Is UNITE backing a possible sex offender?

[Deputy Dawg]

Ignoring for now the fact that Geoff Southern has broken election rules again, this time by trying to make out that the union UNITE is paying for all the one page spreads in the JEP and that he has no knowledge of it whatsoever, which now opens doors for all the richer politicians to get their friends to "sponsor" all their advertising in the next election. After reading Stuarts latest blog, I have to wonder if UNITE are going to get a bite in the rear from the possible backlash and negative exposure that Stuarts latest offering is going to provide.

Stuart has in no uncertain terms called Geoff Southern a child molester (of legal age 16 and 17 year olds) which he apparently groomed while a teacher at Hautlieu and states that he has several witnesses that will stand in court to prove this. Is this a very underhand ploy to gain the left votes away from the favourite to win? or will UNITE look like a group of idiots that supported an ex-teacher and child molester while allowing him to be the spokesperson in the states for our current teachers (and if true, will they be tarnished with the same brush).

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7124117913567332282&postID=3028092065175570769

Lets not forget though that Syvret very rarely gets things right and shoots from the hip on most of his truths. Remember the attack on Durendel a while back, where he has convinced himself that Durendel is Nick Le Cornu?

Is there truth here this time? or is Syvret shooting blanks again?

Hi Nick – how’s it going?

You always were pretty poor at grasping and retaining facts.

Attempted to steal any Nazi war memorabilia from a pensioner’s house lately?

So – Comrade, Commissar Le Cornu – how do you think the glorious revolution is going?

How is Auschwitz looking these days? Isn’t that where you like to take your holidays?

In the break-up of my previous relationship – which you are plainly familiar with - we had one argument, right at the end.  No honorary police were involved - nor any form of “abuse of procedure” and not any “breach of the peace”.  But you always were a pathological liar as well as being an unemployable halfwit.

The reason the relationship ended was because you, Nick – in your obsessive, jealousness and envy of me – had sought out – and set about - breaking up my relationship.

In fact – Nick – the States Police were called once – by me - please note – following your advice to the ex to attempt to smear me. That’s it – one incident – and one incident in which it was me who called the Police as a precaution.  Nothing whatsoever arose from the incident – because there was nothing to arise.

As I remarked to many journalist at the time – its one thing to lose your partner to a rival – but it is quite galling when the rival in question happens to be a closet-totalitarian, crypto-Leninist, Nazi obsessive lawyer – of all people.

But hey-ho! – You too were rapidly disregarded and cast aside by the narcissistic and solipsistic creature yourself – pretty rapidly, as I recollect. You see – neither of us had any money, Nick. In my case – because I was working my butt off in politics – in your case because you were an idle, unemployable loafing fantasist.

I hadn’t let your comment through because I didn’t, frankly, see any great relevance in bringing into the debate a failed relationship from many years ago – but – you know what? – On reflection – you’re quite right – she doesn’t deserve protecting from publicity.

To deal with relevant issues - for a lawyer, I would have expected you to have at least a faint grasp of such notions as the sub judice rule.

Let me explain – public comment about allegations and particular potential criminal cases only becomes ‘out-of-bounds’ once charges are laid.

And insofar as any “unfair publicity” is concerned – given the gravity of the Jersey Child Abuse Disaster and its magnitude – there was never – ever - the remotest hope of any credible, non-conflicted jury being found in Jersey.

Indeed – it’s frequently near-impossible to assemble non-conflicted juries within this small community - even in the case of low-profile charges.

Which is why – foreseeing all such problems – I wrote to the Bailhache Brothers & Co in November last year – explaining all these issues in detail, and suggesting they should invite independent UK prosecutors and judges to deal with any cases arising. Naturally enough, a perfectly sensible suggestion which was dismissed with the predictable arrogance and stupidity.

And, you know, before you get into battles – check your facts first – always check the facts. For had you been paying the merest – the slightest – attention to events – you would be aware from comments made by me on various sites, that I am willingly confessing to corporate crimes, committed by Health & Social Services when I was the politician responsible.

