Ban on US writer was for ‘attempt to mislead’

AN American journalist was banned from re-entering the UK after misleading border officials about her plans to travel on to Jersey, according to immigration authorities.

Leah McGrath Goodman
Leah McGrath Goodman

AN American journalist was banned from re-entering the UK after misleading border officials about her plans to travel on to Jersey, according to immigration authorities.

Leah McGrath Goodman, who recently made headlines after an interview she gave to Russian television in which she made inflammatory comments about Jersey began circulating among Islanders on the internet, was refused entry to the UK in 2011.

Her travel ban, which was reduced to a year following a successful appeal which was supported by Jersey Deputy Trevor Pitman and UK MP John Hemming, has now been lifted and Ms McGrath Goodman said she was looking forward to returning to the Island soon.

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required

Comments for: "Ban on US writer was for ‘attempt to mislead’"


She said that the main reason of her ban was because of her investigation on the sensitive subject of Haut de la Garenne.

She did came out with some crackers on the show.

the thin wallet

i hope mr pitman will show her the library with the books in it .


I hope Mt Pitman will seek alternate employment soon.


Really! I'd like to see you do a better job. Granted he isn't perfect but at least he is trying!


You can expect a lot more inflammatory comments if you stifle free speech and restrict the right to travel because of your views.


Perhaps you are struggling to read the report. Her right to enter the uk was restricted because of her inability to tell the truth, not becuase of her 'views'.


What truth ?

Do you seriously believe in the coconut theory after seeing the Jimmy Saville and Sir Peter Morrison scandal? Same timing, same generation !!!

When you see what people with money and power can get away with, you need to question yourself a bit more.

She said it, there is billions at stake over here. Who would want to put his money on the Island if it happened to be true.

I am not an expert on bones, but a coconut is a lot thinner and has some kind of minuscule brown layers. If you were to dig out a bone, by just scratching it you would see if it is white/cream underneath. The sample found must have been of a substantial size or you would have not paid attention to it.

So why several months of digging? As if a professional couldn't work out the difference between the 2 in less than 48h.


Trying to decipher some of your other comments on this thread, I don't think your lack of expertise relates just to bones does it Kermit ?

Just in case you're missing it:

'AN American journalist was banned from re-entering the UK after misleading border officials about her plans to travel on to Jersey, according to immigration authorities.'


I'm curious as to why you are so keen for a journalist who is proven to be willing to lie, to come and write about HDLG ?

What credibility will her work really have after her behaviour thus far ?

The victims of HDLG deserve compassion and dignity, not to be used by someone who is willing to lie and embellish to peddle salacious, factually inaccurate nonsense about our island.


One person said it had the *appearance* of coconut shell. It was never found to be coconut.

The piece in question tested positive for collagen which is only found in animals - not plants.

The coconut shell myth exposes what stories are peddled as fact over here to discredit/bury unfavourable stories and also how willing the populace is to accept these stories and carry on with their lives.

Should people be denied entry to the island because they don't hold "acceptable" opinions? How is that *not* a totalitarian state?

The Tooth Fairy

I am not quite sure how many times it has to be said but he we go again.

The item found (JAR 6) was scientifically tested and found to contain collagen.

Collagen is only found in mammals. Definitely not in coconuts.

QED JAR6 was mammalian and not a piece of coconut.

It was sent to Ke Gardens for further testing after an untrained lab assistant joked that it looked a bit like coconut.

After being returned from Kew Gardens JAR6 had "changed shape, colour and size".

At some point between the laboratory and Kew Gardens JAR6's entire chemical make up underwent some kind of metamorphosis and turned from part of an animal into part of a plant.

No-one has yet explained how this occurred but it follows that it was one of the following:

1. error in identification, either at the lab or at Kew

2. a miracle

3. skulduggery (sorry, couldn't resist)

The facts are actually out there if anyone wants to look.


Journalists have to take risks sometimes. They have to go undercover with hidden cameras so we can see what is really happening behind the scene. I am not talking about hacking phones, but some of them risk their lives to get us informed.

You would not know how people were treated in North Korea if a journalist didn't cross the border illegally for example.

Do you think the authorities would have welcomed him with a red carpet to film kids picking up dead rats in the mud?

Compassion and dignity is bit late don't you think? If someone had done her job 50 years ago, none of this shameful story would have happened.

Seriously James? If you think everything is pink around you, you either need to remove your sunglasses or repaint the walls of your mansion ...


