Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Shadow Minister Arrested


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 831
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

While, imho, the police were heavy-handed in their actions, it does appear there is evidence that info was being leaked. What do people think the correct response was? If the allegations are proved true then, obviously, Mr. Green and Mr. Galley behaved in an illegal manner.

grammar

Leaking information isn't in of itself illegal. It may be if it breaches the Official Secrets Act, but otherwise should be an HR matter between employer and employee.

The fact that the OSA has not been cited (instead some obscure law about misconduct in public office) implies that it wasn't breached. So there's nothing criminal and the police shouldn't have arrested the source of the leak let alone the MP. The fact that they did not inform the DPP/ CPS and get clearance from them in the usual way also implies this wasn't criminal. Finally the collapse of the Murrer trial (journalist charged with the same offence) implies the police have decided to use this arcane law to suppress dissent against the state. This is a new development

I wonder how much encouragement they got from the Government

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry for going off-topic. I'll say one last thing on the death penalty matter and leave it at that; I find it bizarre that some people are outraged at the government's infringement on people's rights in this matter, but seem to think it a good idea that the state can legally murder people. Some very confused people on this forum.

Once again, judicial execution is not state murder.

Furthermore, you and I ARE the state. We are REPRESENTED by government. As a society we may (or may not, as is presently the case) allow the judicial punishment for pre-meditated murder to be execution of the offender. In so doing we ALL partake in the offender's execution (which is why in times gone by hangings were always public - not for gloating but to reinforce the collective guilt, that the blood of the hanged man was on the hands of ALL the people). Likewise, the blood of an innocent man wrongly executed is borne by every member of society. It is a collective compact that restrains the worst excesses that humankind is capable of and offers justice to the murdered victim's family thus heading off vigilante retribution. In other words, it is a legal resort sanctioned by the collective, and not an individual and independent resort as is murder.

And I, too, apologise for going off-topic again. I shall not say another word on the subject. Sorry.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Leaking information isn't in of itself illegal. It may be if it breaches the Official Secrets Act, but otherwise should be an HR matter between employer and employee.

The fact that the OSA has not been cited (instead some obscure law about misconduct in public office) implies that it wasn't breached. So there's nothing criminal and the police shouldn't have arrested the source of the leak let alone the MP. The fact that they did not inform the DPP/ CPS and get clearance from them in the usual way also implies this wasn't criminal. Finally the collapse of the Murrer trial (journalist charged with the same offence) implies the police have decided to use this arcane law to suppress dissent against the state. This is a new development

I wonder how much encouragement they got from the Government

Fair point, well put. I found it the press reports frustrating in the lack of detail supplied.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else heard the rumour that, on Wednesday, Mr Speaker is going to place the House into Secret Session and read out the evidence placed before his and Sergeant's teams of constitutional lawyers and the unequivocal advice given by them? Apparently, he's not going to take any lip from anyone on this subject. Dynamite, I understand. The Tories have always liked Gorbels Mick! They're going to love him even more after this!

The secret should be safe - after all none of the 650 or so MP's are going to blab, are they?

p

Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone else heard the rumour that, on Wednesday, Mr Speaker is going to place the House into Secret Session and read out the evidence placed before his and Sergeant's teams of constitutional lawyers and the unequivocal advice given by them? Apparently, he's not going to take any lip from anyone on this subject. Dynamite, I understand. The Tories have always liked Gorbels Mick! They're going to love him even more after this!

The secret should be safe - after all none of the 650 or so MP's are going to blab, are they?

p

NO.

Which either makes you very well-placed in government circles or a total troll with a good imagination.

Given your record on this site, I'm not sure which is worse.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Back on topic: what The Torygraph actually says:

Row over claim Damian Green 'groomed' Whitehall mole

In the Comment section:

Heads should roll

Arresting MPs happens in dictatorships

ixdbig01.jpg

Torygraph - dont make me laugh - the Telegraph has been brown-nosing for Gordon ever since Browns pal took over as editor, and imported the whole of the Mirror's political reporting team en-mass. Bar Kevin 'Toilets' McGuire back at the Mirror, Labour have no bigger fan in the media [except the BBC, natch]

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not sure that the Official Sectrets Act is applicable in this case, none of the information leaked was classified Secret, only Confidential.

