Sir Jimmy Savile: BBC responds to complaints 11th October

  • 3 Replies

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


the watcher

  • Guest
Sir Jimmy Savile: BBC responds to complaints 11th October
« on: October 11, 2012, 09:32:40 PM »
Better late than never !!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Offline the leveller

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • 4128
  • +75/-0


the watcher

  • Guest
Re: Sir Jimmy Savile: BBC responds to complaints 11th October
« Reply #2 on: October 18, 2012, 11:00:07 PM »

Wednesday, 8 August 2012

Former Police Chief Exclusive.

In November 2008 Jersey's most senior Police Officer was (possibly illegally) suspended from duty during the biggest Child Abuse Investigation Jersey has ever witnessed. Regular readers will be aware that the "official line" surrounding this suspension as portrayed by the Jersey government along with its State Media just doesn't stack up and has been torn apart by this Blogsite and others including RICO SORDA'S

The latest turn of events has seen the publication of a 62,000 word document submitted by the former Police Chief, Graham Power QPM, to the Wiltshire Constabulary who were tasked with producing evidence against him to take to a disciplinary hearing. A disciplinary hearing that never could have, or ever did take place but still cost the Jersey Taxpayer in excess of ONE MILLION POUNDS

Mr. Powers 62,000 word, 94 page, submission to Wiltshire was leaked to former Jersey politician and Health Minister Stuart Syvret who most will know spoke out, or blew the whistle, while still in post, on the institutional, decades long, Child Abuse in Jersey State run institutions and "care" homes. Mr. Syvret too was removed from his post as Health Minister.

The document itself is, as previously described, "DYNAMITE" and for those with an interest in the full picture of this whole sordid and ghastly affair the document can, and should be, read HERE.

It should also be mentioned that Mr. Syvret gave a copy of this document to BBC Jersey State Radio, over TEN MONTHS AGO back in September 2011 and despite reporting on the case AGAINST Mr. Power they have kept his defence case buried ever since. (More about that in an up-coming Blog).

As a result of Mr. Power's document being published we contacted him in order to verify its authenticity and asked him if he could explain to us its significance, how it came about and related matters. This is in stark contrast to BBC Jersey State Radio, and the rest of the island's State Media who have not sought to ask him a single question, either on its authenticity nor its contents, which in a functioning "Democracy" with an independent media would seem quite staggering, but in Jersey, alas it is quite the norm where Bloggers are the only real independent media there is.

Below is Mr. Power's response to our request and we thank him for his willingness to respond to any, and all, questions put to him in order that history can record a true reflection of the Jersey Child Abuse Atrocities and related issues which you'll not find anywhere in the State Media.

I have been approached by the ?Voiceforchildren? website and asked if I want to comment on the apparent publication on another website of my 62,000 word written statement to Wiltshire Police which I prepared in response to the disciplinary investigation into my management of the Jersey Historic Abuse Enquiry, when I was Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police. The Chief Constable of Wiltshire was appointed to conduct the disciplinary investigation in December 2008.

I have viewed the website on which the statement is said to be published. I have not read the full publication or compared it word-for-word with my copy of the original. I have however checked some randomly selected extracts from the website and found them to be an accurate reproduction of the original document. It appears from the available evidence that the publication on the website is a true copy of the original document, albeit with some redactions for the protection of third parties. I did not provide a copy of my statement to the website or the person who operates that website.

I prepared the statement in 2009 because I was required to do by the Minister for Home Affairs, Senator Ian Le Marquand, who activated the relevant part of the Disciplinary Code for the Chief Officer of the Force, which requires that such a statement be provided. I should perhaps record at this stage that the provision of a statement was not the first option which was considered. I was at first approached by the Chief Constable of Wiltshire, Brian Moore, and asked if I would agree to be interviewed. It was proposed that the interview would be conducted in a Jersey hotel or similar location and would last for about a week. I know of no precedent for an interview of that duration in a disciplinary enquiry. In a criminal investigation the law would normally prohibit an interview of that length other than in exceptional cases with the agreement of a Court. Terrorism investigations are an example of the type of enquiry where authority might be given for an interview lasting for a week.

