Search This Blog

Tuesday, 31 May 2011

"When Propaganda Is Not So Proper"

Some time ago there was a rumour circulating that a member of the Walker family may have been involved in a traffic accident in Jersey. We were later informed of this via other means, and put up a story that this allegation was circulating.

Having communicated with members of the Walker family via email, and having made enquiries myself, it was apparent that "NO ONE" from the Walker family was involved in any "TRAFFIC ACCIDENT" in either Trinity or St Clement, and the post was removed. My email is below.

Dear Tim

Thank you for your email. As you will appreciate, I really do need to speak to someone in this regard. As I have stated, I will issue a full and unreserved apology to your family when I have dealt with the other matter. I am extremely angry at being misled and would wish to deal with this first, then I will honourably do the right thing on behalf of your family.

Regards Ian


Two days ago I spoke with the person referred to and strongly voiced our abhorrence and disapproval at being mislead. It was agreed that we should make a donation to Jersey Hospice on behalf of the Walker family, which will be done this week. What is left to do is below.

We would like to make a full, most sincere, and unreserved apology to ALL members of the Walker family for any hurt caused to any member of the family. We have clearly been misled, and we can confirm that any notion of a Walker family member being involved in this episode is pure conjecture, and is certainly untrue. We will be making the Jersey Hospice donation on behalf of the Walker family this week, and it will be expressed why the donation is being made. This incident is very much regretted.

Kindest regards


"The St Clement Crash"

This afternoon (strangely enough) it was confirmed to us just who was driving the Lotus during the fateful crash in St Clement earlier in the year.
We have also been told that the vehicle is still in Jersey, and that a forensic examination has taken place. We believe that the crash occurred for two, possibly three reasons. We are not able, at this present time, to divulge further information as matters are still ongoing.

What information we have at present, will be filed and saved.


40 comments:

  1. Do you know the name of the driver?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Let's have then? What's the point of having blogs if they can't give us the news BEFORE the goverment's media?

    ReplyDelete
  3. There is a very good reason which you would understand if you knew it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The plot thickens........now I'm really curious

    ReplyDelete
  5. How come Ian you know? if the name is supposed to be disclosed? if you know then why can't we know?

    ReplyDelete
  6. The name is not disclosed, and there are very sensitive issues for family members so will see how that is dealt with....

    ReplyDelete
  7. I was given the right details, I had to find out the name myself.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Oh my God, it's 'He Who Must Not Be Named'!

    Surely in any case such as this there would always be very sensitive issues for family members? What makes this so different?
    Good grief, it's not Royalty ??

    ReplyDelete
  9. Ian where did you mention the Walker family involvement in a fatal car crash rumour? I didn't think you 'did' rumours?

    ReplyDelete
  10. ian
    if you know for sure that it is was not one of the walker family then a lot of us have been misled.me for one and i allso make an unreserved apology to the walker family.martin

    ReplyDelete
  11. Sorry Ian my friend - having been turned into a 'cynic par excellence' by this Island, its government and media, I will remain unconvinced until the truth is out. You must also be aware that you are not the only person who has mooted this theory, and furthermore why did the Walker family not issue a denial knowing the rumours that were circulating?

    Not convinced - yet!

    ReplyDelete
  12. "Oh my God, it's 'He Who Must Not Be Named'!"

    Voldemort is on Jersey? Where's Harry when you need him? :-)

    Have to agree with the last post, I too wander what makes this very sad issue so different? Irrespective of who the victims are and their personal circumstances, the role of a reporter is to .. err ... um ... report.

    From a devil's advocate perspective, if I were to have witnessed the crash and saw the people in the car, what would be stopping me from telling family and friends what and who I saw? Have "they" got the technology from the "Men in Black" films to make us forget? :-) Well, "they" do know how to misdirect the media with fake bomb scares outside a friends office to grab the headlines so other news gets buried ..

    Unless a court order has been issued to silence all media outlets then one feels that the name should be released. After all, we don't want secrets in Jersey ... ;-)

    The Beano is not the Rag

    ReplyDelete
  13. Ok then, can you confirm no "cover up" - i.e. no great wealth or influence is involved? Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  14. thanks for the post guys..family law is the part of legal practice that covers domestic relations. These range between marriage and divorce, to concerns of adoption and surrogacy, and also to issues such as common law marriages and same-sex marriage. In Denver, as anywhere else, you will need a lawyer who has a substantial amount of knowledge within your unique area of need.

