Tory MP's Arrest: 'Stalinesque'

Gorrable wrote:Ministers weren't involved in the decision. Being involved and being informed are very different things.

The juries out on that point - I'm sure the broadsheets will unearth some more on what exactly what went on, who knew what, who said what and when...

Gorrable wrote:Once the police have decided they're going to arrest someone, it would be completely improper for the government to attempt to stop them.

I kind of see what you are saying there, so I won't argue it. For now.

Gorrable wrote:Or are you arguing that the government suggested or in some way encouraged this arrest? Because that's an entirely different argument, one which there's literally no evidence for.

Yet. No evidence for that yet.

Gorrable wrote:

Eighthours wrote:

Gorrable wrote:ministers were not involved in the decision to seek police assistance or in the subsequent investigation and were only told of the arrest after it had occurred."

Then why the **** was Boris Johnson told beforehand? He alone, hmmm? Yeah, they'd really go to the London Mayor and not talk to anyone from the Government of the day. What a load of patent ********.

Ministers weren't involved in the decision. Being involved and being informed are very different things. I still doubt they were informed, but if they were it's irrelivant.

Granted, if a minister was informed they could say 'this is a bad idea', but would you really prefer it if ministers went around stopping arrests because they dissagree with them? Would you be making the same argument if we were talking about preventing the arrest of a Labour MP? Once the police have decided they're going to arrest someone, it would be completely improper for the government to attempt to stop them.

Or are you arguing that the government suggested or in some way encouraged this arrest? Because that's an entirely different argument, one which there's literally no evidence for.

It says above the official position is that no one in the government was told before the arrest.

But Cameron, Speaker, SergentatA, Boris all were told before the arrest - so it seems highly unlikable no one Lab's side was...

It's almost clearly a lie they weren't told, and if that's being lied about, what else is? (Is, I believe, the question/postion most people are taking)

And they (arguable) already did. When Tony Blair was questioned about his possible link to Cash for Hons - it was pre-arranged and not under caution...by arrangement with the government/police

Gorrable wrote:Once the police have decided they're going to arrest someone, it would be completely improper for the government to attempt to stop them.

Agreed, but historical precedent is for Ministers to be informed before a serving MP is either questioned or arrested. It seems more than curious that this apparently didn't happen here, even though the Leader of the Opposition and parliamentary officials were told, not to mention the Mayor of London.

Eighthours wrote:

Gorrable wrote:Once the police have decided they're going to arrest someone, it would be completely improper for the government to attempt to stop them.

Agreed, but historical precedent is for Ministers to be informed before a serving MP is either questioned or arrested. It seems more than curious that this apparently didn't happen here, even though the Leader of the Opposition and parliamentary officials were told, not to mention the Mayor of London.

That is a bit confusing. Parliamentary officials I can understand, because they searched Green's HoC offices, and possibly Boris was told via the Met, but I haven't a clue why David Cameron would know and, say, Jackie Smith wouldn't. Either a breakdown in communication or someone is lying.

So let's say we've got a situation where the police have been brought in by the Home Office's Sir Humphrey to investigate leaks of information from the Ministry. They find out that a junior civil servant has been leaking information. Let's call that person Mr X. It looks to them like a clear breach of the law relating to misconduct in public office. They also have reason to suspect (for the sake of argument) that the leak-ee is an opposition politician who knows where the information is coming from and who has even encouraged Mr X to carry on.

If you were the police in that situation, what would you do?

Atreyu wrote:If you were the police in that situation, what would you do?

Consult with the Home Office before taking any action, as per precedent. Arresting an MP is somewhat different from arresting a normal member of the public - whether that's "right" or "wrong" is open to debate, of course.

What is confusing is that there's bugger-all chance of this ever going to trial due to the public interest defence, and there was no reason to turn up at his house with 9 anti-terror police when Green wasn't exactly a flight risk. They could have simply rung him and asked him to come to the station. This had "sending a message" written all over it, although whether it's just an over-zealous police team or something else, I don't know.

Eighthours wrote:

Atreyu wrote:If you were the police in that situation, what would you do?

Consult with the Home Office before taking any action, as per precedent. Arresting an MP is somewhat different from arresting a normal member of the public - whether that's "right" or "wrong" is open to debate, of course.

