Posts
Green-Gate: Is Slapped-Bottom-Face Yates of Yard involved?
Hopi Sen argues persuasively (citing Lib Dem Mike Smithson and Lab MP Tom Harris in agreement) that there isn't really much profit in the Damian Green swoop for the Labour Party. At least from what we know at this stage of proceedings, but almost (almost) whatever else may emerge from the light-Green-fingered one.
Hopi and his expert witnesses finds the lack of any good politics for Labour in this as pretty compelling evidence that it is a police matter without political guidance or sanction, certainly not for heavy mannered arrests.
Meanwhile we must assume Tory bloggers are all purging their blog archives of glee at the OTT arrest swoop on Ruth Turner who suffered a very similar unnecessary public and heavy handed arrest protocol. At the hands of bully boy Yates of the Yard.
LOL CONTRIBUTION TO SPECULATION: Is Deputy Chief Slapped Bottom Face of the Yard John Yates (right with Green dossier) involved in any way in these Metropolitan Police activities?
BREAKING EXCUSE FOR MORE SPECULATION: the Guardian claim that Acting Chief Const Sir Paul Stephenson may now be deflected from applying. So there's a scalp for someone right there. Guardian smallprint includes: Decision to arrest was by Bob Quick, Met assistant commissioner of specialist operations. Another scalp? 
Arrest NOT sanctioned by the new CPS director of prosecutions, Keir Starmer. Who should be OK. Though he was informed just before it happened. Serjeant at arms and woman in tights Jill Pay may have been codded by police ahead of co-operation? Another guts for garters case? Averted? Speaker will speak, anon.
UPDATE 09:41: Remember Kind Hearts and Coronets? Doesn't Slapped Bottom Face Yates have just the slightest resemblance to the frustrated heir to the fiefdom Dennis Price (left) in this film? Yates for serjeant at arms? CPS director of prosecutions? Head of the Met?
4 comments:
An interesting theory - certainly meets the Cui Bono criteria (which all the Tory bloggers ignore), and he certainly isn't above the odd bit of media management.
Look EHC. DO NOT POST HERE. Unless you have a proper identity, you develop a GSOH, and you learn some manners.
Now to your (RATHER STUPID) collection of points:
The accusations against Ruth Turner et al were of a criminal nature. Those against Green are civil offences.
Does that make any difference?
Are you actually sure about this? Really? Are you a freaking barrack room lawyer all of a sudden? And even if you were right does that make the slightest difference to how people should be treated by police officers as far as you are concerned? If so you are even more of a flipping stupid muppet than first feared.
The officers that carried out Green's arrest came from the counter-terrorism squad, and it was sanctioned by Asst Commissioner Bob Quick, the most senior anti-terrorism police officer in the country - not some Trumpton police chief with a part-time sniffer dog as you suggested.
EHC - You Are 100% Liar
I suggested no such thing, you cheesy prick end. Some of the officers were indeed also engaged in anti-terror measures apparently and therefore had some transferable skills in email etc which they may have learnt when previously doing fraud etc. Or even in arresting Ruth Turner for all I know.
He was the officer that was basically the front man for the massive PR campign that the Met ran on behalf of the Home Office with respect to the "42 days" legislation.
You been googling with yourself again? You'll go blind.
Gordon Brown and Robin Cook made their justifiably stellar Parliamentary reputations partly on the back of leaks just like this. What would your rection have been had either one of them been arrested?
But they were not arrested.
Though various others - not MPs but so what? - were arrested. AFAIK the processes they were involved with are not the same. But even if they are the question you and the Tory muppets ought to be asking - and this has been spelt out for you above - is Cui Bono?
That is NOT the Labour Party. But it could be various Police Officers with ambitions. It might even be Boris (who knew) or Dave (who knew). But it is not Labour that benefits, for the time being at least. And any benefit to Labour was so unpredictable that no-one would risk that course.
This is Plod. Possibly with the boys in blue in conspiracy with them.
NO RESPONSE NEEDED. You've had your say, I've had mine. Get a blog if you wish to expand on your ill-logic.
1. Yes, I'm sure. In fact, I should have gone further. The officer in charge of the 'Cash for Honours' affair basically reported at the end of the investigation that it was almost certain that offences had been commited, but that leading members of the Labour Government had been so unco-operative that it had been impossible to work out by whom.
2. You made out in an earlier thread that these officers may have been involved in counter terrorism but this would not have been their main area of reponsibility. This is the Metropolitan Police, you idiot. They have a unit that is entirely directed at countering terrorism. The officers involved here are from that unit.
3. Not from Google. From the Independent, from David Winnick MP (Labour) and from Liberty.
4. That's the whole point - Brown and Cook were not arrested, nor should they have been. In fact, I'm sure I remember that Cook was voted Parliamntarian of the Year, partly on the basis of various Civil Service leaks.
5. Cui bono? You have such a mediocre, short-term mind. You really do think that this is all just about Damien Green and some low rank Civil Servant. This is a deliberate piece of nasty intimidation aimed at the next person who is even thinking of leaking.
Before you remove this perfectly reasonable contribution, any chance of answering the following question. Which piece of informtion that has come out via Green and his informant do you think does not belong in the public domain?
Post a Comment