In spite of the exceptional nature of the request I nevertheless entered into correspondence to establish whether it would be possible for me to give my agreement to what was proposed. I noted that Mr Moore and his team were benefiting from legal advice funded by the Jersey Government. I therefore asked for a similar facility which would enable me to be advised in respect of the request for an interview, and to be represented during any interview which was agreed. This request was considered by the Minister for Home Affairs, Senator Ian Le Marquand, who decided that he would not allow funding for me to have any legal advice or representation, stating that any legal costs would have to be met from my own personal resources.

Given that the subject matter of the interview was entirely concerned with things I had done in the course of my duties as Chief Officer of the Force, and that the investigating Officers and the Minister were benefiting from full legal advice, I did not think that the Ministers decision was fair or consistent with the principles of Natural Justice. I therefore declined to attend for interview but said that I would comply with the Code and provide a written statement. I was then given a list of points to cover and a deadline for the submission of the final document.

It might be worth recording at this point that apart from the lack of fairness, I did not think that the Ministers decision to require me to provide a written statement was wise. In my opinion few people in his situation would have done the same. The consequence of his decision was that I would produce a full and candid written account of the investigation from my perspective. This would include previously undisclosed information regarding the role and actions of Jersey Ministers and other key figures. Once the statement had been created it would exist thereafter, copies would be made, and interest would be expressed in its content. Given the nature of things in Jersey it would inevitably find its way into the public domain by one means or another. If another person had been the Minister they might have preferred not to have compelled the document to be created in the first place. They may have seen it as a future source of conflict and embarrassment. They could have found another way of dealing with the situation. Senator Le Marquand apparently thought otherwise. That might be one of the reasons why the controversy is still live over three years afterwards. In the circumstances another Minister may have sought a way to ?close down? the matter of my suspension and move on to address the core issues of the decades of child abuse, and the reasons for the abuse being covered-up by people whose duty it was to act. That has not happened.

If the publication of my statement and any issues which arise from that publication are troublesome to the Minister, then it is trouble that he has made for himself. He took the decision to require me to write it. All that has followed could have been foreseen.

Once it was clear that I would be providing a written statement and that there was a deadline to be met I set about the task. At this time both the Wiltshire Police team and the Minister were benefitting, not just from the comprehensive legal advice which I have described earlier, but also from fully staffed administrative support and modern office facilities. I on the other hand did my own typing on a laptop computer with family members acting as proof-readers. Looking back on those events I am confident that a situation was deliberately contrived in order to create feelings of isolation and hopelessness on my part. This would have been done in the hope that I would break under the pressure and quietly slip away. That did not happen.

It is now a matter of record that in spite of a long investigation and suspension costing well over a million pounds, no disciplinary charges were brought and no hearing was ever called. I retired in July 2010 three years after my ?normal retirement age? as set out in my conditions of service.

I was surprised when, shortly before I retired, the Minister made it clear that he intended to publish a redacted version of the Wilshire report. This document was effectively the ?prosecution case? which would have been used at the hearing which the Minister never called. I thought that this was unfair and said so in clear terms. It had been made clear from the onset that all documents in the case were to be kept strictly confidential. The Minister was breaching that rule. He also sought to present the Wiltshire report as some form of ?independent review? which it plainly was not. The idea of a thorough management review of the investigation, and the lessons to be learned, to which I was happy to contribute, had been considered and turned down by the Minister early in 2009. The document which he eventually published was designed to be presented at a disciplinary hearing which never happened. Had the hearing taken place the contents of the report would have been subjected to significant challenge and opposing evidence would have been brought.

When I learned of the Ministers intentions I said that firstly, the Wiltshire report should not have been published, but if it was to be published, there should be at least a parallel publication of my own written statement. This was communicated by a variety of means including a letter to the Chief Minister dated 3rd April 2010. Under some political pressure Senator Le Marquand promised that he would do this, but his promise was never kept and it has now been overtaken by events.

All that said, I believe that the statement which has now entered the public domain is a valuable contribution to the understanding of a significant period in the Island?s history. I believe that it is revealing, not only with regard to the abuse enquiry, but also the cultures, attitudes, and style of governance which existed at the time.

If it serves any purpose in assisting the victims, or preventing similar events in the future, then the time spent compiling it will have been worthwhile.

Graham Power.

North Yorkshire.

