The Sun's Vicar Headlines

Did you see the Sun having a field day on that dishonest clergyman, using their usual baby language, they had it as headlines, I don't think the Daily Mail did, but I found the Daily Mail version.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4669474/Vicar-63-stole-14-500-heeled-parishioners.html

Normally I wouldn't indulge the rag papers using something like this to sell papers or as scandal but I just wanted to point something out.

The Church of England have a secret apartheide policy against the vulnerable. for insurance purposes, to protect the clergy and to protect the vulnerable. They treat the vulnerable as a liability and a risk. 

But they do not have a matching policy to protect the vulnerable against their clergy.

The Church-led National CSA Inquiry

Dear Home Secretary,

I am writing to talk about the National CSA Inquiry, and the mess it has got into. I am sure you receive a lot of correspondence about it.

My letter to you is about the Church of England involvement in the CSA inquiry.

Both Baroness Butler-Sloss and Fiona Woold were not neutral, not just because of their connections in politics and law, but also because they were both Church of England positions holders. Baroness Butler-Sloss was famously a Church position holder and tried to avert the misconducts of a Bishop reaching public knowledge, but Fiona Woolf, as well as being in public office, was also a church position holder, and was on the PPC of a church. Now while some may count that as insignificant, I don't believe it is, especially not after Paul Butler. the Church of England's PR guy, started shouting in the press about the CSA inquiry. It really made me think.

The Church of England remain unable to deal with Safeguarding as they are still in the dark ages where abuse was pretty much a 'perk of the job'. I am sorry if that offends you as I realise that you are a Vicar's daughter and you may well have a bias to the church that will enable them to elect yet another of their own to lead the inquiry, but the thing is, that will not be an effective inquiry if you do, because the Church have done great wrong and a huge amount of institutional and serious abuse is their responsibility, which is why they should not be allowed to influence the CSA inquiry.

Undoubtedly you have heard of Kendal House and the horrific abuse that was carried out there, and as yet there has been no justice and no apology to victims, from the Church of England, who ran Kendal House, and it has had effects on generations of Kendal House survivors.

I also do not want the Kendal House victims to be further used as I have been, I was used for a PR stunt by the church, who seemed to be desparate to claim that they are good at safeguarding, and yet they publicly 'apologized' to me in the press, didn't bother to personally apologized, lied that they did, and spewed my private life all over the press which led to a smear campaign by my abusers' supporters and the wrongdoers who covered up for the abuse at my expense and vilified me.

As yet, nothing has been done about this and I remain anguished, unheard and living in fear because of the church and press vilifying me and leaving me driven from one community and another.

This would be catastrophic for Kenday House Survivors if they are allowed to be treated the same as I have been. 

So, your inquiry, much as you may love the Church of England, needs to be independently led, not led by a Church position holder, because the extent of the church's past and continuing cover up and harm to victims does need to be seen, and as they still can't handle safeguarding but have continued relentlessly to harm me, they should not lead the inquiry, they should be being investigated from the outside either through the inquiry or through an independent body.

I am absolutely sure that Paul Butler or Justin Welby can and will do a PR stunt apology to Kendal House, and make a lot of noise about caring, and probably needlessly defame me as they did in a recent church times article, but public lavish showing off won't change the reality of the horrendous culture of the Church of England, which is a club where government and society condone and pay for these wealthy old people to throw their weight about, influence the press and abuse their power, the CofE most of the time forgets Jesus teaching and example. Jesus lived simply, homeless, dependent on others, and without the affectation and propaganda that the church spew into the press to cover for themselves.

I live simply and in poverty, the church took my career and home from me and I sleep on a mattress and look in bins and will never be able to have quality of life due to what the church have done to me. They are the modern day pharisees and they do not look after children or the vulnerable, in fact they have a very very discriminatory policy against the vulnerable and they call that 'safeguarding' and they actually believe themselves.

sincerely,

St. Saviour, staying with the churchwarden, part 2

This is so painful that I don't want to write it at all, but I guess I have to. That time with the churchwarden and his wife was the most damaging time of my life since I was 12 years old. More damaging that George and Jill Lihou.
This song always reminded me of the churchwarden's wife, she used to work for Victoria college as a teacher, and when I knew her she still worked there part time, her husband and sons went to Victoria college, and she seemed to have an obsession with Victoria college pupils, a 'fixation' to quote the expression that Jersey police abuse constantly. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcOxhH8N3Bo
The churchwarden's wife talked all the time about Victoria college students and people who used to be students, and I remember her saying about how she belonged to a Union, that she said was very expensive but she needed to, in case a boy accused her of abuse. Which was very strange. A bit like the comment she made about the churchwarden's CRB check.

