Rebekah Brooks Resigns .... one down, two to go?

[MadduckUK]

The Mail reports that Rebekah Brooks 'vetoed' David Cameron's choice of spin doctor and intervened to persuade him to employ Andy Coulson:
She is understood to have urged Mr Cameron to scrap plans to give the job to a senior BBC journalist. Mr Cameron was told it should go to someone who was ‘acceptable’ to News International.
The disclosure increases pressure on Mr Cameron over his close links to Mrs Brooks and the Murdoch empire.

[santa claus]

I can see a clear distinction in terms of importance there etc

You quoted me out of context Rave. I agree the African crisis is important; I agree the economic situation is important. I happen to also believe that getting to the bottom of the telephone hacking thing is important because it's getting murkier by the minute. Nor is it a case of choosing a fate between dying of malnutrition and getting your voicemails snooped. The issues are separate; their only link is that you brought the former to an unrelated thread.

You pay Council Tax where you live; I pay it where I live, everyone pays Council Tax. It is, as they used to say, a community charge. The community being the UK. Your Council Tax isn't being pissed away, it is being used, properly, to address an issue relevant to the community.

I notice the DEC appeal has reached £15m including your generous gift. This, together with the £52m pledged by our Government seems to indicate that the issue of most concern to you is being addressed .

[TheAnimus]

I notice the DEC appeal has reached £15m including your generous gift. This, together with the £52m pledged by our Government seems to indicate that the issue of most concern to you is being addressed .

Regrettably no. Its a drop in the ocean to use a in-appropriate metaphor.

[Zinfandel]

Personally I hope the whole empire comes down!

[neonplanet40]

Regrettably no. Its a drop in the ocean to use a in-appropriate metaphor.

At the same time its not up to us to fix the situation.

Help them? Yes definetely, i donated also.

But fix it on our own? Not possible. (not that im saying you suggested as such)

A lot of things would have to change in the world and the main countries would have to come together, bad governments in said countries would need changed (add another long list of problems) and only then can we actually fix this so that it stops happening everyday of every year.

Otherwise our millions is really jsut wasted (helpful in the short term for a small % of people? Yes. But in the long term, its a waste)

[blueball]

Just for questioning, she'll be released soon. It's a formality.

Didn't think you had to arrest someone in order to question them?

[MadduckUK]

Didn't think you had to arrest someone in order to question them?

You don't.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14180043

Met Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson quits.

Why we are still juggling with the idea of not discussing this as "it is not the worst thing happening in the world at this time". I don't know, laugh at it and continue discussing. Jay has brown doors for god sake, and that is worthy of a thread, but not this?

[peterb]

Didn't think you had to arrest someone in order to question them?

As madduckuk says (very succinctly) - you don't, but if they are arrested, they are questioned under caution, so their testimony can then be submitted to the court as evidence, and subject to cross examination.

You don't.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14180043

Met Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson quits.

Why we are still juggling with the idea of not discussing this as "it is not the worst thing happening in the world at this time". I don't know, laugh at it and continue discussing. Jay has brown doors for god sake, and that is worthy of a thread, but not this?

Exactly and well put! It is certainly worthy of discussion (IMNSHO) - a free press is one of the tenets of a democratic society, but that freedom carries responsibility. And if the press has behaved irresponsibly, and abused that freedom, and if there is corruption within the some of the organs of state - that is a very serious matter indeed, and worthy of discussion.

[santa claus]

Regrettably no. Its a drop in the ocean to use a in-appropriate metaphor.

I said addressed, not resolved. Not that it has anything to do with the subject matter of this thread.

[MadduckUK]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14182535

MPs recess delayed "in order to consider the latest developments in the phone hacking scandal."

[Saracen]

Didn't think you had to arrest someone in order to question them?

You don't, as has been said, and in fact, there are many situations where someone would be interviewed when there is no expectation that they are guilty of anything. One example would be witnesses, and another would be professional advisers of someone that is suspected of a criminal act, where the advisor is believed to have information but is not suspected in himself or herself.