August 2012.(END)


the watcher

  • Guest
Re: Sir Jimmy Savile: BBC responds to complaints 11th October
« Reply #3 on: October 18, 2012, 11:03:11 PM »
And much,much more
Wednesday, October 03, 2012


PHOTO: REUTERS/AMIR COHEN. Website for this image
Sir Anthont Blunt worked for the British security service MI5 and was close to Lord Victor Rothschild.
"Sir Anthony Blunt blocked police investigations into activities involving Jimmy Savile.

"This, according to our informant, came straight from the lips of an angry detective involved in the earlier police investigation."
Times Online 'Covers' Jimmy Savile's Child Abuse, Literally

Reportedly, Sir Anthony Blunt enjoyed strangling young boys to death while buggering them.
Lord Victor Rothschild, who was extremely influential within MI5 and MI6, was a close friend of Anthony Blunt and reportedly recruited him into MI5.
Reportedly Anthony Blunt ran a paedophile ring which included included a lot of top people. (aangirfan: Sexpionage)
Reportedly, the former head of Britain's MI6, Sir Maurice Oldfield, was observed by his Special Branch guards  making use of boys from the Kincora children's home. (The troubles: Google Books Result)

Allegedly, Oldfield shared boys with Sir Anthony Blunt, several bishops, and an archbishop. (Cached)

Right wing 'Loyalists' in the UK are linked to child abuse rings and to Israel. (Website for this image)

Journalist Chris Moore wrote The Kincora Scandal an investigation into the Kincora Children's Home in Belfast in the UK, where housemaster William McGrath, and others, abused children.

William McGrath, a Protestant loyalist and member of Ian Paisley's Free Presbyterian Church, reportedly worked for the UK spy service MI5.

Lord Victor Rothschild - spy for the UK 'and Israel'.

Reportedly, McGrath had contacts with UK spy Ted Rothschild's friend Sir Anthony Blunt, the 'pedophile' spy.

Sir Anthony Blunt, allegedly linked to child murder according to T Stokes (ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT COMING SOON)
McGrath had contacts with Sir Knox Cunningham who has been linked to pedophile rings and who was a pal of Tony Blair.

Right-wing Loyalist Sir Samuel Knox Cunningham, who befriended Blair at Fettes school.

Reportedly, the Kincora Children's Home, in Belfast in the UK, was used by the spooks as a boy brothel.

Reportedly, Kincora's clientele included top politicians , judges and other public figures .

"MI5... used it as a blackmailers lever." (Michael stone, MI5 and Kincora - Irish Nationalism)

McGrath was linked to right-wing protestant paramilitaries in Northern Ireland (as was Anders Breivik, reportedly).

Reportedly, the protestant paramilitaries "have long had links with Zionist gangsters and have received Israeli weapons.
"In at least one incident weapons were exchanged for intelligence material on British missile systems, and loyalists rely on Israeli-'Russian' mafiosi for supplies of ecstasy pills.
"Loyalists have also engaged in the smuggling of non-Whites into Eire in alliance with the 'Russian' mafia." (Michael stone, MI5 and Kincora - Irish Nationalism)

Journalist Chris Moore describes McGrath's links to a man from the UK Ministry of Defence.

Colin Wallace, who worked for the UK psyops section of MI5, is linked to Kincora.

Moore describes McGrath's links to Sir Knox Cunningham who provided McGrath with funds for his paramilitary organisation.

Cunningham was an associate of the Ted Rothschild-linked Cambridge spy ring, which included the pedophile Sir Anthony Blunt.

In 1940 Lord Ted Rothschild suggested that communist Anthony Blunt should be invited to join the UK secret service.

In the book 'The Fifth Man', Roland Perry puts the case that Ted Rothschild was a major spy for Israel.

Blunt and the Queen.
The Royal Family shielded Blunt for 15 years until he was exposed by Margaret Thatcher in 1979.
According to the source, Blunt told his colleagues he was the illegitimate child of King George V, by his mother, Hilda Blunt.
"It was long rumoured that the unusual resemblance between Blunt and Edward VIII was because they were half brothers."
Reportedly, Anthony Blunt claimed Nazi party funding came from the same Jewish banks that supported the allies. (Cached)


Posted by Anon at 10:59 AM
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to Facebook

Labels: Blunt, Israel, Jimmy Saville, Kincora, McGrath, MI5, Oldfield, Rothschild

« Last Edit: October 18, 2012, 11:35:25 PM by the watcher »

Share this topic...
In a forum
In a site/blog

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk