Brexit, for once some facts.

[flecc]

The evidence against Green seems to be very strong.

There is no evidence whatsoever of anything wrong and you are very much in the wrong for inferring otherwise. There is only innuendo and false accusations such as the pretence by some that it was a parliamentary computer and accusations without any evidence that he was accessing pornography during parliamentary business.

The computer was Damian Green's own private property, proved now by his giving it to charity. He used it for his leisure and work just as so many of us do or have done. Everything legal on it was his and only he could legally decide who else should know the content.

We have no idea whether there was or wasn't pornography on it, we have no idea who else might have had access to it.

What we do know is that the ex officer was one of a task force that mounted a badly bungled raid on parliament for which they were rightly heavily criticised at the time, something I well remember. That alone casts suspicion on what that ex officer is saying now, since it could be as much sour grapes as anything else. He has acted unlawfully as has been proven in the courts.
.

 

[SHAN]

Perhaps Putin saw what was coming, and that is why pen paper and typewriters are a better option. I wonder if the same furore would have occurred had the officer found a pile of "gentleman's journals" in the bottom of a filing cabinet ?

 

[tillson]

Evidence is that which is presented in a court, not social media.
Now I have no truck with the UK government I have no interest in supporting any party or faction , but any private action by a private citizen or a public person, which is not illegal ,even if hypocritical, should not be leaked by any public servant, or former public servant. That is the ethical, legal and moral duty .
There is another consideration, in that elected politicans are not employees.They have no security of tenure . They are public representives. This does give them additional rights including the right to make statements about others under privilege. To assume that the norms for an employee apply to them is simplistic.

Evidence is information or facts which support a proposition. It is usual for a court to consider evidence in order to decide upon the truthfulness of the proposition, but evidence can exist in other arenas.

Parliament has the power to edit, erase and distort the information which the public receives. The issue regarding Green is about just that, the porn is an hilarious side show. (“As I walked into the public toilet, I tripped and fell forwards. Unfortunately, at that exact moment, another man was bending down in order to tie his shoe lace. I accidentally entered his bottom as I fell. Then all my clothes fell off. It was at that point that the Constable appeared.” Said the MP in a statement made at the gates to his house as his wife and children stood by him. ) The lies and the destruction of evidence is what we need to know about what needs to be exposed. Because of the lying and conniving bastards we are talking about here, sometimes it’s necessary to go straight to the public domain. They would never allow this to get out via conventional channels.

 

[tillson]

There is no evidence whatsoever of anything wrong and you are very much in the wrong for inferring otherwise. There is only innuendo and false accusations such as the pretence by some that it was a parliamentary computer and accusations without any evidence that he was accessing pornography during parliamentary business.

The computer was Damian Green's own private property, proved now by his giving it to charity. He used it for his leisure and work just as so many of us do or have done. Everything legal on it was his and only he could legally decide who else should know the content.

We have no idea whether there was or wasn't pornography on it, we have no idea who else might have had access to it.

What we do know is that the ex officer was one of a task force that mounted a badly bungled raid on parliament for which they were rightly heavily criticised at the time, something I well remember. That alone casts suspicion on what that ex officer is saying now, since it could be as much sour grapes as anything else. He has acted unlawfully as has been proven in the courts.
.

We know that the pornography was accessed via Green’s log in account. We know that the writing and viewing of emails addressed to and from Green are punctuated by periods of viewing porn. We know that documents addressed to Green were viewed either side of porographic images being viewed. We know that documents purporting to be from a Green were constructed on the computer during sessions of pornography access.

The options are:

Green viewed and downloaded the images.

Green was working at the computer, but gave up access intermittently so that someone else could have a quick perv.

As I’ve said, nothing wrong with looking at a nude lady, but something is very wrong about denying it, trying to cover it up and divert attention through smears and lies and trying to bury the story. Someone who is capable of that is unfit for office.

 

[flecc]

We know that the pornography was accessed via Green’s log in account. We know that the writing and viewing of emails addressed to and from Green are punctuated by periods of viewing porn. We know that documents addressed to Green were viewed either side of porographic images being viewed. We know that documents purporting to be from a Green were constructed on the computer during sessions of pornography access.

The options are:

Green viewed and downloaded the images.

Green was working at the computer, but gave up access intermittently so that someone else could have a quick perv.

As I’ve said, nothing wrong with looking at a nude lady, but something is very wrong about denying it, trying to cover it up and divert attention through smears and lies and trying to bury the story. Someone who is capable of that is unfit for office.

