WHY does it matter about Power and Warcup?
Posted on Senator Syvret blogspot
Surely, the Comprehensive Spending Review, or the Sustainable Transport Policy, to take but two things I am currently working on, will have a more direct impact on Islanders' lives?Yes, it can feel like a sideshow - but I am convinced that it is not. It also seems to have gone on forever, but I ask readers to just remember that delay is the classic tool politicians use to make an uncomfortable issue go away.
It must not be allowed to die quietly. It has to be brought to an acceptable, fair and transparent resolution. Otherwise the suspicion of corruption, and the division of our Island, carry on.
I challenge anyone to read what follows and then say hand on heart that they still think that the procedure followed was fair and above board.
. Until 11 November 2008, Home Affairs Minister Andrew Lewis 'had no reason to believe that they (that is, the States of Jersey Police) were not managing the investigation well'.
. It was on the 11th that he saw the letter from Deputy Chief of Police David Warcup sent to chief executive Bill Ogley on 10th November 2008 and forwarded to him by Mr Ogley.
. This account is in Mr Lewis's statement to the Wiltshire Police, which has the force of a sworn statement.
. But the letter from Deputy Lewis to Chief of Police Graham Power informing him that the disciplinary process had commenced was created three days earlier, at 8.44 on Saturday 8 November.
. The written notification of suspension was also drafted on Saturday 8 November at the same time.
. So why was somebody creating suspension letters at a time when the minister thought the inquiry was being managed well, and bearing in mind that only the Home Affairs Minister can discipline or suspend the Chief of Police?
. How could a minister be led to the extraordinary step of suspending the Chief of Police on the basis of one letter (the 'Warcup letter')?
. Particularly when that letter contradicts the opinion of both Her Majesty's Inspector of Constabulary who have praised the leadership of the force, and its success in reducing crime, and the Association of Chief Police Officers' advisory team who have mentored and advised on the handling of the Haut de la Garenne investigation?
. This letter (the 'Warcup letter') of 10 November 2008 relies heavily on the Met 'interim report'. No one has ever seen this report apart from David Warcup.
. The Met withdrew this report from its use by the Jersey authorities for disciplinary purposes.
. So when Senator Ian Le Marquand reviewed the suspension in March 2009, he was forced to put a red pencil though all the references to the Met Report in the Warcup letter. How then could it have properly been used in the original November suspension?
. When Mr Power was phoned by Mr Lewis on 11 November and summoned to the meeting on 12 November, he was not told that it would be a disciplinary hearing. 'I had been given no notice, no time to prepare, and was not offered any representation' and 'suspension was not discussed until seconds before it was actually invoked' and 'I had not seen the documents to which the (suspension) letter referred.' (Graham Power's affidavit).
. The Disciplinary Code states that the chief executive (ie Bill Ogley) carries out a preliminary investigation to 'establish the relevant facts. Facts will include statements from available witnesses and the Chief Officer.' There was no such investigation.
I have focused in this letter on just one event - the suspension. I am happy to help readers who would like to be guided around other aspects of this murky affair.
We have to move as an Island in the direction of openness and honesty. We have to stop holding the door tight shut against the tide of history, justice and the evidence. It is an unworthy and in the end unsustainable position.
Tuesday, 13 April 2010 20:30:00 GMT+01:00
WHY does it matter about Power and Warcup?