    ReplyDelete
  15. You are a fool and I hope the Walker family get around to suing you for slander.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Firstly, you are the fool anon, it would be libel, not slander. Secondly, we did not publish any accusations. Thirdly, the apology was simply the right thing to do. Finally, it was my idea to donate something to Hospice as I have not given anything in a fair while anyway.

    You can crawl back under your rock now!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Why have people in the banking world in the know, been told they must not divulge the name?

    ReplyDelete
  18. Ian - I am still somewhat bemused by this. Was the apology you made done off your own back, or were you 'requested' to do so. If the latter, will the other blogs that have run with a similar story also be asked to do the same.

    When the police made the statement to the JEP about 'rumours abounding' why did they not at that stage discount any connection with the Walker family and put paid to the rumours for once and for all. Also, why are they taking so long with this particular investigation?

    Can you answer any of these questions Ian?

    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  19. {Completely off topic}

    Ian, been reading a post posting of yours ref your little incident with the police and the reference to a certain named person. Have you got an email address I can contact you on?

    The Beano is not the Rag

    ReplyDelete
  20. This rumour has been circulating for some time now, it must have reached the ears of the Walker family.
    It is peculiar that they have remained "mute" all this time, most people would have went "a*****t" at the accusation.
    Maybe they will have their brief on it before long.

    ReplyDelete
  21. ian i do hope you are sure on this i have asked again today some one in a parish hall and they still say same thing walker?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Ian has gone very quite.

    Maybe he is being paid "Hush Money"?

    ReplyDelete
  23. The Beano is not the Rag, my email is ilevans@hotmail.co.uk

    Martin, that is not the info I got yesterday, and I got some rather explicit info which explains a lot, but there is always still the possibility I was being duped.

    GeeGee, I cannot say anything more at the minute on here, Stuart knows why, but I am never "forced" to do anything, you know me better than that, I will ring you hun.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Ian doesn't do corruption, he only fights it Fuckwit!

    ReplyDelete
  25. hi Ian,

    could I just suggest to Martin that a lot of people have the same surnames, but maybe knowing the first name would mean the difference between being right or wrong as to which family one belonged?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Astonishing. Despite being forced into writing a humiliating apology you still refuse to acknowledge that it was your mistake.

    By blaming the person who gave you the wrong information, you arrogantly shift the responsibility to another person and ignore the fact that you were totally at fault – in the eyes of both the law and any moral human being – by your decision to name, or identify, what seems to be an innocent man in a death investigation.

    Who do you think the court would hold responsible in any subsequent libel case? You (the person who publicly named the wrong person in an ongoing criminal investigation) or the person who told you down the pub. That excuse wouldn’t even hold up in the playground.

    To have an open, honest blog that discusses the news stories of the day is a valid, worthwhile exercise.
    But to name innocent people as part of a rabid, paranoid pursuit of the perceived ‘establishment’ is a dangerous game.

    And the amazing irony is that, while you accuse the States of being fascists, you behave in such a tyrannical way that it is you who is acting like a fascist, meting out opinions based on half-truths and Chinese whispers.

    The briefest foray into the law would have helped you to understand the potential reasons why the police have not named this individual.
    But why bother bringing reason and intelligent thought into it? You already have your agenda – as an arrogant, blundering buffoon who rides roughshod over the law and human rights.
    We don’t need the police or court system with you around. Why not just tell us who you think committed crimes and I’ll round up a posse so we can go hang anyone you don’t like?
    You have confused ‘fighting corruption’ with ‘wanting to believe rumours because they suit my obsessive suspicions’.

    Oh, and your fellow conspiracy theorists. They wonder why the family have not spoken out, thus removing that person from the firing line. Well, in a modern, civilised society, people don’t have to deny rumours because, until they are charged by the police, such rumours should not make it into the public arena.
    Otherwise, we would have a state where this hypothetical example would operate:
    A journalist (after hearing a ‘rumour’) could phone you and say ‘Are you a rapist, Mr Evans?’. Following your denial, they could print a headline saying EVANS DENIES RAPE. That, essentially, is the approach you have followed. Seems a bit dangerous, don’t you think?

    You have accidentally done more to assert the value of your hated ‘accredited media’ – who operate by strict guidelines – through this amateurish mistake and consequently damaged the reputation of other bloggers who respect the rules.

    For shame.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I have not written a "humiliating" apology, where does the humiliation come into the scene? Clearly, you have never been taught the basics of humanity.

    "the only mistake, is not correcting the mistake" IF, it was one?

    Not only have I made a public apology, I have done so without knowing fully if I am wrong, where is the humiliation in that?

    "in the eyes of the law"....WHAT LAW?