No we don't know any of that, we only know that is what the ex police officer says. That is not evidence, especially when the officer is breaking the law by the disclosure accusation. He was formerly one of the group who illegally breached parliamentary privilege and illegally accessed the content of a private computer without a warrant to do so. In my book that repetitive unlawful behaviour does not make him a reliable source of unsupported information.

We all know that power corrupts, and the most powerful of all of our citizens are the police, who have all too often been guilty of abusing their power. They watch us as their duty, but we must always be vigilant in watching them too. An essential part of that vigilance is not giving them a carte blanche of unquestioningly accepting everything they do and say.

I've many times made it clear in here that I have little liking for politicians as a breed, but they are still fellow beings entitled to the same protections as the rest of us. The character assassination of Damian Green in this thread without any dependable evidence is a disgrace.
,

 

[Zlatan]

We don't know the porn was accessed through his a account at all Tilson. They are using time stamps on his email account which correlate with times porn was accessed, presuming he was on computer between times but certainly not proving so....but either way ,even if he did access the "porn" no offence has been committed...
To my mind its all a storm in a tea cup whilst the real issues are being missed.
Yes, if he accessed porn, he shouldn't have done...but casting first stone and all that...
I wonder how much inspection policeman's private computer would stand before similar accusations could be made ???

 

[oldtom]

Politicians are terrified by whistle-blowers and hate them with a vengeance. One needs to understand why that is but it is most certainly not because they have suddenly decided to become defenders of the public interest and wish to demonstrate their commitment to decency, high moral standards and law and order.

'tillson's post, #24757, hit the nail on the head and describes exactly the closing of ranks we have witnessed time and again when these people are caught with their trousers down and then choose to use their influence to persuade the public that an horrendous crime under the OSA has been committed, in this instance, by a low-level copper.

We need only consider some previous events where those in high places have allowed their sexual proclivities to occupy their time in office, in or out of the workplace to realise how dangerous it can be - think Boothby or Profumo for example but there have been several others which I'm sure those who have been around long enough will recollect without research.

It is not surprising that a knighted ex-policeman should come out in support of Green and that again was alluded to by 'tillson'. Many by now will have forgotten the various inquiries set up to investigate, in particular, allegations of the sexual abuse of children and young people by figures of public prominence. Some of those inquiries are ongoing but for those familiar with the London-based allegations, the perpetrators being investigated include senior police figures, politicians and peers of the realm, members of the judiciary, royalty and the aristocracy. Can you see the problem for the victims?

It has taken so many years to launch investigations into these matters, or perhaps more pertinently, why those allegations were not investigated more fully at the time, that many of those named are now long dead.

This article provides a summary of the inquiries that were gathered together under the umbrella name: 'Operation Fairbank'.

uk-28194271

That was two years ago!

There are other police officers and members of the secret service who have stayed quiet about matters, such is their commitment, not to the British public, but to their employer. A misguided corps d'esprit exists among those, reinforced by membership of another organisation.

Tom

 

[flecc]

Politicians are terrified by whistle-blowers and hate them with a vengeance. One needs to understand why that is but it is most certainly not because they have suddenly decided to become defenders of the public interest and wish to demonstrate their commitment to decency, high moral standards and law and order.

'tillson's post, #24757, hit the nail on the head and describes exactly the closing of ranks we have witnessed time and again when these people are caught with their trousers down and then choose to use their influence to persuade the public that an horrendous crime under the OSA has been committed, in this instance, by a low-level copper.

We need only consider some previous events where those in high places have allowed their sexual proclivities to occupy their time in office, in or out of the workplace to realise how dangerous it can be - think Boothby or Profumo for example but there have been several others which I'm sure those who have been around long enough will recollect without research.

It is not surprising that a knighted ex-policeman should come out in support of Green and that again was alluded to by 'tillson'. Many by now will have forgotten the various inquiries set up to investigate, in particular, allegations of the sexual abuse of children and young people by figures of public prominence. Some of those inquiries are ongoing but for those familiar with the London-based allegations, the perpetrators being investigated include senior police figures, politicians and peers of the realm, members of the judiciary, royalty and the aristocracy. Can you see the problem for the victims?

It has taken so many years to launch investigations into these matters, or perhaps more pertinently, why those allegations were not investigated more fully at the time, that many of those named are now long dead.

This article provides a summary of the inquiries that were gathered together under the umbrella name: 'Operation Fairbank'.

uk-28194271

That was two years ago!

There are other police officers and members of the secret service who have stayed quiet about matters, such is their commitment, not to the British public, but to their employer. A misguided corps d'esprit exists among those, reinforced by membership of another organisation.

Tom

All true Tom, but not in any way justifying a character assassination of Damian Green based on an unlawful statement by an ex police officer who has grounds for disaffection based on his own previous unlawful conduct.