• As I said in the previous statements, from the songs, and that row where the wife was shouting at the churchwarden, things were not ok from the start. Normally she went along with the ancient Christian traditions in Jersey and did as he wanted, but she was not a happy woman. And she was not a happy woman before I was there, but I didn't know that.
• I am going to jump ahead here and correct the Korris report again before I forget. I didn't move out in spring 2008 because the relationship failed, which is what I think Korris wrote, I moved out because I found lodgings as agreed, I found a room through Jersey insight and I moved there, the churchwarden always went on about me coming back for supper every night when I moved out, but that was not what his wife or I wanted, and I needed space and wouldn't come back for Sunday lunch when I was put under pressure to, because, just as the Lihous did, the churchwarden and his wife decided, without consulting me, when I would come for dinner and did not take my own plans into account - isn't it stunning that safeguarding prefer to waste time villifying me and never deal with this church attitude to the vulnerable?!! This attitude that damaged me throughout my time in the church of England!
• Ok, lets go through some scary stuff that I don't want to remember. OK, gonna tell you a bit of what it was like there, now working from some of the statements made to police and Diocese, and when these things were happening, I didn't really know they were wrong, Philip LeClaire told me, and Philip did a great thing in teaching me about boundaries in that way, because he has prevented me from being abused a number of times since because he told me what people like the churchwarden shouldn't do. Funny isn't it, a Catholic doing the church of england's work for them!

A statement written in 2008, one of many:

• The churchwarden always sat on the sofa with me next to him when we sat in the lounge, The churchwarden’s wife always sat in a chair. I sometimes wondered if this was right, but this seemed to be the routine, this was how it was arranged, this is where I was sat. The churchwarden’s wife would go to her chair when she put the telly on, The churchwarden would beckon me to sit with him if he was there, or I would sit in the middle of the sofa and The churchwarden would sit next to me. Sometimes The churchwarden’s wife would sit on the end of the sofa, and  I would rest against her when The churchwarden wasn’t there,but we were never really at ease, we were making an effort to be ok, but when The churchwarden got back he would sit down and I would cuddle up  to daddy.
• Once when The churchwarden’s wife was going mad about me for an unknown reason, I wrote her a letter and went through possible problems, I asked if it was causing a problem, me sitting with The churchwarden, and told her to say so or tip me off the sofa if she wanted to sit with The churchwarden, but there was no response to that, and it just seemed to be the way things were. She always put the telly on first and went to her chair though, so the rest of us went to the sofa.
• The churchwarden’s wife used to just be cross and not talk about things.

• The churchwarden would cuddle me when I sat with him, apart from the times that I wouldn’t let him, when he was really upsetting me, for example, when he spoke to the Vicar's wife about me. The churchwarden’s wife quite surprisingly tried to push me to hug The churchwarden that time, I was distressed for a long time over that.
• 
  
• The churchwarden didn’t misbehave while The churchwarden’s wife was in the room, but if she went out of the room, he could be naughty, The churchwarden’s hands would slide down my back to my bottom and sometimes he slapped my bottom but only gently, and he put his hands up the back of my teeshirt and stroke my back, which could be a bit worrying, he said he preferred me to wear a teeshirt when he was cuddling me, rather than a jumper, and he preferred me not to be wrapped up in my blanket that I liked to be wrapped in when I was on the sofa. He said so.
• 
  
• I never touched The churchwarden sexually or invited sexuality.
• 
  
• Sometimes when he held me close it seemed like he was aroused and he was quite shaky and breathing hard, one time he felt definitely aroused and I was a bit shocked, he held me very close and kissed my lips, he wanted to hold onto me, but I let go.
• And he could get quite flustered and start breathing more heavily when I was sitting with him, I would move away from him, daddy is a man after all.
• ‘Daddy is embarrased’, the first time he was holding me and that happened, in the early days of the friendship,  I said to him ‘you are blushing’, he said ‘yes, I probably am’,
• I went outside in the garden, told him ‘have some time to calm down’.
• He told me he didn’t normally hug 26 year old girls.
• It haunts me that I should have realised this was all wrong and put a stop to it, but I believed in God and believed the churchwarden when he said God had sent me to them, I wanted so much to belong to a family! I acted in blind faith by allowing this to happen, which shows how dangerous the church can be. 13/06/2014

• The churchwarden made a big thing of hating sexual immorality, but he was misbehaving with me.
• Did I talk about sexuality?
• The churchwarden’s wife: ‘There’s a very randy blackbird in the garden’.
• Me: ‘mummies don’t know words like that’.
• Just normal teasing, I don’t think I was being very naughty saying that.
• The same when The churchwarden’s wife was laughing a lot about someone on television talking about someone  sucking someone off. ‘mummy you’re not meant to laugh, they are saying rude things’.
• The churchwarden’s wife said her boys would have said ‘mother, what do you know’, but I don’t know what that means.
• (The churchwarden and his wife used to watch the Jonathan Ross Show, which is quite perverse and lewd show, it surprised me that they watched it and found it funny, I was reminded of George and Jill calling my Buffy programmes evil, I am not prude but the Jonathan Ross show was a bit sick)13/06/2014
• And when The churchwarden and The churchwarden’s wife were being naughty together in the kitchen while I was finishing my breakfast, I called them geriatric teenagers, The churchwarden’s wife changed that to ‘we’re Recycled teenagers’. I always looked the other way or put my hand to shield my eyes when they were touching and kissing and slapping each other because I was shy and unsure that I should be there, they were much more physical with each other than my other friends.
• I didn’t think I was being too cheeky.