But it's possible, of course, that someone interviewed as a witness (or an adviser for that matter) could go from witness to suspect, in which case, they should go to interview under caution (or arrest and caution) when that becomes apparent.

And, whilst it's certainly true that anyone under arrest should be cautioned (or risk having the interview deemed inadmissible), it's also certainly the case that many people interviewed under caution aren't under arrest. In other words, you're "invited" to attend an interview under caution when the authorities suspect you of an offence, but either :-

- that authority does not have power of arrest, or
- they don't have enough yet to arrest, or
- it's not an indictable offence, or
- there's admin reasons for not yet wanting to or needing to arrest.

In an interview under caution, you're there "voluntarily", and can leave at any time. If you elect to leave, you will either be allowed to leave, or arrested, depending on the situation .... and the evidence to that point.

One common reason for interview under caution is that as soon as you've been arrested, a whole series of events and procedures kicks in, not least all the custody recordings under PACE. It takes time and is administratively wasteful unless it's necessary, so to use time more effectively, why do it if you don't need to do it.

Also, once arrested, the PACE time restrictions on detention kick in too because, of course, until you're arrested you're not "detained" so they don't apply.

In other words, there's a complex spectrum of circumstances when you'll just be interviewed, when you'll be interviewed under caution and when you'll be arrested, not least based on their understanding of the degree and nature of your involvement in whatever you're being interviewed about.

There are other factors that would determine arrest or interview under caution, too. One is that in many situations, arrest confers powers of search that don't apply to non-arrestees. In the other direction, for non-violent type offences where the "suspect" is law-abiding, perhaps not suspected of serious crimes, has a permanent address and local ties, it's unlikely they're going to do a bunk or can't be got hold of when the police need them.

Oh, and police are FAR from the only ones with the authority to conduct interviews under caution, too. The DSS does, HMRC does, and even TV licensing officers do.

Oh, and one more thing. An interview under arrest is unlikely to take place anywhere other than at a police station and, if detained and so interviewed, you have a right to legal representation and, in those circumstances, access to duty solicitors free of charge (or your own choice, if you're paying for it or can otherwise get it free, like legal aid). If you're interviewed under caution, it can happen pretty much anywhere, like in your own home, and while you have a right to legal representation, it probably won't be free and they'll be no duty solicitor option.

All this is, of course, "as I understand it".

[Rave]

Why we are still juggling with the idea of not discussing this as "it is not the worst thing happening in the world at this time". I don't know, laugh at it and continue discussing. Jay has brown doors for god sake, and that is worthy of a thread, but not this?

Exactly and well put! It is certainly worthy of discussion (IMNSHO) - a free press is one of the tenets of a democratic society, but that freedom carries responsibility. And if the press has behaved irresponsibly, and abused that freedom, and if there is corruption within the some of the organs of state - that is a very serious matter indeed, and worthy of discussion.

You make it sound as if I was arguing against discussing it on Hexus- that was not my intention at all. In fact, my own contribution to the discussion was to ask if anyone else was sick of the blanket media coverage. Possibly I didn't word it very well, but I'd have no possible motive for shutting down a discussion on Hexus, not least because- no offence- the opinions of a bunch of internet chatterers matter diddly squat.

I do, however, strongly object to it being front page news on every newspaper and the lead story on every news broadcast including those provided by the publicly funded BBC. And as I have already stated, I object extremely strongly to 50 police officers being assigned to this for what I see as entirely political reasons. This is not a serious crime, I'm afraid. It's certainly a crime, and a moral disgrace, but there's no hurry to sort it all out- a couple of coppers restricted to desk duty for whatever reason could chunter through all the 1000s of pages of evidence over the course of a few months, and meanwhile the other 48 could be out solving and preventing muggings, shootings, bombings etc.

The Met Police are already stretched very thin, and are suffering budget cuts on top of that. Really, if anyone here thinks investigating a bit of voicemail hacking is more important than taking guns off the streets or preventing suicide bombings, then quite honestly I will laugh when you get shot by a gangsta or blown up by a terrorist.

