Sunday, September 6, 2015





It must be noted that having looked at the order paper for the coming tuesdays states debate the question really must be asked to the many states members who simply can't be bothered to lodge anything. It goes without saying that this is the weakest most lacklustre bunch of politicians to probably ever be elected to the States of Jersey.  They are a disgrace. Not ALL. But a good 90% of the 49 we have in there.

Lets not forget that 26 politicians, elected to represent us, couldn't even be bothered to wait for the Corporate Services Scrutiny Panel in giving the go ahead for building on a toxic dump that doubles as the Esplanade car park. These postings can be read here.

Here is the Oral question lodged by Deputy Tadier:  

  1. 1. Deputy M. Tadier of St. Brelade will ask the following question of the Minister for Home Affairs 

  2. “Could the Minister please inform members how many arrests have been made in relation to Operation Whistle and state whether any allegations have been made against former Prime Minister Sir Edward Heath which relate to his time in the Island and whether any investigations are taking place in this regard? 

 Voiceforchildren posted a blog about the Ted Heath Jersey connection that can be read here:


"On November 10th 2008 Jersey’s Chief Police Officer, Graham Power QPM, was (possibly illegally) suspended from duty by the then Home Affairs Minister (above) discredited and disgraced ANDREW LEWIS.

He was suspended under very dubious circumstances where the official version of events that led to his suspension did not, does not, stand up to scrutiny so he had to be suspended again with an official line that (for the Establishment) would look a little more credible to the gullible public.

The former Chief of Police, it should be mentioned, was (illegally?) suspended from duty during the biggest Child Abuse Investigation (Operation Rectangle) this island has ever seen, or is likely to see.

A matter of weeks after (illegally?) suspending the Chief Officer, Andrew Lewis stepped away from political life and didn’t stand for re-election until 2014 where he was re-elected as a Deputy in St Helier District 3/4. The equally disgraced (former Magistrate) Ian Le Marquand was elected as Senator and took over the role as Home Affairs Minister where he too dubiously suspended Mr. Power with a story that was little more credible than that of Andrew Lewis' but did not, does not, stand up to scrutiny either.

The now (or then) Home Affairs Minister Ian Le Marquand claimed he was going to bring Chief Officer Power to a disciplinary hearing and employed (at huge expense) an outside police force to gather the evidence against Mr. Power. That UK Police Force was The Wiltshire Constabulary.

Wiltshire’s alleged “investigation” (Operation Haven 1) subsequently went on to miss just about every deadline it was set, went way over budget, and didn’t bring a single disciplinary charge against Mr. Power. But that didn’t matter, its job was done. Wiltshire were able to give the Home Affairs Minister some unproven, untested allegations against Mr. Power (the prosecution case) to which Mr. Le Marquand duly (possibly illegally) published, with the help of the State Media. Neither he, nor the local State Media, who are all in possession of Mr. Power's defence case, to this day, have published/broadcast a SINGLE WORD OF IT."

  1. 1. Deputy M.R. Higgins of St. Helier will ask the following question of the Chief Minister – 

  2. “Will the Chief Minister explain why two officers, appointed to liaise with the Committee of Inquiry for document provision, are present at the majority of hearings and explain how their normal duties are being covered, at what cost, and where the budget has been allocated from, and whether he is aware of any concerns regarding the potential impact of their attendance at hearings?” 

Deputy Higgins has lodged the above  Oral question which relates to the below posting:

3 August 2015

"The Chair of the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry, Mrs Frances Oldham QC, on Thursday (13/8/15) made the following statement at the end of Phase 1b of Public Hearings:
“During this phase of evidence, the Inquiry has received excellent cooperation from the vast majority of witnesses, who have assisted the work of the Inquiry. 
“However, we have been hampered by the late and non-disclosure of important documents, largely by the various States’ Departments, but also from the Law Officers Department. These include HR records, disciplinary and other investigations, policies, procedures, reports and emails, which have either failed to be disclosed, or have been disclosed after the relevant witness has given their evidence. Over the coming weeks, the Inquiry will review the recent disclosure and any documents which are forthcoming and will consider whether witnesses need to be recalled as a result. 
“Furthermore, in relation to specific disclosure requests that have been outstanding for a number of months, the Inquiry will consider setting a final date for the provision of these documents or written confirmation that the documents do not exist.  Failure to provide documents may lead to adverse inferences being drawn by the Inquiry in its final report.”
Public hearings will resume on Tuesday 8 September with four days of hearings to hear evidence from various members of committees of the States of Jersey.
A detailed timetable will be made available at the beginning of September.
In the meantime the Inquiry team will continue their intense preparation for the next phase of the Inquiry.
Hearings will recommence in earnest the week beginning 12 October with the Panel hearing any outstanding evidence relating to Phase 1b of the Inquiry. They will also hear evidence relating to Phase 2 where they will look at the decisions taken in relation to the timing of the police investigation and prosecutions of alleged abusers."