• I think The churchwarden talking about sex had a bad effect on me, but if I was with JM or my other friends, we would be able to joke about things like what I said above, without it being serious or me being a bad girl.
• And when The churchwarden asked about my sexuality, I told him I was normal and and able to deal with my sexuality, maybe I shouldn’t have told him anything. Reality being that I am not really mature enough to have a sexual relationship or even be interested in one 13/06/2014
• One time when things were bad he said to me, ‘you’re not feeling yourself at the moment are you?’, then he said with a grin ‘you do feel yourself though don’t you?’
• ‘Not at the moment I dont’. I told him. I was a bit revolted by that.
• Fortunately, though The churchwarden was naughty, he didn’t rape me, or expose himself or commit a serious sexual assault or ask for a sexual favour, I guess he probably improved his sexual experiences  by being naughty with me though. And if the relationship had continued, he may well have got worse, which is terrible because he called himself my Daddy and made me into a little dependent child 13/06/2014

• He did say something about cuddling me all night once, but he never would have because he had to be in his room with his wife all night.
• When I asked The churchwarden’s wife about calling me a burden she said that she was just worried that I would have lost my independence by living with them, that never made sense to me, she said she thought I wouldn’t be able to look after myself any more, but I have always looked after myself, and that is nothing to do with being a burden.
• Remember what I have written below was written in 2008, when I was in a terrible state from being regressed and abused 13/06/2014
• The churchwarden’s wife and The churchwarden did spend a lot of time helping me, and I do feel incredibly bad that things have gone so wrong and I am making a complaint against them, I hate myself because of what they did to me, because of all my faults that The churchwarden’s wife pointed out and every bad thing she said about me and everything I got wrong and reacted badly to and everything The churchwarden did to me and that I couldn’t break away from them because I loved them and this complaint and all the anger I have shown to them in letters,emails, phonecalls etc etc, I am devastated by it all and I cant even call myself a Christian or a believer or even a worthwhile human being any more.
• When The churchwarden phoned the people that I did work experience with without my permission and I was angry and embarrassed , I refused to let him tell me what they had said. The churchwarden’s wife chased me up the stairs shouting at me for it, I never heard what she said because I was screaming in terror and distress, I hid in my room and locked the door.
• This was the farm work, I had forgotten about the churchwarden's wife chasing me and yelling. 13/06/2014

• It was shortly after this that The churchwarden’s wife and The churchwarden were having a loud conversation late at night, The churchwarden’s wife was saying she wanted me gone, I was very upset, I went to their door and knocked on the door and I was so distressed. ‘Daddy, Daddy’. The churchwarden’s wife kept talking but I couldn’t hear her, The churchwarden came and sat with me and I told him I knew The churchwarden’s wife didn’t want me in her family because I wasn’t good enough, I knew she didn’t want me, but The churchwarden said I was ‘daughter’ and part of the family, I never really found my place in the family though, in the beginning The churchwarden proudly told people I was his adoptive daughter, and even The churchwarden’s wife said it a few times, but then The churchwarden’s wife put pressure for me not to be daughter, to be like a daughter, but she deliberately left the like a daughter out of things that she invited her daughter in law ‘like a daughter ‘to . I never recovered from being strategically got rid of, I went on hurting, and The churchwarden’s wife got angry with me for crying for being excluded, I was telling The churchwarden how I was hurting and what was the way forward, and The churchwarden’s wife was shouting why was I going over it all again, but they didn’t help me to understand and come to terms with being ‘got rid of’ I was really got rid of when I refused to accept guidlines from The churchwarden and I said that he’d misbehaved. But I went on struggling to save the friendship.

Now here are safeguarding issues that the church of england refuse to even look at but prefer to villify me, why exactly was I repeatedly taken over and abused and belittled by people who refused to be responsible for their actions and the consequences and resolving issuesand instead of having my concerns investigated, I was villified by the church?  Why does the church consider the repeated irresponsibility of it's officers to be just a case of me being mad and bad? When will the church understand what psychological damage looks like? 13/06/2014

• The friendship ended on a day when The churchwarden’s wife had been making a fuss of me and I couldn’t respond because things weren’t ok and I couldn’t stop crying.
• The churchwarden told me that The churchwarden’s wife didn’t like me, it wasn’t the first time he had said that, but he told me she was pretending to like me because she was a ‘good christian’, I wanted to go back to The churchwarden and The churchwarden’s wifes house and talk things through, I told him I was hurting unbearably because he had said that he was daddy and now he wasn’t daddy any more, he told me his wife didn’t like me. He walked away, this is how the whole relationship had been, I took all the responsibility and all the blame, I knew it was over then, The churchwarden had just done what he did all the time, saying devastating things and walking away.
• I spent some weeks just hurting, then I decided I had to do something because of what The churchwarden had done, what The churchwarden and The churchwarden’s wife did between them to damage me emotionally has got very mixed up with what The churchwarden did sexually, and I am a bit confused now. Written in 2008, I was confused, being regressed and adopted but not adopted, and being abused and called a burden did so much harm.
• And I feel terrible about everything, I feel like the worst person in the world for all of this.
• I am hurting a lot, I don’t seem to recover at all, I wanted to belong, I dint want to be sexual, I didn’t want to be criminalised. I don’t want the churchwarden couple to keep phoning my friends and slandering me to them. They were in touch with Juliet before Bob Key had my permission to contact her. So was Bob Key. JM told me this. 13/06/2014

2007 Jersey church

St. Aubin's harbour, where the churchwarden had his boat, we went out on the boat and he talked about sex. The church never warned me that he had a history of inappropriate behaviour.