[pp05]

Another resignation.. What is it about UK and resigning. Does it somehow mean you won't have to face up to the law? Can you imagine if each of us had to resign everytime we made a mistake?

I think the bigger issue that has finally come out of this whole saga is our so called 'democracy' is corrupt to the core as some of the most corrupt regimes in the world. Those who don't vote can sit there vindicated. Wear nobody to be exporting democracy to others.

I'm just sad how he through these media outlets swayed the british folk to become so epenly racist towards muslims rather than be angry at him and politicians. British were pawns in the game.

[Saracen]

Another resignation.. What is it about UK and resigning. Does it somehow mean you won't have to face up to the law? Can you imagine if each of us had to resign everytime we made a mistake?

I think the bigger issue that has finally come out of this whole saga is our so called 'democracy' is corrupt to the core as some of the most corrupt regimes in the world. Those who don't vote can sit there vindicated. Wear nobody to be exporting democracy to others.

I'm just sad how he through these media outlets swayed the british folk to become so epenly racist towards muslims rather than be angry at him and politicians. British were pawns in the game.

I'm not sure what the last para has to do with any of this. So keep it op topic, please.

As for the first bit, my view is that far too little resigning has been going on in recent years, not least, among politicians. If you run something and it goes badly wrong, then you should carry at least part of the responsibility for it, and you certainly ought to carry the can for major errors of judgement.

And no, it certainly doesn't mean you won' get to face up to the law, if you've done anything illegal. But it used to be the case that anyone with any self-respect would take responsibility for things that went wrong on their watch. That was what Andy Coulson claimed to have done (and we don't yet have evidence that it wasn't what he did) when he quit the NotW, and it's what the Met Commissioner said when he resigned yesterday. And I agree with Paul Stephenson - if the story starts to become about him and that risks public confidence in the police, then he needs to step down.

And as for the latest to quit (Yates of the Yard), even I watched his performance before the Select Committee last week with something akin to disbelief, and in my ever-so-humble opinion, his actions showed such a monumental lack of judgement as to be barely believable, and if true, clear evidence of inability to do the job. Stephenson I have some sympathy (based on current evidence) for, and he appears to have done the decent, responsible thing. Yates? Not so sure.

[pp05]

I'm not sure what the last para has to do with any of this. So keep it op topic, please.

As for the first bit, my view is that far too little resigning has been going on in recent years, not least, among politicians. If you run something and it goes badly wrong, then you should carry at least part of the responsibility for it, and you certainly ought to carry the can for major errors of judgement.

And no, it certainly doesn't mean you won' get to face up to the law, if you've done anything illegal. But it used to be the case that anyone with any self-respect would take responsibility for things that went wrong on their watch. That was what Andy Coulson claimed to have done (and we don't yet have evidence that it wasn't what he did) when he quit the NotW, and it's what the Met Commissioner said when he resigned yesterday. And I agree with Paul Stephenson - if the story starts to become about him and that risks public confidence in the police, then he needs to step down.

And as for the latest to quit (Yates of the Yard), even I watched his performance before the Select Committee last week with something akin to disbelief, and in my ever-so-humble opinion, his actions showed such a monumental lack of judgement as to be barely believable, and if true, clear evidence of inability to do the job. Stephenson I have some sympathy (based on current evidence) for, and he appears to have done the decent, responsible thing. Yates? Not so sure.

Saracen you know what is really surprising in all this? It is Labour in opposition who are really driving home the issue and trying to pin this on the Conservatives (revisionist history anyone?). This was going on under their own watch. As far I'm concerned we need labour MP's exposed too.

I do think this goes all the way to the top which is why the back stabbing has started. Maybe Cameron may have to step down too.

[santa claus]

Maybe Cameron may have to step down too.

Oh no, surely we're not going to end up with Mr Clegghorn and weasley Vinnie? This just gets worse by the minute.