Skip to main content

Stuart Syvret Jailed

According to Channel TV Stuart Syvret has been jailed for 10 weeks.

Former Senator Stuart Syvret has been jailed for ten weeks and faces heavy fines after being found guilty of breaching data protection laws.

This looks like an attempt to put the frighteners on people critising the failures of the rule of law in Jersey.

Comments

Jerry said…
From one of Stuarts Blogs.

http://therightofreply.blogspot.com/2010/11/jailed-as-predicted-only-in-corrupt.html?zx=7c18da70aedb2257



"JAILED As Predicted" Only In Corrupt Jersey


Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret was jailed in the Magistrates Court today.



Of course, we did not need to have precognition to know this was going to happen as we had predicted it many many months ago. This outcome was never going to be in doubt for two reasons....


1. Our corrupt Government had no choice but to try and destroy Stuart Syvret before he destroys them.

2. Stuart Syvret was never, in a month of years, going to back down one inch and accept a fine.


So, it's off to B-Wing for Stuart, but he embarked on his journey to a round of applause from his loyal supporters, and most definitely, with his head held high and his honour intact.


The prosecution on the other hand appeared quite bewildered. Perhaps the realisation of what they had unlawfully done to the Ex Senator, & Father of the House, had even shamed THEM!

Stuart was resilient to the last and even when warned with imprisonment, he flatly refused any compromise that was afforded him. Magistrate Shaw offered him the redemption of community service, and the prosecutor was heard trying to persuade him to take this option, but NO GO.


Stuart also refused to pay any monetary sum throw at him in the way of fines & costs, which if my memory serves me correctly, was in the region of £10,250.00 at £50.00 per week. This bearing in mind that one day in jail is equivalent to £50 off your sum total, it's looking like being a long ride.


Stuart applied for bail pending appeal but this was also flatly rejected by Magistrate Shaw. Personally, I think she was a bit peeved that the threat of prison had not broken Stuart, but rather, had made him stronger. Stuart also rejected the advice of an Advocate to the new charges he was encumbered with, stating that Jersey Legal Aid did not comply with his mandatory human rights under article 6 of the ECHR. He was further charged with Contempt of Court, and (I think) another related Data Protection Offence. He was also given one week to remove and/or destroy all data concerning Nurse-M.

How in God's name does one achieve such a task from a prison cell??? Incredible Jersey.

To sum matters up, he did just what he has been doing all along, fighting for ALL of the victims of this utterly Vile Regime. I think that some letters of support might bring a smile to his face so I will add the address of the prison in the comments section. I shall leave you with a very appropriate little piece of philosophy that sums the man, and his character up...
Ian Evans said…
That piece of philosophy was....

"Those who value freedom most, must sometimes choose to lose it."

Ian Evans.

An avid supporter of Stuart Syvret.
This man is a hero we need to all stand together and take lawful rebellion against this tyranny the more of us who stand firm and strong together will eventually beat this corrupt Nazi system
Ian Evans said…
"This man is a hero we need to all stand together and take lawful rebellion against this tyranny the more of us who stand firm and strong together will eventually beat this corrupt Nazi system".

NO MAN is a hero, lest in the eyes of the weak. Each man is his own to discover, and his ways of peace shall profit the world with kindness and understanding.

Do not look to the alleged heroes of today, but see yourself as a hero of tomorrow. Only through yourself shall you find freedom, and aspire to the courage to defeat evil....

Or, as they say in Manchester...."pay for nothing, go to court, fcuk em!"

Popular posts from this blog

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Gender Issues comparison of candidates

John Hemming believes that an MP should represent everyone in their constituency.  This should be regardless of their race, religion, gender, abledness, sexual orientation or anything else.  It should be everyone.

When he was an MP he worked on issues relating to men, those relating to women and those relating to non-binary people. Everyone.

For example here is John Hemming on a demonstration outside the courts with the campaign group Women Against Rape (it related to the case of a mother who had her child removed from her because the mother was raped).




Jess Phillips, who campaigns on women's issues, notwithstanding the questions asked about her appointments in her parliamentary office, had the following response when asked for a debate on issues specifically relating to men: