|
|
Post by johnc on Dec 1, 2017 13:23:05 GMT
I was a bit surprised to hear on the news this morning that the information which has put Damian Green under pressure for "shock horror" having watched some adult porn, is coming from an ex Policeman divulging information he found whilst undertaking Police work. Is there not some kind of restriction on individual Police officers making public things they have found during investigation? I can't think of any other Profession where you could make public statements about someone and not be sued from here to kingdom come for the disclosure of information which came to you in your capacity as a Professional.
I make no moral comment on what he did but I have an uneasy feeling when personal details can be made public without permission, when that information was obtained only because of the privileged position the disclosing person held. I dare say the using of a work computer to access such content will be contrary to the rules of employment but watching such content is perfectly legal as far as I am aware. |
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Dec 1, 2017 13:33:18 GMT
It had better be, eh?  I must say anyone caught accessing such images on a work laptop is in for the high jump at almost all businesses these days. Says more about his personality and intelligence than the act of simply looking at some pornography does! |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Dec 1, 2017 14:36:00 GMT
The days of the police being apolitical are long gone. If it suits an individual officer's agenda, in fact of it suits an entire force's agenda, they will leak away.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Dec 1, 2017 14:44:25 GMT
The days of the police being apolitical are long gone. If it suits an individual officer's agenda, in fact of it suits an entire force's agenda, they will leak away. Do as I say not as I do!
Well the judiciary should take them by the bollocks and give them a mighty hard squeeze if it's illegal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roadsterstu on Dec 3, 2017 21:59:35 GMT
The days of the police being apolitical are long gone. If it suits an individual officer's agenda, in fact of it suits an entire force's agenda, they will leak away. The divulging of the information by the former officer(s) is an utter disgrace. Quite what the motivation was I'm not yet sure of. |
|
|
|
Post by michael on Dec 3, 2017 22:03:19 GMT
The days of the police being apolitical are long gone. If it suits an individual officer's agenda, in fact of it suits an entire force's agenda, they will leak away. Quite what the motivation was I'm not yet sure of. To do as much political damage to ‘the tories’ as possible. We’ve seen it before with the plebgate debacle. |
|
|
|
Post by Roadsterstu on Dec 3, 2017 22:13:34 GMT
Indeed. Although risking criminal charges, aside from the wider issues? It does make you wonder who is pulling the strings behind the scenes.
|
|
|
|
Post by PG on Dec 4, 2017 13:21:40 GMT
I read that an officer's notebooks are the property of the force, not him, so they could get him for theft at a minimum. He deserves far worse.
The new Met boss (Ms. Dick as the press seem to call her) said on the radio this morning that if the sx officer has committed any offence, there could be a prosecution. Lot's of "ifs" and "coulds"there, but at least a bit more encouraging than the inevitable whitewash that I feel would have taken place under the last two met commissioners.
|
|
|
|
Post by michael on Dec 4, 2017 13:24:53 GMT
There needs to be a prosecution. The police are not above the law and are in need of a serious kicking if they think they are entitled to abuse their power to influence politics.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Dec 4, 2017 14:27:21 GMT
I assumed the ex-plod had done it for financial reasons rather than political?
Otherwise why wait so long.
|
|
|
|
Post by grampa on Dec 5, 2017 10:08:37 GMT
I heard this being discussed on TV - someone made the point that the alleged porn is on a 'work' computer which would get most people, certainly any working in government department, sacked and also mentioned that the police officer would be protected under some whistle blower regulations. Not sure about the last bit - would whistle blower regulations allow you to report to the press? (obviously his motivations are political/financial/personal grudge or he would not have sat on the information for so long.
|
|
|
|
Post by michael on Dec 5, 2017 10:22:45 GMT
The details of what was on the computer are not clear, it's now being said they were thumbnails so these could be the by product of an image search or anything else. It does not prove Damien Green looked at porn on a work computer and even if he did it's immoral not illegal - ignoring IT terms and conditions. The second issue is that if he had been looking at gay porn this wouldn't be an issue, what Keith Vaz has been up to blows this out the water but it didn't get half as much coverage.
That these revelations were made at a time when two other cabinet members had been forced to resign suggests a concerted effort to do political damage, probably by the Police Federation who have had it in for May since she was home secretary.
This episode highlights why the police need sorting out and while they're at it they can start to address problem of being seen to be policing what is politically correct rather than protecting public order. One of the most idiotic things I read recently was that free speech is less important than causing offence, the two by their nature go hand in hand. It's time the police did their job and kept well out of politics.
