The Pitman’s problems stem from a cartoon in a Broadlands
the estate agents’ advert which appeared in the Jersey Evening Post. The
cartoon gave me the impression that the Pitman’s were only in the States for
the money and I am not surprised that they considered the cartoon to be
offensive.
The Pitman’s like many other States Members and
Parliamentarians throughout the world gave up their job following their
election. Whether their salary was more or less than their previous jobs was
irrelevant. If the cartoon was intended
to depict the Pitman’s as money grabbers why were they singled out? Was it because they were seen as a thorn in
the butt of some the perceived Establishment figures?
The Pitman’s sought justice and took the matter to the Royal
Court where unfortunately they lost and have ended up with horrendous legal
fees which not only have to be paid to their lawyers but also to the other
side. Not being in a position to pay
they have been declared bankrupt whereby they not only lose their home but also
their jobs. One may ask where the justice is and did it make sense for the
Court to take such drastic action? If the creditors hope to see any money,
making the Pitman’s bankrupt, destitute and jobless is hardly the best way of
going about it.
At the end of last week in the same building a lady in her
late 80’s was attempting to secure £30,000 in compensation from former
Magistrate Ian Christmas who had been convicted in 2012 for fraudulently
inducing the lady to invest £100,000 in a US property scam. The lady had lost
over £500,000 in the scam and was ordered to pay thousands of pounds in legal
fees following a failed bid to secure funds from Ian Christmas. Last year a
£100,000 compensation order was overturned after the Court of Appeal had found
that Christmas was “balance sheet insolvent” and could not afford to pay.
The lady and a number of other people had lost considerable
sums of money after they were duped into parting with their savings in what
turned out to be a property scam. Some may be asking what the Magistrate’s
involvement was and indeed why was he using his position to give his fellow
fraudsters credibility. His three fellow
fraudsters are currently serving 4 year plus prison terms.
In court is was claimed that Mr Christmas was not opposed in
principle to paying compensation but a court order would present him with the
choice of bankruptcy or returning to prison. I say “Big Deal.” Mr Christmas
unlike the Pitman’s was not in financial difficulties because he was seeking
justice. He was a well-paid judge with friends in high places and with all the trimmings who was using his
position to persuade trusting people to part with their money which for many
was their life savings.
Mr Christmas was given only a fraction of his fellow
fraudster’s prison sentences and was in receipt of his full salary for around 4
years whilst suspended. He chose to enter into a business arrangement and as a
judge must have or should have known how deep a hole his colleagues were
digging. An investigation into his activities took years and like the Court
Hearing was very costly. He chose to spend thousands of pounds defending his
actions and lost.
I knew Mr Christmas who was a charming man and I am saddened
to see how he has fallen from grace, but he was the instrument of his own
misfortune. However unlike the Pitman’s he still has a home, a pension and
savings and not been declared bankrupt. He may have had to pay for his legal
fees but not the cost of the investigation and prosecution. He does not have to
pay any compensation to the other investors/victims and has been able to retire
to Yorkshire and enjoy the rest of his life. To seek any compensation the
investors like the 80 year old lady must invest their own money, however for
most they have already given what they had to Mr Christmas and his fellow
fraudsters who no doubt will again cry “foul” and claim hardship if ordered to
pay anything.
The Advocate pleading for Mr Christmas claimed Mr Christmas had
served a prison sentence, lost his matrimonial home, been vilified publicly,
been forced to leave the Island and being asked to cover a great level of
debt. Whilst some the claims like the
prison sentence might be true, Mr Christmas can hardly claim to be a victim of
some conspiracy to inflict him with hardship when he had inflicted untold
hardship on his victims who have no means of redress because Jersey’s Financial
Services which claims to be world class still does not have an Ombudsman nor a
compensation scheme.
As a child it was drummed into me that crime does not pay,
60 plus years later I have found that some time’s crime does pay or/and some
time’s the punishment does not fit the crime. It may well be that with
hindsight the Pitman’s may have been better advised to swallow the insult inflicted
on them, but hindsight is a wonderful thing and was their punishment when
seeking justice really fair. I am told that the Privileges and Procedures
Committee is looking into Article 8 of the States of Jersey Law and hopefully
it will find that it is too draconian and no longer fit for purpose.
However the States are all the poorer for the loss of Trevor
and Shona Pitman and the Investors are all the poorer for their involvement
with Mr Ian Christmas, Mr John Lewis, Mr James Cameron and Mr Russell Foot. It is often said that life
is unfair and justice is blind. Making the Pitman’s bankrupt and not Mr
Christmas does not add up unless one takes into account who they all are and who has friends in high places.
Postscript Friday 21st February 2014.
I regret to inform readers that the elderly lady referred to in my Blog above has recently passed away. She was obviously a lady of principle who did not want to let those who had conned her get away with her life savings. As such she was prepared to risk what little she had left to pursue Mr Christmas to the end of her days.
She deserved better from the Courts and those who employed to safe guard the interests of justice. Mr Christmas was ordered to pay in instalments only a portion of the money he and his colleagues took from the lady. I don't know what the ruling is now that the lady has died, but I hope that what is still owed will be paid to the beneficiaries of her will.
May she rest in peace.
Postscript Saturday 8th March 2014
I am pleased to report that the Appeal Court has ruled that sum of money still outstanding must be paid in instalments to the lady's Estate.
Postscript Friday 21st February 2014.
I regret to inform readers that the elderly lady referred to in my Blog above has recently passed away. She was obviously a lady of principle who did not want to let those who had conned her get away with her life savings. As such she was prepared to risk what little she had left to pursue Mr Christmas to the end of her days.
She deserved better from the Courts and those who employed to safe guard the interests of justice. Mr Christmas was ordered to pay in instalments only a portion of the money he and his colleagues took from the lady. I don't know what the ruling is now that the lady has died, but I hope that what is still owed will be paid to the beneficiaries of her will.
May she rest in peace.
Postscript Saturday 8th March 2014
I am pleased to report that the Appeal Court has ruled that sum of money still outstanding must be paid in instalments to the lady's Estate.
