Search This Blog

Wednesday, 11 September 2013

"Syvret Defiant In The Face Of Jersey 'Kangaroo' Courts"

"Syvret Has Not Yet Responded To JEP Tosh"






10 comments:

  1. And still the establishment whores Rag allows no comment,Many islanders want their views known on the subject,after all we are paying for it...still no comment From Rat Routier on why public funds can be spent on personal Vendettas and using the brothers Law firm who get the dosh...the Crookery on this rock is staggering,yet the punters are either too scared or involved to squeek up...sad sicko's

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ian.

    The disgraced JEP writes (actually just repeats what Ian Gorst says with absolutely no journalistic scrutiny);

    “It is the job of the of the office of the Data Protection Commissioner to respond, without fear or favour, to complaints from individuals who feel that their rights, as set out in the law, may have been abused. The data protection law must be enforced independently and impartially”

    Why doesn’t the JEP ask how it is possible that Deputy Sean Power can actually steal work colleagues personal data as in personal e-mails. Shares the e-mails with others which causes them to be published on the internet with zero public interest value and the data protection commissioner (or the police for theft) doesn’t take him to court and says this is a “regulatory” offence?

    Perhaps if Stuart had have stolen the data, shared it with others and got them to publish it on the Internet his offence would have been “regulatory” too?

    Or is the truth that the Data Protection Law isn’t being enforced “independently and impartially?” And the JEP just forgot to ask about this anomaly?

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Judge had it right when he basically said that nothing had been gained that is of course, except for the contempt and disgust, intelligent observers have in a states department bringing a court case, that should have been brought by the four private individuals under existing defamation/ liable laws.

    That would never happen because the four would have stood in open court using their own money, and faced questions by Syvret and the witnesses he has lined up. I would have been one of the witnesses if invited.

    It was all done behind closed doors and in supposed secret, so secret that even several of the more open politicians were in the dark. The banana jurisdiction of Jersey that hunts political objectors, dislikes free speech.The States members who support this are a disgrace.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon, if these four creatures had taken to pursuing matters in the correct manner they would have found themselves and their actions being questioned on a truly alarming scale. The evidence against all four of them is so compelling it simply beggars belief. This charade 'had' to be conducted via State controlled conditions in order to maintain the appearance of impartiality and fairness to the brainwashed public....

      Delete
  4. Voice quote: "The disgraced JEP writes (actually just repeats what Ian Gorst says with absolutely no journalistic scrutiny," but he forgot to add that Gorst says exactly what, and only what, P.B. and the Law Office tell him to say.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think for a minute that VFC forgot anything, it is so blatantly a part of his life it is second nature to him. It is usually an observation of those who are not fully akin to the corruption of this vile regime, perhaps as in this case anon. No disrespect by the way, all our eyes open eventually, some quicker than others as we have already had a good taste of the oppressions of the Jersey scum.

      Delete
  5. Hi Ian,you say that the evidence against all four is compelliing and I would totally agree with you up to a point.What I don't get is why Stuart can't give proof to a Lawyer and be done with it..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A LAWYER!!!

      Most comical of you anon (or is it Jon?), why would Stuart ever have anything to do with one of the monkeys that make up the Zoo that is Jersey Governance, and statutory law?

      Answers on a carton of GMO milk please!!!

      Delete
  6. Interesting, so where is the remaining £7,613,000 ?

    The Beano is not the Rag

    ReplyDelete