Saturday, June 18, 2011

"My Apologies To readers"

Sorry for not posting in some time but there are legal reasons for this, nothing bad I might add.

I will be resuming posting shortly.

Thank you for your patience.

In the mean time, you might like to visit the blog of Stuart Syvret
who has today released a "shocking posting" on the Jersey Police,
and Government Corruption.
Please click on the green link below for
Stuart Syvret's blog.

Sunday, March 6, 2011

"The O'bar Incident" PC Nelson - the perjury

Scene Two: The Police Arrive

SO, whilst the kicking of Graham Cousins was subsiding, our wonderful police arrive. I was pointed out to a police officer by a witness, Slim Miri (general slime ball/liar, and thief) that I was one of the assailants.

Indeed, I was one of the assailants. I punched Cousins twice at the outset of the incident OUTSIDE the nightclub, and never once denied it when questioned by the police. In fact, I told them before they had even asked me about my actions outside of the nightclub. I had punched him twice to put the filthy coward down, down so he could not pick up another lethal weapon to maim or kill his victim. This might sound a little far fetched, but kill, was a distinct possibility with a pint glass. Only good fortune by the merest few inches had stopped Glen Phillips having his Carotid artery severed, possibly suffering a stroke, or even bleeding to death. It takes just a matter of a few minutes to bleed to death when your Carotid artery is severed!

Anyhow, there I was, accused of being one of the gang who beat Graham Cousins, right in front of a police officer! What did police officer PC Nelson do? Well, nothing actually, nothing other than to tell me to “fuck off or I would be arrested”. My response was to tell him that “I was going nowhere until I had found my cross and chain” which Cousins had ripped from my neck a few minutes earlier. However, when in court, and under oath, PC Nelson denied my saying anything about my cross and chain?
I would love to quote, at this juncture, from PC Nelson’s statement; however, this is impossible as my lawyer had never provided me with a copy of it? And to this day, I have still not received a copy of it? There is a good reason for my lawyer not furnishing me with a copy, that reason is that another officer had (in court) concurred with my assertions, and had backed me up in Court by saying that he heard me saying I was going nowhere until I had found my cross and chain. A fact that the corrupt, PC Nelson had denied under oath!
Advocate Renouf asked PC Nelson “did he (Evans) mention a cross and chain to you?” PC Nelson replied “No Sir” Advocate Renouf then said “are you sure about that, sergeant, now?” PC Nelson replied “Yes Sir”. Advocate Renouf then asked “might you have forgotten what Evans said to you after the nine months that has passed since December 19th?” PC Nelson replies “No Sir, No Sir”.
PC Robert Alan De La Cour stated under oath that “Mr Evans was in dispute with another officer who was trying to get him to leave. Mr Evans, however, was concerned about a neck chain that he had lost somewhere near the front step of the O’bar.”
Advocate Renouf then asked, “who was the other officer? Can you remember?”
PC Robert Alan De La Cour stated under oath “PC Nelson, Sir”. Pc De La Cour then goes on to say “he just kept saying that he had lost a neck chain, and PC Nelson was telling him to leave and he said he was refusing to go until he found his neck chain.”
Advocate Renouf also said to PC Nelson “PC De La Cour told us that Evans was in dispute with you, and that Mr Evans was concerned about a neck chain he had lost.”
PC Nelson responds under oath that “I know nothing about a neck chain”. And again “nothing about a neck chain”.
WPC Alexandra Le Chevalier also recalled me going on about my cross and chain. Advocate Renouf asked her “did you hear Ian Evans speaking, even shouting, about the fact that he had lost a chain, a neck chain?” the WPC replied “Yes”.
Also, the head doorman, Sean Brennan, remembers the incident about the chain. He states under oath that “a grey headed policeman, dog-handler, was actually having an argument with Mr Evans”. The prosecutor then asks “can you remember what the argument was about?” Sean Brennan replies “the policeman was asking him to move back from the actual step, and he (Evans) was saying you’re not going to stitch me up for this. He also mentioned at the time that he had lost his chain, which I later recovered from just outside the O’bar”. Sean Brennan also states “I went down because Ian was actually saying he had lost his chain, he had lost his chain”. Advocate Renouf then asked “who was Ian Evans saying this to?” Sean Brennan replied “the grey haired policeman”. Advocate Renouf then said “PC Nelson, yes, I think it would be. That he had lost his chain.”
SO, what conclusions can we draw from the evidence given by PC Nelson?
For one, we know he is a complete and utter liar. Two, he has brazenly committed perjury in the Royal Court. Three, even when confronted with the fact that he might be mistaken about his recollections, he adamantly stated he was not wrong, or mistaken, about the evidence he had given.
Given these facts, his evidence should have been stricken from the proceedings, he should have been charged with perjury, and dismissed from the police force. But hey readers, this is “The Jersey Way”.