    "But to name innocent people as part of a rabid, paranoid pursuit of the perceived ‘establishment’ is a dangerous game."

    There is nothing rabid or paranoid about my pursuit of Jersey's disgusting criminals, who incidentally, have destroyed my life over the last 23 years for no reason other than they feared me, or took a disliking to me because I speak my mind.

    The States of Jersey are not fascists, they are MURDERERS!!! Who brings the legislation that puts people into poverty and despare? The very same people who hang themselves in the woods? or knowingly inject themselves with enough smack to never wake up? OR, launch themselves off the roof of a public car park? Or hire a nail gun to end their misery???

    "The briefest foray into the law would have helped you to understand the potential reasons why the police have not named this individual."

    YOUR TAKING THE PISS-RIGHT? I know all about Jersey Law, it exists for specimen of wealth, and no other.

    "You already have your agenda – as an arrogant, blundering buffoon who rides roughshod over the law and human rights.
    We don’t need the police or court system with you around. Why not just tell us who you think committed crimes and I’ll round up a posse so we can go hang anyone you don’t like?"

    "Roughshod over the law" WHAT LAW???
    "Human rights" WHAT HUMAN RIGHTS???

    "Oh, and your fellow conspiracy theorists. They wonder why the family have not spoken out, thus removing that person from the firing line. Well, in a modern, civilised society, people don’t have to deny rumours because, until they are charged by the police, such rumours should not make it into the public arena."

    You are correct on this point, but I must hasten to add, WE DO NOT LIVE IN A MODERN CIVILISED SOCIETY....We live in a fucking dictatorship of the Stalin/Hitler era where those with money are sweet, and those without are nowt.

    "Otherwise, we would have a state where this hypothetical example would operate:
    A journalist (after hearing a ‘rumour’) could phone you and say ‘Are you a rapist, Mr Evans?’. Following your denial, they could print a headline saying EVANS DENIES RAPE. That, essentially, is the approach you have followed. Seems a bit dangerous, don’t you think?"

    THEY HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR THE LAST 23 YEARS IN MY CASES. Are you really that stupid you cannot comprehend why I loathe the JEP and Cover-up TV?

    Along with your bent coppers, corrupt judges, petty civil servants and the totally corrupted stool pigeons perched at the top of the tree?

    "You have accidentally done more to assert the value of your hated ‘accredited media’ – who operate by strict guidelines."

    HAHAHA, NOW YOU REALLY ARE TAKING THE PISS....and this converstaion is over. But, remember one thing, there are "NO" rapists blogging in Jersey, there are "NO" child abuse concealers blogging in Jersey, there are "NO" political oppressors blogging in Jersey....

    We kinda come out smellin of roses when compared to you ASSHOLES :)

    ReplyDelete
  28. Q. How can I be sure the stories I read in the 'accredited media' is not rumour PR spin or lie.

    A. I cant be sure I have to trust the reporter or not.

    Rumour always will and always has been in the public arena bars clubs homes etc etc

    The case of rumour towards the landlord of Joanna Yeates.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Not wishing to sound obtuse anon, but who is Joanna Yeates? and what is the story if you don't mind my asking?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Trial by media

    http://enemiesofreason.co.uk/2011/01/02/chris-jefferies-and-trial-by-media/

    ReplyDelete
  31. Thanks anon, just had a mate up north onto me filling me in on the case, the landlord did it, not!

    ReplyDelete
  32. It always strikes me, the sheer one sided crap that comes from the media, who never appear to be accountable, then the second that Joe Public makes the exact same inference, there is uproar!

    ReplyDelete
  33. rumour or Tittle tattle happens accredited or otherwise.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Sounds like your "For shame" anon writer is happily in the Right Class in Jersey (the wealthy) or is some mug who buys into their spin.

    ReplyDelete
  35. No retreat no surrender.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I think you have done the right thing publicly apologising and I applaud you for doing that. I do not believe that even if you were correct about any names involved you should have approached the subject in the manner that you did. Being someone who expresses they have been victim to just having a face that doesn't fit should understand that it is unjust to bully because someone's name just does not fit. I hope that you learn from this and approach your blog in a different way from now on. Type only fact - not fiction or hearsay. I would encourage anyone to speak their opinion, shout loud and proud but be sure to get your facts right first and foremost.

    ReplyDelete
  37. I am grateful for your thoughts and advice which is duly taken, and is totally correct, in apology, I simply did what was right.

    "The only mistake is not correcting the mistake."

    ReplyDelete
  38. I think I know who sent that last message :)

    "The fool is the man who needs to be told twice!"

    ReplyDelete