At Work - The Issue Of People Asking...
Jobs & Education0 min ago
Damian Green Goes
125 Answers
another Liar MP goes down the tube
altho he was in the news for possibly looking at porn
he fiddled Kate Maltby when he said he hadnt
Theresa May - 'I have therefore asked for your resignation'
I can't recollect a minister going with that reproof echoiong in his ears
altho he was in the news for possibly looking at porn
he fiddled Kate Maltby when he said he hadnt
Theresa May - 'I have therefore asked for your resignation'
I can't recollect a minister going with that reproof echoiong in his ears
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Peter Pedant. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
anne, our waiting is over
https:/
Perhaps EU negoiators will be impressed by his reluctance to keep promises.
https:/
Perhaps EU negoiators will be impressed by his reluctance to keep promises.
which serious criminal offence are you wittering on about - Ni my sweet ?
NJ is silent on this - I thought s/o wd immediately say - "oi those notebooks are ours ( mets) so give them back!" - but no - silence on that.
Do you remember Pell ? the fella who used to go round dustbins and pick carbons out of lawyers rubbish ? He outted paddy pantsdown.
The lawyers had a hoolie arguing over a sheet with writing on it ( which they alleged he stole ) and the information on it
breach of confidentiality isnt a crime
they cant do - misfeasance in public office as - he's not in a public office
so I think they are very quiet about whether PC Blabber has committed a crime as they are short of really good one to charge him with
this has not happened in medicine since 1967 when Lord Moran kissed and told and the BMA (!) voted that year 497 to 3 that confidentiality extended beyond the grave
NJ is silent on this - I thought s/o wd immediately say - "oi those notebooks are ours ( mets) so give them back!" - but no - silence on that.
Do you remember Pell ? the fella who used to go round dustbins and pick carbons out of lawyers rubbish ? He outted paddy pantsdown.
The lawyers had a hoolie arguing over a sheet with writing on it ( which they alleged he stole ) and the information on it
breach of confidentiality isnt a crime
they cant do - misfeasance in public office as - he's not in a public office
so I think they are very quiet about whether PC Blabber has committed a crime as they are short of really good one to charge him with
this has not happened in medicine since 1967 when Lord Moran kissed and told and the BMA (!) voted that year 497 to 3 that confidentiality extended beyond the grave
"NJ is silent on this..."
No I'm not. I told you what offence I think he should be investigated for.
“No, of course not but that isn't what happened to Green, so you analogy is entirely spurious.”
No it’s not. The officer in my scenario discovered information that was entirely unrelated to his enquiries, did not form part of the evidence connected with the matter he was investigating and in fact it constituted no criminal offence at all. That’s exactly what happened during the raid on Mr Green’s office. The lying for which Mr Green was dismissed is also not a criminal offence nor is the possession of the pornographic material said to have been discovered. The former police officer had no business personally retaining that record, let alone revealing it.
As I said earlier, if you’re happy with police officers treating privileged information with such a cavalier attitude (because it suits their ends) you have lower expectations of them than I have.
No I'm not. I told you what offence I think he should be investigated for.
“No, of course not but that isn't what happened to Green, so you analogy is entirely spurious.”
No it’s not. The officer in my scenario discovered information that was entirely unrelated to his enquiries, did not form part of the evidence connected with the matter he was investigating and in fact it constituted no criminal offence at all. That’s exactly what happened during the raid on Mr Green’s office. The lying for which Mr Green was dismissed is also not a criminal offence nor is the possession of the pornographic material said to have been discovered. The former police officer had no business personally retaining that record, let alone revealing it.
As I said earlier, if you’re happy with police officers treating privileged information with such a cavalier attitude (because it suits their ends) you have lower expectations of them than I have.
If it was a labour person I have little doubt Mickey would not have such a cavalier attitude.
Green had to go, he is now toxic. Seems to me there is something that still smacks as a witch hunt as the 'lie' is about there not being porn on the computer, he is not admitting to viewing it nor as far as i can ascertain no one is pushing that point.
The bigger problem is the Police. With recent events on their behaviour this needs looking into, indeed the investigation has been taken from the Met: obviously cant be trusted.
Green had to go, he is now toxic. Seems to me there is something that still smacks as a witch hunt as the 'lie' is about there not being porn on the computer, he is not admitting to viewing it nor as far as i can ascertain no one is pushing that point.
The bigger problem is the Police. With recent events on their behaviour this needs looking into, indeed the investigation has been taken from the Met: obviously cant be trusted.
// No I'm not. I told you what offence I think he should be investigated for. //
misfeasance in public office
Oh God another CPS non starter - havent we had enough of them this week? - another rape acquittal I notice today
R v Belton 2010 EWCA/Crim/2010/2857
OK if you like reading cases ( well it beats AB on a lot of days!)
and fails on condition 4 ( see the case) (4) "Without reasonable excuse or justification ..."
PC Blabber has already said he thought he did have a reasonable excuse in that he had already pointed the sins of Damian Green out to (ministers of the crown) which sets up a defence under PIDA - Protected information disclosure act - the whistleblowers act.
but is usable in the public office defence. - see 4
a judge acquits four policemen in 2000 - way-haaaay! - for this offence.
Attorney General's Reference (No 3 of 2003) [2004] EWCA Crim 868, [2004] 2 Cr App R 23.
which I havent read but Lord! I know a dead horse when I see one.
I honestly (! ha) think PC Blabber will come out of this chargeless, smiling to himself in a delphic way
misfeasance in public office
Oh God another CPS non starter - havent we had enough of them this week? - another rape acquittal I notice today
R v Belton 2010 EWCA/Crim/2010/2857
OK if you like reading cases ( well it beats AB on a lot of days!)
and fails on condition 4 ( see the case) (4) "Without reasonable excuse or justification ..."
PC Blabber has already said he thought he did have a reasonable excuse in that he had already pointed the sins of Damian Green out to (ministers of the crown) which sets up a defence under PIDA - Protected information disclosure act - the whistleblowers act.
but is usable in the public office defence. - see 4
a judge acquits four policemen in 2000 - way-haaaay! - for this offence.
Attorney General's Reference (No 3 of 2003) [2004] EWCA Crim 868, [2004] 2 Cr App R 23.
which I havent read but Lord! I know a dead horse when I see one.
I honestly (! ha) think PC Blabber will come out of this chargeless, smiling to himself in a delphic way
.
Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough stated, [2003] 2 AC 1 at page 230F:
"….. The official concerned must be shown not to have had an honest belief that the was acting lawfully; this is sometimes referred to as not having acted in good faith… Another way of putting it is that he must be shown either to have known that he was acting unlawfully or to have wilfully disregarded the risk that his act was unlawful.
completely screws PC Blabber and misconduct in public office
He ( PC B) has already stated he thought he was behaving lawfully
Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough stated, [2003] 2 AC 1 at page 230F:
"….. The official concerned must be shown not to have had an honest belief that the was acting lawfully; this is sometimes referred to as not having acted in good faith… Another way of putting it is that he must be shown either to have known that he was acting unlawfully or to have wilfully disregarded the risk that his act was unlawful.
completely screws PC Blabber and misconduct in public office
He ( PC B) has already stated he thought he was behaving lawfully
For what it's worth, I agree with NJ/Naomi here. I find it very hard to get het up about Damian Green lying about porn. It is not a lie which seriously affects his former duties as a minister, and is frankly quite understandable. The real story here is that privileged information has been used as a political weapon. Everybody knows that this kind of information comes at a premium in Westminster, and that the men in smokey rooms are very tactical about using it. There is a "black arts" story here that is not getting nearly enough attention because the word "porn" gets more headlines.
“PC Blabber is not an office holder - game over on that one isnt it?”
But he was at the start of his misconduct, Peter (retaining or copying his notebook). And his responsibility does not end when he leaves his post. Anybody subject to the Official Secrets Act (which I know is not an issue here but I use it just for analogy) knows that their responsibilities do not end when they leave their jobs. So it is with misconduct in public office. As Commissioner Dick said, officers have an “enduring responsibility” to behave. So not game over by any means.
“He ( PC B) has already stated he thought he was behaving lawfully”
But, as with all offences that have such a "get-out-of-jail-free" clause, that belief must be reasonable. Many miscreants have a belief they were acting lawfully. That belief has to be reasonable (or else everybody would cite it) and the level of that reasonableness must usually be tested in court.
But he was at the start of his misconduct, Peter (retaining or copying his notebook). And his responsibility does not end when he leaves his post. Anybody subject to the Official Secrets Act (which I know is not an issue here but I use it just for analogy) knows that their responsibilities do not end when they leave their jobs. So it is with misconduct in public office. As Commissioner Dick said, officers have an “enduring responsibility” to behave. So not game over by any means.
“He ( PC B) has already stated he thought he was behaving lawfully”
But, as with all offences that have such a "get-out-of-jail-free" clause, that belief must be reasonable. Many miscreants have a belief they were acting lawfully. That belief has to be reasonable (or else everybody would cite it) and the level of that reasonableness must usually be tested in court.
mikey - // I don't have any problem with Police Officers, serving or retired producing evidence. //
Don't you?
I certainly do!
For a police officer to retain not only notebooks from his service, but a copy of the PC hard drive from the office of a government minister - and then use them for what certainly appears to be personal advantage, is absolutely unacceptable, and I am most surprised that you do not think it so.
Don't you?
I certainly do!
For a police officer to retain not only notebooks from his service, but a copy of the PC hard drive from the office of a government minister - and then use them for what certainly appears to be personal advantage, is absolutely unacceptable, and I am most surprised that you do not think it so.
Latest Posts
Jobs & Education3 mins ago
Labour's Lead Evaporating.....
News4 mins ago
Crosswords6 mins ago
Politics25 mins ago
Trouble With Wi-Fi On My Iphone 11
Technology74 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.