The Jersey children's home story .. "Former Police Chief to be Witness"

Hopefully now they are convinced there was no murder they can plod on with the abuse claims where at least there does not seem to be much doubt that abuse did happen.

its one big coverup. The bigger the lie the more people believe.

i totally agree pete. lets hope the abuse claims are fully looked into as it took a lot of courage for these people to come forward.

Pete Burtenshaw wrote:its one big coverup...

Where's your evidence of this Pete? I know you've stated previously, and since reaffirmed, that you base much of your accusations on your own gut feeling, but don't you think the legal process of justice needs to be based on a little more?

Clearly you're ready to lead the lynch-mob against all and sundry who disagree with you, but put the show on the other foot; just imagine you're proved wrong (although you'll never believe this because you're too closed minded to consider actual evidence), how would you feel to be wrongly accused?

Pete Burtenshaw wrote:...The bigger the lie the more people believe.

This I can agree with, just look at religion.

Thistle wrote:...lets hope the abuse claims are fully looked into as it took a lot of courage for these people to come forward.

The claims are being looked into, as they have been for some time. That's fact, hope isn't needed for this to contiue, it will; save your hope for justice, which will only happen with due process, not by lynch mob mentality.

HISTORICAL abuse allegations at the Greenfields children’s home dominated a press conference given by the Howard League for Penal Reform yesterday afternoon.
During the delivery of the organisation’s report into Jersey’s youth justice system, members of the audience – which included States Members – repeatedly looked for assurances over the welfare of children in the Island.
Ministers listened to the Howard League team say that they were ‘shocked’ to hear from residents of the homes who said that they suffered abuse in the past.
They were also told about the failures of the ‘unlawful’ Grand Prix system – in which a solitary-confinement method was allegedly used to counter bad behaviour. But the prison reform charity has said that there is no evidence that children are at risk today in the children’s remand home.
During the press conference the author of the report, Lynne Ravenscroft, a former UK Magistrate, said that they had interviewed four former residents of Greenfields. ‘I was very shocked to hear what I heard and I found it very difficult not to believe it,’ she told the press conference. (from thisisjersey)

Here is Lenny Harper view.




Jersey probe: Lenny Harper hits back
The Northern Ireland police officer who headed up the Jersey child abuse probe
last night furiously defended his investigation after his successor attacked
several key pieces of evidence.


In an interview with the Belfast Telegraph, Londonderry man Lenny Harper hit
back at claims from senior officers that he had previously released
“misleading” and “inaccurate” information, stating that he and his team had
always acted with integrity.

The credibility of the £4m investigation was last night in tatters as the
Jersey government and Mr Harper’s successor, Deputy Chief Officer David
Warcup, claimed that some aspects of the probe “had not been conducted
properly”.

Speaking to the Belfast Telegraph, Mr Harper, who retired in August, said he
was “disappointed” and “mystified” at the comments, which he claimed
misrepresented what he had said during his time at the fore of the
investigation.

Earlier Mr Warcup said there was no evidence that any children had been
murdered or bodies destroyed at the former care home Haut de la Garenne. He
expressed “much regret” at “misleading” information released by Mr Harper.
He also said bones found at the home were probably hundreds of years old and
so-called torture chambers were merely cellars.

“What I have said has been deliberately, or otherwise, totally
misrepresented,” Mr Harper told this paper.

“I am bemused as to why this press conference was held to say nothing
substantially new. I never said we had credible evidence of murder or murder
suspects. I have always said we did not have a homicide enquiry but were
treating the scene as one of a potential homicide. I would have thought they
would have understood the difference.

“As for the bones, they said they could be hundreds of years old — we said
that months ago. And the fragment thought to have been from a skull — we
ruled that out of the investigation months ago. They are not saying anything
I have not said previously,” said Mr Harper.

He added that officers had never labelled the cellars at Haut de la Garenne as
torture chambers and had been acting on evidence from victims.

