Tory MP's Arrest: 'Stalinesque'

Tory leader David Cameron has reacted angrily to the arrest of his immigration spokesman, describing the police operation as "heavy handed".

Damian Green was questioned for nine hours over an inquiry into Home Office leaks before being released on bail. Mr Cameron said he was arrested for releasing information "the government didn't want to be made public". The government has said it had no knowledge of Mr Green's arrest before it happened.

Speaking outside the House of Commons, Mr Green said: "I was astonished to have spent more than nine hours today under arrest for doing my job. I emphatically deny I have done anything wrong. I have many times made public information that the government wanted to keep secret - information that the public has a right to know."

Speaking on BBC One's Question Time, shadow chancellor George Osborne said: "I think it's absolutely extraordinary that the police have taken that decision. It has long been the case in our democracy that MPs have received information from civil servants - I think to hide information from the public is wrong. It is early days, it's an extraordinary case. I think there are going to be some very, very big questions asked of the police."

Conservative sources said a police investigation into a high-ranking politician would have to have been cleared at "the very top" and have described the actions as "Stalinesque".

The Lib Dems said Mr Green's arrest was a "worrying development" with serious implications for the balance of power between the government and parliament. "Receiving information from government departments in the public interest and publicising it is a key part of any MP's role," said Chris Huhne, the party's home affairs spokesman. It seems that either the law needs to be changed over the police have overstepped the mark."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7753763.stm

When you newly empower a monster, as our Beloved Dear Leader (G Brown) has done with the Police, arming them with all the trappings of a repressive, suspicious State machine, this is what you get: in the end, the mechanism turns on itself and the show trials begin... Welcome to Mr Brown's 'fairer' Britain. You'll like it here. It's safer.

If they'd have duffed him up and forced him to flee, resulting in him waging a guerilla war against the coppers in the nearby forests and hills, would it have been 'Stallonesque'?

Alternatively, if they'd have have played him the greatest hits of 90's Britpop band Sleeper, would one of the hits have been 'Statueseque'?

I'm sure if it was another party, the would'nt of overstepped the mark..

The forum has noticed the Prime Minister’s remarkable transformation in the last few weeks from Mr Bean back to Stalin.

The Government's grubby footprints are all over this. The police would never arrest an MP without checking with the powers that be.

Bah, as much as the conspiracist in me would like to believe that I think this was most likley the work of an over zealous police. However, even that is still pretty bad. Furthermore, the lack of communication/intervention with the home secretary is unexcusable.

So why was he arrested for leaking information that the government didn't want releasing? if so that sounds like an arrestable offence! if so then what's the problem? TBH he's lucky he was only in there for 9 hrs. If they arrested him after 6pm then he probably would have been left in a cell all night before being interviewed the next day.

Return_of_the_STAR wrote:that sounds like an arrestable offence!

Hopefully Atreyu will come in to explain the public interest defence, which so clearly applies to Green's passing of information to the media. There's more chance of Gordon Brown smiling than this coming to court.

Return_of_the_STAR wrote:So why was he arrested for leaking information that the government didn't want releasing? if so that sounds like an arrestable offence?

Why?

It's in "public interest"?

Cal didn't include the things leaked, but here's some of them:

It follows a series of leaks, including:

* The November 2007 revelation that the home secretary knew the Security Industry Authority had granted licences to 5,000 illegal workers, but decided not to publicise it.

* The February 2008 news that an illegal immigrant had been employed as a cleaner in the House of Commons.

* A whips' list of potential Labour rebels in the vote on plans to increase the pre-charge terror detention limit to 42 days.

* A letter from the home secretary warning that a recession could lead to a rise in crime.

There's not much there that I can see the public shouldn't know, but there's a lot government wouldn't want them to know...

Besides MP always publicise things they learn from government bodies "in the public interest"

"Police in crime investigation shocker"

Seriously though to call it Stalin-esqe is laughable. They had information he may have been commiting an offence (I dont know exact details, maybe offical secrets or data protection etc) so they needed to investigate. Im guessing it was a fairly complex case so 9 hours is hardly torture.

Will everyone just leave the police alone. We do as we are told and believe me it could be a lot worse. Britain is recognised as having one of the most professional police forces in the world. We look after peoples rights here (whether you agree or not)

I bet if anyone here was ever accused of an offence you would be bloody grateful for our justice system, it protects the innocent. Some countries you would be slapped in jail before they even bothered to investigate.

Hexx wrote:

Return_of_the_STAR wrote:So why was he arrested for leaking information that the government didn't want releasing? if so that sounds like an arrestable offence?

Why?

It's in "public interest"?

Cal didn't include the things leaked, but here's some of them:

It follows a series of leaks, including:

* The November 2007 revelation that the home secretary knew the Security Industry Authority had granted licences to 5,000 illegal workers, but decided not to publicise it.

* The February 2008 news that an illegal immigrant had been employed as a cleaner in the House of Commons.

* A whips' list of potential Labour rebels in the vote on plans to increase the pre-charge terror detention limit to 42 days.