When I first moved to the Island, I was working on a Sunday.
This made church difficult, so my only options were early morning and evening services.

I always liked 8am communion as it was simple and quiet, this is still the case.
So I started to go to 8am communion at the church down the road from me, which co-incidentally was Phil and Heather Warren's church, but I had no wish to tell them who I was as I wanted no further association with the Lihous at the time. I was very wounded by the Lihous.
I also went to 8am communion at St. Ouens, and later the churchwarden laughed as I continued to go to various 8am communions, and he said another lady in church did this too, 'going round the churches', she, incidentally, was also disabled and also treated badly in church.

Right from the start, I would sit out on the rocks and watch the sunset at Corbiere.

Anyway, so I went to 8am communion at my local church and at the church near work, and then rushed to get to work.

I wanted a local church as my main church, but St. Ouens and the church up the road didn't have an evening service at the time, and my landlord suggested St. Andrews, as his and his partner's friends, the Viberts, went there, and my employers family were also staunch members of that church and financially blessed it as well.
So I guess it was a foregone conclusion, there was no doubt from the start that this was the church I was to go to, and it was indeed one of the churches from my dream before I moved to Jersey, a prophetic dream that showed St. Andrews and St. matthews.

I recoil and the word 'prophetic' now, because in Jersey it was a word that was abused to manipulate people very heavily, and I know prophecy is real but I have been sickened by it being abused, faked and used to make people do things that they shouldn't.

An extreme example is a man who needed to walk with sticks, being told to put his sticks down and walk without them as a 'prophetic' expression of faith, he remained needing his sticks and made to feel he had failed, I was subjected to the same by the same people, in a milder form, told to 'make a prophetic step forward' literally, and 'leave the past' ie the abuse and St. Andrews, behind.

As anyone will realise as they read this, real life is not about suddenly leaving your distress or disability behind in this way, and it is wrong and harmful for this to be done.
-And these same people made me out to be mad!

The affect of this constant spiritual abuse in Jersey as well as the sexual and emotional abuse from the churchwarden, was catastrophic, I was fragile, having grown up with severe spiritual abuse, and Jersey was the last straw for me.



Anyway, so, I went to an evening service at St. Andrews.
I walked in and took a pew at the side, the evening service was small, very small, and was strange, not your normal church service, it had a strange atmosphere and I was not sure about it.

The people I came to think of as 'the fanatics' were there, they kind of walked around 'God-stoned' and not in the real world, really scary, they lived in a fantasy world where they used God for their own purposes, and yet, they didn't seem too bothered about living an example of God's love and Jesus' ethics. They scared me.

And they were my first experience of Jersey cult, with one of them coming up to me with a 'sign' from God for me, which, despite being vulnerable, I took lightly, because although I was vulnerable, I had heard of this sort of manipulation.

So, I sat in the corner and watched this rather weird service.
And then the churchwarden walked in during the service, and walked round hugging and shaking hands with the few people there.

He asked a few people who I was, and he mistook me for a boy, which was not a good start.

He came over and asked if he could sit with me and he told me he was a 'church officer'.
He sat with me, told me he had mistaken me for a boy, and had been corrected.

He sat with me, and he seemed surprised that I knew the Bible when there was a reading, and that I knew about taking communion.

After the service, the Vicar's wife came to sit with us, and the churchwarden significantly said that she was there to keep an eye on him, but I did not know the significance of this, nor did the churchwarden's wife explain this to me, then or ever.
Instead she also started on the 'prophetic', and said she had been 'told by God' that there would be someone new at the service tonight,

now, aside, what kind of God is wasting His time with absolutely pointless signs like this, while in Jersey, abuse victims are crying out for justice and being silenced, suppressed and harassed?
What kind of God, is wasting time on signs and wonders while the very people giving them are silencing and villifying abuse victims to protect dignitaries and the wealthy?
Is there any significant spiritual benefit to vulnerable people in the church and community of Jersey from these signs and wonders?

No, they are manipulation, and the church and community reflect no benefit from this manipulation, there is no sign that Jersey is a more Godly community than most, in fact, in the suppression, the opposite is the case, so maybe they should drop the signs and start focussing on what the Bible asks of them: look after the poor and vulnerable.

And instead of speaking to me about the churchwarden's history, I was given a 'sign' that was of no worth to anyone, that God had said there would be a new person there.
If God has time to do this through them, He would have time to change a rotten church system and protect the vulnerable, and likewise, if He had told the Vicar's wife I was to be there, just for the sake of it, why did he not warn her to protect me from the churchwarden?

As it was, I blanked her sign, and she then allowed the churchwarden to lead me outside and away from the church.

The past 15 months

I think I write most about the past 15 months since the Diocese launched on me, but I will write some more.

