Tory Chief Whip 'Plebgate' Thread

[truman]

No, can you prove that they did?

 

 

How about the "meber of the public" who said that they heard the exchange? This was an off duty officer who wasn't even at the site..

 

"one officer was to be charged with misconduct in public office. The officer, PC Keith Wallis, 53, allegedly sent an email to the deputy chief whip purporting to be a member of the public who had witnessed the incident."

 

Or..

"A further two officers will be dealt with by their superior officers in a locally managed misconduct hearing for providing inaccurate statements or inappropriate comments and an eighth officer will be spoken to by his managers in relation to inappropriate comments.

 

The four officers who face misconduct are accused of discreditable conduct relating to honesty and integrity and/or to the improper disclosure of information.

 

From here

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/nov/26/plebgate-police-officer-charged-andrew-mitchell

[ricgem2002]

"The Independent Police Complaints Commission says five police officers - all members of the elite Diplomatic Protection Group - will now face gross misconduct proceedings linked to the subsequent row, meaning they could lose their jobs."

i hope they swear on oath when it comes to the miners investigation ( thatchers bully boys) and drop the condems init

[I1L2T3]

Apparently the CPS are saying that the footage Mitchell provided was 'edited' and that other camera angles support the story of the officers, specifically about more people being present. There are two more camera angles it seems. Channel 4 not best happy - they displayed the footage on Dispatchrs as it was supplied to them and are submitting FOI requests.

 

This one is going to get interesting again.

[truman]

Apparently the CPS are saying that the footage Mitchell provided was 'edited' and that other camera angles support the story of the officers, specifically about more people being present. There are two more camera angles it seems. Channel 4 not best happy - they displayed the footage on Dispatchrs as it was supplied to them and are submitting FOI requests.

 

This one is going to get interesting again.

 

You have to ask why it's taken the police over a year to find this...

[RonJeremy]

Apparently the CPS are saying that the footage Mitchell provided was 'edited' and that other camera angles support the story of the officers, specifically about more people being present. There are two more camera angles it seems. Channel 4 not best happy - they displayed the footage on Dispatchrs as it was supplied to them and are submitting FOI requests.

 

This one is going to get interesting again.

 

Can u cite this please

[I1L2T3]

You have to ask why it's taken the police over a year to find this...

 

It seemed pretty obvious that the cameras used in the footage could not possibly have been the only ones. It's Downing Street, one of the most heavily policed and guarded locations in the country.

 

It's also obvious that the footage shown is a composite from several cameras, cut together to kind of portray a story. Almost like a little film.

 

As I pointed out on threads on here there are other people present never mentioned in news reports or by Mitchell. For example two guards/police just inside the outer gate but not inside Downing Street itself.

 

Like I said interesting. The police will have known this all along. As will others.

 

---------- Post added 26-11-2013 at 20:05 ----------

 

Can u cite this please

 

Channel 4 news at 7pm tonight. You will catch it on +1 if you have it.

 

 

CHANNEL 4 AND ITN STATEMENT

 

Director of Public Prosecutions Alison Saunders said on Tuesday: "The CCTV footage that has been aired publicly was edited and did not show the full picture."

 

In response, Channel 4 and ITN said: "The CCTV footage was obtained by Andrew Mitchell from Downing Street and provided to Dispatches and Channel 4 News. The footage as broadcast for the first time on 18 December 2012 was not edited by the production team to change or alter the sequence of events.

 

"Furthermore the three camera angles that we were provided with were image-matched frame by frame to confirm their veracity. We stand fully behind this investigation."

 

http://www.channel4.com/news/plebgate-police-charge-officer-mitchell

Edited November 26, 2013 by I1L2T3

[RonJeremy]

Can u cite this please

 

can u cite this please?

thanks

 

---------- Post added 26-11-2013 at 20:16 ----------

 

It seemed pretty obvious that the cameras used in the footage could not possibly have been the only ones. It's Downing Street, one of the most heavily policed and guarded locations in the country.

 

It's also obvious that the footage shown is a composite from several cameras, cut together to kind of portray a story. Almost like a little film.

 

As I pointed out on threads on here there are other people present never mentioned in news reports or by Mitchell. For example two guards/police just inside the outer gate but not inside Downing Street itself.

 

Like I said interesting. The police will have known this all along. As will others.

 

---------- Post added 26-11-2013 at 20:05 ----------

 

 

Channel 4 news at 7pm tonight. You will catch it on +1 if you have it.

 

 

CHANNEL 4 AND ITN STATEMENT

 

Director of Public Prosecutions Alison Saunders said on Tuesday: "The CCTV footage that has been aired publicly was edited and did not show the full picture."

 

In response, Channel 4 and ITN said: "The CCTV footage was obtained by Andrew Mitchell from Downing Street and provided to Dispatches and Channel 4 News. The footage as broadcast for the first time on 18 December 2012 was not edited by the production team to change or alter the sequence of events.

 

"Furthermore the three camera angles that we were provided with were image-matched frame by frame to confirm their veracity. We stand fully behind this investigation."

 

http://www.channel4.com/news/plebgate-police-charge-officer-mitchell

 

Soooooo........ Mitchel not guilty, policeman guilty?

That's how I read it

[Uptowngirl]

can u cite this please?

thanks

 

---------- Post added 26-11-2013 at 20:16 ----------

 

 

Soooooo........ Mitchel not guilty, policeman guilty?

That's how I read it

 

I think that is the view of everyone although it probably won't be stated publicly by those that long ago dug themselves into a very deep hole and are desperately trying to cling on to any blade of grass.

 

It will be interesting to see what emerges in the next few weeks. Mitchel is taking one of the officers to court over his claim that the officer deliberately lied about the happenings in Downing Street.

 

As Mitchel said, he is perfectly willing to take the stand on oath and testify that he never uttered the word pleb as was reported in the officers log. He will ask the officer also to take the stand and swear on oath his version of events. I can't wait. Lying under oath in a court of law is a whole new ball game, and carries a long prison sentence. It remains to be seen how many police officers are prepared to do this and how many break ranks. I can see lost pensions and jail sentences if this runs much longer.

[I1L2T3]

can u cite this please?

thanks

 

---------- Post added 26-11-2013 at 20:16 ----------

 

 

Soooooo........ Mitchel not guilty, policeman guilty?

That's how I read it

 

Nobody is guilty yet. There haven't been any trials. One person has been charged though.

[RonJeremy]

Nobody is guilty yet. There haven't been any trials. One person has been charged though.

 

Someone is guilty - just not been found to be in a court of law - that's how I see it