Skip to main content

Surreal Government response to Haut de la Garenne

I have encountered a wide range of political responses to things, but yesterday's conference call with Michael Wills MP has to take the biscuit.

Here we have a situation in which a Crown Dependency's police investigation has clearly found evidence of 5 children whose bodies have been disposed of unlawfully and concealed in a childrens home.

We have a large number of witnesses to various forms of child abuse. Although three people have been charged there is a list of 5 people where the prosecution process has been halted. Jersey is a Crown Dependency that gives the Privy Council a power to intervene.

Senator Stuart Syvret, Austin Mitchell MP and I arranged a conference call to discuss this issue with Michael Wills MP (Minister for the Crown Dependencies). Michael Wills' response was to say that he didn't want to explain the government's view unless there was a meeting with all three of us present. He know that Austin was in the USA until September. Austin was quite happy for the meeting to proceed without him.

Obviously the government want to delay saying anything. However, this was a really silly political tactic. All they have done is to refuse to state their position and given specious reasons for this. The Minister also said that we should not comment publicly about it. I am not falling for that one.

We had put the Judicial Review of the Privy Council on hold. During the meeeting I took it off hold by email.

Comments

madhavi said…
I am amazed that they can give up on prosecuting these creatures on the claim they can't date the bones(which is in itself not believable), when so what, since there is surely ample dna in the little bones to make a comparison to the dna's of their families of origin. Perhaps they are too lethargic to go through the difficult task of tracing back to the families of origins, through the quagmire of social service stonewalling. Surely it would be possible to do, when we know chldren were reported to have dissappeared. I hate the expression, but to all of that I have to say, duh. And before the excuses comes up, if no living relatives exist, exhume closest. This is, after all, child torture and murder we are talking about. And did I say, child torture and murder perpetrated by social services victims whose mothers were crying for their babies/children, in most instances(if not all). We need Mulder and Scully on this. Thank you Sir. And thank you for all your work on this topmost of issues.
madhavi said…
Sorry, I sent my comment without the required word below and when I backpaged it disappeared in this window. BUt the codeword below must be the one you received with it blank. I hope you got it because I would hate to have to rewrite it! Thanks again.

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Statement re Police investigation into Harassment and Perverting the Course of Justice.

It was recently reported that the police were not investigating the allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice that I had made. This came as a surprise to me as I had been told for some time that my allegations were to be considered once the VRR had been rejected. I have now had a very constructive meeting with Staffordshire police on Friday 29th June 2018 and the misunderstandings have been resolved. At that meeting the evidence relating to the perversion of the course of justice and the harassment campaign against my family were discussed. The police have decided to investigate both the perversion of the course of justice and also the harassment campaign. I would like to thank them for changing their decision and I accept their apology for the way in which they did that. I am also in possession of written confirmation a police force would be investigating allegations that a vulnerable witness has been harassed for trying to expose the campaign against me. I hope that the aut…

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).

KING’S BENCH DIVISION

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

LORD HEWART CJ:
It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…