Green has done nothing unlawful and there is no proof that he has even done anything improper.
.
.

 

[Steb]

Not so, and I'm pleased to note from current news that almost all very senior police officers agree with me that the ex officer was completely wrong to disclose this personal information, wrong in terms of his duty, privacy legislation and morally. He should be publically condemned and warned that his prosecution is still possible if he persists.

The only one siding with him is the officer in charge of the public standards division, so more than a little biased in his judgment. His argument is spurious, that disclosure was in the public interest. That is clearly wrong since the disclosing officer has himself acknowledged that Damian Green had done nothing illegal. The disclosure of legal private information is never in the public interest, as the Max Mosley test case proved in the courts, at the cost of the News of the World.
.

However, the police officer said he did it in response to green accusing the police/Bob quick of attempting to politically smear him. Legality aside, there is the matter of integrity, if one of us witnessed a wrong and had information that showed it to be so, what would we do?

 

[flecc]

if one of us witnessed a wrong and had information that showed it to be so, what would we do?

But there was no wrong, even that ex police officer acknowledged that.
.

 

[Steb]

You dont fear prosecution or fines ? If nobody feared prosecution courts would be overflowing...hang on a minute ?
I accept many will " obey" the law for intrinsic moral reasons but certainly not all.

Next time you are speeding down M1 and catch a glimpse of a white car coming up behind with lights on top I bet your heart rate goes up....perhaps not ??
But perhaps fear is wrong word, but you get my drift. I trust our police force , been ripped off by Spanish twice, but there has to be an element of fear (respect?) to make us think twice about breaking the rules, otherwise we would not need fines, community service or prison sentences.

Oddly in principle I don't trust the police, and do fear them. Stuff like Hillsborough make me deeply grateful no one has my dna. It's a burocracy and the stuff about power corrupting holds true. But then there's my direct experience, a major rta a few months ago in which the other party alleged I was responsible and a cop on the beat who witnessed it went out of his way to see justice done

 

[Woosh]

Legality aside, there is the matter of integrity, if one of us witnessed a wrong and had information that showed it to be so, what would we do?

if looking at nude pictures is wrong then most of us men would all be criminals. Also, it's his laptop, not government's property.

 

[Zlatan]

Politicians are terrified by whistle-blowers and hate them with a vengeance. One needs to understand why that is but it is most certainly not because they have suddenly decided to become defenders of the public interest and wish to demonstrate their commitment to decency, high moral standards and law and order.

'tillson's post, #24757, hit the nail on the head and describes exactly the closing of ranks we have witnessed time and again when these people are caught with their trousers down and then choose to use their influence to persuade the public that an horrendous crime under the OSA has been committed, in this instance, by a low-level copper.

We need only consider some previous events where those in high places have allowed their sexual proclivities to occupy their time in office, in or out of the workplace to realise how dangerous it can be - think Boothby or Profumo for example but there have been several others which I'm sure those who have been around long enough will recollect without research.

It is not surprising that a knighted ex-policeman should come out in support of Green and that again was alluded to by 'tillson'. Many by now will have forgotten the various inquiries set up to investigate, in particular, allegations of the sexual abuse of children and young people by figures of public prominence. Some of those inquiries are ongoing but for those familiar with the London-based allegations, the perpetrators being investigated include senior police figures, politicians and peers of the realm, members of the judiciary, royalty and the aristocracy. Can you see the problem for the victims?

It has taken so many years to launch investigations into these matters, or perhaps more pertinently, why those allegations were not investigated more fully at the time, that many of those named are now long dead.

This article provides a summary of the inquiries that were gathered together under the umbrella name: 'Operation Fairbank'.

uk-28194271

That was two years ago!

There are other police officers and members of the secret service who have stayed quiet about matters, such is their commitment, not to the British public, but to their employer. A misguided corps d'esprit exists among those, reinforced by membership of another organisation.

Tom

Lot of assumption been made here Tom. Much as I agree with all your points about MPs covering their tracks after wrong doing I hardly see the connection between what this MP has done ( or hasn't) and what Profumo etc get away with.
For a start he has not been caught with his trousers down , has not committed any crime, has not actually even offended / insulted or taken advantage of anyone.
Even if , and its a big IF, he has watched porn it still is not a crime. ( perhaps it should be?)
In a way ( IMHO) its the same old story..folk accuse others of crimes, misdemeanors etc and the real offenders just get passed by. It actually does a disservice to the real victims, in tho case with porn.
At worst he has been stupid.