Indeed – when I was  meeting with two Police officers this Friday morning just gone, amongst other, related issues, we had an initial discussion of my wish to confess corporate guilt – and to that end I am producing a written statement and will give a formal recorded interview next week.

As I’ve said publicly – on many occasions before – the States of Jersey – guilty as hell.

Meanwhile – may the glorious peoples’ revolution continue for you – and after these elections, the decent candidates like Monty will see - and curse - what a pair of losers they made the mistake of associating themselves with – and leave you and Mike Dunn to your sad, isolated, Leninist fantasies.

Ciao

Stuart.

[danrok]

If the union was unaware of this story, then I don't see that they have done anything wrong.

If the story is true, then I'd be more interested to know why the SOJ did not do more about it at the time, assuming this was the real reason he was sacked/resigned as a teacher.

[rogueelement]

Well St SS never lies does he?
Maybe Geoff will get in the line to sue him?

[Bentos]

I was a pupil at Hautlieu duuring the late 70's and early 80's and have long wondered how these allegations have never come out

[Fritz]

No use suing St. Stuey, he cant even pay his phone bill.

[danrok]

No use suing St. Stuey, he cant even pay his phone bill.

Indeed, I believe suing someone is expensive, even if you win, and so pointless if the person you are suing has no money.

[Malachi]

I was at Hautlieu from 1989 to 1991, and was sort-of there during 1992 & 1993 (I was ill during my A-levels and eventually ended up studying for them and taking my exams in the UK in 1994>1995).

I've heard the rumours (and so have most people my age), but AFAIK rumours are all they are (ditto for the rumours about Frank Walker).

If Stuart really thinks he has got something on Southern, then he should keep quiet about it and inform the Police or whatever the correct procedure is...

but he's just trailing innuendo and doing the "I can't tell you I can't tell you please stop asking me I can't tell you... oh, I WILL tell you!" routine on his blog... again...

Twit.

[GeeGee]

Actually Stuart had been furnished with proof from one of the girls involved, and I know that it has been seen by a third party also.

You were aware of rumours then, Geoff had to leave teaching - no smoke without fire.

Let Geoff come out and deny it all, and if not, why not?

[Malachi]

I can't remember when I became aware of the rumours, probaby at the same time I became aware that he was no longer teaching.

I've read Stuart's blog, but I think he is going about things the wrong way (again), i.e. if someone had furnished me with proof about somebody else's rumoured/alleged wrongdoing, I would let the police know about it or encourage the someone to tell the police instead.

It's not something I would publish on a blog, either as an article/entry or in my comments.

I've got a lot of time for Stuart, but his insistence on doing things the wrong way often tries my patience.

[Daren O'Toole]

Ignoring for now the fact that Geoff Southern has broken election rules again, this time by trying to make out that the union UNITE is paying for all the one page spreads in the JEP and that he has no knowledge of it whatsoever, which now opens doors for all the richer politicians to get their friends to "sponsor" all their advertising in the next election. After reading Stuarts latest blog, I have to wonder if UNITE are going to get a bite in the rear from the possible backlash and negative exposure that Stuarts latest offering is going to provide.

Stuart has in no uncertain terms called Geoff Southern a child molester (of legal age 16 and 17 year olds) which he apparently groomed while a teacher at Hautlieu and states that he has several witnesses that will stand in court to prove this. Is this a very underhand ploy to gain the left votes away from the favourite to win? or will UNITE look like a group of idiots that supported an ex-teacher and child molester while allowing him to be the spokesperson in the states for our current teachers (and if true, will they be tarnished with the same brush).

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7124117913567332282&postID=3028092065175570769

Lets not forget though that Syvret very rarely gets things right and shoots from the hip on most of his truths. Remember the attack on Durendel a while back, where he has convinced himself that Durendel is Nick Le Cornu?

Is there truth here this time? or is Syvret shooting blanks again?

These allegations about Geoff have been doing the rounds for years and as much as I can't stand the odious little weasle a couple of points need clarifying. The girls he allegedly slept with were over 16 and if true while morally repugnent he did nothing illegal as Jersey at that time did not have a breach of trust law, if it happened today he would almost certainly be prosecuted under the breach of trust law now in place.