How it Works40 mins ago
Partygate - Met Police Useless
Sue Grey independently investigated lockdown restriction breaches in January, and amassed a great deal of evidence. She was about to publish her report before the Met Police belatedly launched an investigation and the Grey report had to be severely redacted.
12 weeks later and the police have still not finished their investigations. Half the people investigated have now been fined, but not all of the gatherings have been looked at, and the police investigation is on going.
The Prime Minister has not been fined, but has not been cleared either.
What are the police playing at? Surely when they had all the evidence on a platter, it should not take over 3 months to conclude. Considering what is at stake, surely the Prime Minister (and Carrie) should have been prioritised to be looked at first, not last, to end the speculation and uncertainty.
Anyone agree that this has dragged on for far too long ?
12 weeks later and the police have still not finished their investigations. Half the people investigated have now been fined, but not all of the gatherings have been looked at, and the police investigation is on going.
The Prime Minister has not been fined, but has not been cleared either.
What are the police playing at? Surely when they had all the evidence on a platter, it should not take over 3 months to conclude. Considering what is at stake, surely the Prime Minister (and Carrie) should have been prioritised to be looked at first, not last, to end the speculation and uncertainty.
Anyone agree that this has dragged on for far too long ?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Gromit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.It all takes time ann, plus it would be a very big distraction from world events. Sadly it appears the cons have become very soiled over the last few months with one thing or another so picking another PM is of very little interest to the public at this moment in time.
They are more concerned with their own day to day struggles with paying increased bills.
They are more concerned with their own day to day struggles with paying increased bills.
The process of questionairs was used for the first phase and presumably there doing that for the next phase. Given that the events were over a year ago and theres sometimes no definite proof of who was there who was in the room rather than working in the office above, how long they stayed etc theres sometimes a need for the questionairs
Khandro
We can keep more than one news topic going simultaneously.
What's happening in Ukraine take precedence right now, but not to the exclusion of *all* other news.
Regarding your point - the difference between everyone else and Johnsons is that he lead the government inflicting he rules on the rest of us.
He also lied on multiple occasions as to whether the parties happened, and whether he was there or not.
If for any reason the government have to introduce further restrictions many people will ask whether it has the moral authority.
We can keep more than one news topic going simultaneously.
What's happening in Ukraine take precedence right now, but not to the exclusion of *all* other news.
Regarding your point - the difference between everyone else and Johnsons is that he lead the government inflicting he rules on the rest of us.
He also lied on multiple occasions as to whether the parties happened, and whether he was there or not.
If for any reason the government have to introduce further restrictions many people will ask whether it has the moral authority.
// Perhaps Gromit would like to apologise to the Met for the OP? //
Not really. The story I read this morning said 30 new fines had been levied, and the Prime Minister was NOT thought to be among them. Downing Street said the public would be informed if he is fine. And they later did that after I posted.
Not really. The story I read this morning said 30 new fines had been levied, and the Prime Minister was NOT thought to be among them. Downing Street said the public would be informed if he is fine. And they later did that after I posted.
//Given that the events were over a year ago and theres sometimes no definite proof of who was there who was in the room rather than working in the office above, how long they stayed etc theres sometimes a need for the questionairs//
Why so? If the police have no proof that an offence took place, how is sending a questionnaire to the alleged offender going to help (unless he's dopey enough to admit the offence)? If I was suspected of committing an offence and I knew I'd done so, but no proof existed, I'm hardly likely to help the police with their enquiries, am I? If one was sent to me I would suffer a memory lapse, decline any fixed penalty if it was offered and put the prosecution to proof in court.
The entire business is a complete farce. Evidence to support a prosecution should be available when a fixed penalty is issued. It would be an abuse of process to offer somebody suspected of a criminal offence a fixed penalty when there was no realistic prospect of a conviction. If all the police have is responses to their questionnaires then the recipients of those questionnaires have only themselves to blame for providing the police with the material to prosecute them.
Why so? If the police have no proof that an offence took place, how is sending a questionnaire to the alleged offender going to help (unless he's dopey enough to admit the offence)? If I was suspected of committing an offence and I knew I'd done so, but no proof existed, I'm hardly likely to help the police with their enquiries, am I? If one was sent to me I would suffer a memory lapse, decline any fixed penalty if it was offered and put the prosecution to proof in court.
The entire business is a complete farce. Evidence to support a prosecution should be available when a fixed penalty is issued. It would be an abuse of process to offer somebody suspected of a criminal offence a fixed penalty when there was no realistic prospect of a conviction. If all the police have is responses to their questionnaires then the recipients of those questionnaires have only themselves to blame for providing the police with the material to prosecute them.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.