Loco Says:

'Should people be denied entry to the island because they don’t hold “acceptable” opinions?'

Absolutely not. And this journalist wasn't denied access to the UK because of her unacceptable opinions. She was denied access because of her UNACCEPTABLE LYING TO IMMIGRATION OFFICERS IN THE UK.

How is that *not* a totalitarian state?'

I think if you are honest with yourself, you can probably answer this question


Got your point, ok, but how the hell did they know she was lying ?

Is there some kind of super spy working for the States ?

I doubt she had any criminal history, so why stopping her?

How did they know she was investigating HDLG and not coming to Jersey like thousands of tourists every year?

She came once , asked questions, got herself noticed and all of sudden her name shows up at customs in the UK. As if her name didn't ring the alarm in immigration office.

You don't find anything fishy in this story?

Bean About A Bit

When questioned on arrival she stated that she was working, despite having only applied for a tourist visa.

The law is clear that any form of work is forbidden unless you have the right documentation. I once had a friend who was refused entry because he mistakenly said, when questioned by immigration, that he was going to do some volunteer work at the Zoo during his time here when he came to visit for the summer.

Whether you agree or not, it is the law. If she was writing a book on sea shells, the same thing would have happened.


Her name came up because Journalist have to apply for a specific type of visa, and they are screened to see if the information is correct. As I am sure you are aware she has been doing a lot of press conferences relating to the ban and also the her agenda, prior to the ban, this would give the customs agency enough evidence to ban the visa for giving false information as to what she was doing. it is quite straightforward as to how/why she got stopped.

Also, again presuming you have seen some of her press work relating to Jersey you must understand how she does like to embellish everything, which is not good investigative journalism. All she is doing is taking the facts which are there for anyone to see and putting her own opinion on them, for example talking about Jerseys wealth, yes there is a lot of wealth here in the open and hidden, everyone knows that but she mentions a champagne sipping, yacht owning, diamond collecting society, like it is the norm, that is great journalism isn't it...


Some of comments were a bit wacky but she also had some very fair comments about what happens here !

Bean Telling Porky Pies!

I don't think there has been one factual comment come out of this woman's mouth. What on earth is Pitman doing?

Another reason why this man should NOT be voted in next time round.


I did hear about a book on this forum, which I think she refers to: Nobody Came

Banned or not I do not know, but its definitely the one ...

I can understand a journalist to be banned from entering North Korea, but the UK ?


The book 'nobody came' was sold by Amazon and was not available to the Channel Islands, this is a fact....make of it what you will! She was right in that......what else I wonder, and yes I agree that some of it is very sensationalist, but such is the nature of journalism, if there is a grain of truth in anything she says, and the grain is the apparent banning of a book by a survivor of the Jersey 'care' system then I for one have no objections. Most criminal activity expose's seem to be at the hands of investigative journalists these days and not the police....let her come, what have we to fear????


I ordered it from amazon and it came


3 2 1 and here comes the next round of astroturfing. Confused? See here

Double Standards

You've got to laugh really.

1. Journalist banned for ‘attempt to mislead’.

2. Europes most wanted and prolific drug dealer allowed entry and free passage to conspire to flood island with drugs.

Only in Jersey

Bean About A Bit

When I have been to the US, I have always filled out a Visa Waiver form. If I had lied on it, and been caught, I would expect to be sent home with future opportunities to visit limited.

Why should the same not apply when a US visitor enters the UK, lies about the nature of her business, and is then caught out.

Warren, on the other hand is a British National so there are no restrictions on his entering the island unless he was breaking the law whilst doing so, or there was evidence at the time to suggest he was intending on breaking the law.

Seems like you are the one that wants one rule for one, and not the other.

Double Standards

Do you not remember the covert photos of Curtis Warren arriving at Jersey Airport?

Please explain why our police force would want to waste their time covertly photographing a "british national" arriving at the airport if they didn't think he was going to break the law?

I find it quite strange that we do not impose border restrictions on people convicted of drug dealing and manslaughter just because they are British.

If you think it makes sense to let people like that in just because they have a british passport fair play to you. Personally I would rather an island full of visiting american journalists whether the lied or not.

Bean About A Bit

Oh dear. It really is not that hard to understand. Even my children get it.

There was never any doubt that Warren was intending on breaking the law, however one must be able to PROVIDED EVIDENCE to substantiate the claims.

The covert operation was to get that evidence so the police could then arrest, charge and convict, which they did!

I agree with you in as far as I wish there was a system in place to prevent these types coming in, but as it stands at the moment there is not and until the law changes, these people will be free to enter Jersey as they please.

Lying on your visa application form is unlawful, which is why Ms Goodman was refused entry.

Double Standards

Clearly you are struggling to understand what you have said yourself despite the fact your children not be.

You said "Warren, on the other hand is a British National so there are no restrictions on his entering the island unless........there was evidence at the time to suggest he was intending on breaking the law."

You then say "There was never any doubt that Warren was intending on breaking the law".

You then go on to say "I agree with you in as far as I wish there was a system in place to prevent these types coming in, but as it stands at the moment there is not and until the law changes, these people will be free to enter Jersey as they please."

Statement 1, he can be stopped if intending to commit crime.

Statement 2, he was intending to commit crime.

Statement 3, even if he was we cannot stop him.

If you're going to try and argue a point I suggest you try and be a little more consistent, ask your kids what that means if you are struggling with it.

Banging my Head Against a Wall

AGAIN... it's about being able to PROVE that he was intending to commit the crime.

Now, read this very carefully. I will try and keep it simple for you.

You can suspect, assume and speculate all you like, but at the time, the authorities did not have any EVIDENCE to suggest he was going to commit a crime, therefore they were unable to prevent him from entering the island. Or they were still gathering evidence to build a case meaning any action taken may have jeopardised the investigation.

Dear me, It's like trying to teach a fish to walk!


You have to laugh yes, an investigative journalist that could not even investigate the correct size or population of the island! let her come and see Jersey she propbably won't recognise it anyway!


Well Pitman has lost my vote.


Trevor Pitman is a laughing stock after supporting this Journalist. Actually can somebody explain what his purpose is in Jersey Politics?

the thin wallet

this lady should could come here and meet the real jersey folk of all walks of life ( rich and poor plus the squeezed middle).

and dispel certain misconceptions .

iwould invite her round for a good old spag boll or a bean crock.

spend a evening with a ordinary working person who was born here .

we need finance and we also need a fair and even society for us all.


Should be banned for not being a particularly good journalist

James Wiley

If we had to have good journalists who would write the JEP?


If they're going to ban journalists for 'attempting to mislead' it won't be too long before Fleet Street becomes a ghost town, ;-).


We have been "mislead" for years in Jersey by Politicians and Civil Servants!!!!!!


Here she is on Youtube....

I like her comment about Jersey at 6:20

"Books are banned on this democratic island"

So, you have to wonder why the UK customs wouldn't let her in, and why she didnt go to France and get on a boat here... Oh yes, you can only fly to Jersey....


"... according to immigration authorities .."

Now can we have the case for the defence please.


We keep on being told that the piece of coconut tested positive for collagen which is only found in animals though we are yet to see a link to an official report stating this (?).

As for Leah McGrath Goodman, she is free to come to Jersey anytime but whether I will be reading any of her rubbish following her daft interview is another thing!


the story has changed, when immigration spoke to the bbc some months ago on this topic the reason she was refused entry was because she had applied for the wrong type of visa.....


She said that they couldn't give her the reason why at the time. Very strange...

Now back to Reality

I take it those who believe this journalist also believe in the tooth fairy, the bogey man, the loch ness monster etc etc etc!


You should take it easy on the horse meat before assuming that everything is as it should...


I think if you include the word 'knowingly' Sam, you'll have your answers to how they are one and the same.


Jersey has always had a high level of establishment corruption. I think this journalist had linked some of the corruption in Jersey to UK politicians and that is the reason they have been so stringent. It is true she communicated on some issues too generalized and now has lost credibility. But the facts remain the same Jersey and the UK need a complete clean up as there continue to be unaccountable historic abuses. The establishment just want a cover up.


I find the reason behind toe original ban, if reported correctly, wrongful. Since when were travel plans to visit Jersey ever a consideration for a travel ban to the UK.


Banned for trying to mislead? Our COM had better not try to go to the UK then.


What has John Hemming Liberal MP for Yardley Birmingham got to do with anything in Jersey?


Some of you people are incredible. You are knowingly or unknowingly creating and defending a situation that protects those guilty of horrendous crimes against children. Foreign journalists always use business visitors visas. There isn't a more suitable immigration catgegory. She didn't lie. She was going onto a conference in Austria, and she had no intention to LIVE in Jersey. She'd had no interrogations before and had never come close to overstaying. But she had raised the hackles of some very powerful people. This woman wants to find the truth. Check out her most recent interview on youtube onm the voiceforchildren channel.