Sunday, January 30, 2011

"The O'Bar Incident" The Story

Section G, page 7 of 11

THE STORY: scene 1

As you are now aware, this epic (yet, unfinished) journey began at the O'bar nightclub in December 1995. This saga of grave and criminal assault, corruption, conspiracy, perjury, doctoring of evidence, etc etc, was initiated by one gutless coward known as Graham Cousins. Not content with the privileges he was born into, he decided through his cowardice and drunken bravery, to bring about vicissitudes that would impact on many people, and over many years. Not least of all, myself.

The story begins at the foot of page 7 in section G of the 11 page document that I wrote in prison. As will become clear, I have learned more than is written in this document, as obviously my discoveries have, over time, given a much wider picture of the events following the glassing of Glen Philips by the spineless Graham Cousins.

As we move through the story, I will update the relevant information in relation to the original letter as much has changed since it's creation. Matters take a rather sinister turn from the moment of arrival on the scene by the States of Jersey Police. That is the moment at which the conspiracy, and subsequent fit-up began.

Section G, page 8 of 11

Section G, page 9 of 11

Section G, page 10 of 11

Section G, page 11 of 11

Monday, December 27, 2010

"The O'Bar Incident" A vile corruption

The Introduction:

We now move on to what can only be described as a Government Conspiracy. A conspiracy to imprison myself for a crime I had not committed, why you may ask? would a Government collude and conspire to lock up a rather insignificant chap such as myself? The answer lies in protection, the protection of five corrupt Jersey Policemen, the same five Policemen who are described in my previous posting, "The Buchannon Affair".

Andrew Smith.
Tracy Le Neveu.
Paul Whale.
Alexander MacDowall.
Keeley Wood.

The unlawful actions, and subsequent perjury by these officers, is (in reality) the reason I was imprisoned. The many people who have been drawn into this saga since it's inception, is nothing short of fantastical. These people range across the whole spectrum of Jersey Governance, the Judiciary, Appeal Judges, Advocates, law enforcement in Jersey, law enforcement in England, members and departments of the UK Government, doctors, forensic scientists, the Judicial Greffe of both the Police & Royal courts, prison officials, and even witnesses? Notwithstanding the most important in all of this, the company called Laidler/Haswell who transcribed my trial tapes.

The saga starts at the O'Bar in Gloucester Street/Patriotic Street, at the end of 1995. A gutless coward by the name of Graham Cousins (son of Diane Cousins), who for no apparent reason, tried to pick a fight with me, and then went on to glass a friend of mine in the face causing him serious injury. Cousins then received his mandatory retribution for the vile attack on Glen Phillips by way of an assault upon himself by a number of persons.

I was blamed for repeatedly kicking Graham Cousins in the face, even though the Police knew it was not me, and I had to be convicted for this crime. Why, you ask?
Well, I had filed charges against the five officers named above, and was awaiting the outcome of the investigation into my complaints against them. The Jersey Authorities were stalling on releasing the report into my complaints, and now, were suddenly presented with a chance to blackmail me, or stitch me up and incarcerate me to deter me from my pursuance of justice over these complaints. The consequences of this little ruse are as follows.

The Jersey Police refused to take my shoes at the scene, which I had asked them to do! They also refused to take my shoes when I got a taxi, from the scene, straight to the police station!

They refused to arrest me (at the scene) despite me being named as one of the assailants! One officer even telling me to "fuck off, or I would be arrested" which was what I wanted, so I could prove my innocence.

Detective Constable David Harrison re-wrote the last page of the main prosecution witness statement by a certain David Snowdon, who D.C David Harrison later conspired with, to pervert the course of justice.

Detective Constable David Harrison later destroyed one of my statements, and then claimed that "I had not even made the statement"?

Richard Renouf (middle)

At the preliminary magistrates court hearing I was saddled with perhaps, the most incompetent either/and/or corrupt lawyer that Jersey had to offer, one Richard Renouf then of (Renouf, Lempriere & Whittaker).

When in court, we had the judge, Mr T. Sowden Q.C, questioning one of the main witnesses in a language (french) that we did not understand? and no objection from any of our lawyers?

Some "nine months later", Advocate Renouf finally submitted to me, copies of all the case statements and evidence. Why was I made to wait 9 months? and only furnished with them just before my trial?

At trial, Advocate Renouf knew I had a tape recording of a witness (Sylvia Grimmes) who had alleged a conspiracy to frame me, Advocate Renouf refused to even listen to the tape, yet then, advised me to withdraw the tape? He landed me in more trouble after refusing to contact me during an adjournment in connection with the tape, and after which I was arrested and later accused of intimidating a witness by the Attorney General, Michael Birt Q.C! Indeed, Advocate Renouf should have advised me not to speak with Sylvia Grimmes, or he should have spoke to her himself.

This tape recording was subsequently tampered with by that re-writer of statements, D.C David Harrison, who later, denied having transcribed the tape after informing me in front of Advocate Renouf, that he "HAD" transcribed it?

A (new) witness at trial, Marsha Warden, had made a very detailed statement to police, just one day earlier. In that statement, she had said that she had not seen me take part in the attack against Graham Cousins. When giving evidence the very next day, and under oath, she responded to every question put to her, that she could not remember? Bearing in mind her very detailed statement of the previous day, why could she not remember? Were the Jersey Police protecting her, as they did Sylvia Grimmes?

After (not surprisingly) being found guilty, I was up for sentence where the prosecutor (Julian Clyde-Smith) gave me a better reference than my own advocate, Advocate Renouf, and indeed, praised me for my honesty at trial.

Advocate Angela P Roscouet

After receiving a two year sentence for being stitched up, I wrote the covering letter and eleven page document and began to get some support from certain members of the Jersey Government. I was also allocated a new Lawyer, Advocate Angela P Roscouet then of (Le Gallais & Luce). This new allocation of Advocate proved to be the worst possible scenario ever as Advocate Roscouet took the largest dump on me, and possibly, on a legal aid client in Jersey history!!!

When after discovering, that D.C David Harrison had doctored the tape recording of Sylvia Grimmes, and that he had re-written the last page of the main prosecution witness statement of David Snowdon, Advocate Roscouet threatened to leave me with NO legal representation at my appeal hearing if I insisted on making police corruption an issue!!! After hearing of this, my fellow prisoners nicknamed me "Briefless in Brelade"!!!

On the morning of my appeal, and five minutes before entering the court chamber , I was presented with a letter to sign by Advocate Roscouet. This was to confirm that Advocate Roscouet would only act on my behalf if I signed the paper stating that "no mention of Police corruption would be made at the appeal" ??? What choice did I have but to sign? But I did so in front of two witnesses!

During my appeal in front of the three Q.C's from England, J. Nutting, J. Sumption and J. Collins, I was drawn to certain sections of the transcripts from which they were reading. Mr Nutting was reading things out to the court, that were NOT even in the transcripts that I possessed!!! It was on return to prison after my failed appeal that I started to look into these matters.

After some long days and nights (in my cozy little prison cell) working on my transcripts, I discovered that they had in fact, been doctored!!! I informed Advocates David Le Quesne & David Le Cornu of this discovery as they were looking into my case on behalf of the Jersey Law Society.

I eventually decided to request a trip to listen to the trial tapes (which was ok'd) at the Judicial Greffe. The Judicial Greffe at the time was one, Ian Le Marquand. I was asked to supply a list of the extracts that I wished to listen too. However, having furnished Ian Le Marquand with the list, I was then flatly refused permission for the visit to go ahead. I wonder why???

My consolation prize was for Ian Le Marquand to send me some copy tapes of my trial, which I had to accept. On listening to the tapes, I discovered that a number of sections of the oral evidence were missing from the copy tapes. This prompted me to contact a Mr K. Budding of Laidler/Haswell Ltd, the company who transcribed the original trial tapes.

Mr K. Budding checked and confirmed to me by fax, and telephone, that the transcripts were a very accurate and precise copy of the tapes with which he was supplied.
He also confirmed that he was NOT SUPPLIED WITH THE ORIGINAL TRIAL TAPES, bagged, tagged and sealed!!! BUT SECOND HAND C90 CASSETTES???
Mr Budding further instructed me that Jersey had not sent ANY ORIGINAL TAPES for the preceding 18 months!!! Strangely, this was right around the same time as the sentencing policy on drug dealers had doubled! You may draw your own conclusions on why no original tapes were sent again, but I would submit that it really doesn't take much working out, does it?

After all of my discoveries, I wrote a lengthy list of complaints against the police, judicial greffe, advocates, and others. These were taken up by an honourable Lady named Barbara Myles, the Lieutenant Bailiff, and head of the Prison Board of Visitors who was already familiar with my case. Mrs Myles set about the initiation of an investigation that was to be taken out of the hands of Jersey's corrupt Police Force.

It was decided by those unknown to me, that CI Dennis & Insp Rogers of the Avon & Somerset Constabulary would be looking into my complaints of corruption. By this time I had amassed all the evidence required to prove my innocence, and duly passed this to the two investigating officers. Many months later, as I was nearing my release date, the investigation file was submitted to the Attorney General of Jersey, Mr Michael Birt QC.

Mr Birt flatly refused me a copy of the report, and any information as to the findings of the investigation? This went on for a considerable period, and as I had been released from prison, I think it was hoped that I would forgive and forget about matters. A view that was reiterated by Advocates Le Quesne & Le Cornu who I felt were trying to influence me into letting the matter drop.

Since then, I have been informed by the Attorney General Michael Birt, that NO evidence of any wrongdoing was ever found!!! Again I requested a copy of the investigation report, and was refused. I then applied for legal aid to gain access to the report. I was allocated Advocate Peter Harris, who for a whole year, dragged his feet on the issue. The only positive from Advocate Peter Harris was the fact that we managed to obtain a letter from the Attorney General, Michael Birt QC stating that all the evidence would be saved, and that the investigation report would not be disclosed on the grounds that "IT WAS NOT IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST" !!! And we all know what that means, don't we?


