Monday, 12 September 2011

Channel Television & Mick Gradwell>,,,,,,,, "Daniel Wimberley" ,

Dear CTV

The reporting of the Jersey Main Stream Media

Could you please explain to me why the 'News' of the  costs of Stuart Syvret's court cases made instant news today. You have flashed up £400,000 pounds with zero back-up information, could this be because its election time. This came up in the States of Jersey today. It came from an oral question from the disgraced Senator T. Le Main and you have jumped on it and reported it straight away.

Could you please explain to me why you have failed to report the news that a former Senior Investigating Officer of the Historic Child Abuse Investigation Mick Gradwell has been caught leaking information to Daily Mail Journalist David Rose who is a known historic child abuse denier. Thats right, you have reported nothing. Think about how serious that is. The leaking was done whilst the 'HCAE' was still live.

This was first mentioned when Deputy T Pitman asked an oral question to the Home Affairs Minister Senator Le Marquand. You can listen to the question with the link provided

Now, if it had been Lenny Harper im sure you would have splashed it everywhere. No one mentioned it, not CTV - BBC or the JEP  why is that?

Lets look at what a police consultant said about the actions of D/S Mick Gradwell. This is taken from the transcripts of the Scrutiny Sub Panels  Review into the BDO Report. 

 CTV why haven't you reported any of this? Is it because it goes against your opinion management?

You should have a duty to report an un-biased News but you fail, why is that?

What about the Abuse Survivors don't you think you have a duty of care towards them in reporting something as serious as a former SIO leaking material to a child abuse denier journalist - but you want to know about the exact price of a curry - Please Explain 

You report Nothing

You have done Nothing but trash the Child Abuse Investigation

 You splash the Syvret question all over your news within minutes of it being mentioned 


Rico Sorda

As you know there is so much more information coming out the excellent BDO Review

Managing Director, BDO Alto Limited:

Yes, just to clarify, and it is in our written submission, the material that was leaked to the newspaper was not a BDO work product.  I cannot comment on what was leaked to the media.  As again we say in our written submission, we provide you with copies of the correspondence with Home Affairs on 5th October 2009.  This matter was clearly brought to our attention.  We were concerned that anything that was related to our review was finding its way into the national media.  As I say, it was not a BDO report.  There was not an interim report at that point in time.  What appears to have been leaked were, again, some of the early drafts of some of [Police Consultant]’s work.  He might want to say something about that.


Deputy R.G Le Hérrisier:

As a result of your subsequent inquiries and your contact with Home Affairs, did you come to a considered judgment as to how it had occurred and who had done it?


Managing Director, BDO Alto Limited:

I think, when we had an opportunity to have a look at the article that had been published on the Mail on Sunday, it became clear to us what material was being quoted from.  Therefore, from our perspective, we were able to narrow down where that material had gone, but as I say it was not a BDO interim report.  It was not an interim report at all, in fact.


Police Consultant:

The circumstances of the source are as set down in my written submission.  The source was [retired D/Superintendent].  He has admitted that to me in telephone conversations.  He first telephoned me about a week or so after the article appeared.  I had already worked out that it was probably him.


Police Consultant:

I deplore what he did.  I have told him I deplore what he did.  In terms of why he did it, you would have to ask him.  He says - so what he told me - and he has repeated that in recent telephone conversations that he has made to me arising out of the establishment of this Panel that he did not give copies of my written work, but he disclosed the contents of some of them to a reporter.  It was not BDO at all.  It is not me.  It was not Wiltshire or [then Acting Police Chief].  It was [retired D/Superintendent].



voiceforchildren said...


Here is a comment on left on Stuart's site earlier.

"Here's where I'm a little confused. In 2008 you held a public meeting at the Town Hall and CTV filmed it all. When I asked why they didn't (and still haven't) broadcast ANY OF IT they told me that you were a declared candidate in the Bi-Election and it would break OFCOM regulations if they were to give you, what could be viewed as "favourable" coverage.

Firstly the nomination meeting had not yet taken place at that time so you were not "officially" a declared candidate.

Secondly how is it that now you are an "official" candidate they can have you up as their headline "news"?

Is it OK by OFCOM regulations to give "official" candidates "un-favourable" coverage but not "unofficial" candidates ANY kind of coverage? "

The public meeting in question is HERE

Channel Television certainly are starting to make a name for themselves.

Oh! by the way, the "reason" (according to CTV's "Political Reporter) they never mentioned anything about Gradwell allegedly leaking confidential data to the national "journalist" when Le Marquand mentioned it in the States is because the political reporter "didn't hear it".

Bl--dy priceless!

voiceforchildren said...



Anonymous said...

Have you had a reply from channel tv yet Rico?

rico sorda said...

No nothing