• I don't understand why the Diocese launched on me in the press, especially as they claim the whole thing to be about safeguarding. How does publicly humiliating a broken, vulnerable and homeless person that they have given a record to, relate to safeguarding? Did they not think that through? Certainly the backlash that has left me a terrified fugitive with old friends and strangers alike condemning me and turning away, has not been to do with safeguarding but the opposite, didn't the Church of England think of that? How did they ever protect me from the Backlash and smear campaign that ensued? They didn't.
• Although I had made enough of a recovery from 2010/2011, and I was in therapy, I was still too traumatised to go back through what happened to me, and against my will and without any concern for me, the church dragged me back through it, with their publicity stunts and their press and the smear campaign, and then Bob Hill needed my side of things but never got my full story as I was too traumatized. I was too traumatized to relive things in therapy, how was I supposed to go through being dragged back through it, with the smear campaign dominating, and total strangers condemning me?
• Most people, faced with being assaulted by a wrong version of their past, plastered all over the press, and having no voice, would consider suicide, and I certainly did, and yet the Diocese want to do exactly the same again to me through the Steel report, and no-one will stop them, and so I am left with diminished quality of life, in fear, and waiting to be destroyed, because I cannot go on being publicly condemned in a one-sided statement that damns my whole life and does not allow my side of things, this wait is intolerable and completely and utterly unjust and inhumane.
• The Diocese allowed people who had no contact with me and whom I had done nothing to, such as Teri Bond and Gavin Ashenden and Bruce Willings, to defame and smear me and write untruths, these people claim to be Christians, how can they claim such a thing, and how can this be about safeguarding when it is killing a vulnerable adult who the church have already destroyed?!
• Last year, from the moment the church launched on me in the press, and the smear campaign ensued, I felt that I was on trial, that I had to confess all my wrongs, and explain them, when, in shock, taken by surprise and beaten down, I could not defend myself against the public defamation and condemnation of me, my side was not included in the Korris report, no one asked for my side, and I was voiceless as the condemnation poured over me, just as I was voiceless in Jersey and in Winchester on my return from Jersey, homeless and destitute as I still was last year when the church of england launched this terrible charade.
• No attempt was ever made by anyone in the church to get my full account of things and adjust the Korris report accordingly, no effort was made to stop the smear campaign or put the condemners on Clerical Whispers, Thinking Anglicans or other such narrow, opinionated Unchristian gossip sites right, no attempt was made at all by the Church to reach out to me or hear my distress or reassure me, nothing was offered to help me.
• Instead, there was silence for weeks as I protested at the police violation of my life, and after that, no attempt was made, as above, to do anything about my plight, instead when I phoned the Diocese to beg them not to harm me further, the Bishop threatened me, why did they have me violently traced and violated and shocked and offer nothing at all in return? Why in all the earth did the police agree to this, allow it or condone it? It was a horrifying and illegal invasion of my life which left me shocked and ill, and all in the pretence of care and safeguarding by the Diocese.
• And it remained, a violation, for no reason, no help offered, no reassurance, just threats that showed that whatever was going on, it wasn't about contrition, apologies or making things up to me, the Bishop also lied that he had personally apologized to me, which was shocking as he hadn't. 

Together we heal -7 ways churches can help survivors.

Shocking example of the girl and the doctor, but very much the 'Church' way:
http://together-we-heal.org/2014/06/02/7-ways-churches-should-begin-to-welcome-survivors-of-abuse/

I hope Eli doesn't mind

Eli sent me this link and I am just going to put the link here while I wait his permission to put the link here, because I don't know when I am next online.

 http://www.itv.com/news/2013-05-10/former-choirboy-issues-cofe-abuse-cover-up-claims/

What I find tough about the headlines is the 'press speak' the 'claims' and 'allegations' press speak, that can leave people in doubt as to whether the survivor is a real survivor or not.

I am in no doubt as to whether Eli is a survivor or not, he is. 

Eli is very brave, the Church of England, powerful and cut-throat as they are, are still not used to being challenged, and Eli waived his right to remain anyonymous in order to speak up, this takes away the Church's ability to run and hide, because this is an act of courage against an essentially cowardly organization.

Eli, myself, and others, have had to put up with abuse and then the Church of England's 'anything but responsibility' cover up and inaction. And worse, the Church of England's pretence of care, which is for the benefit of the press and the public, those who still believe a word of  what the CofE says.
Well, the old people who put money in the coffers blindly believe it all, because that is part of their belief system.

The Church of England seem to spend years 'dealing with complaints', and when they have to use the press, these days they make grand claims of taking things seriously. This can injure survivors even more, because their personal dealings with the church, and the way the church treat them, is different from what is being paraded in the press.
This is certainly my experience!!!

Oh yes, they take their 'reputation' (whatever that may be) seriously, they do not take victims seriously, they do not take the fact that Eli and I and other victims are left harmed and struggling seriously.

NOT Duty of Care

Jane Fisher's incessant interference behind my back and without my consent led to me abandoning and mistrusting help and support services and also being shunned.

One of the services she interfered in was autism Jersey, even though I told Philip LeClaire expressly not to communicate with her or be a go-between.

Her interference meant I did not trust Philip at all, especially after what had already occured, see my letter to the police complaints department a few posts ago.

It is incorrectly claimed I kicked up a fuss at autism Jersey when Philip told me about the 'Chaperoning policy' that the churchwarden was supposed to be under.
This is rubbish.
It is rubbish because I told Philip he was not to tell me what the Diocese said, and he was not to act as  go-between, and he never did tell me what they said, but he claimed, incorrectly, that they had removed the churchwarden from his position, that is all he said when I told him not to upset me again by repeating anything Fisher said back to me.

