In Part 1, the Panel heard evidence from former residents of the Jersey care system, those who worked in child care services and those accused of abuse.
Phase 2, will look at the decisions taken in relation to the timing of the police investigation, subsequent decisions to prosecute alleged abusers, whether or not those responsible for deciding which cases to prosecute took a professional approach and was that process free from political interference.
In Phase 3, the final phase of the Inquiry, will examine whether the child care system since the war was adequate, what went wrong, has the system changed for the better and what is the way forward.
Those who have been following the Inquiry will have been impressed with the Panel's attempts to seek out the truth and it is now evident that there were victims of abuse and their concerns were not adequately addressed.
In Phase 2 the Panel will seek to establish the competence of those entrusted with responsibility of safeguarding the interests of the victims and did they short change those who sought justice. Among those due to appear during the next few weeks are police officers, politicians, Crown Officers past and present and from all ranks.
We should hear what led to Operation Rectangle, was it justified and was it the failure that critics with vested interests have claimed. Were the Crown Officers even handed and were their decisions really in the public interest? I also hope the Panel will seek answers as to whether there was justification to suspend the Police chief and how was it that around £2million was spent trying to justify the suspension and to cover up the actions of those involved.
The schedule for next week’s Hearing is posted on the Jersey Care Inquiry Website, however for reader’s convenience I can report that proceedings get under way at 10am next Tuesday with an opening address which will be followed at 11am with the first witness Anton Cornelissen giving his evidence.
On Wednesday at 10 am, Brian Carter will give his evidence and at 2pm will be followed by Emma Coxshall. I understand the 3 witnesses are from police headquarters.
On Thursday at 10am I am due to give evidence and note that I am to be followed at 2pm by an unnamed public witness which awaits confirmation.
Whilst I have no wish to stay in the witness box for as long as Alastair Cook is at the crease during the current Test Match, given the length of my statement I will be surprised if we don’t need a bit of extra time.
I believe the next Phase will be illuminating and with the approach of Guy Fawkes it’s likely that there will be a few extra fireworks coming our way. It is evident that the Panel has been doing its home work and has been prepared to challenge witnesses to substantiate claims made in their statements. Therefore it will be interesting to see how well the so called heavyweights cope with their evidence.
While those in power are STILL THIS UNACCOUNTABLE the children of Jersey will never be safe.
Given Deputy Lewis's involvement in the Power suspension, I am sure that he will be attending the Hearing and telling the Panel which of his comments about the Met Police Interim Report is the truth.Delete
As long as Lenny Harper is coming over in person to give evidence, as it would be great to meet him again.ReplyDelete
Personally I'm looking forward to Mick "The Leak, The Tooth Fairy and The CELLARS" Gradwell giving some evidence after he refused to give evidence to the last Inquiry he was invited to. There is little doubt he will be called as a witness but will he have grown a back-bone since his departure and turn up to this one?Delete
Thanks for the link. I would recommend that readers click on to and watch the YouTube report of the search of the Haut de la Garenne cellars.Delete
If the Reader who sent me the comment about the 3 outstanding warrants would like to tell me what they are for and where they were issued, I will publish your comment.Delete
I am pretty sure that Lenny is to give evidence, but as he is now living outside the Island, he might, like others, be heard via Video Link.ReplyDelete
I knew that by mentioning the length of Cook's innings it could be the kiss of death. Unfortunately he was out ten minutes after the publication of the blog. I reckon it was a "No ball" too as his foot was over the line at the point of delivery and not where it ended up after the ball had left the bowler's hand.ReplyDelete
Bob, I agree, but what a great score.Delete
Look forward to hearing what should be very honest and enlightening evidence from you Bob. This will be a most interesting phase with no doubt a lot of 'I can't remembers'!ReplyDelete
I am outraged at this comment, I can't remember what you mean at all.Delete
Sir Philip who???Delete
Let's forget the "sir" bitDelete
Another who should be giving evidence to the Inquiry is disgraced former PPC Chairman Juliette Gallichan.
Julliette Gallichan is not 'disgraced'.Delete
Come on lets stop rumour mongering people online willy nilly.
It is a question as how one defines "disgraced" if you have read the blog that Voice published you will understand the responsibilities of a Chairman as opposed to a Minister and will have realized that the Connetable should have put the matter before her Committee.Delete
Her response to Mr Power was carefully drafted for her to sign and should have been approved by her Committee.
If you are aware of the difficulties Mr Power had to overcome with States Departments you will understand why some members actions could be described as disgracful.
There was a closing of ranks and what Voice has published is an example.