I did read that the guy who leaked this may yet be prosecuted, here's hoping.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Dec 5, 2017 13:28:43 GMT
This episode highlights why the police need sorting out and while they're at it they can start to address problem of being seen to be policing what is politically correct rather than protecting public order. One of the most idiotic things I read recently was that free speech is less important than causing offence, the two by their nature go hand in hand. It's time the police did their job and kept well out of politics. I did read that the guy who leaked this may yet be prosecuted, here's hoping.
I agree with this but also if Damian Green was looking at porn (and I think your point about thumbnails is a tad generous given there were allegedly thousands, Michael) then his judgement, in doing it on a work computer, is clearly questionable. If one of his minions did it - see yesterdays reporting of the comment sof various other MPs of all parties and their sharing of passwords - then again they need to have a look at their whole IT policies and the implementation and monitoring of such.
To my mind neither party comes out of it at all well.
I hope the leaky plod does get prosecuted though.
I was also irritated that it was the main news headline on whatever day it was, it's hardly that important.
|
|
|
|
Post by michael on Dec 5, 2017 13:40:25 GMT
I agree with this but also if Damian Green was looking at porn (and I think your point about thumbnails is a tad generous given there were allegedly thousands, Michael) then his judgement, in doing it on a work computer, is clearly questionable. When the story first broke the inference was it was illegal pornography, now we know it isn't. He claims his innocence which he has a right too as the public have been deliberately misled on the issue. This is not a police matter. |
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Dec 5, 2017 13:48:55 GMT
I agree with this but also if Damian Green was looking at porn (and I think your point about thumbnails is a tad generous given there were allegedly thousands, Michael) then his judgement, in doing it on a work computer, is clearly questionable. When the story first broke the inference was it was illegal pornography, now we know it isn't. He claims his innocence which he has a right too as the public have been deliberately misled on the issue. This is not a police matter.
Yup, once these things get into the hands of the media then it's guilty until proven innocent. However, as a government minister who has probably used the media at some point to leak some element of policy, he's got to take both sides of it.
To be honest though, I'm kinda fed up with these relatively non-stories being blown out of proportion. My biggest concern (apart from the police leaking it) is whatever error of judgement he has made that has allowed this content to appear on his work computer.
Also, don't forget that Jacqui Smith, the Labour Home Sec (I think that was her role, can't be bothered to check) had her career sabotaged by her husband's porn viewing habits that were also perfectly legal, carried out at home and actually nothing to do with her directly!
|
|
|
|
Post by michael on Dec 5, 2017 13:52:33 GMT
I think Jacqui Smith put in an expense claim for the porn which is a rather different thing. I agree there is an issue of judgement about having porn on your computer but until it's clear it was him who was responsible it's a non-story as you say.
|
|
|
|
Post by grampa on Dec 5, 2017 13:55:12 GMT
Each time I'm typing a reply michael gets in before I do with more or less the same comment!
The whole Damian Green thing should be a non story and at the most the subject of internal discipline. It does seem worrying that other MPs don't seem to have a handle on the level of their responsibilities to protect their personal work computers though.
|
|
|
|
Post by michael on Dec 5, 2017 13:58:04 GMT
I really need to open a project and get to work but my distraction level is off the scale. Apologies!
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Dec 5, 2017 14:24:45 GMT
I think Jacqui Smith put in an expense claim for the porn which is a rather different thing. I agree there is an issue of judgement about having porn on your computer but until it's clear it was him who was responsible it's a non-story as you say.
Ah, I remember. Wasn't it a fairly innocent (!) expense claim for a Sky package that included the porn, rather than a specific claim for the porn?
Maybe we should stop that part of this conversation now anyway as MPs expenses will be yet another subject that gets my blood boiling
|
|
|
|
Post by michael on Dec 5, 2017 14:33:09 GMT
No it was pay per view. He ran her constituency office (there's a rant about nepotism right there, too) and clearly didn't know how to use the internet given he chose to pay for porn.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roadsterstu on Dec 7, 2017 18:56:51 GMT
I agree with this but also if Damian Green was looking at porn (and I think your point about thumbnails is a tad generous given there were allegedly thousands, Michael) then his judgement, in doing it on a work computer, is clearly questionable. When the story first broke the inference was it was illegal pornography, now we know it isn't. He claims his innocence which he has a right too as the public have been deliberately misled on the issue. This is not a police matter. Agreed. If it is not illegal then there is no role for the police and it is none of their business. It a disciplinary matter. As for the leaking of information then there are offences around that and I totally agree that those responsible should be subject to a criminal investigation. |
|