Indeed, it took some time for me too work out what exactly was going on, and why? Of course, unless you have been through the Jersey system, and possess the intellect to reason out each corrupt manoeuvre made by the Jersey Authorities, you have very little chance of ever finding the answers.

This story encompasses corruption and cover-up at the highest level in Jersey. It is a damning indictment of how a parochial community band together in the face of threats of exposure to a world wide audience.

The evidence is to follow, and in great detail.

Monday, May 31, 2010

"The Buchannon Affair" the epilogue

Since finishing the "Buchannon Affair" postings, I have been pulled in the street about this blog topic by a number of members of the public, and friends and associates of Stuart Buchannon.

Most have come out with phrases like "you could really screw his employment up" and "the police will harass him now". Well, for one, I am sure that Stuart does not live in Jersey anymore, and if he does? So?

Sorry, but I just don't get it!
What Mr Stuart Buchannon did in this case was totally and utterly commendable.

These comments only serve to endorse the (climate of fear) argument that many of us in Jersey are fighting to eradicate. The fear of being honest and telling the truth, is that so bad? Just because the truth happens to be against members and employee's of the Establishment, does not make it wrong or an error of judgement.

Stuart Buchannon went against the grain, and he went against a good friend of his (Pc Andy Smith) who he knew had committed crimes against two innocents! Where is the dishonour in that?

Stuart Buchannon (through his selfless integrity) saved Paul McAvoy from his first criminal conviction for a crime he had not committed. The ramifications of Stuart's actions are imponderable as Paul may have wished to emigrate in the future, or seek employment with some company that required a clean criminal record? Did these five scumbag Jersey Police Officer's think about that when they tried to stitch Paul McAvoy up for a crime he had not committed? NO!!!

Stuart Buchannon, through his honesty and sheer human decency, also saved myself from going to prison for crimes that I had not committed. Again, did Jersey's finest think about that when they tried to stitch me up? NO!!!
All they thought about was protecting themselves and their colleagues from conviction for crimes they had committed.

So, if Stuart Buchannon is harassed by the Jersey Police, I and a number of my allies will be on it like flies on shit!

Furthermore, I would like to point out that any potential employer of Stuart Buchannon would hire him in a minute after reading this blog!!! WHY? Because any potential employer would recognise what an upstanding, honest, forthright person Stuart Buchannon is!!! What company boss would not want a workforce full of people of the calibre of Stuart Buchannon?.... Only the Jersey Establishment and Police, that I can think of.

In short, Stuart Buchannon has done nothing in this case but show us what a real man he is. To those of you who think he did the wrong thing, your judgement is truly clouded indeed.

I shall be indebted to him for all my life, and with the greatest of respect.


Monday, May 3, 2010

"The Buchannon Affair" The 'filthy rag' Reports!

So the filthy rag (jersey evening post) sticks its oar in, and gets it wrong again!
Can't even get the judges name right!
Says that, "no prosecution evidence was offered" ha ha, aaahhaahh haahaha ???
Doesn't mention the charge of assaulting a female police officer!
Doesn't make any mention of the tape recording!
Nothing about the Police perjury!
It is as though they have been complicit in hushing this case up!
Is it any wonder that the Jersey public have no idea what Stuart Syvret has been banging on about for the last 20 years!!!

"The Buchannon Affair Summary" Advocate Lakeman and the Judge

So there we have it, Police corruption to the point of committing perjury!

I will now go through matters with my Advocate and the judge, which I believe were designed to protect the five police officers from facing any charges over their crimes.

So, we are in court and four policemen have lied under oath. Pc Andy Smith, after testifying that he had never had the conversation with Stuart Buchannon, is then spoken to by the judge. The judge then says "if you never had the conversation, how is it that Mr Evans has a tape recording of it?" or words very similar.

The Centenier presenting the case, then jumps up at this point and utters that immortal line "The Police offer no evidence?" How can the police offer no evidence when they have just finished standing in the witness box and given their evidence? It was at this point that I was expecting Stuart Buchannon to appear and give his evidence, but there was no sign of Stuart, why not?

Now, here's the trick!!!
How could the judge possibly have known that I had a tape recording of Stuart Buchannon telling me what officer Smith had said? The Centenier didn't know, the police didn't know, only myself, Stuart and Advocate Lakeman knew! Stuart was not present at court, and I did not tell the judge of the existence of the tape, so it can only have been Advocate Lakeman! Further more, Lakeman must have colluded with the judge before the trial began. What kind of lawyer would do such a thing? A corrupt one.

So now we have the prosecutor wanting to throw the case out. He is wanting to do this without hearing the tape recording, or even reading a transcript of the tape recording? WHY? The judge then adjourns the case for some months? Again, WHY?
Should not the proper procedure have been to call Mr Buchannon as a witness, for him to give his evidence and to admit the tape recording as official evidence? Then to allow the policemen a chance to refute the evidence and question Mr Buchannon!

The reason for this failure (I believe) to not legally admit the evidence, was to protect the police from prosecution for perjury and conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. I think it is beyond doubt that this has been the case, if anyone can enlighten me as to any legal reason why this was not done, I am all ears.

We are now back in court, some months later. The judge then throws the case out on the grounds that he is "concerned about the length of time the case has gone on for?" He, the judge, is the one who made it go on as long as it did by adjourning it in the first place? And why, exactly, was it adjourned anyway? And for so long?
SIMPLE, that was the only way the Establishment could get themselves out of the mess they were in, and without Mr Buchannon being called as a witness against the police.

What should have happened in any lawful jurisdiction, is this. The judge should have immediately ordered a full and independent inquiry/investigation into the conduct of these police officers. The findings should then have determined whether or not myself and Paul should have been acquitted, and whether or not, the police officers should have been charged with any offences?

But truthfully, such is the lawlessness in Jersey, that this outcome was never going to be on the cards. The only real (half) apology we ever got was when we went to claim our expenses, a Mr Austin Vautier told us that "the judge was very sympathetic to our case." Obviously not sympathetic enough to do the right and lawful thing though? Which would have been to have these police officers prosecuted.

Following on,

1/ We have to ask why Advocate Lakeman would not call Stuart Buchannon as a witness?

2/ We have to ask why there was no transcript made of the tape recording?

3/ The mere fact that Advocate Lakeman states that he did not have to see Stuart Buchannon, is indicative of a cover-up. No statement taken from Mr Buchannon, why ever not? This has to be unprecedented in legal circles?

4/ We have to ask why the judge did not insist Mr Buchannon testified?

5/ Why did the judge adjourn the case for months?

6/ Why did the judge not sanction any investigation into the police?

7/ The fact that Stuart Buchannon had never even attended court shows that the Jersey Authorities had already decided the outcome of this trial, well in advance of it beginning!

The Attorney General (on my complaints)

1a/ The A.G, Mr M. Birt QC states of my complaints that....
"you duly made a complaint against the police alleging verbal abuse, a number of assaults and wrongful arrest."

1b/ I also made complaint of four counts of perjury and five counts of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice!!! Why does the A.G not make any mention of these facts when whitewashing my complaints, for the second time???

2a/ He then goes on to say "The matter was investigated by Inspector Upton, who prepared a report for my consideration. I concluded that there were no grounds for instituting criminal proceedings against any of the officers concerned."

2b/ So, we can conclude from the Attorney General's findings....

That Stuart Buchannon was lying?
That officer A. Smith never had the conversation with Mr Buchannon?
That four police officers never perjured themselves?
That five police officers never conspired to pervert the course of justice?
That five police officers never lied in their statements?
That I was not assaulted?
That myself or Paul were not unlawfully imprisoned?
That we were not maliciously prosecuted?
That the Centenier had, in fact, let two criminals off the hook?
That the judge was utterly incompetent in letting us off?
That the judge was wholly wrong to tell Mr Austin Vautier that he had sympathy for our case?
That we have in fact, illegally claimed expenses, and indeed, been granted those expenses?


"My Thoughts On Tape 3"

This tape transcript highlights another identical case and reinforces the facts that are now obviously clear.

Page One

1/ Stuart says "I've not said you've threatened me, I've already been asked by the police, if you've threatened me, I says, there's been no threats handed out."

Page Three

1/ S. Comer says "It happened with me with the coppers. They stand up first and deny ever having the conversation, then the tape gets produced and then Martin Stokes has, well he had to put in a sworn statement in then, saying that they did have the conversation."

Page Five

1/ Stuart says "At the end of the day, I can't deny it Ian, if its on tape."

2/ I then said "I just want the truth Stuart, nothing else. You don't need to stand there lying for me and saying things he never said. I just want the truth, what you told me on two occasions."

Sunday, April 25, 2010

"The Buchannon Affair" tape 3

This tape confirms the Police conspiracy against myself but also highlights another (identical) case wherein the Jersey Police employ the same methods to gain an unlawful conviction through lies that were told by the police.
This other case was dealt with on appeal by P. Bailhache in the Royal Court. The plaintiff (after paying for his own lawyer) was acquitted, and the Policemen involved, received NO PUNISHMENT for their conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, and their fabrication of evidence. Just another Jersey Tale? Tape 3 is also integrated into the player in the top right hand corner of this blogs home page, just click fast forward twice.

Friday, April 16, 2010

"My Thoughts On Tape 2"

My Advocate, Christopher Lakeman, is now in possession of the first tape recording, and matters are beginning to look a little suspect. I will elaborate more as we go through the transcript of this tape, as the actions of my lawyer begin to make me feel uneasy.

