Singletrack Mountain Bike Magazine

• Overview
• Bike Forum
• Chat Forum
• For Sale
• Wanted
• Forum Help
• Classified Rules

Chat Forum

1. porterclough - Member

   Predictable outcome really:

   http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8011341.stm

   So, did Quick's mistake mess up the investgation so badly they had to move in and arrest before having enough evidence, or was it all a load of codswallop in the first instance?

   
   The raids had to be brought forward following a blunder by the UK's most senior counter-terrorism officer.

   Assistant Commissioner Bob Quick quit his post a day after the operation - after he had accidentally revealed operational details to photographers from a document he was carrying.

   However, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith told MPs on Monday the error had not damaged the operation and the only impact had been that the raids had been brought forward "by a matter of hours".
   

   Posted 3 years ago #
2. jova54 - Member

   police intelligence

   Oxymoron?

   Posted 3 years ago #
3. jova54 - Member

   Ooops double post.

   Posted 3 years ago #
4. yossarian - Member

   load of old bollocks in my opinion, a knee jerk reaction to g20 i think.

   Posted 3 years ago #
5. zaskar - Inactive

   Still they got deported?

   no evidence?

   Or suspect without evidence as cops screw up again?

   Dimwits...

   Posted 3 years ago #
6. jojoA1 - Member

   However, a police officer just won the first Orwell Prize (awards prizes for journalism/reportage) for blogs. So one of them must be reasonably intelligent.

   Posted 3 years ago #
7. coffeeking - Member

   

   Posted 3 years ago #
8. Andy_K - Member

   Agree, no big supprises here. Majority of terror "suspects" never get charged. Probably try to deport them so the police don't look like ineffective tools operating on internet chat-room hearsay!

   Posted 3 years ago #
9. BigDummy - Member

   As my principal political act at the moment, I refuse to be terrorised either by bearded loonies or by the Home Secretary.

   Posted 3 years ago #
10. epicyclo - Member

    If they put as much effort into the big killers the tobacco manufacturers would be strung up, and young lunatics with hot cars would be right beside them

    Posted 3 years ago #
11. Richie_B - Member

    For once I sympathise with the police sounds like they had fairly conclusive non-admissible intercept evidence but nothing that would stand up in court. What would everyone be saying if they had let things run a bit to gain the hard evidence and people had died?

    The police can be heavy handed and bigoted at times but you would have to be seriously into paranoiac conspiracy land to believe that there was absolutely no grounds for their actions even if the intelligence they had was wrong. Its easy to make comments made in hindsight when someone is making what they believe to be a life or death call on limited evidence.

    Case of they would be damned if they did or didn't act.

    Posted 3 years ago #
12. mrmichaelwright - Member

    terrorists or not, they are innocent until proven guilty. Like it or not, that is the law of the country in which we live DESPITE our current government's efforts to corrode this.

    Posted 3 years ago #
13. uplink - Member

    They may well be innocent but arresting & questioning is acceptable & necessary

    Posted 3 years ago #
14. mrmichaelwright - Member

    not for 28 days without charge it's not.

    Posted 3 years ago #
15. uplink - Member

    Has it been that long?

    Time flies, it only feels like a couple of weeks

    I have no issue whatsoever with what the police did in this instance

    Posted 3 years ago #
16. TandemJeremy - Member

    Richie_B - Member

    For once I sympathise with the police sounds like they had fairly conclusive non-admissible intercept evidence but nothing that would stand up in court.

    Where do you get that from? Nothing I have seen indicates that.

    Posted 3 years ago #
17. surfer - Member

    Richie_B - Member

    For once I sympathise with the police sounds like they had fairly conclusive non-admissible intercept evidence but nothing that would stand up in court.

    Where do you get that from? Nothing I have seen indicates that.

    That appears to be the stance. They are holding firm that there was sufficient intelligence to pick them up for questioning.
    The level of proof required for deportation is far lower than a criminal court would require, hence them being released but deported.

    Posted 3 years ago #
18. yossarian - Member

    http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/war/very-big-terror-plot-not-very-big-or-terrifying-or-a-plot%2c-admit-police-200904221718/

    sums things up quite well

    Posted 3 years ago #
19. nickc - Member

    For once I sympathise with the police sounds like they had fairly conclusive non-admissible intercept evidence

    Bollards, I'm afraid. They had one email, that if taken out of context might have made oblique references, and a couple of phone calls. and that's yer lot.

    Posted 3 years ago #
20. easygirl - Member

    would you be critisising the police if a bomb had detonated in a busy nightclub or shopping centre, killing a member of your family, thats the reality of the situation.
    the anti terorist squad are also spending millions of pounds and hours trying to stop young muslims being drawn into the terrorist culture, so dont think its only about arresting "innocent " people.There is a massive drive behind the scenes to try and stop the extremist culture in this country.