Not sure I understand the need for police, I understand the need for a disciplinary proceedure or dismissal of an employee breaching a confidence. This is not official secrets act, this probably all comes under what in the past we might have thought should be available under the somewhat farcical freedom of information rules - like everything we get, the title means exactly the opposite.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone else heard the rumour that, on Wednesday, Mr Speaker is going to place the House into Secret Session and read out the evidence placed before his and Sergeant's teams of constitutional lawyers and the unequivocal advice given by them? Apparently, he's not going to take any lip from anyone on this subject. Dynamite, I understand. The Tories have always liked Gorbels Mick! They're going to love him even more after this!

The secret should be safe - after all none of the 650 or so MP's are going to blab, are they?

p

Shhhhhhhhhh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, thinking a bit more about the case, I find the language used by the Telegraph disturbing:

It appears to be intended to suggest a deviant relationship between the two men. I am a long way removed from conspiracy theory nuttery but this seems to be a deliberate smear.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mr Parry
Actually, thinking a bit more about the case, I find the language used by the Telegraph disturbing:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/353...aim-police.html

It appears to be intended to suggest a deviant relationship between the two men. I am a long way removed from conspiracy theory nuttery but this seems to be a deliberate smear.

BBC bloke did say the Tories were angry about the 'grooming' comment from the Police, he even said because of the paedophilia connotations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BBC bloke did say the Tories were angry about the 'grooming' comment from the Police, he even said because of the paedophilia connotations.

Yes, with the connotations the word now has, it could do the man serious harm. It was a very nasty comment, and hard to believe it was not deliberate. The UK needs proportional representation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mr Parry
Yes, with the connotations the word now has, it could do the man serious harm. It was a very nasty comment, and hard to believe it was not deliberate. The UK needs proportional representation.

Well, that Galley guy did look about 12.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quite. We should feel sorry for poor young Galley.

p

Is that "We" as in "the Labour Party", being apologetic about the unnecessary force and heavy-handed attitude to a leak? This will be the first time a leak has been detected that I recall, suggestign every other one has been sanctioned....

Press conference was sadly devoid of detail to support the conspiracy theory that there was actually a really strong dangerous treachery going on here.

"Mr Christopher Galley first met Damian Green in the Houses of Parliament in 2006. He was in contact with Mr Green over the following two years, including further meetings with him.

As a result Mr Galley gave Damian Green MP information which was important for the public to know in an open and democratic parliamentary system. As shadow minister for immigration and as a member of parliament Damian Green received the information in the same spirit and used it in his parliamentary duties.

In providing this information to a shadow minister, Mr Galley believed that it would be used in a wholly responsible manner in the public interest.

As a consequence you will know that Mr Galley was arrested by counter-terrorism officers in a dawn raid at his home on November 19. He was held under arrest at a police station for 17 hours and then released after exhaustive questioning by police.

Throughout that period Mr Galley was open and cooperative. He himself volunteered the whereabouts of his computer, his mobile phone and the documents the police needed for their inquiries whenever he was asked.

Those who initiated the police investigation and those who sanctioned the use of theses powers of arrest and search against a civil servant who was giving information directly to an MP should consider whether this was a necessary and proportionate way of dealing with this kind of allegation.

If ever there was a case of don't shoot the messenger, this was surely it."

I believe this is the press release as given in the Guardian.

I guess Ms Smith, who clearly knows lots more than she admits, evidenced by her continual use of the prefix "specific", will find some new angle for the smear.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, thinking a bit more about the case, I find the language used by the Telegraph disturbing:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/353...aim-police.html

It appears to be intended to suggest a deviant relationship between the two men. I am a long way removed from conspiracy theory nuttery but this seems to be a deliberate smear.

Of course, wouldn't expect any less from the handywork of Mandelson & Campbell - this is straight play from the ZaNu Labour spin book - first, muddly the water [the comparison with the Ruth Turner/cash-for-peerages arrests] then move on to smearing your opponent

Link to post
Share on other sites
Press conference was sadly devoid of detail ...

Yes. What do you think that press conference was for? It gave no new information and questions of any interest were declined. It was very noticeable, though, that the solicitor was keeping very clear of the subject of 'twenty leaks or four leaks'. I'm sure he wasn't trying to hide anything, though.

p

Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, thinking a bit more about the case, I find the language used by the Telegraph disturbing:

It appears to be intended to suggest a deviant relationship between the two men. I am a long way removed from conspiracy theory nuttery but this seems to be a deliberate smear.

Strange that. Why would the Telegraph take that line. d'you think?

p

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.