Advocate Lakeman told me (immediately after listening to tape one) that there was a very good chance that I would still be found guilty? What did he know that I did not? This tape was gold dust, one could not have wished for better evidence yet my own Advocate is implying that it is virtually useless! What bizarre behaviour for your own Advocate to display, but I suspected there would be a huge cover-up to protect the bent coppers that had lied under oath.


1/ I said to Stuart "did he (advocate Lakeman) give you a transcript of the tape?"
Stuart said "no, he never gave me the transcript." I then asked "why not?"

The answer was obvious though, Advocate Lakeman had no intention of making a transcript, and never did make one. I believe that (even at this early stage) the case was already destined to be swept under the carpet. I will wager that the second I left his office, he was onto his buddies at the law officers department.


1/ I said, "my brief never told them (the police) anything that was on the tape."
I should have cottoned on at this juncture that something was badly awry, but I didn't.

2/ Stuart then says "and your lawyer says the tape can't be played in court, it's something to do with Jersey Law."
Something to do with Jersey Law? If the tape cannot be played in court, how do we know that the tape even exists? I never cottoned on to this little stunt either! not admitting the tape as evidence.


1/ Stuart says "your lawyer says to me, has there been any threats? and I says no, there's never been threats."
This statement had me worried as I had already heard rumours that people were saying Stuart had been threatened into making the tapes! The only way now, that the police could cover up this little inconvenience.


1/ Stuart then says "well at the end of the day, I would say somebody is trying to stir the shit then Ian."
Damn straight Stuart, and we can guess who!

2/ Stuart says "If there is any threats, I'll be honest, I'll go straight to the police about it Ian. Cos I've, I've going to court cos I've been tricked, and at the end of the day, I am going to court too tell the truth."
I would say that this statement is proof enough that Mr Buchannon was not threatened, and that the conspiracy by the police is genuine.


1/ By now, I had twigged what was going on and asked Stuart the following question.
"How many times have the coppers asked you?"
Stuarts reply was "If Ive been threatened"
How did Stuart know what I meant by the last question?

2/ Stuart says that a Sergeant asked him "have there been any threats?"
Stuart then replies "to be quite honest, NO."


1/ Stuart then repeats (after being asked again) "there's been no threats to me, my family or friends, any shit like that."
Then the Sergeant asks him yet again! "are you sure."
Stuart replies "I'm a hundred percent sure."
The deaf/corrupt Sergeant, then tells Stuart "well, an Inspector will get in touch with you about that?"
I hope you readers understand now, the depths that the Jersey Police will sink to to prosecute me, or to save themselves.

2/ Our corrupt Sergeant then persists "an Inspector would be in touch within the next day or two."
Clearly, the Jersey Police have already got their plan of action worked out. That plan is to get Stuart Buchannon to say that I threatened him into making the tapes and that he complied under extreme duress. They would then be in a position to get themselves out of the crap they were in, and prefer more charges against myself!!! Yes, I would have been charged with many more offences, perverting the course of justice, to name but one.
They were even prepared to make an Inspector complicit in this web of corruption and conspiracy, how else would our corrupt Sergeant know that an Inspector wanted to talk to Stuart?

The one, single, tiny detail that buggered up their entire corrupt little charade, was this!

3/ Stuart goes on to say "Andy Smith told me this, one night erm, what/whats been said on tape is what I've been told, and your lawyer says he will prompt me on a few things."
He might well have prompted you Stuart, but he knew you would never get to court!


1/ I ask Stuart if my lawyer took a statement off him, Stuart replies,
"NO, he says he didn't actually have to see me."
Can any sane person be asked to believe that a lawyer would not want to see a witness who corroborates the assertions of his client, especially against the word of five police officers ?????
Of course Lakeman is up to his eyeballs in this conspiracy, how the hell could he not be?

I think the evidence really does speak for itself, especially in this case, total corruption!!!

"The Buchannon Affair" tape 2

Our next tape (tape 2) and set of transcripts 2, deals with the even more disgusting manner in which the Jersey Police try to encumber their victims. In tape 2, I will demonstrate how the Establishment try to cover up their lawless behaviour by trying to "fit the victim up" with even more charges! Not possible you think! over the top you think! well, just listen and read and be astounded....IT HAPPENS.

Tape two is integrated into the tape one player, top right hand corner of the home page. Too play tape one, click play. Too play tape two, click the fast forward button and it will play automatically.

Thursday, April 15, 2010

"The Buchannon Affair" transcript of tape 2

"My Thoughts On Tape 1"

Let us look now at some of the aspects of tape 1.


1/ Mr Buchannon states that Pc Smith says that "some woman copper had wound you up" and "she was out of order winding you up" this is as I told the story from day one.

2/ How is it that Mr Buchannon knew the Christian name of the Wpc? I only prompted him on the surname, so it is clear that Mr Buchannon must have had the conversation with Pc Smith!