To be honest, if all the people that Voice described as 'disgraced' were actually disgraced, then the island would have a serious problem. They over-use the word to suit themselves.Delete
If you have a complaint about all these 'disgraced' people, you must submit it to the relevant authority, so if you don't like what Gallichan, the Dean, LeMarquand, the BBC, etc do, then make a complaint, there is a system. But the word 'disgraced' is becoming over-used on the blogs, without you having submitted any formal complaint. The excuse of conflicted and corrupt complaints system may well be valid but it doesn't mean you can't submit a complaint and take it further.
I know Bob is selective about what comments he publishes, so is Voice, but the fact remains that you can't just go round calling people disgraced, it is petty and you are doing it too much without having any complain or investigation.
I mean, even though it isn't true, it could be tempting to say that the suspended former Police chief was disgraced, because he was actually suspended until he left. but you don't call him disgraced. The Dean was cleared but you call him disgraced.
Do you think you could find another word for your personal opinion?
one of your disgraced.
ps, usually you would call me Jon or Sue, but I can spell, they can't, and I don't drink.
And now for all the venom from other anons, who are very opinionated themselves.
"closing of ranks" to defend their paedophile history.Delete
If that is not a disgrace, I don't know what is.
Burn in hell !
No official record says she is disgraced and in any case the VFC seems to tell its readers everybody is disgraced, which, is tiresome.Delete
@09:43 "No official record says she (Julliette Gallichan) is disgraced"
No official record was published saying that children were beaten raped and buggered while in the "care" of States of Jersey over the course of DECADES.
However they were.
This information was discovered and published on excellent blogs such as this one. All in the face of official denials but the very expensive CoI is now confirming that all that information published (and, BTW rubbished by people such as yourself) on these blogs was true!
So yes, a fair portion of Jersey is "disgraced"
Oh, Did anyone mention ......Burn in hell !
With reference to the Comment at 0821.Delete
I stand to be corrected but I don’t think the word disgraced appears in the blogs I publish but the word does appear in the comments I have received from people like Voice who is known to the public.
You are right to say that I am selective in the comments I publish, but I need to be, particularly when the comments are from people like you who choose not to disclose their name. You will have seen in one of the comments I have posted above that I have asked a reader to elaborate on the comment he/she has submitted because the allegations are serious and I would be irresponsible if I allowed the comment to be published particularly when the person does not have the courage to disclose his/her name.
In the eyes some of the uniformed public Lenny Harper and Graham Power are disgraced. Voice considers the way Connetable Gallichan dealt with Mr Power’s letter of complaint was disgraceful, the same could say that the way the Dean handled the complaint against the Church Warden was disgraceful for which he was suspended and reinstated after apologising for his actions.
If you have read the Bishop’s letter which is in the public domain you will have noted that no disciplinary action is being taken against the Dean but there is no mention about him being cleared or exonerated.
Whilst on the Dean one might say that the way in which he and the Bishop of Winchester have conducted themselves which has led to the split in our 500 year relationship is disgraceful. Given their positions one could hardly say it was exemplary.
You are right to question whether the complaints system is corrupt because of confliction and I believe that is what Voice was saying in his blog.
If you would like to give me details of your name and what you have done to warrant being called a disgrace I will see if I agree with you.
@08:21 (& multiple other comments):ReplyDelete
"To be honest, if all the people that Voice described as 'disgraced' were actually disgraced, then the island would have a serious problem."
Dear Troll/Denialist, The island HAS a serious problem
.........as demonstrated by the current inquiry into child abuse and cover up.
When are you going to start being honest ?
The "disgraced" commenter at 08:21 is your typical text-book Troll, or at least his/her comment is.
The comment was submitted anonymously solely to attack me and divert readers attention away from the subject of the Blog. Out of everything you have published, and the links I have submitted to this Posting, the commenter ignores all the "disgraceful" behaviour exhibited by those complicit in the protection of Jersey's reputation, to the detriment of Abuse Victims/Survivors and those who campaign for them.
The particular comment wouldn't have been published on my Blog for the reasons I have just pointed out. It is text-book Trolling...............And a disgrace!
For the benefit of the author of that comment, you are not being attacked, or called a Troll simply because you have (cowardly) posted anonymously. Until you have the courage to attack people (and attempt to divert readers attention away from the Blog subject) under your own name you will be seen as a cowardly Troll.
You might get some respect if you had the courage of your convictions........but you don't.........so you won't.
On a finishing note; credit to Bob, readers, and commenters for seeing that comment for what it is and keeping the subject of the posting alive.
Jersey Child Abuse Inquiry carries on "THE JERSEY WAY"