parents ! I was not aware of this case at the time , I think if i had of been I would of spoken out if only to log it with the police this could be one of the men in this case ! I think pre HDLG everyone has thought of Jersey as a place of , It does not happen here mentality , and as there has still not been any Justice in that case and how it has been discredited by local media etc , this is still what is believed about this Island ! As parents we need to be aware , and not complacent to what is lurking out there , and teach our kids how hopefully to stay safe and take and incidents seriously and report them to the police straight away !

Anonymous said...

The only problem with this is who gets to chose the non Jersey lawyers?
Also why should it be reverted back to Jersey only lawyers after the CoI.
I agree it appears to be a step in the right direction,but as the establishment is notoriously untrustworthy is it all as it seems.Why did the usual suspects who always vote the same way as Bailache not do so this time?Has the crafty old fox got something up his sleeve?

Is Jersey the Next Rochdale by TJW said...

Thank you 10:52am
[Daughter and another girl had gone to the shop to get credit for her phone so they could call to be collected .........left the rest of the girls waiting age 12/13.......a man in a car had stopped and asked if they would like to go and get something to eat !]

Lucky we wasn't a bit less scary and and didn't opt for "do you girls want a lift home?"
There is a chance they might have said yes, had a "shandy" on the way or given a mobile number.
This could have been relatively innocent or a gateway to drugs or self harming.

So we see the wisdom of ILM/Bowron's 'case by case' decision to maintain the plastic image.

ILM stated "These matters have to be decided on an individual basis. Here, the primary concern was to protect the children involved. This was a highly successful matter."

Really ?!!!

Well done those kids. But had the grooming gang facts been made public those girls would have been more resistant and switched on. Had their parents had a chat on the subject or had it been a topically covered in PSHE at school, they could have been real cool and cunningly written down his number plate.
Quick check on this character's history and mobile phone etc. and Jersey kids could have been a little or a lot safer.

Those sound well cared for kids. What if they were bored kids or latch-key kids killing time?
Or just plain hungry ......'no such thing as a free lunch' as the kids in Rochdale found out. Click on my name for http://thejerseyway.blogspot.com/2014/01/is-jersey-next-rochdale.html
and listen to the Victoria Derbyshire piece !

Feel free to provide further info to the bloggers, even if it is "not for publication".
Also, it is not too late to report to the police. the vaguest description even and the car type and colour might prove helpful, also you probably have the exact date (CCTV?).

Reports can be made anonymously at crime stoppers or the mostly excellent
www.asklistenrespect.co.uk
on the "Report Anonymously" link at the top:
www.asklistenrespect.co.uk/anonymous-reporting.aspx

Girls dress up and, to be fair, it can be confusing as biology can make young women exceedingly attractive.

But 12/13 !!! and he thinks he is a man ?
I believe there is a small operation which could clarify his 'small' confusion.

Póló said...

Anonymous @11:11

Now that's an interesting thought.

Might he want to show that out of island lawyers cannot cope with the unintelligible morass that is the Jèrriais legal system. This way that could be shown through a plausable temporary reversible window.

And he could still assert that he had already pointed out that these types were not only not needed, but a threat to the island's culture and identity.

It could backfire, though, and lead to pressure for the Jèrriais laws to be translated into a modern English legal idiom.

Never a dull moment.


Resident Evil said...

I am glad to have had the opportunity to mention the 'mostly' excellent Jersey Police "Operation Amber" website:
www.asklistenrespect.co.uk

"Ask, Listen, Respect (sex without consent is rape)" is an excellent website ......mostly, and is aimed at informing both sexes on sexual assault & it's avoidance ( click my name 'to go all the way' -I make it that 'easy' :)

Why only "mostly" excellent ?
Well this is Jersey and the [baby] elephant in the room is that there is NOT ONE mention on the website of the age of consent !
www.asklistenrespect.co.uk/what-is-consent.aspx

"The official police guidance defines consent as the person 'agreeing by choice and having the freedom and capacity to make that choice'. So if you make the decision based on fear, fraud or because of drug or alcohol intake, it is not true consent and will amount to rape."
(someone please tell the law offices and the JEP that!)