“We never called them dungeons. The victims were telling us that they were
lowered down into these rooms, which we always made clear, used to be the
ground floor of that building,” he said.

Mr Harper added that Mr Warcup's comments came at “an opportune time” for the
Jersey government, as a report into the island's care system by the Howard
League for Penal Reform was due to be released on Friday.

“I’m totally mystified as to why he should issue this non-event. I’m sure it
is a coincidence that the Howard League for Penal Reform is publishing its
report on allegations of abuse within the Jersey care system. That will be
interesting,” said Mr Harper.

He added: “I am not going to let this get to me. I have no regrets about the
way this investigation was handled by myself and my team. Some of the
criticisms made (yesterday) were made by Andrew Lewis the new Home Affairs
Minister who said they had not been told all details.

“I briefed Andrew regularly when he took over the role. Indeed, the night
before I left the island he told my wife and myself that my team and myself
had done a fantastic job, despite all the political nonsense and backbiting
we had to endure.”

A former minister for health and social services in Jersey, Senator Stuart
Syvret, has rushed to defend Mr Harper.

Senator Syvret said yesterday’s press conference by the new investigations
team was a bid “to justify the dismissal and abandoning of certain aspects
of the Haut de la Garenne investigation, including the possibility of child
deaths having occurred there, and certain of the more serious abuse claims”.

The suggestion that children could have been murdered at Haut de la Garenne,
which closed in 1986, was first made by Mr Harper in February when he
announced that what appeared to be part of a child’s skull had been found
underneath a floor at the home.

Forensic tests later established that the “skull” was more likely to be a
piece of wood or coconut shell.

Warcup and Harper's war of words: The accusations and the rebuttals

Deputy chief officer David |Warcup’s claims at press conference... and Lenny
Harper’s |response to the Belfast Telegraph in his own words.

? Warcup: There is no evidence that any children had been murdered or bodies
destroyed at the former home.

? Harper: They said they have “no credible evidence of murder” and “no
suspects for murder.” They announced this as if it was a contradiction to
what I had said. Not true. I have always said we did not have a homicide
enquiry but were treating the scene as one of a potential homicide.
Surprisingly they seem to miss the distinction. Furthermore I told the Chief
Minister Frank Walker, on the day that he brought his wife for a tour of
Haut de le Garenne, in her presence and that of my team, that he should
prepare himself for the fact that we might not be able to launch a homicide
enquiry because of a lack of evidence. He said this would not be a bad
outcome and he was confident that we would do what we could.

? Warcup: After being examined by experts from the British Museum, a fragment
thought to have been from a skull turned out to be a piece of Victorian
coconut shell.

? Harper: They spoke about the original find “probably being a piece of
coconut or wood.” The truth is that the item has never been positively
identified and the source they quoted was only one of a number of varying
opinions. Furthermore, it has never been explained just how collagen, which
is only found in mammals, was found in it. Additionally, we had, of course,
ruled out the item anyway because our experts were telling us it was too old.

? Warcup: “Shackles” found in rubble turned out to be “a rusty piece of
metal”, and there was no evidence to suggest it had been used for anything
suspicious.

? Harper: They described the shackles as “just rusty pieces of metal.” Of
course they are rusty pieces of metal — they have been in the ground for
over 30 years. Furthermore, they ignore the fact that it was not only us who
described them as shackles, which one pair obviously are. Builders who found
them in 2003 and left them where they were, tipped off the media that we
would find shackles.

? Warcup: The “secret underground chambers” were just holes in the floor, “not
dungeons or cellars”.

? Harper: They said that the cellars are “not cellars or dungeons, but are
merely floor voids.” Surprisingly, I never used the word dungeons. They are
not floor voids. What we call the cellars (and what the victims call the
cellars) are in fact what used to be the ground floor. What is certain is
that victims described them accurately and the abuse that went on in there.

? Warcup: Most of the 170 pieces of bone found in the search came from
animals. Three were human and two of these dated from between 1470-1670 and
1650-1950 respectively.

? Harper: “The bones could be hundreds of years old.” Well this is certainly
not new. When detailing the results of carbon dating, I made it clear that
the dates ranged from 1650 to 1950. The expert in the UK who had examined
the first bones we sent (which included a piece of child's tibia) said that
they were very likely the bones of a juvenile human, they had been burnt
shortly after death and buried shortly after burning. In his view they were
no more than a few decades old. I made it clear that in the light of the
conflicting information which, if it remained the same, it was “obvious that
there would not be a murder enquiry.” This is clearly confirmed by, among
others.

Harper's becoming less and less credible with every article I read.

I remember watching him on the TV making his media briefings and saying how what he was saying sounded like spin, to sensationalise the story and make himself a more important person to the media. It was clear he was choosing his words to make great sound-bites, but when you interpreted the facts there wasn't nearly the story to be told that his chosen words could imply, if you wanted to believe or portray the worst scenario.

Without evidence there'll be no trial; with weak evidence there could be an attempt at prosecution, but with the piss-poor, amateurish, self-promoting, stupid handling of the case in the public domain by Messers Harper et al, any defense lawyer will declare that there can now not be a fair trial.

Of course when this happens, will the conspiracy theorists all jump ship and claim Harper knew what he was doing all along and deliberately screwed-up the investigation's handling to get the defendants off??

Troy McClure wrote:

Pete Burtenshaw wrote:its one big coverup...

Where's your evidence of this Pete? I know you've stated previously, and since reaffirmed, that you base much of your accusations on your own gut feeling, but don't you think the legal process of justice needs to be based on a little more?

Clearly you're ready to lead the lynch-mob against all and sundry who disagree with you, but put the show on the other foot; just imagine you're proved wrong (although you'll never believe this because you're too closed minded to consider actual evidence), how would you feel to be wrongly accused?

Pete Burtenshaw wrote:...The bigger the lie the more people believe.

This I can agree with, just look at religion.

Thistle wrote:...lets hope the abuse claims are fully looked into as it took a lot of courage for these people to come forward.

The claims are being looked into, as they have been for some time. That's fact, hope isn't needed for this to contiue, it will; save your hope for justice, which will only happen with due process, not by lynch mob mentality.

Troy, at least we agree on one thing. I STAND BY all of my posts on this thread and repeat.............It’s a cover up and god help the abuse victims of yesterday, today and tomorrow in Jersey. It’s a total disgrace that the corrupt establishment is still doing all ‘’they’’ can to protect them and their powerful friends. Its alleged the local media radio, TV and the paper should be ashamed of themselves for they are party to this cover-up with the appalling coverage. But only they can redeem themselves. Something stinks here and it isn’t your harbour. The people of Jersey are not stupid they know something is not right and one day they will over come the fear they feel about ridding Jersey of these corrupt men and women and by doing so reinstate some pride in their island once again.

Pete, is there anybody other than Lennie Harper and yourself who isn't involved in the conspiracy?

So far, in this thread alone, you've accused;
The BBC
Channel 103
Channel Television
The Jersey Evening Post
All of Jersey's State's members
The judiciary
The 'establishment' (whoever they are?)
The independent lawyer working with the Police
The recently appointed investigating officer
The new SoJ Police DCO
...and of course, me!

And you claim that the Jersey people are too fearful to seek rid of all these people and entities; can you not stop and think for a second that the people of Jersey aren't filled with the same paranoia as you, and perhaps their, to you, seeming inaction is based on reason and a belief in the due process of law rather than fear?

Or by disagreeing with you, does that make the people of Jersey part of 'our' dastardly plot?

I think that the Media interpreted a lot of the information to sensationalise the story,

The worst thing about all that is the story of abuse was then deemed to ba a less serious story and was almost ignored by the Media.

Problem is now, a lot of the UK Media will probably not give it the coverage it deserves because they wont want another non-story from Jersey.

I dont think Harper said too much wrong most of it was just Twisted by the Media to suit there story.

The Howard league Report has been criticised by senator elect Le Marquand. The man who wants to be our new Home Affairs Minister thinks we need to be tougher on kids:

http://www.jerseyinsight.com/news_1.aspx?id=0:11710&news=2:1183

where has the compassion and community spirit gone from the islands?

Pete Burtenshaw wrote:where has the compassion and community spirit gone from the islands?

A perfectly valid question, but I'm not sure the middle of a thread is the best place to ask it.

So who is to blame?

Another fine mess with our wonderful States Departments

Well I suppose we could get so more consultants in the advise how to sort it out?

Or better still sack whats left of the people involved, and start afresh

Or is there another way out?

Troy McClure wrote:

Pete Burtenshaw wrote:where has the compassion and community spirit gone from the islands?

A perfectly valid question, but I'm not sure the middle of a thread is the best place to ask it.

So where should one ask this very poignant question then?

Former Jersey deputy chief police Lenny Harper this week found himself the target of accusations that he mishandled the Haut de la Garenne inquiry, stoking speculation about murders – the possibility of which has been ruled out by his successors. Speaking to the Guernsey Press’s Nick Mann from his Ayrshire home, Mr Harper claims he is the subject of a politically-motivated smear campaignDo you feel you are being made a scapegoat by the Jersey authorities and/or Jersey police and if so why?
The States of Jersey Police is a professional and dedicated organisation. I have an extremely high regard for all of the officers and staff who were there when I was in the post.
Of course, I believe that this smear is politically motivated.
This has been an ongoing situation from the day the inquiry went public when the chief minister [Frank Walker] told me that I was in danger of bringing the government down, tried to admonish me for speaking to a politician who was representing victims and tried to force me to take the word ‘victims’ out of my media releases as ‘they are not victims until something is proved’.
Furthermore, I have been approached now by four journalists in the past 24 hours who tell me they have been questioned by police officers appointed by [Jersey deputy police chief] David Warcup and asked if I have leaked documents to them.
This refers to the report which I sent to the Attorney General in Jersey which was critical of him.
The efforts to smear me contrast markedly with the lack of effort which Frank Walker put into investigating the leak of an email by one of his ministers to a journalist after the SOJP [States of Jersey Police] made a formal complaint.
Both the minister and the journalist denied it, but the journalist’s admission was recorded on the publicly-known system at PHQ. That, and the timing of the release last week, which actually said nothing I had not said previously, give obvious clues.
If you are in any doubt that some months ago I was saying that the bones could be very old and that we might never be able to launch a murder inquiry, go to the BBC News website and go into the link of 31 July at 1756 UK time which features an article headlined ‘Jersey Murder Inquiry Unlikely’.
In that I am quoted as saying that if the evidence remains the same it is obvious there will not be a murder inquiry. This is vastly different to what Warcup inferred yesterday [Wednesday 12].
Do you regret the information you put out during the investigation or do you stand by it and feel the situation has been misinterpreted?
I stand by it and feel it has deliberately been misrepresented.
Was there enough evidence to dig up Haut de la Garenne and what was it?
The reasons for going in there are fully documented in a report on the SOJP website - unless it has been removed. Basically, witnesses were telling us of remains in the location and there was a local solicitor who said he had a client who would confirm the presence of a child’s remains.
We did not go into the home to dig, but to screen the area to try and prove the suggestions one way or another.
This was after a meeting in the UK with experts in the areas of search, anthropology, archaeology, canine recovery and scientific search methods and a desk top study by the leading scientist of a forensic science company.
There was close consultation with the National Policing Improvement Agency. It was only after we started to recover evidence and builders who had worked at the home were telling us that they had been told to burn bones and let bygones be bygones that we started to dig.
Who did you report to? Was there strong enough political oversight of the investigation? Did you make it clear to the Home Affairs minister or the chief minister that the evidence may not prove to be conclusive and when?
The Home Affairs minister [Senator Wendy Kinnard, who subsequently stood back because she was interviewed as a potential witness in the historic abuse inquiry} was totally supportive.
The political oversight of the inquiry was appropriate at her level. The degree of political interference from others masked as oversight was intolerable.
One bizarre aspect was the fact that the two politicians responsible for child safety showed no interest in the inquiry whatsoever other than to try and rubbish it.
Several months ago Frank Walker brought his wife to the scene for a tour. In her presence, and that of some of my team, I told him that he had to prepare for the fact that there would probably never be enough evidence to launch a homicide inquiry.
He put his hand on my shoulder and said that would be no bad outcome, but he was sure I would do what I had to do.
The Home Affairs minister was being closely briefed and she was strongly supportive.

Lenny Harper has now retired from the States of Jersey Police, but this week he was accused of mishandling the Haut de la Garenne investigation. (Picture by PA News, 0543045)
How many officers were working on the investigation and did any of them voice concerns?
There were roughly 50 officers from the UK and Jersey working on this. The team morale at that time was superb.
UK officers were reluctant to leave the inquiry and all had a shared sense of purpose.
They fully supported what the team were doing. Not one of them ever expressed any concerns.
When did you find out the ‘fragment of child’s’ skull was probably coconut?
Again, I have fully explained this. The lab who had the fragment had it for three weeks and reported to us referring to the item as ‘the Jersey skull’.
Firstly they said the bone was too old or too degraded to date. They then reported that they had found collagen in the item, a substance only found in mammals, not wood or coconut.
They then changed their stance again saying that the collagen was too degraded to date.
They then, and only then, said they were no longer sure it was bone.
They added in response to a question from me that if I wanted it definitively identified I would need to have it examined again.
They have never answered my other question which was how they had found collagen in it.
By this time however, the item had been ruled out of the inquiry because our experts had said that the context it had been found in dated it before our inquiry.
All of this was ignored by Warcup on Wednesday.
Are the Jersey authorities deliberately trying to divert attention from Howard League report?
That is a possibility strongly put to me by a number of ex colleagues and journalists.
Have you been contacted by the Met Police who carried out the independent investigation into the inquiry? If not, does that cast doubt on its findings and why?
The Met have arranged to come and speak to me in a week’s time. There has been no other contact. I would be surprised if they had delivered any conclusion to Jersey before speaking to myself.
Have you met David Warcup or [Detective Superintendent] Mick Gradwell since they took over? if so when?
Journalists have told me that Warcup inferred on Wednesday that we had. This is nonsense. There has been no contact since I left the island other than a letter from Warcup advising me ‘of my public duty and for the good of the victims, not to speak to the media’.
Jersey police chief Graham Power has been suspended and you stand by him why? And will you be prepared to defend him as part of the disciplinary process?
Graham Power has been an outstanding chief officer. Under his leadership, an abundance of local talented officers at all levels have prospered.
The HMI has delivered glowing inspection results in marked contrast to those before he arrived.
He has taken a firm stance against corruption, inappropriate behaviour, and, most of all, has fought a long battle against political interference in the operational tasks of the force. I will do anything I am asked to do on his behalf.
Will Wednesday’s announcements affect abuse victims in terms of coming forward to the Jersey authorities and why?
They did not trust the authorities previously and this will make it worse. The view expressed to me by several victims in the past 24 hours is that yesterday was politically motivated as was the suspension of Graham Power. One victim said it is back to the bad old days. Speak to Stuart Syvret.
Is there anything else you want to add?
No. Other than to say that the victims and the people of Jersey were badly served on Wednesday by the blatant misrepresentation of my views and things I had said. They made it appear as if they were contradicting me. In reality, they were saying nothing new. (from thisisguernsey)

HERE HERE MY HARPER.....YOU TELL THEM.

Pete Burtenshaw wrote:HERE HERE MY HARPER.....YOU TELL THEM.

What exactly is your relationship with former DCO Harper Pete?

Have you had any first hand dealings with the man, or is you unfailing opinion of him formed solely from the media reporting of him that fits neatly with your conspiracy theory?

SACKED social worker Simon Bellwood is calling for a full public inquiry into the alleged ‘unlawful’ and ‘abusive’ mistreatment of former residents at Greenfields secure remand home for children.
Last week the Howard League for Penal Reform criticised past practices at the home and said they had been ‘shocked’ to hear from former residents who said that they had experienced ‘isolation, separation or solitary confinement’ at the home and staff who claimed that they did not trust the management.
Mr Bellwood, a former manager of Greenfields, said that he was dismissed shortly after he scrapped the ‘Grand Prix’ system for discipline in 2006 – a system which he says led to children, especially new arrivals, being locked up in solitary confinement for 24 hours at a time.
The behaviour management régime was started in 2004 as an official policy by Joe Kennedy, who had a background in the Prison Service. Mr Kennedy insists that periods of isolation described did not happen and that children were brought out for fresh air, exercise and meals.(from thisisjersey)

A brave man indeed standing with the guy from the film ''The Hills have eyes''.

THE social worker whose concerns sparked a major investigation into conditions at Greenfields today reveals why he still wants a public inquiry into the Grand Prix scheme.
In his first full public interview, Simon Bellwood, the secure unit’s former manager, also reveals details of the pay-off he received from the States after winning an unfair dismissal employment tribunal.
In today’s Saturday interview in the Jersey Evening Post, Mr Bellwood talks about how the centre was run when he took over and explains why he spoke out for the children.
He claims that many were routinely locked up for 24 hours in solitary confinement and maintains there has been a cover-up. (thisisjersey)

please vote in my poll http://voiceforchildren.blogspot.com/

HEALTH Minister Ben Shenton has revealed why Greenfields manager Simon Bellwood was sacked last year.
In a letter sent to all States Members marked ‘strictly confidential’ and entitled Greenfields: Time for the Truth, Senator Shenton writes that he wants to expose what he calls ‘the myths, mischief and speculation’ surrounding the secure unit and explains why Mr Bellwood was dismissed.
He said that Mr Bellwood used foul language and his management was chaotic. The minister decided to speak out after Mr Bellwood revealed details in a JEP interview about the settlement of the employment tribunal that ruled he had been improperly dismissed. Senator Shenton’s nine-page letter has been leaked and published on sacked social worker Mr Bellwood’s blog.
Last week in the JEP interview, Mr Bellwood claimed that he witnessed the Grand Prix system being used to hold children in solitary confinement for 24 hours at the Greenfields Secure Unit in St Saviour. Senator Shenton denies that the Grand Prix system was ever used at the new £5m remand home, but admits that it was used at Les Chênes, the previous children’s home (from thisisjersey)

Health Minister Senator Ben Shenton has denied a so-called "Grand Prix" disciplinary system ever took place at a Jersey young offenders secure unit.
However, in a letter to States members about the Greenfields unit, he said a penalty and reward system at another facility had improved behaviour.
His letter claimed a new disciplinary regime which replaced this led to a deterioration of children's behaviour.
The minister has so far declined to comment publicly on the leaked letter.
Last month the Howard League for Penal Reform said the number of children being held in custody in Jersey was "unacceptably high".
'Diversionary' tactics
The prison charity had carried out a review of the island's care services after concerns were raised by the former manager of Greenfields, Simon Bellwood.
It said in England and Wales the proportion of youths held on remand as opposed to being bailed is about 20%. The figure in Jersey was about 80%.
Mr Bellwood, who was criticised by Mr Shenton in the leaked letter, described parts of it as "exaggerated and manipulated".
He said the minister was attempting to divert attention away from issues surrounding the island's youth justice system.
"It creates a diversion, which is exactly what he wants to do," Mr Bellwood told BBC News.
When Mr Bellwood was sacked in May 2007 after 10 months in charge, he took the States of Jersey to an employment tribunal, claiming he was unfairly dismissed for "whistle blowing". A settlement was reached in March this year during the tribunal. (from thisisjersey)

ISLAND social workers are having to juggle almost twice the number of childcare cases recommended following the death in the UK of Victoria Climbié.
The JEP has learned that Children’s Services are so short-staffed that each officer is dealing with an average of 20 cases – even though Lord Laming, who led an inquiry into failings by Haringey Social Services following the eight-year-old’s murder, concluded that individual caseloads should be capped at 12.
Senior figures in the Health and Social Services Department said that they would need an extra ten staff to meet the target, but stressed that the system was still working well. Health chief executive Mike Pollard (pictured) said: ‘Providing social services in a small community is likely to be more successful because there is a very close working relationship between the many agencies, like the police and Hospital staff, who work together to keep children safe and far from harm. Providing services in a small island like Jersey also means that it is far harder for families to slip through the net.’
However, it is understood that recruitment is becoming harder and harder in the wake of both the Haut de la Garenne inquiry and Senator Stuart Syvret’s past criticisms of the service. It is also now much harder to recruit qualified social workers to the Island because UK pay levels have now caught up with Jersey’s and restrictive housing laws make the Island an unappealing option (from thisisjersey)

Abuse: Minister silent on staff involvement



By Ramsay Cudlipp
THE Education Minister refused to reveal in the States yesterday if any of his department’s employees were currently under investigation by the police for child abuse allegations.
Senator Mike Vibert (pictured) said that he was not in a position to answer the question from Senator Stuart Syvret because of a conflict with the ongoing child abuse inquiry.
But Senator Syvret said that the response received to his question was ‘completely inadequate’ and stated that there was ‘no reason’ why the Assembly should not know if any employees were under investigation. ‘This is a matter of very significant public interest,’ he said. ‘There is simply no reason why the minister will not give the figures. Will he give them?’
Senator Vibert said that as an employer, it was States policy not to divulge individual information on employees. He added that he had checked with the police and was happy that his answer was entirely proper and accurate. (from thisisjersey)

That's a yes, one must assume.

looks very much like the Police run the island.....

The chief constable of Wiltshire is to lead a discipline inquiry into the conduct of the chief officer of Jersey police.
Brian Moore will look at the conduct of Graham Power over the investigation of alleged abuse at the former Haut de la Garenne children's home.
It comes as Sussex Police have begun investigating how a report by Mr Power's former deputy was leaked.
The report was published on the blog of Senator Stuart Syvret.
The separate investigations are both linked to the former Haut de la Garenne children's home.
It hit the headlines in February when police found what they believed to be part of a child's skull and began a murder investigation.
Scores of people then came forward saying they had been abused at the home between the early 1960s and 1986, leading to a number of people being charged by police.
Correct procedure
But the piece of suspected skull later turned out to be a piece of coconut, and detectives found no-one had been murdered.
The plan to investigate Mr Power, who is suspended from duty, was discussed in Jersey's State Assembly on Tuesday and Wiltshire Police have now confirmed the inquiry will be led by Mr Moore.
In November Jersey's government criticised the £4.5m police investigation into the case and ministers suspended Mr Power.

Graham Power was suspended last month

Mr Power said his suspension had not followed correct procedure, a claim rejected by the home affairs minister Andrew Lewis.
Mr Lewis told BBC News procedures had been followed "to the letter".
Meanwhile, the investigation into the leak of the report produced by former Deputy Chief Officer Lenny Harper has been ordered by the post's current occupant, David Warcup.
Mr Harper's report concerned the collapse of prosecution proceedings against certain suspects and was intended for the chief officer and the attorney general. It later appeared on Senator Syvret's blog.
Sussex Police say they want to speak to Senator Syvret as a witness, but he has so far declined to offer assistance. (from thisisjersey)