3/ "Basically, you were minding your own business at the time/or you were ready to fuck off on your own without causing any grief." This is exactly how it was.

4/ "you know what they're like though, they all fuckin close ranks straight away." This is so true, and is eventually, exactly what happened.


1/ He says "I think I get on alright with Ian" he says "I felt a right cunt being there." A true statement of guilt, if ever I heard one.

2/ "I knew him before he joined the Pozzies." This is an important part of the recording, because officer Smith stated in court "that he was not friends with Mr Buchannon."?

3/ "he would never give anything up, nor give anything away." Mr Buchannon, you know him, and the police, so well!

4/ He says "they was out of order, what was done, yeah" he says "it was fuckin naughty/definitely/without a doubt." Mr Buchannon then goes on to say "getting him to say that in a courtroom is another fuckin ball game." It sure is Stuart, as matters proved!

5/ I then said "I'm not pleading guilty to something I haven't done." NO, too much of that in the past as readers are fully aware.


1/ "they had to fucking nick you for something, didn't they." Yes, that was the only way that they could cover themselves, how very sad it was too.

2/ Andy says "they had to nick you that night, for something." He just says "Oh, I knew everybody had to nick him."

3/ Stuart then says "being a copper he'll lie in court." This guy really does know the Jersey Police inside out, wow.


1/ "Your joking, and he got nicked for that?" and "Oh, that's a fuckin joke" and "can't believe, that's fuckin bang out of order." As you rightly remark Mr Buchannon, it certainly was bang out of order!!!

All things said and done, I think this tape speaks volumes about the Jersey Police and the disgusting manner in which they stitch people up like the proverbial kipper. Rest assured people, this is no one-off case. This happens day in, day out in Jersey, it is known locally as "The Jersey Way"....

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

"The Buchannon Affair" tape1

So, here we have the first of three tape recordings in this case. All that I have said in the eleven page document is true, these tapes go some way to giving my assertions credibility.
I hope that my readers will now begin to understand the utter lies and corruption that The States of Jersey Police employ. It only gets worse from here on in, so be prepared for a few shocks. This is just the start.


Monday, April 12, 2010

"The Buchannon Affair" transcript of tape 1

"The Buchannon Affair" summary of transcript 1

There has been an assertion from our wonderful Policemen at Rouge Bouillon Police Headquarters.
This assertion centres around their speculation that I had threatened and bullied Stuart Buchannon into these tape recordings, and forced him to comply with my wishes to frame the police officers concerned.
So, let us look at (and dissect) the evidence that is on offer.

1/ How could I possibly know that Stuart Buchannon's best friend (Pc Andy Smith) was an officer involved in this case, indeed, how could I even know that they were friends?

2/ The only reason that I knew Mr Buchannon was pals with Pc Andy Smith is the fact that both parties must have talked about the case, otherwise, Mr Buchannon would have never approached me in the first instance?

That is enough for now, we shall revisit later.

I must add however, that I transcribed these tapes whilst in prison, and with very poor equipment. This transcription is (under the circumstances) a very accurate representation of what was said on the tape.

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

"PC Andrew Smith Statement" page 4

Phew! that is all the police lies (err, statements) now taken care of.

How about some real, impartial, honest to goodness truth now? That would be a most welcome change wouldn't it?

So, let us see what we can conjure up shall we?....

"PC Andrew Smith Statement" page 3

I was then bundled into the police van,

"along with McAvoy who was calm and was in no way aggressive."

What a truly strange thing to say about Paul, if he was so calm and well behaved, why was he arrested?

Because he was also a witness, that's why! They had to arrest and charge him so too deter him from backing me up that I had been punched and sworn at, by an out of order Wpc Le Neveu. It's another filthy little police shit trick that usually works. I will demonstrate this little ruse in a future case, it keeps potential defence witnesses from testifying in court.

"PC Andrew Smith Statement" page 2

"Evans then walked directly towards the male pushing Wpc Le Neveu with his body. Wpc Le Neveu told Evans to leave the area but Evans ignored her and just walked into Wpc Le Neveu again. Evans was verbally abusive to Wpc Le Neveu and shouted that she had assaulted him."
Please note the way Pc Smith and Co keep referring to the alleged (body pushes). Any psychiatrist worth a nickel would tell you that the constant references to this point are all indicative of rehearsed conspiracy. Far to accurately described by all policemen concerned, and indeed, the only point accurately described.
I am not wasting any more time on this page, as the lies of Pc Andy Smith will be made as clear as crystal very shortly.

"PC Andrew Smith Statement" page 1

"On our arrival one male was seen walking very quickly up to Wpc's Le Neveu and Wood being pursued by Ian Evans."

That is now, all the other officers who totally refute the evidence given by Wpc Wood, that she radioed for assistance. If she had radioed, the other officers would have stated that they were responding to a call for assistance!

The woman is an out and out LIAR.