Because by then Jane Fisher was just a severe trauma to me.

She still is.

Jane Fisher tried to use Philip to get a meeting with me, just as she tried to use Tracy.
She was told NO and told not to use people.
After all, she hadn't dealt with my complaints and had rubbished me and allowed me to be harmed and coldly told me that what happened did not.

The letter sent to Jersey police complaints department 13/02/09

If anyone wonders why I went mad, this is why. The incidents described in this letter below this paragraph. To me, being regressed and abused and thrown away, being told the police results in an email and being immediately brutalized and locked up - very deliberately omitted from the Korris report, which goes on about the police sending me a 'nice letter' which I never got, this, regressed to childhood, left back in my original childhood and some of the blank horror of what I went through then, and left abused and abandoned by EY and his wife who had always belittled me. Brutalized by police and shunned in the community, Philip LeClaire publicizing the brutality after playing a part in having me captured by police and trying to make out he was not part of that.
Bob Hill wonders why I don't trust, why I don't like people going behind my back.
I suffered severe Post Traumatic Stress as a result of the detention and brutalization the day the police let my abuse go, they used force, just as they always have because of my terror, and they locked me in a cell and were rude and insulting to me, for the crime of reporting an abuser.
I didn't recover, and this is when I stopped coping, stopped coping with Jane Fisher's nonsense, stopped coping with my abuser laughing when he saw me while he remained in church positions, stopped coping with Philip, with being shunned for reporting the man I reported, stopped coping with what was a horrible and hopeless situation, from which I didn't and can't recover.
 


** **** ******* ****
** ******
JE* ***
Email: ********@hotmail.co.uk

13/02/09

Police Complaints Department
Jersey

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am not at all sure if I should be writing to the police complaints department with my queries, but the DC who dealt with a complaint that I made seems unable to deal with my queries and concerns and seems more concerned with protecting my abuser. I am unwilling to contact the police again as I am afraid of them because of their treatment of me.
I am autistic, and am much more able to write than speak, I am making these queries entirely on my own.
I made a complaint to the police last year, with a bit of prompting, the complaint was about a man called Mr.******, Mr.****** is a churchwarden at St. A’s church at **** ******, Mr.****** decided to ‘adopt’ me as his daughter very shortly after meeting me, I believed that Mr.****** was trustworthy as he professed to be a Christian, but Mr ***** subjected me to unwelcome sexual advances and emotional torture, he was very careful in doing so, and made sure that I felt ‘to blame’ for my reactions to his treatment, and for a long time I took the blame.
Mr ****** told me that ‘God had told him to take me as a daughter’ and because of my faith I believed that my prayers for somewhere to belong were answered, I tried to cope with the increasing distress Mr.****** was causing me, and eventually had to tell his wife, who had never wanted a disabled ‘adoptive daughter’, I was brought into their family by her husband, for his own reasons, so I was thrown out of the family, with Mr.****** denying doing anything wrong, his wife despised me from the start, and when he heard I was making a complaint, he had the arrogance to phone an older friend of mine in order to try to get her to ‘shut me up’, she is not a good person to deal with abuse, despite being a priest, but she told him he had done wrong when he explained to her that he was trying to ‘help me’ by ‘breaking through my sexual barriers in order to cure my sexual problems’, I do not have significant sexual problems, my main problems are autism and trauma.
The matter was brought to the police, someone went with me to the police, there was a very helpful DC who’s name I cannot recall, he had shirt sleeves and a big grin, he seemed very prepared to deal with the matter. But then the matter was passed on to DC Hare, who I do not understand, and I do not understand the way he dealt with the matter or explained/didn’t explain it.
DC Hare interviewed Mr.******, he then contacted me by email with the results of the complaint, which didn’t make sense and still doesn’t. It seems to read that they ‘let poor Mr ****** off because there wasn’t enough evidence, and poor mr ****** had been under so much pressure due to the complaint that he wouldn’t do it again’. Mr ******  could not give a damn about what he has done, he has called me a liar since and has gone on with his life, he was sacked from his previous church for misconduct but he happily told me that they were mistaken, he refuses to take responsibility for his actions, and while he was abusing me he told me about how he talked sex to girls on his evangelising walk, he has not taken any responsibility for what he has done.
DC Hare told me that Mr.****** ‘admitted to most of the things I said? But said he was doing it to help me), therefore they could not prosecute Mr.******.  I do not understand this, is it legal in Jersey to force sexual contact in order to help someone? I did not understand the results , originally sent by email. I think what Mr ****** has done is wrong, but he appears to Have gained DC Hare’s sympathy. DC Hare said it was ‘on Mr.******’s record’, but I also did not understand what that meant. DC Hare was also aware that I have difficulty using a telephone, he said in his email that I could ‘phone him if I had any queries’.
If Mr ****** admitted to anything sexual, and DC Hare never explained what Mr ****** did or didn’t admit to, then why can no further action be taken?  DC Hare is obviously not willing to take further action even though I have asked. DC Hare has ignored my requests for further action or explanation, and I am afraid of DC Hare because he got me locked up.
When I received the unhelpful results of my complaint by email from DC Hare, I apparently threatened suicide, I am somewhat confused about this, but to cut a long story short I was seized by the police and locked up, I am told that this was for my own welfare, but I can see no evidence of that, DC Hare omitted to tell the police that I was autistic, dislike having my arms touched and need an appropriate adult at the police station.
Though I was very tired and ill and unable to run, and not trying to run, and was also trapped between two police officers and two cars, I was taken hold of by the upper arms, it was specifically mentioned in my statements to the police about Mr.****** that I have an extreme dislike of my upper arms being touched, because Mr ****** forced ‘therapy’ on me including constant touch of my upper arms, DC Hare, who apparently sent these officers out of ‘duty of care’ hadn’t bothered to tell the officers that he sent that I was autistic, disliked touch, and needed an appropriate adult, the officer, PC O’Brian, refused to let go of my arms even though I couldn’t run anywhere, I was panicking, I cannot begin to describe the severity of this panic to you, O’Brian said if he let go of my arm he would have to handcuff me (for the crime of reporting my abuser?), I said ‘handcuff me, let go of my arm’, he refused to do so, and I continued to panic with this nasty police officer gripping my arm when I had not commited a crime. It was only when my landlord stepped in and persuaded the officer to let go of me that he did, they then took me to the police station, they prepared to search me but I wouldn’t let them, I was absolutely out of my mind with terror. I told them not to lock me up because I suffer with claustrophobia? It means terror of enclosed spaces, they locked me up and I had a severe and prolonged panic attack, then they sent me to see a doctor who I didn’t understand and then they sent me home, no appropriate adult was present even though DC Hare was aware of my disability, and I was confused and distressed, I was shaking in severe shock and very much awake in the early hours of the next morning and the trauma of this on top of being abused by people who should have been safe, having to make a complaint, and feeling that DC Hare sympathises with Mr and MRs ******, who made my life living hell, has left me severely distressed, being ‘locked up for the crime of reporting my abusers’ did nothing for my welfare.
I still have nightmares of being on that police station floor struggling to breathe.

