Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties
 

Some people are just never happy :rolleyes:

Everyone* cries for a police investigation, and now complain because the police say if a similar investigation releases information that *could* influence or jeopardize the police one it's a 'cover up'


*usual suspects

Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties
 

one did point this out

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/show...4#post36111054

Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties
 

I had a chat about the latest events with my CPS friend, and they pointed this out to me…

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...2&d=1643364807

https://twitter.com/crimelinelaw/sta...541153792?s=12

However, they did deem it "unusual" that this would happen if it was only about Fixed Penalty Notices - normally, this might occur if it was about a potential interview strategy for something more than a FPN; if someone gave an statement to the Gray Inquiry that was not matched by another’s statement, the police might not want to let the first person know this until after it’s been followed up.

Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties
 

Just popping out to see my mate the Queen ttfn

Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties
 

Sometimes you don't need a big sample size. Compare with
https://www.cableforum.uk/board/show...php?t=33708500

Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties
 

Uncanny!

Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties
 

The story so far
- the Met don’t investigate Covid crimes retrospectively
- the Met believe there is insufficient evidence to investigate
- the Met says we’ll see what comes of Gray inquiry
- Gray inquiry found evidence so the Met says we’ll investigate
- the Met says they do not object to Gray publishing her report in full
- the Met says they don’t want Gray inquiry to publish evidence as it’ll prejudice their investigation

What happens next
- the Met says the investigation is proving more complex than they originally anticipated so they don't expect to complete it for several months
- after a suitable period of time, the Met says the evidence they’ve found doesn’t meet the level necessary for prosecution/fines
- the Government says since no breach has been committed there’s no need to publish Sue Gray’s report
- the Government says "national security" means they can't tell you what happened or what, if anything, they’re going to do about it

h/t @pauldavisITV and others

Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties
 

all nicely sorted then, and people can get back to planning their summer holidays . . . . until the next Covid variant comes along ;)

Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties
 

Thank you, Michael Fabricant... ;)

My holidays are already (mostly) booked - 4 days in the Algarve in March, 11 days in North Cyprus in May, 7 days in North Cyprus in September, just got to find somewhere for 10 days in July (those are all the times we have the pooch booked into kennels). :D

Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties
 

I just had to google that geezer, what a fine looking specimen he is, although to be fair the only thing I could find that we *may* have in common is on his wiki page . . .

:D

Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties
 

Planned and booked, a while ago (May, Tenerife :Sun:)

:D

Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties
 

This is turning into an episode of "The Thick Of It"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60177028

Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties
 

I wish they'd give it a rest, it's becoming seriously boring now imo.

Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties
 

+1

If he was going to go, he’d have gone by now.

Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties