"“We have lent a huge amount of money to the U.S. Of course we are concerned about the safety of our assets. To be honest, I am definitely a little worried.” "

Chinese premier Wen Jiabao 12th March 2009

""We have a financial system that is run by private shareholders, managed by private institutions, and we'd like to do our best to preserve that system."

Timothy Geithner US Secretary of the Treasury, previously President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.1/3/2009

Thursday, February 19, 2009

Terrorism Act section 58A -Channel 4 , BBC and others in breach of photographing constables about their duties guarding Home Secretary

Now here is a conundrum.

Channel 4 (as well as BBC Channels) obligingly showed fillum / video in news items of Jacquie Smith finishing off a punishing day at the Home Office and arriving at 4 pm at the easily identified and distinctive house she sometimes shares with her obliging sister (No dogs, childen or spliffs) .

No doubt ready to shuck of her shoes and settle down with a kebab and a long, well iced G & T... ready no doubt to make a fist at her red boxes with her obliging chinless chum from the office.

Now these fillums (Channel 4 is still up on You Tube herefronted by the scrumptious Victoria MaDonald) show (inter alia)

1. The distinctive Ministry car
2 The mandarin paper / file / red box office wallah
3. The details of the procedure the Home Secretary uses to enter her sisters house
4 . Shots (see above) of Plods with guns loitering outside said property - note also still snapper busy at work.

Lots of other info that would help terrists no doubt - not including Google Earth pics of Plod Slow, Bo, WEave, Duck, Slow, Slow, Slow, Gay pride Wedding Taxi service available directly from Yellow Pages etc.,

Ignoring the fact that the Home loving Home Secretary told Der Spiegel and the German nation this week ..Monday, February 16, 2009 Terrorist attack "Highly likely" Home Secretary tells the Germans but not UK citizens ... We believe that an attack is highly likely and could happen at any time and without warning.

Not only would it appear reckless that she parade publicly in this way - exposing herself to evident and needless risk but also of her sister's neighours ... although they evidently keep a better eye on her movements than Plod.

The taking and use of identifiable pics of the Plods - plus security procedures etc., must surely constitute an offence under the provisions now enacted this week of the Terrorism Act section 58A. @ Para 76 ***

Therefore where do Lord Patel's screen grabs come as evidence ... ? Why isn't Jon Snow / producer / VCR Editor / cameraman / focus puller / best boy, not cooling their heels in Paddington nick and disgorging their DNA, sweaty fingerprints, birth details, drugs preferences etc , etc.,

*** Para 76

(1) After section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (collection of information) insert—

58A Eliciting, publishing or communicating information about members of armed forces etc

(1) A person commits an offence who—

(a) elicits or attempts to elicit information about an individual who is or has been—

(i) a member of Her Majesty’s forces,

(ii) a member of any of the intelligence services, or

(iii) a constable,

which is of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism, or

(b) publishes or communicates any such information.

Just a thought.


gyg3s said...

But My Lord, they've thought of that. You see, there's this thing called "The Code for Crown Prosecutors" which has a two stage test.

1 "Crown Prosecutors must first be satisfied that there is enough evidence to provide a "realistic prospect of conviction against each defendant on each charge"."


2 "... Crown Prosecutors must then decide if a prosecution is needed in the public interest."

Now, there's the rub.

A blogger or protestor in the same situation. Get 'em prosecuted; the BBC or Channel 4 TV, not in the public interest.

It works quite well with the Theft Act 1968. Here the public interest test boils down to working class or not working class.

gyg3s said...

Here's a link to the 2004 Code.

Watching Them, Watching Us said...

If you are arrested under the Terrorism Act section 58A, your life will already have been ruined, before the Crown Prosecution Service ever get to decide whether or not you are to be charged or prosecuted.

This is not a minor Public Order Act offence, it is a serious Terrorism Act offence, and that alone will be enough for you to be DNA sampled, fingerprinted, photographed and to have all your computers and cameras etc. seized.

You will then be blacklisted forever, on terrorism, criminal intelligence, financial and travel databases and on criminal records based job barring systems, both in the UK and internationally, regardless of whether you are are ever actually charged, prosecuted or convicted.

The NPIA Practice Guidance for Terrorism Act section 43 and 44 stops and searches says that these should not be used for public order situations i.e. protests and demonstrations, but they clearly have been, and there is no reason to believe that the new section 58A will not be abused in the same way.

If the Mail on Sunday were to try to run another story like the one about Bob Quick and his limousine hire business run from his family home, why would section 58A not now used to try to frighten off their investigators ?

The MoS story, and the Postman Patel blog analysis of it, clearly falls under the "eliciting or attempting to elicit" and the "publishes or communicates" wording of section 58A.

ziz said...

Sounds like the well known Section Catch 22 @ work here.

However , discounting the perils of stigmatization by the CPS there is / are (for the CPS) the perils of negotiating a jury trial.

The fine legal distinction about public interest of Jon Snows gang showing the world and his wife the Home Secretaries recklessness (not withstanding their general interest in her personal / family / MP / finances currently) and a blogistes / e-mailers interests may well escape them.

Even now more people watch Ch 4 News at 7.00 than read this blog.

Of course if the world and his wife , blogged / e-mailed etc., the way Ch 4 news /BBC elicit public interest etc., etc, it makes the work of the CPS somehwat more confused (ie blogs may well be located overseas)dificult, and effectively comical and subsequently unenforceable

Point taken that Plod's harassment , DNA sampling etc., could make life for an employed sober suited serf a trifle difficult.

However as the Chief Constable of GMP who ran the GMP Counter Terror office of 300 staff and managed to avoid anyone noticing his acknowledged "contact" with 39 female officers ,affairs of the heart with married staff and other likely and likeable ladies until he was murdered - one wonders ...

Then again ,even making well informed comment on such stories is all helping to elicit and identify information "which is of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism, or (and)

(b) publishes or communicates any such information.

probably falls within the meaning ....

Anonymous said...

...(for the CPS) the perils of negotiating a jury trial.

When one of the CPS perils involves the likeliehood of a prosecution not suceeding, it seems that replacing the jury is in order....

I watched Channel 4 news last night & it seemed that the homesec was definately being gunned for. By whom & for why, though, is unclear....

ziz said...

Yes. That was mysterious our Court reporter could only get "for legal reasons"

Many years ago a Lancaster University Academic (1977 ish) on jury service announced he refused to make judgement on his peers - they replaced him but not the jury.

He got banged up for contempt.

In this case it seems remarkable that a gang of wallies, albeit with apparently malign intent was firmly under surveillance / control of spookery and jiggery pokery, recordings etc AND posed a threat of scandalum magnatum to the state 10aeoplanes, passengers and the civilised world.

Perhaps (but don't bet on it) all will become clear.

Lot of Cabinet in fighting at present . Who for example might like the world to know that the home Secretay kncks off inthe middle of the afternoon ?

Another Blair Babe whose better half missed all those contributions to the common cause for the 2005 election from the City and North London gentry ?

We know who spilt the beans on the HS's imaginative use of housing allowances but who fed him the griff ?

Maybe a Kebab seller somehwee had better find some more customers, he might be losing one real soon now.

Talking of Home Office staff Sir John Gieve told LSE students today we were heading for 10 yeas Nippon style austerity - than man whose accounts wouldn't asdd up and the Auditor failed to pass. Tha man who fast racked Blinkets mistresses and mother of his childs nanny visa.

The man whose wife acted as Blunkett's solicitor when he was involved in meetings on the case.

Many wouldn't consult Sir John about the time if he had an Omega Chronostar on his wrist.

Yes it looks as though someone has Kebab Kate in their sights.

Maybe a quick shuffle whilst they are all on hols - often the quickness of the hand can deceive the eye . ... will Tessa of Hackney Marshes survive ?

Anonymous said...

So if somebody, whether a member of the public who has to defend himself in a court case or his solicitor, needs to gather information about an individual who is or has been a member of Her Majesty’s forces or member of any of the intelligence services, that person and his solicitor will be fucked

Anonymous said...

Just read the *** Para 76 stuff - that is real police state/Stasi stuff...

Anonymous said...

The operation involving ensnaring the tangobottle 'bombers' cost £37 Million. That operation (Overt), for reasons not forthcoming, was linked to another - Operation Overamp, which featured Mohammed Hamid (who was under surveillance with most of the J21 'gang' at 'terror' camps in the English Lakes...

ziz said...

It hasn't taken long to display what deep thinking preceded these changes

It will however provide

1. Illusion of activity by the vast Police terrist conspiracy (aided by pintless 10 month trials)

2.Convince the hoi polloi of the threat both without and within - especially within men with brown skins.

3 Luvvly Jubbly for the legal profession.

ziz said...

Been pondering the vt. elicitapparently derives as the PP of Lat. elicitus - elicere - to entice (Chambers)

To draw out, evoke, to educe, extract.

Now sat on the baronial couch watching the BBC News or Channel 4 (without effort, design or prior planning) the Press raid on the Home Secretaries pied a terre hardly suggest an active role by the observer

Not much educing, extracting (except the piss) or drawing out there then.

As to publishes or communicates any such information , the material is /was in the public domain and the offence (if there was an offence) was committed at the tie of the the original publication.

Accessory after the fact maybe but the CPS would struggle with that.

As would a jury - pubglishing what state and national news organisations has published is an offence ? Especially if they are not also charged ?

Drafted by and for lawyers and in the furtherance of burdening their wallets - when did you last use the verb elicit ?

Anonymous said...

If you are found with one of these you will? maybe if the police want to arrested you...they have done to some...


It`s an open thing,the reason,scroll down to signal flares...


The government don`t want to ban them,but won`t define them as firearms...the police do. The police say one thing and LIE they say male type signal flares like the one above are firearms, female are not? Hmmm.Then you have military/civilian signal flares,the police have said on the charge sheet that the military signal flares have the male thread and the civilian ones don`t "generally" a bloody LIE and they get away with it.

I kid you NOT.

I can come to your house with the police and have you arrested under section 1 firearms...I kid you NOT.

Read on...

You only need the bits that can make a firearm and you could be arrested under section 1 firearms and you do have such in you house...Read on...

"Definitions of Firearms and Air Weapons"

"The term "component part" may be held to include (i) the barrel, chamber, cylinder, (ii) frame, body or receiver, (iii) breech, block, bolt or other mechanism for containing the charge at the rear of the chamber (iv), any other part of the firearm upon which the pressure caused by firing the weapon impinges directly. Magazines, sights and furniture are not considered component parts."...

Hmmm...copper pipe could be the barrel,if the police say it could be.


"Mr Ahmet was charged with possession of a firearm namely a "Pains-Wessex Mark 1 mini-flare". This was a military issue hand-held flare launcher for use as a signalling device. It consisted of a pen-sized grip onto which a flare-cartridge is attached."...


See the term "military issue" it`s the same as the civilian signal flare.You only need a pair of eyes to see this. This man says it is the same as well,he is making a good living out off going into court to prove these things are not firearms...




You couldn`t make it all up.

Anonymous said...

24 Feb 2009

"DNA retention may be extended for minor police stoppages"...


ziz said...

Anon :

DNA retention

"We believe the only circumstances in which the state should have powers to keep DNA or fingerprint evidence indefinitely is where it has been taken from a convicted criminal." say the ooman righte people that's not what ACPO want.

Birth probably

Note that Ch 4 news in filliuming the movement / arrival of te Gitmo release di NOT fzzy the news pictures as BBC did.

Who made the decision at BBC to fuzzy their news fillums ?...and why ?

Anonymous said...


I don`t care what anyone says we are heading to a microchiped society.


It`s been privatised for all intent and purpose.A tool for the far right.They used the David Kelly affair to kick out the last bit of independence it had.

Anonymous said...

It appears that the second jury in the airline tango bango plot has been dismissed on Friday 27/2/09. Very little reporting of this, apart from this snippet grabbed by J7 researchers.

(C) Very Seriously Disorganised Criminals 2002/3/4/5/6/7/8/9 - copy anything you wish