The word "capacity" above, would include (amongst other things) being of sufficient age / i.e. the age of consent
But there is literally NO mention of it
...or the fact it is illegal
...or that the seriousness of the offence increases the younger the child
...or the potential damage to the child, particularly if any degree of coercion is used .....or if free will / understanding / coping is compromised by drugs/alcohol.

These faggots and fag-ends will be more than happy to give your children drugs alcohol in order to draw them into sex.

ILM says "But frankly, you may call me a cynic if you like, but the issue of young men trying to ply young women with drink in order to get their - if I can go Victorian now - wicked way with them is not a new issue."

Okay Mr Le Marquand, you are a 'cynic' .... oh, and a 'fool' .......and a bigot ......and a 'fraud' .......and a 'coward' .......and an 'enabler of child abuse'

What was your expression Ref. maintaining Graham Power's suspension? ....."a Corporate [sold his] sole" .....I think

Aren't you supposed to have resigned a while back Ian?
http://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2010/03/31/ill-resign-over-police-chief-appointment/

ILM is a shyster who's weasel words are worthless and causing untold damage to the island. He did not resign in 2010 like he said he would, and he will not resign now ...or ever?
Gorst, When are you going to sack the buffoon? How are those vertebrae coming along? Just cartilage for a while yet? A little time and more calcium and phosphorus in the diet perhaps to grow them bones.

It is good to see Bailhache loosing his bizarre grip on States Members.
Did the 'infant Macon' ask why that old fool had no clothes? LOL
That boy will go far.

Anonymous said...

Ok, its understandable that P Bailhache would want to fight/vote against English Lawyers, being allowed to represent victims, or ledged perpetrators....

But why would Constable Le Troquer, born and bred at Summerland, feel the need to be the only other one to agree with him?!

voiceforchildren said...

Rico.

Roland Wright victim and anti chid abuse campaigner TOM PERRY

Anonymous said...

David Rose has become a thriller writer. See his tweet at https://twitter.com/DavidRoseUK/status/432445251840507904

I've read his fiction, it's pretty good.

Póló said...

How many David Rose's are there?

Is this the one who used to write Jersey fiction based on corrupt police leaks, or another one?

Anonymous said...

syvret blog taken down sometime before 19:40 GMT today ?????

am mailing him.


Has he been taken by the stasi again?

Anonymous said...

Rico, can you explain why the change with Stuarts blogsite ? please, try getting onto it.

rico sorda said...

Google have taken SS Blog down. The Jersey Establishment have been trying since 2008. VFC should be explaining all very soon. rs

Anonymous said...

Polo, this is the same David Rose who wrote in the Daily Mail about HDLG

Anonymous said...

Rico, the Hansard is online from 4th Feb 2014, re allowing non-Jersey lawyers at the CoI:

14. Draft Amendment (No. 22) of the Standing Orders of the States of Jersey (P.167/2013)

See page 107 of http://www.statesassembly.gov.je/AssemblyHansard/2014/2014.02.04%20States%20-%20Edited%20Transcript.pdf

Senator Gorst makes a very good speech, it has to be said, as do some others.

The Constable of St Martin seems to think that it is a criticism of the ability of Jersey lawyers to act fairly. He doesn't seem to understand the need of victims for a choice of external representation. As Senator Gorst says:

"It is the nature of some of the deep concerns of those individuals who need to, and we want to encourage to, appear before this committee that they want support from outside of our community, in many ways. It is not just when it comes to the legal profession but sometimes it is also with regard to counselling and professional medical or social service support, that because of the damage that has been done to them - I use these words carefully - within the system they feel that trust is at such a low level that they want to avail themselves of professional advice across a range of services, as I have said, from outside the Island. I think, therefore, it is extremely important that we today amend Standing Orders to allow that to happen."