* A letter from the home secretary warning that a recession could lead to a rise in crime.

There's not much there that I can see the public shouldn't know, but there's a lot government wouldn't want them to know...

Besides MP always publicise things they learn from government bodies "in the public interest"

My guess is that it was an arrestable offence, i can only assume that if the govt doesn't want something releasing to the public and someone does then it's against the law. I know nothing about that section of the law but i assume that there is a law in place covering this. It was probably bought in as one of New Labours thousands of new laws though.

FatDaz wrote:Will everyone just leave the police alone. We do as we are told...

I invoke:

FatDaz wrote:...and believe me it could be a lot worse.

Oh, it will be. I believe you.

My guess if they weren't sure what information he had taken and so decided to take him into custody to prevent any potential security leaks of protected infomration. After some consideration I have to say the police were actually pretty prudent. After all the leaks of secret information that keep happening a bit of caution is advisable.

Brerlappins little hat wrote:

Drunken_Master wrote:If they'd have duffed him up and forced him to flee, resulting in him waging a guerilla war against the coppers in the nearby forests and hills, would it have been 'Stallonesque'?

Alternatively, if they'd have have played him the greatest hits of 90's Britpop band Sleeper, would one of the hits have been 'Statueseque'?

I prefer stallonesque. Or in a similar vein, you could have swayzesque, if the guerillas were caled 'the wildcats' and was waging a war against the communists

edit:
it was the wolverines in red dawn

How about SharonStonesque? - Picture the scene, Eight hours hours into questioning Damien Green uncrosses his legs and flashes the police with a snatch of hairy beaver. An hour later randy lustful cops release him on bail.

Return_of_the_STAR wrote:My guess is that it was an arrestable offence, i can only assume that if the govt doesn't want something releasing to the public and someone does then it's against the law. I know nothing about that section of the law but i assume that there is a law in place covering this. It was probably bought in as one of New Labours thousands of new laws though.

You won't find this one in any legislation. 'Misconduct in public office' is an ancient 'common law' offence. (Nothing sinister in that: much of the really important stuff, like murder, are common law offences.) I've just skimmed a judgment handed down by the Court of Appeal in 2004 (which you can read here): the court refers to a case decided in 1599.

The elements of the offence are (see para 61 of the judgment):

1. A public officer acting as such

2. Wilfully neglecting to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconducts himself

3. To such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder

4. Without reasonable excuse or justification.

Note that Green was questioned about "conspiring" and "aiding and abetting" the offence. Conspiracy and aiding and abetting are like 'both on' offences to someone else's commission of the 'main' crime - in this case, the unnamed civil servant. The civil servant is the guy who would actually be charged with the offence of misconduct in public office.

Although the Guardian briefing on the subject confidently concludes that acting in the public interest would defeat element 4 set out above, they don't provide any analysis on the point. I guess it would have to be something like that, though 'public interest' is about as slippery as tests go.

If the civil servant is innocent then Green would be as well: you can't be guilty of conspiracy or abetting if there is no primary offence. But it's not obvious to me that must be true, not least because we haven't yet heard anything about what the civil servant did. The CPS won't have taken a step like this without having run it thoroughly past their own lawyers, who will have had the advantage of having some evidence before them.

I don't think being a Tory MP or any kind of MP should prevent anyone from being arrested. Labour MPs were investigated in a similar way over the cash for honours enquiry and I see no difference here.

Cal wrote:When you newly empower

As noted above: no new powers used in this case.

Brerlappins little hat wrote:

Drunken_Master wrote:If they'd have duffed him up and forced him to flee, resulting in him waging a guerilla war against the coppers in the nearby forests and hills, would it have been 'Stallonesque'?

Alternatively, if they'd have have played him the greatest hits of 90's Britpop band Sleeper, would one of the hits have been 'Statueseque'?

I prefer stallonesque. Or in a similar vein, you could have swayzesque, if the guerillas were caled 'the wildcats' and was waging a war against the communists

edit:
it was the wolverines in red dawn

What if he'd grown a mane & a massive cock and started whinnying around the police station? Stallionesque?

Cal, it might have been overzealous of the police, it might be sensationalism in the media, whatever...

...but I'm getting pretty sick of your Orwellian conspiracy theory angle on every single news story you put up.

I don't usually comment but I would say pretty much everyone on this forum can read a story and make their own mind up and doesn't need your paranoid outlook.

Can you tone it down please?

Danny Boy wrote:Cal, it might have been overzealous of the police, it might be sensationalism in the media, whatever...

...but I'm getting pretty sick of your Orwellian conspiracy theory angle on every single news story you put up.

I don't usually comment but I would say pretty much everyone on this forum can read a story and make their own mind up and doesn't need your paranoid outlook.

Can you tone it down please?

You can't talk to her majesty like that!!! Insolent knave.

Grrr.

Atreyu wrote:

Cal wrote:When you newly empower

As noted above: no new powers used in this case.

No, but 3000+ new laws & offences since the New Labour Experiment gained control of the judiciary. New laws & offences = new powers of arrest. I rest my case.