Another piece in a jigsaw
More information emerges. It is another piece in a jigsaw. The ±«Óãtv has learned that Lord Levy - Labour's chief fund-raiser - was asked by police about notes of meetings at which he's believed to have discussed honours with senior staff at Downing St. The notes of meetings, which the ±«Óãtv understands were obtained by police from within No 10, were put to Lord Levy on Tuesday for the first time.
Lord Levy's refused to comment after his but, he's always protested his innocence telling friends that "only one person can nominate people for honours and it isn't me". I think we know what - and who - he's referring to.
I'm 
Comments
Apologies if this is a silly question, but can someone explain the variation in significance of people being interviewed, interviewed under caution and arrested. Also what's the point in keep arresting people if no charges are then brought?
Seems to me, Nick, that now that the fertiliser has started to hit the fan, people around 10 Downing Street are suddenly running around pointing fingers..
Nick,
Have the news media gone quite mad? As Michael White has just predicted, there's going to be massive disappointment if (when?) the police fail to bring charges.
Whatever happened to "innocent before proven guilty"? I thought it was the government who were supposed to lack respect for our traditional liberties?
Nick,
As usual you are right on the money with your observations and comments.
This Government has always had the charge of releasing bad news on day's where there is a major headline story.
I've just seen on your ±«Óãtv News front page that Des Browne has ordered that another 800 UK troops to be deployed to Southern Afghanistan.
Is the Government trying to protect the PM with this release of this news?
Or is the Government knowing full well that the news blackout was going to end today, knew it was the best day to release the details of an additonal deployment of our professinal soldiers overseas?
What do you think Nick?
Its some time since I practised in criminal law and then rather infrequently. But can I try to help your first contributor.
Anyone can be interviewed (assuming they are willing)by the police. This will ususally result in a witness statement coming into being. The first part of which warns the witness of the risks of giving false information and the consequences! This evidence may be used or not used by the police in any prosecution. If it is unused it will be referred to as part of the unused material and as such will be disclosed to any potential defendants. Its real value may be however is getting a potential defence witness tired into a particular account- in other words stopping someone coming along as a star witness for the defence. eg Tony Blair could not suddenly appear for the defence and change his account without loosing credibility.
Someone cautioned knows that he/she are potentially suspects in a criminal investigation. As a consequence of which they must be cautioned. This is contrary to the postion described hereinabove in that anything they do say (or maybe not say) can be used against them in criminal proceedings. Any arrest/caution that follows brings the police and the suspect within the provisions of PACE. The arrest I assume gives additional powers in respect of searches/bail etc.
I can tell you that the latter two would make anyone who is normally law obiding feel sick with fear!
Apologies to criminal hacks if I have got anything wrong!
James
People who aren't suspected of a crime aren't or who are a witness to a crime are interviewed without caution.
Someone who is suspected of a crime are arrested because the act of arresting them give the police certain powers but also gives the interviewee certain protections in law.
Re-arresting someone is used when there's a prospect that a different offence might have taken place, again it gives the person under suspicion legal protections.
As for the dawn raid this is a normal police practice and is designed to secure evidence in a criminal investigation.
Again during the search an officer is assigned to watch the person arrested and to ensure their safety and well being.
Nick,
Yesterday (Wednesday) you were saying how ANGRY No. 10 was at the police investigation. All very sad, except that we (the voters) did not then know that TB had been interviewed by the police, again, the previous Friday.
Neither did he volunteer that information to the House of Commons (during PMQs')despite questions on the investigation.
Not good - for #10.
Alun
That Downing Street statement:
"Last Friday the Prime Minister was briefly interviewed by the police as a witness. At the request of the police this was kept utterly confidential and, as a result, the press and communications team in Downing Street were not informed. As far as they were concerned nothing had changed.
"During the course of yesterday afternoon the police contacted Downing Street to inform us that the requirement for confidentiality had been lifted. We are therefore informing you at the first appropriate moment.
"The Metropolitan Police Service is issuing a short statement in parallel."
Wouldn't it have been polite just to have added, "Sorry we misled you"?
If anyone has the timerity to plead 'not guilty' what happens then? It it realistic to find a memberof the jury that has not read any of the letters and comments in the media or in blogs like this? Would it be possible to find a jury that does not include political opponets who would be able to decide on the evidence what really has happened? How could a jury be vetted to avoid any political bias? From time to time challenges are made at trials that the case should not proceed as there has been an 'abuse of process' , usually where they has been a long delay in bringing proceedings. Here it might be argued thta the media commnet etc now means that it is impossible for a fair trial to proceed.Have you discussed the implications of this with your legal correspondents and if so what do they say?
Nick,
you should have titled your piece "another nail in the coffin" rather than another piece in a jigsaw. Politically, it doesn't matter whether charges are brought or not, the electorate now believe that New Labour is rotten to the core. Gordon Brown has a major building exercise to perform, distancing himself from the scandal is not enough.
"Back to basics" to coin a phrase.
Unsensational reporting would focus on whether the police are, or if not,whether they should be using their powers to identify:
1.
How the millions came in and were spent i.e.the bank accounts used.
2.
Who were the signatories on the latter.
3.
Under what Labour Party authorisation were they empowered to act as signatories
4.