 

[Zlatan]

Oddly in principle I don't trust the police, and do fear them. Stuff like Hillsborough make me deeply grateful no one has my dna. It's a burocracy and the stuff about power corrupting holds true. But then there's my direct experience, a major rta a few months ago in which the other party alleged I was responsible and a cop on the beat who witnessed it went out of his way to see justice done

There is another side to the entire Hillsboro fiasco, which I,m certainly not getting into.
We have to judge as we find. I,ve only ever been dealt with perfectly by our police.
There are obviously corrupt ones etc etc but that applies in every walk of life.
I,ve got way more faith in police than lawyers, bankers,politicians. For the most part they do a difficult job well..ofcourse there are exceptions, but doesn't that prove the rule ?
Anyhow way OT now.

 

[Steb]

But there was no wrong, even that ex police officer acknowledged that.
.

Criminally, yes there was no wrong. But there it's more nuanced morally, and we're all citizens as well as professionals bounded by codes of conduct. If one of us did research on say genetically modified wheat and found it correlated with incidents cancer, but were bound by professional codes prohibiting disclosure what would we do?

 

[flecc]

Criminally, yes there was no wrong. But there it's more nuanced morally, and we're all citizens as well as professionals bounded by codes of conduct. If one of us did research on say genetically modified wheat and found it correlated with incidents cancer, but were bound by professional codes prohibiting disclosure what would we do?

Yes but hardly the same thing. Here we are dealing with a possibility of ths presence of prornography, which even if present was adult soft porn as the ex officer acknowledged, and therefore in no way improper, let alone illegal.

And if present, it was on a private computer which the officer accessed illegally without a warrant, for which he was duly heavily criticised and no doubt reprimanded by the force. Clearly he has an axe to grind and he is the only one who has acted illegally in this affair, not Damian Green.
.

 

[Danidl]

Criminally, yes there was no wrong. But there it's more nuanced morally, and we're all citizens as well as professionals bounded by codes of conduct. If one of us did research on say genetically modified wheat and found it correlated with incidents cancer, but were bound by professional codes prohibiting disclosure what would we do?

If you were part of a research group, you would know the answer. There are protocols for so doing. My point in bringing up this point is not that a policeman may not make decisions but where they come accross material in the course of their duty , they are obligated to go through a protocol and not to make it publically available, naming persons, without it being the basis for a prosecution . The term is unauthorised disclosures , and the police service as a disciplined service has to follow these rules. That he is retired does not lessen the obligation. It is my contention that he should be prosecuted for breaking the official secrets act.

 

[flecc]

There is another side to the entire Hillsboro fiasco, which I,m certainly not getting into.

Sounds like you know more about the background, as I do Zlatan. My knowledge indicates the police were certainly not the villains and would have prevented it ever happening if they'd been listened to years before.
.

 

[tillson]

Yes but hardly the same thing. Here we are dealing with a possibility of ths presence of prornography, which even if present was adult soft porn as the ex officer acknowledged, and therefore in no way improper, let alone illegal.

And if present, it was on a private computer which the officer accessed illegally without a warrant, for which he was duly heavily criticised and no doubt reprimanded by the force. Clearly he has an axe to grind and he is the only one who has acted illegally in this affair, not Damian Green.
.

I have no doubt that it was soft porn which is no big deal. When confronted with the allegation he should have said, yes, it's mine, so what?

To declare war on the police and discredit them shows flawed judgement, dishonesty and a lack of integrity. The Tory party are starting to close ranks and attack the police, just as we saw with Andrew Mitchell and the Pleb incident. This makes Green unfit for office.

I am no fan of the police, but the tactics that Green, his knighted servants and aspirational lickspittles are resorting to are dangerous and need exposing.

 

[Danidl]

Evidence is information or facts which support a proposition. It is usual for a court to consider evidence in order to decide upon the truthfulness of the proposition, but evidence can exist in other arenas.

Parliament has the power to edit, erase and distort the information which the public receives. The issue regarding Green is about just that, the porn is an hilarious side show. (“As I walked into the public toilet, I tripped and fell forwards. Unfortunately, at that exact moment, another man was bending down in order to tie his shoe lace. I accidentally entered his bottom as I fell. Then all my clothes fell off. It was at that point that the Constable appeared.” Said the MP in a statement made at the gates to his house as his wife and children stood by him. ) The lies and the destruction of evidence is what we need to know about what needs to be exposed. Because of the lying and conniving bastards we are talking about here, sometimes it’s necessary to go straight to the public domain. They would never allow this to get out via conventional channels.

In the context of this discussion, it is forensic evidence. That which would in the fullness of time, appear in court. When the word policeman is used, that creates the context... It is not a scientific or a debating point.