I guess so. But doesn't that compromise the police's impartiality, or at least the appearance of impartiality?

Atreyu wrote:...If you were the police in that situation, what would you do?

Eighthours wrote:

Atreyu wrote:If you were the police in that situation, what would you do?

Consult with the Home Office before taking any action, as per precedent. Arresting an MP is somewhat different from arresting a normal member of the public - whether that's "right" or "wrong" is open to debate, of course.

Diplomatic immunity? sorry Political immunity!

Eighthours wrote:What is confusing is that there's bugger-all chance of this ever going to trial due to the public interest defence

A tad hasty to come to that conclusion, perhaps?

Eighthours wrote:and there was no reason to turn up at his house with 9 anti-terror police when Green wasn't exactly a flight risk. They could have simply rung him and asked him to come to the station.

Agree entirely. Whichever way you look at it, this was overkill.

I bought that exact model of hard disk and it went kaput about 3 months after purchase. Now most of it is unreadable (and it gets more so with every use) and after about half hour of use it stops reading completely.

I hate that picture.

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

I'm missing something I think.

Why was this in the Home Office "system" to start with?

Atreyu wrote:

Eighthours wrote:

Atreyu wrote:If you were the police in that situation, what would you do?

Consult with the Home Office before taking any action, as per precedent. Arresting an MP is somewhat different from arresting a normal member of the public - whether that's "right" or "wrong" is open to debate, of course.

I guess so. But doesn't that compromise the police's impartiality, or at least the appearance of impartiality?

Now I don't think that should be the case. If you are in law enforcement and you suspect anyone of criminal activity, and you feel you have enough cause for arrest, its your duty, your job to do so. Does not matter whether its your average joe on the street, or the highly paid well fed comfortably living MP's.

Atreyu wrote:

Eighthours wrote:

Atreyu wrote:If you were the police in that situation, what would you do?

Consult with the Home Office before taking any action, as per precedent. Arresting an MP is somewhat different from arresting a normal member of the public - whether that's "right" or "wrong" is open to debate, of course.

I guess so. But doesn't that compromise the police's impartiality, or at least the appearance of impartiality?

You're right, and if we were at "Day One" in terms of Parliamentarians being arrested I'd completely agree with the principle - but when there's an existing precedent, you have to ask why it was overlooked in this instance. Er... except when it came to informing Mr Cameron, the Speaker, the Serjeant and Boris, of course. Given the obvious political fallout that would follow the arrest, I have to go back to wondering why it seems that nobody in the Home Office was informed. It's just a very, very bizarre omission.

There is another theory on that, of course: maybe the omission was deliberate so that it couldn't look like the HO was pushing for an arrest. We definitely haven't heard the last of this.

Hexx wrote:

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

I'm missing something I think.

Why was this in the Home Office "system" to start with?

The legislation was the pet project of the Home Office, therefore the list of rebels would have been "worked on" (ie. to try to change their minds before the vote) by their officials and Ministers.

Clearly I'm being dense but I have no idea what Cal's picture-based post was trying to express.

Atreyu wrote:Clearly I'm being dense but I have no idea what Cal's picture-based post was trying to express.

I think it's a post referencing the forum "in-joke" of "Try an external Hard Drive" being the response to a fair amount of questions.

Atreyu wrote:Clearly I'm being dense but I have no idea what Cal's picture-based post was trying to express.

He was implying that Green will have his computer searched and be done for the paedogeddon images contained therein. It's his standard line when it comes to police entering people's houses when they can't make any other charges stick.

Government = bad, conspiracy theories, police = bad, Orwellian powers, and now Paedogeddon. We have a CAL THREAD JACKPOT, ladies and gents. Send on Brucie and the dancing girls!

Beef rictus.

Eighthours wrote:

Atreyu wrote:Clearly I'm being dense but I have no idea what Cal's picture-based post was trying to express.

He was implying that Green will have his computer searched and be done for the paedogeddon images contained therein.

Government = bad, conspiracy theories, police = bad, Orwellian powers, and now Paedogeddon. We have a CAL THREAD JACKPOT, ladies and gents. Send on Brucie and the dancing girls!

I like mine better.