Where in the world could this be?
‘Critics of the island’s oligarchic establishment believe they already know the answer: that ……, with its long-standing culture of secrecy, put self-preservation before justice.’
‘“The first instinct of the …… establishment whenever there is trouble is to keep quiet,” he explained, pointing out that the political classes are terrified of scandals that bring questions and interference from the outside world.’
‘He believes that many of the island’s politicians are concerned only with their image, and with protecting the tourist industry and the stability of the finance sector.’
‘But on …… widespread fear of establishment still exist.’
‘I have been approached or telephoned by a number of people who want to talk about what they believe to be one of the factors in the alleged culture of cover-up – the island’s allegedly nepotistic political and legal system, which some liken to a banana republic.’
‘In almost every case, these individuals say they can not risk being quoted by name, because they are genuinely afraid of being persecuted for speaking out. “The people who run this island are very powerful, and they are not answerable to any higher authority, so they can easily make life difficult for you,” says one. “Anyone who speaks out is regarded as an enemy of …..”’
‘The ease with which secrets can apparently remain hidden is a result of the intimacy which exists between the island’s political classes, business leaders and these in authority.’
‘There are no checks and balances from outside, and some of the most important work, such as choosing the chief minister, is carried out in secret. The island’s politicians, judges, policemen and business leaders are also drawn from a small pool, with many being relatives or lifelong friends.’“‘It is an excessively intimate system which doesn’t have any checks and balances ……When a problem comes up, it is often concealed. Things don’t tend to get investigated and exposed in this climate.”’
‘Just why, on a such a (sic) small and supposedly idyllic island, did so many hundreds of children end up in care homes?’
‘Some 13,000 people live – more than one in seven – live in social rental properties.’
‘The island’s wealth is largely held by the privileged few.’
‘The crumbling 1960’s council estates ….. are testament to the years of neglect.’
‘“This place is run by the finance industry for the finance industry,” says one resident. “Anyone else just doesn’t count.”’
These quotes are extracted from an article, by Gordon Rayner, published in the Daily Telegraph on Saturday, 1st March 2008.
It may all sound depressingly familiar but he was not writing about the Isle of Man but Jersey and their child care scandal.
There are clearly differences in how Peter Newbury came to abuse and murder young people in the care of the Manx authorities; but so much else of what Mr Rayner reports rings true.
He concludes his article ‘Many on the island hope that the child abuse scandal will finally force Jersey’s ruling class to get its house in order, and address the problems which, they say, it has always preferred not to discuss.’
The Manx Herald endorses those words and we hope our leaders are taking note of what is being said in the media, about Jersey, as it could so easily be applied to our island.
del.icio.us |
Digg
Email to a friend
Print version
Plain text
Comments (3 posted):
Jersey is going to see very serious repurcussions from all of this in terms of possible UK appointments of judiciary etc .. could that happen here too? We'll see won't we.
Luckily all our past little 'mishaps' appear to have been money related.
However I have to take issue with your comment concerning Peter Newbury. I have studied this case over the past five years.I have also combed through the tome produced by the commission of enquiry.
There are many reasons to doubt the safety of that conviction,and they are there in black and white.
The Judiciary here might well consider the "cardinal principle" of the law. Justice according to law demands proper evidence.By that it means not merely evidence which might be true,and to a considerable extent could probably be true,but which reaches the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
In my opinion the quality of the evidence against Peter Newbury fell far short of the standard required and was often mere speculation.The DNA evidence presented to the court would not even warrant consideration in an English court.
Further the thoughtless and slapdash manner of the procedures by which the evidence was cobbled together would be damning in any criminal court in the western world.
There is absolutley no proof that Peter Newbury was even there.
I can prove this if I could just get through to the establisment.Believe me , I have tried.
Lin Corlett
F.Inst.Pa.
Certified Paralegal.
Post your comment