Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Mon Nov 11, 2013 9:44 am  

Lord Elpers wrote:

...
No attempt by you to malign the exisiting CCTV tapes can contest the absence of these 'invisible shocked members of the public.

I have seen CCTV of Mitchell cycling towards the gates in Downing Street.
Also of Mitchell pushing his bike past the police box to the pedestrian gate to exit Downing Street.
I have not seen any footage of the time between those two pieces, i.e. the time of the alleged altercation, have you?

The footage shot from the Treasury building outside of Downing Street (in the version I've seen online) has the time-of-recording pixillated-out (why?) and doesn't show Mitchell emerging from the gate, so we have no idea at all when it was recorded.
It shows one guy who stops and takes a step back to look into Downing Street ... this doesn't correspond with the footage taken from inside Downing Street, which shows more people walking past at the time when Mitchell was walking past the police box and exiting from Downing Street.

Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Tue Nov 26, 2013 12:33 pm  

One police officer to be charged with misconduct in public office Please heed the warning at the top of the CPS statement: Journalists and users of social media are urged to exercise care and restraint in any additional reporting or commenting on the following statement. This is because they may risk committing a contempt of court as strict liability contempt rules apply. But there are a few interesting paragraphs: Previously unseen and unedited CCTV evidence has been considered very carefully. In addition there has been a detailed enquiry into emails, text messages, social messaging and telephone contact between numerous police officers and members of the public. The locations of mobile telephones have been analysed using cell site technology. We have considered evidence in relation to 14 individuals including 10 police officers, a member of the media and three members of the public. Much of the press reporting to date has assumed that the CCTV recordings show that the gate officer lied about the words used during the incident. The CCTV footage that has been aired publicly was edited and did not show the full picture. Over to you Lord Elpers

One police officer to be charged with misconduct in public office Please heed the warning at the top of the CPS statement: Journalists and users of social media are urged to exercise care and restraint in any additional reporting or commenting on the following statement. This is because they may risk committing a contempt of court as strict liability contempt rules apply. But there are a few interesting paragraphs: Previously unseen and unedited CCTV evidence has been considered very carefully. In addition there has been a detailed enquiry into emails, text messages, social messaging and telephone contact between numerous police officers and members of the public. The locations of mobile telephones have been analysed using cell site technology. We have considered evidence in relation to 14 individuals including 10 police officers, a member of the media and three members of the public. Much of the press reporting to date has assumed that the CCTV recordings show that the gate officer lied about the words used during the incident. The CCTV footage that has been aired publicly was edited and did not show the full picture. Over to you Lord Elpers

Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Tue Nov 26, 2013 12:38 pm  

Well there's no surprise.

Good to know they don't just rely on Maplins DiY security kits.

Also explains why Cameron has avoided any mention of this part ever since.

Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Tue Nov 26, 2013 1:08 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

Well there's no surprise.

Good to know they don't just rely on Maplins DiY security kits.

Also explains why Cameron has avoided any mention of this part ever since.

But no audio?

I'm still struggling with that one

Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Tue Nov 26, 2013 1:21 pm  

Ooooooohhhhh

David Davies is going to show "the whole footage" this afternoon. Should be interesting

Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Tue Nov 26, 2013 2:40 pm  

cod'ead wrote:

Ooooooohhhhh

David Davies is going to show "the whole footage" this afternoon. Should be interesting

Should also be interesting to find out why the Ch4 previously released footage had been edited so, who edited it, who obtained it and from where, and who fed it to Ch4 along with the script, the three cameras on their footage are on the Downing St security office and on the outside wall of the government buildings, facing Whitehall, either side of the gates - presumably these three cameras were in the control of civil servants who were sympathetic to Mitchells case, presumably also these were the only ones that Mitchells team could get their hands on.

Media manipulation eh, who would have thought it ?

Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Tue Nov 26, 2013 2:43 pm  

cod'ead wrote:

But no audio?

I'm still struggling with that one

Yep, me too.

Ten years ago I fitted two small cameras, the aforementioned Maplins kit, to the side and back doors of my house, wired them up to an old TV set and video recorder and when I switched them on found that they had infra red capabilities so filmed at night too, and bugger-me if they didn't have sound too, all for less then £100.

I'm writing my application to be the Downing St security advisor right now, sponsored by Maplins of course.

Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Wed Dec 04, 2013 11:57 am  

Policeman set to sue Mitchell for libel over claims that any officer who maintained he had used the word 'pleb' was "not telling the truth". Well ...

Policeman set to sue Mitchell for libel over claims that any officer who maintained he had used the word 'pleb' was "not telling the truth". Well ...

Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Wed Dec 04, 2013 1:00 pm  

Mintball wrote: Policeman set to sue Mitchell for libel over claims that any officer who maintained he had used the word 'pleb' was "not telling the truth". Well ... Hope it goes better for him than his case against News Group. His solicitors had failed to file their costs budget until the day before the Case Management Conference. The result was that an order was made that this means they are taken to have filed a "notional" costs budget of zero except court fees, and so that's what he will get from news Group for his costs even if he wins the claim. Oops. This has been appealed up to and comprehensively dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 7 November. It remains to be seen what the effect will be on his legal representation.

Mintball wrote: Policeman set to sue Mitchell for libel over claims that any officer who maintained he had used the word 'pleb' was "not telling the truth". Well ... Hope it goes better for him than his case against News Group. His solicitors had failed to file their costs budget until the day before the Case Management Conference. The result was that an order was made that this means they are taken to have filed a "notional" costs budget of zero except court fees, and so that's what he will get from news Group for his costs even if he wins the claim. Oops. This has been appealed up to and comprehensively dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 7 November. It remains to be seen what the effect will be on his legal representation.

Re: Andrew Mitchell - Update : Wed Dec 04, 2013 1:26 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

Hope it goes better for him than his case against News Group. His solicitors had failed to file their costs budget until the day before the Case Management Conference. The result was that an order was made that this means they are taken to have filed a "notional" costs budget of zero except court fees, and so that's what he will get from news Group for his costs even if he wins the claim. Oops. This has been appealed up to and comprehensively dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 7 November. It remains to be seen what the effect will be on his legal representation.

I didn't realise the rozzer was suing News Group, I thought it was Mitchell doing that