    Posted 3 years ago #
21. Nonsense - Member

    Now I thought about posting on this for a little while. Then annoyance got the better of me. I find it quite staggering that a group of people I would ordinarily consider to be fairly well-rounded and analytical can come up with such a bunch of reactionary toss. The fact is none of you categorically know what the police based the decision to arrest on, but are quite happy to assume they were wrong because there were no charges? It demonstrates a quite staggering misunderstanding of the issues, and that guff about it being linked to G20! Gimme a break! It's like reading the Daily Mail in reverse.

    Posted 3 years ago #
22. BigDummy - Member

    What would everyone be saying if they had let things run a bit to gain the hard evidence and people had died?

    That the people who had died had been killed by idiot criminal fantasists posing no existential risk to us or our way of life who should have got girlfriends and a shave, and that we were glad we didn't live in a country where people got their doors kicked in for no good reason. Sorry. Pseudo-muslim murder-prats have had a couple of seriously lucky breaks, and made a couple of game tries. They are basically lousy at killing people.

    Posted 3 years ago #
23. AdamW - Member

    Now I thought about posting on this for a little while. Then annoyance got the better of me. I find it quite staggering that a group of people I would ordinarily consider to be fairly well-rounded and analytical can come up with such a bunch of reactionary toss. The fact is none of you categorically know what the police based the decision to arrest on, but are quite happy to assume they were wrong because there were no charges? It demonstrates a quite staggering misunderstanding of the issues, and that guff about it being linked to G20! Gimme a break! It's like reading the Daily Mail in reverse.

    Fair enough. But if they have not been found guilty of anything then they should be released. The efforts to deport smack of someone attempting to cover up embarrassment. To say otherwise would be reactionary toss of the Daily Mail variety.

    Posted 3 years ago #
24. TandemJeremy - Member

    I strongly believe that had next to no evidence - as has been the case with the vast majority of these type of raids / arrests. If the police got any real evidence from the raids they would have been charged. For sure the suspicion was there and enough to do the raid - but what evidence did they get from the raid? Where are the bomb making kits etc.

    I am sure they have been deported to prevent complaints and to hush it all up. Much easier to deport than to apologise and attempt to make good for the wrongful arrests.

    Posted 3 years ago #
25. coffeeking - Member

    Not really wrongful arrests if they have enough to arrest them?

    Posted 3 years ago #
26. Nonsense - Member

    Fair enough. But if they have not been found guilty of anything then they should be released. The efforts to deport smack of someone attempting to cover up embarrassment. To say otherwise would be reactionary toss of the Daily Mail variety.

    I agree totally that they should be released if there isn't sufficient evidence to charge. Not sure I agree entirely about the deporting bit. I can think of instances where there would be insufficient evidence to charge, but strong intelligence to show individuals are a danger to the public. In this instance I would imagine deportation is probably preferable to a control order, thankfully I don't ever expect to be faced with those options. Although government and police sources have stated that Bob Quick's faux pas had very little effect on the decision to arrest, the over riding factor in all of these cases is going to be public safety. That means the decision to intervene is always likely to err on the side of caution, rather than effective evidence gathering.

    For me the issues of government intrusion and the horrible consequences of getting it wrong are too important to be discussed so flippantly and without proper measured argument. I consider myself to be fairly liberal, but I also experienced first hand the events in London on 7/7. I find the description of the deaths of 56 people as a game try abhorrent. I'm gonna leave it there I think. It's all getting a bit serious for a Thursday afternoon.

    Posted 3 years ago #
27. grizzlygus - Member

    would you be critisising the police if a bomb had detonated in a busy nightclub or shopping centre,

    Well I guess it would all depend on whether the bombing incident occurred because of police incompetence or not. If it was proved to have occured because of police incompetence then yes, I would feel that it was appropriate to criticise the police. If however the police were not at fault, then it would clearly be inappropriate to criticise the police. All pretty obvious stuff I would have thought.

    I think what people want easygirl, is simply for the police to do their job properly as indeed they expect all professionals to do. Surely this is a concept which you can easily understand ?

    I do however agree with what I believe to be your sentiments, ie the level of criticism against the police is starting to reach truly absurd levels. Knocking the police for everything they do, appears to becoming very fashionable indeed. And plenty are happy to jump on the bandwagon, as is wonderfully illustrated in this daft comment :

    police intelligence

    Oxymoron?

    I don't know/care enough about this case to have any opinion or be concerned about police actions surrounding it. I am however concerned about this government which I trust even less than the police, and whilst I might not know about these individual cases, I do know about stuff such as "innocence" and "evidence".

    If these guys get deported it won't be imo, because there is a long history of people committing terrorist outrages after being arrested and released due to lack of evidence, but purely for 'political reasons'.

    And that worries me.

    Posted 3 years ago #
28. Sandwich - Member

    The problem with dismissing the flippant response is that the police service has allowed itself to be politicised. A professional outfit would have ensured they kept their distance from the political classes. As a result there is mission creep where the senior officer in a serious case will criticise the judge for dismissing the charges or giving a reduced sentence. Invariably this will be due to a technical legal flaw or incompetence by his team.
    They have done themselves no favours by being drawn into the political sphere and losing their independence/impartiality.

    Posted 3 years ago #
29. seven - Member

    and what do you think politicised the police?

    Posted 3 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.