Plebgate - An interesting new twist

[Rovinghawk]

I thought that the ability to not blurt confidential information was fairly fundamental to a position of trust.

RH

Edited by Rovinghawk on Monday 17th December 17:10

[Derek Smith]

eldar said:

So what does Pace Code G actually mean - I've had a quick look, but is my simple eyes it looks like you need some evidence to arrest people, and don't pick on minority groups. Which doesn't seem unreasonable?

1.3

There must be a reason for the arrest and the arrest must be a reasonable way of dealing with the offence.

Many might have felt that if the officer had disclosed the details to the press then it is a breach of regulations and should have been dealt with internally. I cannot think of any other time when a prosecution for misfeasance or misconduct has been proceeded with for disclosing information to the press. I'm not even sure that I've known of anyone ever being dismissed the force for doing so.

The suspicion might be that the arrest and detention of the officer was unreasonable given the circumstances. If so then it fails to comply with Code G. Being a bit of an embarrassment for the bosses is not enough in many people's eyes.

There has been a previous case, mentioned earlier in this thread, when an MP was arrested and kept in custody and that was felt to be unreasonable and therefore it would be unlawful. Sauce for the goose and all that.

[rewc]

Derek Smith said:

1.3

There must be a reason for the arrest and the arrest must be a reasonable way of dealing with the offence.

Many might have felt that if the officer had disclosed the details to the press then it is a breach of regulations and should have been dealt with internally. I cannot think of any other time when a prosecution for misfeasance or misconduct has been proceeded with for disclosing information to the press. I'm not even sure that I've known of anyone ever being dismissed the force for doing so.

The suspicion might be that the arrest and detention of the officer was unreasonable given the circumstances. If so then it fails to comply with Code G. Being a bit of an embarrassment for the bosses is not enough in many people's eyes.



There has been a previous case, mentioned earlier in this thread, when an MP was arrested and kept in custody and that was felt to be unreasonable and therefore it would be unlawful. Sauce for the goose and all that.

if he sold the information to the press would that make a difference?

[ClaphamGT3]

As per usual, the "Police can do no wrong, the Govt can do no right" brigade are bestriding their hobby-horses.

What this makes clear is that no one has an informed view here; we'll just need to see how it plays out.

[Derek Smith]

rewc said:

if he sold the information to the press would that make a difference?

It would, with a caveat. Such things are normally dealt with internally, mainly because the press do not normally release sources or information as to how much they paid. This makes a conviction for corruption all but impossible.

[Zod]

Elroy Blue said:

It will be interesting to see if Keir Starmer feels the same about this case. Starmer is infamous in police circles for his strategy over PC Simon Harwood. “Not enough evidence to charge, Oh wait… there is, Oh wait, he has been acquitted…”

Edited by Elroy Blue on Monday 17th December 11:12

PC Simon Harwood is infamous to the public as the violent brute of a policeman who somehow got off. Your paranoid complaints about government match the feelings of the general public over Harwood's acquittal.

Note, I am talking about the public, not myself.

[Derek Smith]

rewc said:

if he sold the information to the press would that make a difference?

In addition:

Damien Green was suspected of prooming a civil servant to obtain confidential and sensitive information. A senior ACPO officer authorised the arrest for conspiracy to commit misconduct in a public office, and an additional, but slightly less serious offence.

The action, that's the arrest and detention, was felt to be disproportionate to the offence, for which Green was not prosecuted.

Is there any difference between selling information to the press or giving it to them for political advantage? Now there's a question.

Do not forget that the allegation against the officer is considerably less serious at this stage. There is no conspiracy, there is no grooming. Both of these circs would be serious aggravating factors.

[Zod]

Derek Smith said:

In addition:

Damien Green was suspected of prooming a civil servant to obtain confidential and sensitive information. A senior ACPO officer authorised the arrest for conspiracy to commit misconduct in a public office, and an additional, but slightly less serious offence.

You mean Bob Quick? A real credit to the force, that man.

[wiliferus]

rewc said:

Derek Smith said:

1.3

There must be a reason for the arrest and the arrest must be a reasonable way of dealing with the offence.

Many might have felt that if the officer had disclosed the details to the press then it is a breach of regulations and should have been dealt with internally. I cannot think of any other time when a prosecution for misfeasance or misconduct has been proceeded with for disclosing information to the press. I'm not even sure that I've known of anyone ever being dismissed the force for doing so.

The suspicion might be that the arrest and detention of the officer was unreasonable given the circumstances. If so then it fails to comply with Code G. Being a bit of an embarrassment for the bosses is not enough in many people's eyes.



There has been a previous case, mentioned earlier in this thread, when an MP was arrested and kept in custody and that was felt to be unreasonable and therefore it would be unlawful. Sauce for the goose and all that.

if he sold the information to the press would that make a difference?

Would make a difference to the alleged offence, but not to the apparent failure to comply wih Code G.

[rewc]

wiliferus said:

Would make a difference to the alleged offence, but not to the apparent failure to comply wih Code G.

Perhaps the Police believe there is a reason to arrest and the arrest is a reasonable way of dealing with the offence.

No doubt the Police Federation will be trying to question this belief.

[wiliferus]

rewc said:

wiliferus said:

Would make a difference to the alleged offence, but not to the apparent failure to comply wih Code G.

Perhaps the Police believe there is a reason to arrest and the arrest is a reasonable way of dealing with the offence.

No doubt the Police Federation will be trying to question this belief.

I would certainly hope so. It is, after all, their job.

[XCP]

I should imagine the review officers entries on the custody record make interesting reading.

[Rovinghawk]

One can only hope that they are leaked to the press.

RH

[rewc]

The BBC are reporting that:
"A police officer's claim that he witnessed a row outside Downing Street involving ex-chief whip Andrew Mitchell is being probed by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC).
It said it was "considering the validity of the officer's claim", which he apparently made to his local MP.
The police constable was arrested on suspicion of misconduct in a public office on Saturday.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20764044

Edited by rewc on Monday 17th December 21:00

[streaky]

Fort Jefferson said:

I blame Thatcher, if it wasn't for her, there wouldn't be any gates.

You should direct your blame towards those pillars of Ulster politics, Messrs Jerry Adams and Martin McGuinness.

Streaky

[eldar]

Derek Smith said:

1.3

There must be a reason for the arrest and the arrest must be a reasonable way of dealing with the offence.

Many might have felt that if the officer had disclosed the details to the press then it is a breach of regulations and should have been dealt with internally. I cannot think of any other time when a prosecution for misfeasance or misconduct has been proceeded with for disclosing information to the press. I'm not even sure that I've known of anyone ever being dismissed the force for doing so.

The suspicion might be that the arrest and detention of the officer was unreasonable given the circumstances. If so then it fails to comply with Code G. Being a bit of an embarrassment for the bosses is not enough in many people's eyes.

There has been a previous case, mentioned earlier in this thread, when an MP was arrested and kept in custody and that was felt to be unreasonable and therefore it would be unlawful. Sauce for the goose and all that.

Thanks, appreciate the explanation.

[Jasandjules]

Does leaking to the press justify arrest and detainment?

[anonymous-user]

It might or might not, depending on what was leaked, but it now appears that the arrest may relate to an allegedly false claim that a particular officer was present at the shouty incident.

[ClaphamGT3]

If this is as flagrant a breach of Code G as some are making out, why did the police arrest him, the police detain him and the police question him?

Why didn't they just say that they didn't think that there were grounds for arrest?

[Red Devil]

Leaks are the standard way of comunicationg information informally in Westminster. Funny how, when this practice occurs outside those hallowed precincts, it suddenly becomes the subject of righteous indignation and extreme reactions.

Yes Minister - as always, had it spot on.

"That's another of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I give confidential press briefings; you leak; he's being charged under section 2A of the Official Secrets Act."