Why neither the Treasurer or the Party Secretary appear to have been aware of a parallel financial universe within their "organisation"
I wonder what the offical book from the PM will say on all this? Keep digging Nick! The issue now seems much wider than cash for honours which was pretty big in itself. It seems to be about those at No 10 having the simple decency to co-operate with the same police force that invests so much effort to keep them safe! Why not try to speak with anyone who has resigned over the years to see if they might have come across anything which pricked their conscious before leaving for public-stated reasons? What about Labour's accountants? Do they have a duty to investigate when producing accounts? Do they use emails; if the Labour party finance chief did not know what was going on, could they have been received at somewhere other than No10? No doubt the police will be checking anyway, but it's just a thought.
Nick
Don't you feel very sorry for the poor note taker and subsequent transcript writer who will have to endure 45 minutes worth of Blair's 'Yr know's' and 'It's like this' while he evades each question?
David Williams, I believe that "innocent until proven guilty" was repealed by this government in its War On Terror (tm).
It was also rescinded because of difficulties in ASBO's, car parking and other nefarious activities carried out by the populace.
We only have ourselves to blame, if only we'd just Obeyed....
Does this country deserve some of it media? We read it, listen to it and watch it so I suppose we do. I concur with No 3 - Mr Williams.
Chill. I am listening out for the quiet voice of what may be going on and am prepared to wait but can hear nothing in all this din.
The "Juice" is all being generated by the Press themselves. Judgemental before any evidence is given. Media, in the old days it would be called a lynch mob. Shame on you all.
I think the Prime Miniser should go now, if the police are going to talk to him again and we cant be sure this is the end, he does not want to be in Lady T place, forced out by his Cabinet. Why the delay, If the police wanted to catch Lord Levy out, and this is a Capital IF they have proof of wrong doing, will the good Lord take the blame or point finger at the PM, it is time for Gordon Brown to show political savy and move against the PM, if is he weak will the British or the Labour Party want him as leader.
"The notes of meetings, which the ±«Óãtv understands were obtained by police from within No 10."
Do you mean that the notes were physically removed from the building or obtained from a source (or the home/premises of a source) working in No 10?
for God's sake let's get this latest interview into proportion.
put it this way: I see a road crash and call the police. they attend and ask for my contact details. later they call at my house to find out what I saw. my neighbours see the police call at my door. word gets out that I've been in the road crash and somehow caused it. now that's just silly, isn't it?
so, we should be scared about putting ourselves forward as a witness, should we? BACK OFF, please!
This affair is just another story of order and desire, of how things are and how people wish them to be. When an imperfect system meets with imperfect desire, the inevitable result is a storm. It has always been thus. The superior leader sits back with a gentle smile and waits for it to pass then, in the full scope afforded by more settled waters, may despatch or pardon his enemies as he sees fit, at his convenience, according to taste.
If Prime Minister Blair is really, really smart, he won’t waste effort with spite but help assist people in understanding how things work, and listen to their concerns. By this he will sidestep the traps of backward and negative looking strategies, and continue to develop the image of sound leadership and encourage an improvement in public policy and social attitude. Brought down by their own faults, his enemies will accept their burden.
This is not the scheming of Machiavelli, a noxious book that plants poor ideas in the minds of low calibre and ill-disciplined people. Nor is it the superior Discourses. This is the subtle but very powerful, much older, and more widely adopted Tao. It recognises that great strength is its own downfall. Fighting spite with spite never works. Best to invest in the low road, and be remembered, not by fear or even respect, but love.
Got a little bored. Thought I’d add a different perspective to the mix.
THIS IS WHY BLAIR DID AWAY WITH CLAUSE 4 THEN, WEALTHY PEOPLE WOULD NEVER HAVE DONATED ( OR MADE LOANS TO) TO OLD LABOUR , A PARTY REPRESENTING THE LESS WELL OFF IN OUR SOCIETY AT ITS HEART AND ITS RAISON D`ETRE. I USED TO BE A PARTY MEMBER IN THE `80`S AND WAS ELECTED AS A DISTRICT COUNCILLOR BY KNOCKING ON DOORS AND WORKING HARD TO REPRESENT PEOPLE WHO NEEDED HELP IN THEIR LIVES. THESE DONATORS ARE JUST INTERESTED IN POLITICAL INFLUENCE FOR THEIR OWN ENDS AND ITS SICKENS ME TO SEE IT. IT WILL BE THE DEATH OF THE LABOUR PARTY AND THAT WILL BE BLAIRS TRUE LEGACY!
BILL BEEBY DOVER IN KENT.
Nick,
I echo Mark's comments above.
It does seem very suspicious that on the day when this major story breaks the government also announces that 'The rail services on the Wherry Lines between Norwich and Lowestoft and between Norwich and Great Yarmouth via Acle and Berney Arms have been designated as community rail services'
(source
Very suspicious indeed methinks. Better keep your eye on this one.
"Is the Government trying to protect the PM with this release of this news?"
More likely the news that police in birmingham had arrested more potential 'terrorists' was designed to take attention away from blairs latest problems with the law.
Strange how every time blair runs into problems the police suddenly arrest hundreds of terrorists..
>Whatever happened to "innocent before proven guilty"?
As Tony and chums have been saying over the last three years justifying ID cards. "If you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to hide".
Why are you all even wasting your time? Just outlaw the whole outdated business. Someday I'm going to travel to England just to see if you all still walk around in suits of armor.
Some 200+ year old wisdom from across the pond...
From Article One,Section 9 of the United States Constitution:
"No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state."