Sir Cliff Richard
Discussion
Derek Smith said:
Monkeylegend said:
10.
1 to turn the lights on, 2 to do the search and 7 to guard the cars.
How many police officers does it take to search premises? 1 to turn the lights on, 2 to do the search and 7 to guard the cars.
Firstly you need the team which enters the building, complete with warrant. Any occupant has to be escorted away or monitored while they remain. You need a search team. This is an essential. They are the pros, the ones who grimace in disgust when some ignorant director has the police search premises on a film or TV programme. You need evidence bagged. You need someone to open things. You need someone in charge of the search team. You need someone in charge of the property seized. You need everything itemised, including the stuff you choose to leave behind.
How long do you think it takes to search a room? One where items, small items, might be secreted?
On one search I was on - I stood at a door to stop people going in and out - there was an electrician because there was a fad of hiding drugs behind sockets and some of the sockets in other searches were booby-trapped.
Evidence gathering is a specialist job. I don't know the tenth of it but I do know a lot of people are required to ensure that anything found is not rejected in court due to poor process.
Oh, and there might well have been a video record of every room.
Or they could have sent one PC on foot with instructions to look around to see if there was anything that looked good.
Just the one car then.
dandarez said:
It may well be correct that we imprison more people than other European countries.
The fact is though many of them in our prisons are... Europeans!
To put things into a real perspective, last year we jailed 142 Vietnamese.
Everything, as per usual in the UK, is all under control... not.
Our prisons are revolving doors.Hull prison 70% return rate the majority are locals (British).The fact is though many of them in our prisons are... Europeans!
To put things into a real perspective, last year we jailed 142 Vietnamese.
Everything, as per usual in the UK, is all under control... not.
skeggysteve said:
Are you saying that every time 'your' record gets played on the BBC they pay you £89?
I don't know much about the music business, but there is one person on PH (who has posted in this tread) that does and I hope he reads this and posts.
A comment on a recent (quite interesting, as it goes) programme about the songs that have made the most money suggested that although the BBC wouldn't say exactly how much they paid, it was around £56 per minute on Radio 1, and possibly less on local channels.I don't know much about the music business, but there is one person on PH (who has posted in this tread) that does and I hope he reads this and posts.
skeggysteve said:
I thought you got paid by the PRS not directly from the BBC as you seem to be saying?
I just assumed that was shorthand - BBC pays PRS, PRS pays music publisher, publisher pays writer.Cliff Richard hires Max Cliffords lawyer. Well that went well last time. Or is it a case of damage limitation?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11042...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11042...
It raises general questions about publicity for as yet untested allegations, and about relationships between police and media, a subject discussed but not resolved by Leveson. I am generally in favour of public justice, but executing a search warrant with media in attendance may cross a threshold as to what is fair and necessary.
No one says it was the police on this occasion. My money is that the source is a court employee, but who knows? On previous occasions, police have tipped off the media, but police and BBC say that the leak did not come from the police in this case. There remains a concern about what the police did once they knew that the BBC knew of the planned raid.
Oakey said:
Who cares how the BBC found out about the raid, just seems like a diversion from the actual matter at hand.
At the back of my mind, since last week, it did occur that if someone with influence were being looked after, a leak would be a good way to obfuscate or even nullify evidence gained.Nope. Won't work. English law has no general exclusionary "fruits of the poisoned tree" doctrine, and there is in any event nothing to suggest that the warrant was gained or executed unlawfully. Seeing spooks and shadows behind every bush may be fun, but sometimes boring old reality intervenes.
Breadvan72 said:
Nope. Won't work. English law has no general exclusionary "fruits of the poisoned tree" doctrine, and there is in any event nothing to suggest that the warrant was gained or executed unlawfully. Seeing spooks and shadows behind every bush may be fun, but sometimes boring old reality intervenes.
I read it as they felt this was a diversion from the issues around the "Establishment" figures.desolate said:
Breadvan72 said:
Nope. Won't work. English law has no general exclusionary "fruits of the poisoned tree" doctrine, and there is in any event nothing to suggest that the warrant was gained or executed unlawfully. Seeing spooks and shadows behind every bush may be fun, but sometimes boring old reality intervenes.
I read it as they felt this was a diversion from the issues around the "Establishment" figures.It seems to me that previous convictions have been on a collective basis, whereby "patterns of behaviour" have added weight to the argument.
In this case we have a single complainant from a long time ago, so I guess the Police have done the search in a blaze of publicity in order to garner further accusations and increase their probability of success.
Shabby.
The problem with conspiracy theories about helping the guilty is that if the step taken could not achieve the effect intended it makes the supposedly cunning and devious conspiracy look a bit rubbish. If this is supposed to be high level string pulling you might think that they would be a bit better at it.
Breadvan72 said:
The problem with conspiracy theories about helping the guilty is that if the step taken could not achieve the effect intended it makes the supposedly cunning and devious conspiracy look a bit rubbish. If this is supposed to be high level string pulling you might think that they would be a bit better at it.
The top brass have been crap at a lot of things - why should we suppose they should be particularly elegant at conspiracy?In very simple terms I wouldn't mind that helicopter and the X amount of policeman looking for the missing dossier rather than in Sir Cliff's knicker drawer.
Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 19th August 13:26
Einion Yrth said:
He may, or may not, be entirely innocent of any child abuse but as I continue to remind myself he is very definitely guilty of "Mistletoe and wine" and should hang for that.
Half of my ipod Christmas song playlist will be taboo if Cliff goes down. I already court controversy by having "Rock and Roll Christmas" on it.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff