Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexanderHanff
|
My take on the first call Alex, is that until you mentioned RIPA, he didn't seem actually have a single fact about the issue to hand. When you mentioned RIPA he then used a stock answer - "RIPA doesn't cover BT".
When you rang the second time, he didn't seem to know about the contents of your email.
There was every evidence there of a lack of acquaintance with the detail, which may have led to the clear reluctance to discuss the detail during the call, rather requesting everything in writing - surely he already HAD the case file with everything in writing? Or maybe not....
I really do wonder how much of the file or the email had been read.
I think this sounds extremely hopeful, although it must have been irritating for you personally. It's going to be a slow slow job, but this one will run through to the bitter end, with a lot of public humiliation for various people who have been unwise enough to make assumptions about the guillibility of the public.
What the police seem to have done, is invite the glare of the spotlight to shine brightly on the whole investigation. Not a clever move. It's going to have to be a broadly focussed spotlight, to include them and all the BT executives who are potentially liable for the actions taken by them in 2006 and 2007 - but it will do us no harm for the whole thing to attract more media attention.
Well done Alex. It's going according to plan IMHO.