There was no follow up on that nasty incident. I have been left to ‘commit suicide as I please’ and I believe that if I had not been exhausted after that police incident I would have taken my own life because of how I was treated, it is incredibly cruel and twisted that the DC got me locked up and punished, while my abuser is walking around calling me a liar and has laughed the whole matter off, and he really has called me a liar.
And now my abuser is aware of me being locked up due to Phillip LeClaire publishing it in an article, it no doubt gave the ******s a good laugh to hear how I was locked up for their crime.
DC Hare offered to meet with me to ‘discuss the matter’, I was persuaded by Phillip LeClaire to attend a meeting, at short notice, though I said I was ill and couldn’t cope, I attended the meeting, but the primary aim of the meeting seemed to for DC Hare to act as a mouthpiece for the ******s to ‘shut me up’ , as I had not understood DC Hare’s email of the results of the complaint, I thought Mr ****** had simply walked away laughing, and as Mr.****** was calling me a liar, that seemed to be the case, so I had continued to tell Mr.****** off myself, he has never apologised or taken any responsibility, DC Hare ‘warned me’ that ‘people would think I was bad’ if I continued to deal with ****** myself, I felt intimidated and was afraid of being arrested again, so I was all agreement, ‘oh yes, I will behave myself, don’t lock me up for my abuser’s crimes again’. Mr ****** had phoned DC Hare, who should have dealt with Mr.******, and ‘told him I was verbally attacking him in the street.’ Mr ******’s arrogance in doing that, phoning the officer who was supposed to deal with him abusing me, and DC Hare actually trying to shut me up on ******’s behalf seems incredibly wrong.
Why was Mr ****** allowed to ask the DC who should have taken action against him to shut me up? I want something done about Mr.******, I am certain from things that he and his wife said, that he has abused before, and will again, he is very clever, hence me being punished for his crimes, and will get round the tiny mark on his CRB check, which has in big letters next to it ‘his victim is trouble’.
 I will shut up when something has been done about my abuser.  I don’t think it’s fair if it has been recorded on my CRB check instead.
DC Hare said that what ****** did was bad but not criminal  (so I am being told that sexual assault is not criminal on a disabled person?), and I am the one in danger of a criminal record, why? I am being told that Mr.****** adopting me to Abuse me, damaging me and letting me bear his wife’s fury, and throwing me away when I spoke up is my fault and the police couldn’t care less.
I was also not happy with Mr. LeClaire discussing things about me with DC Hare without my permission, but that is Mr. LeClaire’s fault. He works for Autism Jersey and wants to be on good terms with the police, hence his backing DC Hare and reference to the police being marvellous in his article where he talked about me in the paper against my wishes, that article was also without my permission and against my will, but that is Mr. LeClaire’s fault, I am in support of Mr. LeClaire’s marvellous advocacy of autistic people, but confused about some things he does.
DC Hare hasn’t clarified some things and I was too intimidated by the meeting, what did ****** admit to? If he admitted to sexual things, why are they not criminal? If he didn’t, he still did all those things, why does DC Hare believe ****** over me and stand up for him? If ****** admitted to doing some of those things to help me, why is that believed?  I feel that Mr.****** set up a situation where he could get gratification from me. Mr ****** continues in his role as church officer and works with young mothers and Yacht club cadets, he has taken no responsibility for what he has done to me, he and his wife have left me devastated. Mr ******’s excuse of doing things to ‘help me’ is made very believable by his demeanour, but it could not possibly be true, I know from living with him as his daughter that he is very sexual and has a huge problem with boundaries.
I don’t expect you to understand this, but my faith in God was central to my life, it has been destroyed by the ******s, I wanted to belong to a family, Mr ****** called me his ‘daughter’ and then I was thrown away when I started to speak up and Mr ****** denied everything, these things have hurt me more than anyone can imagine, my background was from poverty and abuse, violence and neglect, but I lived on faith and hope, that has been taken from me by these things and I have been left devastated by these things.
I don’t understand the results of my complaint, I feel that I have been called a liar, I have been traumatised and devastated, my abuser has walked away calling me a liar, the police are on his side and I expect to be arrested again and treated brutally for standing up for myself.
DC Hare did explain at the meeting that it is on Mr.******’s CRB check in the ‘greyline’ because what Mr.****** did was ‘bad but not criminal’I don’t understand what this means, does this mean it’s ok for Mr.****** to abuse because he has friends in the police? I am also concerned what this has done to my CRB check because the police are hostile to me, why is my abuser walking around laughing and calling me a liar? Lying about something like that would be horrific for me, being called a liar of something like this is horrific, I am the one suffering massively for this, for the crime of reporting my abuser, I am the one who was locked up and had my arms and brain hurt, why am I the one in massive trouble and why was I arrested for my abusers crimes?

