Morning:
13°c
Met to be criticised for 'unjustified' raid on Tory MP's homes
Joe Murphy, Political Editor10.12.08
SCOTLAND Yard is likely to be criticised by the independent police inquiry into the arrest of Tory MP Damian Green, the Standard has learned.
Ian Johnston, the chief constable reviewing the Met's handling of the case, has indicated privately he might rule that the arrest was not proportionate.
He handed in a preliminary report yesterday, which is understood to raise concerns about whether the arrest of the MP and search of his homes and offices was justified by a risk of evidence being destroyed.
Although Mr Johnston has yet to form conclusions, he is confident that the Yard acted lawfully at all times. However, detectives appeared to have breached guidelines and good practice.
Crucially, he is understood to be concerned that the Yard's justification is weakened by an eight-day time-lag between the arrest of alleged Whitehall mole Christopher Galley and the subsequent arrest of Mr Green, the shadow immigration minister.
But for the delay, a major arrest could be defended as necessary to safeguard evidence that might be destroyed if a suspect was invited to attend a police station at a convenient time.
Moreover, it could have been argued that a swift arrest and search guarded against the risk of "highly classified" government documents being passed on, endangering national security.
In the Green case, however, the delay undermined the argument.
Mr Galley was arrested at 5.50am on 19 November at his home and released later without charge. The police waited until 27 November before arresting Mr Green at 1.50pm in his Ashford constituency.
In the interim, Mr Green would have had plenty of time to cover his tracks and was even reportedly telephoned by Mr Galley.
The Met team may also be criticised for breaching a code of practice when they obtained consent to search Mr Green's office at the Commons.
They should have given explicit advice to the Serjeant at Arms, Jill Pay, that she could refuse consent but appear to have assumed she knew her rights from taking independent legal advice.
Mr Johnston's final report is due to be handed in next week. If his preliminary findings are confirmed, it will be a blow to Assistant Met Commissioner Bob Quick, who is in charge of the mole hunt and is a contender for the vacant post of Met Commissioner, Britain's most senior police officer.
Mr Quick took the decision to arrest the MP and informed acting commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson afterwards.
The Yard does not intend to publish the report, on the grounds that it could influence any potential prosecution.
Shadow home secretary Dominic Grieve said: "This is deeply disturbing. This report must be immediately published so we can begin to resolve the unanswered questions in this serious matter."
Reader views (8)
Many people are unaware of the penetration within the public and corporate sectors, of the insidious organisation 'Common Purpose' which purports to be a charity but operates more like a business and receives vast amounts of public finance. It runs education and training courses in 'leadership skills' for those in middle to higher ranking jobs. Graduates of its brainwashing courses are urged;"Lead beyond your authority", which might reasonably be interpreted as an ecouragement for public officials to act ultra vires and thus break the law. 'Common Purpose' is already active in the Metropolitan Police and in other police authorities, Councils, Civil Service and Quango's up and down the land. Its underlying political agenda is to promote all the usual political correctness hogwash which has had such a catastrophic and damaging effect on this benighted country of ours. All of this is aimed at preparation for EU rule in what is chillingly called the 'post-democratic era.'
- David Moon, Seaford, UK
As I've been saying all along, how do you achieve impartiality when a policeman is passing judgment on the police??
This is the most ridiculous state of affairs and is akin to Haringay council passing a verdict on themselves.
- Bingham Macnamara, lymington, hants
"How was this leaked-does anyone know?"
It isn't a leak - it's just another made-up story. Can you really imagine the police criticising themselves?? Do me a favour
- Keith Price, Luton, England
How was this leaked-does anyone know?
Another embarrassmnent but who i wonder is going to review this one!
- Harvey Lawrence, london
Has Ian Johnston undergone an overnight metamorphosis, from being a police officer to a senior QC or High Court Judge when he confidently states that he believes the Met officers '..acted lawfully at all times...'?. If so he must be reading from Stephenson's and fat Bobs 'dodgy dossier'. No doubt he will make issue that the codes of practice, contained within the PACE 1984, are just that and that any breach does not make subsequent evidence inadmissable. This may be true, but only if such a breach occurs by error or misunderstanding. However, if there is a deliberate and calculated breach or omission then any judge will certainly be under severe pressure to exclude evidence gained as a result of the breach, under S78 PACE. The fact that officers 'assumed' but did not enquire, directly or indirectly, whether Miss Pay was conversant with her rights appears, to me, to be prima facie evidence of a deliberate and calculated breach of Code B 5.2.
- Pete, Croydon Uk
Why did the police wait until Parliament was prorogued prior to the Queen's Speech before storming in? Looks like they deliberately wanted to avoid too much bother from MPs and officials.
- Mike Mitchell, Spalding, England
It does not seem to have been commented on that the House of Commons is within the precincts of a Royal Palace, the Palace of Westminster. The normal powers of magistrates and the police may not apply within the precincts of a Royal Palace. (This was the basis of the exemption of the Lords and Commons bars, etc, from the licensing laws.) According to an official publication, within the House the powers of the police must be exercised under the orders of the Sargeant at Arms:
- David, London, UK
The Met may well be criticised for this. And so they deserve to be. They may languish in the belief that the esteem of politicians is at an all time low, but in the light of the public so is theirs. The quality of policing in this country is now appalling, and so is the heavy handed way the police deal with the community. I do not think that there is one chief constable in the country who would have behaved any differently to the way the Met has behaved, and that I find to be the most damming indictment of all. I was brought up to respect the police, and am from a passing generation that held those beliefs to be self evident. Sadly this is no longer the case. I detest their behaviour in this and so many other cases I have seen. Never thought I would say this, but have said it and will be damned. And as for the loathsome reprobates from the Met who took part in the raid I can only wish them a few months in the Tower of London to reflect on what they have done. They do not deserve the anonymity of having their faces blanked out on press photographs. They are a disgrace to their profession, whatever that is, and should be seen and be seen so.
- Dr C R Westwood, Crawley W Sussex
