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

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. …

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…

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…