The statement by the Chair of the Inquiry is carefully worded in lawyers language but its message seems to be clear enough. States departments and the Law Officers are not co-operating with the Inquiry and appear to be withholding essential documents.What have they to hide? Could it be that more uncomfortable truths have been blatantly buried by the Jersey Establishment? No wonder why Senator Philip Bailhache and his followers wanted to bring the Inquiry to a halt.

In the disciplinary hearing arising from the Warren case the panel made similar criticism saying that Home Affairs and the Law Officers, having commissioned an investigation, had not co-operated with it.

It seems that they would rather be criticised for not co-operating than give the COI the information and documents they are asking for which invites speculation as to just what the documents may contain and why they are so desperate to withhold them?  

Ironic that even in the midst of a Committee of Inquiry investigating cover-ups they engage in further cover-ups right under the noses of the Inquiry and defy anyone to do anything about it. Only this time the world is watching.

Questions now need to be asked of Richard Jouault who's position was solely created at tax payers expense to assist the Jersey Child Abuse Inquiry with obtaining crucial documents from States Departments."

Rico Sorda

Part Time Investigative Journalist 


Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...

So that those not familiar with the Jersey child-abuse cover-ups - and a number of similar symptomatic failings to deal with serious crime which characterise what passes for "public administration" in Jersey - are kept informed, Richard Jouault was one of the most senior and primarily involved civil servants in concealing decades of child-protection failure and covering-up child-abuse in Jersey.

Jouault and a number of similar colleagues - routinely lied to me as the relevant politician, lied, and deliberately misled by omission.

The fact that the Jersey Committee of Inquiry agreed to abdicate core evidence-gathering and collation functions to the States of Jersey - and expressly to profoundly conflicted individuals such as Jouault and his similarly conflicted colleague Tony Le Sueur - is one of the main acts by which the CoI destroyed any possibility of ever being able to possess vires in any engagement with me.

The administrative law case-law on 'bias', 'abdication/fetter', 'structural unfairness', 'HRA-violation', 'procedural unfairness' - is all there - settled - for anyone who cares to look.

There is no "public inquiry" in Britain in the post-WWII years which has operated on such a jaw-droppingly ultra vires basis as the Jersey CoI. Sadly, I get the strong impression of the crew involved, they're so incompetent - and so out of their depth - they don't know that.

Stuart Syvret

Anonymous said...

The Ted Heath question is a Police operational question so cannot be answered.

Anonymous said...

Stuart you have made it crystal clear scores of times on Twitter and blogs that you want to have no part on this Committee of Inquiry, you say its unlawful and incompetent etc so why go on about it?

rico sorda said...

The question from Deputy Tadier can be answered by the Minister without any concerns for it being an "Operational Matter". They just like to use that as an excuse.

Anonymous said...

Agree with Anon at 7.36. Stuart is becoming like a stuck record which makes his posts/observations no longer worth reading.

Please give us a break.

Another good blog Rico with good questions by good deputies.

rico sorda said...

Surely, the Bailiff, as Chief Judge and lawyer wouldn't allow the question if it was to do with operational matters?

Click HERE to listen to Jersey States death threat troll nail itself said...

Anonymous @7:36 AM & 1:06 PM

There is a very similar comment left 07:45 on the VFC blog:

Perhaps you would like to read the answers there.

The CoI into DECADES OF CONCEALED CHILD ABUSE is important and is a vast sink of taxpayer's money and so should be done on a competent and legally defensible basis.

"The "Jersey Care Inquiry" is a title thought up by some PR nonce to try to justify their space on the planet.

Rather than endlessly attempt to harangue the Ex.Health Minister (for daring to express his justifiable opinion) why don't you counteract his argument by explaining how this CoI IS competently run, fit for purpose and legal?

Is it because you can't?

Anonymous said...

What was the outcome of these questions?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous September 7, 2015 at 8:59 PM is either Stuart Syvret or his clone.
At least former States Members like Shenton and Le Claire is giving evidence without wasting everybody's time on these Blogs and Twitter with ridiculous excuses.

Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...

An alcoholic perjuring sociopath and probable covert employee of Shenton says: -

"Anonymous September 7, 2015 at 8:59 PM is either Stuart Syvret or his clone.
At least former States Members like Shenton and Le Claire is giving evidence without wasting everybody's time on these Blogs and Twitter with ridiculous excuses."

No - not "excuses" - facts; facts and a detailed and robust grounding in the relevant case-law. That's why I don't adjudge it to be in the public interest for me to confer credibility on a make-believe "public inquiry" - that's actually operating out of the back-office of a law-firm almost as corruptly conflicted as Appleby Global/Bailhache LaBesse.

And no - the many comments on the blogs left under the very evidential and useful link referring to "The Jersey States Death Threat Troll" are not left by me. But to whoever is posting the comments with that link, I'd say - "it's hitting the target" - adjudging from the amount spittle-flecked, weepy, foot-stamping, deranged trolling I've seen in elicited in response.

Stuart Syvret

Anonymous said...

Ex Senators Shenton and Le Claire, after their evidence to the COI, will now never get back as establishment politicians....
Then again will there be any establishment politicians left after this COI?!

voiceforchildren said...


Statement from Chair of Jersey Child Abuse COMMITTEE OF INQUIRY.