Wednesday, 2 February 2011

Question 17. In the States on the 01/02/11.

17. The Deputy of St. Martin will ask the following question of the Chief Minister –

“Following the Chief Minister’s written answers on 18th January 2011, will he advise the actual date Mr Napier was instructed to withdraw part (d) of the Terms of Reference and, given the Affidavit’s significance to the suspension of the former Chief Police Officer explain why neither he nor the Deputy of St Martin who were supposed to have oversight of the review were consulted before the decision was taken?”


rico sorda said...

Great Stuff TJW

Keep going with this. Its a very big help


voiceforchildren said...


Just how long are the people of Jersey going to tolerate this cover up and corruption? That is one bumbling Chief Minister the historians are going to have plenty to write about. This audio is very revealing thanks for putting it up.

Anonymous said...

Of course it wasn't relevant to interview some witnesses in Mr Power's affidavit, as it was no longer within the terms of reference.

If we are to believe what TLS is trying to effectively allude to, that Mr Napier could have interviewed anyone, without term(d) in the remit, why did Mr Napier not interview a couple of people who would have been able to back up Mr Power's account of events that were contradicted by some others interviewed, which made it impossible for Mr Napier to know who was being truthful.

In fact if Mr Napier had done so and made reference to any such interview in his report, surely the Jersey legal oversight would have had such sections removed on the very basis that it was not part of the remit!.