"SGT Charles MacDowall Statement" page 5

Ha Ha Ha....
"Evans remained abusive and aggressive throughout the detention process."

Now where have we heard that before, OH YES, in every statement ever compiled by the utterly maleficent States of Jersey Police.

I would like to point out at this stage, the little scribbles and arrows in these statements where not made by me. They were made by an Advocate called Ashley Hoy, who I was going to privately pay to represent me. This was because of the absolutely appalling service that I had received from previous Advocates under the Legal Aid System in Jersey.

Mr Hoy listened to the tape recordings of Mr Buchannon and myself, then set about making points of reference on the statements. He described these statements to me as "utter nonsense, not fit to be put to a Court of Law."

He then, shortly afterwards, refused to represent me saying that I should go with Legal Aid as I could not lose my case. I didn't lose. So, my next question was, if I could not lose, why is this Advocate unwilling to represent me?
It crossed my mind that perhaps Mr Hoy may have telephoned the Legal Aid office to inform them they had a man who was going to win his case, coming to them. This is not a statement of fact, it is just my thoughts on the matter, nothing more.
My eventual Advocate however, was the corrupt Christopher Lakeman, an Establishment Man of Loyal Pedigree. Matters will become clearer as we progress through this case.
Ha Ha the laughing policeman.

"SGT Charles MacDowall Statement" page 4

Ha Ha Ha....

"Evans remained extremely aggressive and abusive referring to me as a little prick."

Well Sgt MacDowall, you got that spot on, "A Little Prick." The first and only time in the entirety of your statement, you have spoken the truth, well done.
The rest of this page is taken up with MacDowall's lies about me threatening to get his wife and kids. The same wife and kids that I didn't even know existed???
Please see 11 page document for the details of this little charade.
Ha Ha Ha....

"SGT Charles MacDowall Statement" page 3

Ha Ha Ha....

More of the the same wall etchings on this page, "physical strength and violent behaviour" and "eventually after a violent struggle".

How come the only person to ever get injured in these violent struggles, is me???

"McEvoy started to interfere with the arrest of the first man."

Again, how did he interfere? what was said? what was done?

MacDowall then goes on to say...."McEvoy was in a drunken condition."

Paul (is the same size and build as myself) and did not like to drink more than three or four pints in one night, and on this occasion, did not. His favorite tipple was (fresh) Britvic Orange with lots of ice.

Anyone who knows Paul McEvoy will tell you that he never gets drunk!!!!!

Ha Ha Ha....

"SGT Charles MacDowall Statement" page 2

Ha Ha Ha....

"I could hear, and see Wpc Le Neveu tell this person to refrain from making use of foul and disgusting language."

If that is the case, why the hell does Le Neveu not mention this factor anywhere in her statement???
Now we have more of those "police station wall etchings" and I quote "I noticed by his demeanor that he was in a drunken condition" and "his breath smelt of intoxicants" and "his eyes were glazed" and "his speech was slurred". When will these imbeciles stop using this nonsensical garbage, it just beggars belief. This crap, is in every statement ever recorded by The States Jersey Police where even the slightest amount of drink is apparent.
"I then told this person to be quiet and to leave the area, or he would be arrested, to which he shouted in reply "fuck off".
Well now, why does no one else say this in their statements???
Ha Ha Ha....

"SGT Charles MacDowall Statement" page 1

Ha Ha Ha.... it's the turn of the (laughing policeman) as I call him.

This is the guy that I described as "twisted and sick" in the eleven page document. You will soon see why!
"was on mobile patrol, when on driving into Minden Place, my attention was drawn to an incident."
Nothing to do with the support that Wpc Keeley Wood had radioed for then??? That is now, 3 out of the 4 officers in this case that do not mention any call for assistance? ODD!
"I saw Wpc Le Neveu being confronted by a man who was physically walking into the officer by barging into the officer and thrusting his upper body into her's."
Ha Ha Ha, "and thrusting his upper body into her's" the exact same horse crap that Le Neveu wrote, word for bloody word. Do you think this clown had perhaps, conspired with Wpc Le Neveu? His statement was written after that of Le Neveu! No surprises there then.
"I approached this person, and as I did so I could hear this man shouting, most of what I could hear consisted of foul and disgusting language, and much of the abusive language appeared to be directed at the female officer, although there were a number of members of the public close by."
Well, what was said? tell us something, anything, anything at all!!! NOPE, NOT A DICKIE...
As for the members of the public close by, why were no statements taken from them?
Ha Ha Ha....

"PC Paul Whale Statement" page 4

Again, the mandatory "cracker barrel" nonsense on this page.

Evans was swearing, Evans was abusive, Evans was struggling, Evans was threatening all officer's,
Evans was the devil incarnate.

"I took no further part in this investigation."

OH YES YOU DID WHALE, when you perjured yourself in a court of law and attempted to get me throw in jail for crimes that I had not committed!!!
"What goes around, comes around." Or had no one told you this?