My continued concern and request for further action has been totally ignored by DC Hare, and since I couldn’t understand his explanation of all this, I asked him for someone who could, and the address of the police complaints department, that was also ignored.
I also remain confused about being told firstly there was not enough evidence to prosecute Mr.******, then being told that he had admitted to a lot of things but because he ‘did them to help me’ it was bad not criminal’, I was not told what he admitted to, but probably not the more serious sexual things, but if he admitted to anything, why is he walking around laughing and calling me a liar while I am still suffering? I really want something done.
I have done my best to protect other vulnerable people, I do not expect to be arrested for it, but I wouldn’t be surprised.`
I am not Jersey born, I know about Haute de LA Garenne, is this just normal Jersey justice? Should I pipe down and wait for the police to think of another excuse to thrash me for being autistic yet speaking up about being mistreated? Am I going to be named and shamed in the paper?

Can you help me with my concerns please?

Sincerely,

****** ******

Abuse enquiries

It is terrible that a so-called 'Christian organization' who get charitable status as well as being a government department, could do such a terrible thing as put their image before the needs of abuse victims, especially in the Chichester Case, where victims were promised a full enquiry, which was used as part of the 'hug an abuse victim' campaign, and then that promise of an enquiry was withdrawn later.
The Church can't investigate themselves because they are are a patriachal oligarchal club.
Why are people still paying for this club to run? I suppose because the main payers are the rich who use the club.


http://freethinker.co.uk/2013/07/10/stuff-your-apologies-what-we-want-is-a-public-inquiry-abuse-victims-tell-church-of-england/

http://dearkitty1.wordpress.com/2013/07/16/child-abuse-in-the-church-of-england/

http://www.lanternproject.org.uk/church-abuse-survivors-betrayed-by-the-church-of-england/

http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/when-will-the-church-of-england-face-up-to-the-abuse-i-suffered-in-their-care-6496457.html

Korris Thoughts and Jane Fisher's boast

How did Ey know what I had said about him? It is highly possible that the Dean was passing information back to EY, especially as PC LeMarquand said someone was forwarding information and then refused to say who - is this what the Korris report was on about when it was said that Ey was 'hearing about me insulting his good nature by saying about him being sacked for misconduct? why did Jane Fisher allow the Dean to continue to communicate information to Ey? And why is the church leaving him in a position in the church under the Dean and claiming that the Dean has acted in good faith in all this?

Why was the fact that I was slandered round the Island not included as EY insulting my good nature or whatever, why was it claimed that I wasn’t discussed in the Deanery or chapter when I was? When I was told by a priest I was!

Korris does not seem to realise that in a then hostile community, I had to speak up for myself and say that this man had done wrong before.

And if Fisher, c/o Korris, wants to vilify me that way, what about what she and Scott-Joynt did in Winchester in slandering me, and what about how they allowed the Warren-Lihou;EY-Dean collaboration against me and listened to them and not me?

In 2010 Jane Fisher was going on about how she was meeting with a states member in Jersey, and although she was very sparse with any information or answers to me about everything else, she repeatedly mentioned this but never told me who I was meeting with or why, and I asked her why she thought it was so special that she was meeting with this states member, she didn't say, nor did she say who it was.

She appeared to be boasting, and it appeared to be to do with my case, so who did she meet with? ILM? Bailhache? Or any others who have been supporting the Dean.

Who did Jane Fisher meet with and why? 

I am sure Jane Fisher cannot object to me speaking about her, especially after she has maligned me and left me outcast, and I am just sharing my side of things.