Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
Judge: Article 8 isn't the whole story. She was targeted here for her political opinions.
Perry: It is important to bear in mind, if the Tribunal go down the route, #spycops authorisations must not only be Article 8 compliant but also an Article 10, that could be problematic.
Crazy, I thought investigations should have to comply with the whole Human Rights Act, but apparently David Perry QC thinks that would be "problematic" for the police and security services. #spycops
Perry: Whatever you make of Art 10 & 11, the facts remain the same. We are not saying that the Tribunal cannot state the facts. We do not dispute the facts. But we are asking you to limit your ruling to articles 8 and 3.
#Spycops logic...
Now talking about intelligence flow.
The difficulty is that intelligence flow within the NPOIU appears to have "evolved over the lifetime of the deployment" and in Aug 2006 a new system was implemented. We cannot really know what happened before that. #Spycops Secrets and lies
Perry is going through search terms the police used to find the evidence they did present. We are back on the issue of police having "lost" a lot of evidence relating to very key parts of this case, and no explanation for the loss of those documents has ever been given. #spycops
The key point is whether the absence of material is suspicious. The police submit this is "regrettable human error". The Tribunal is aware of the efforts we have made to ensure material was made available to the Claimaint in as orderly a format as possible.
This is hilarious. The disclosure made to me was appalling: chaotic, served late and in utter disarray. One commentator described the police approach as "incompetence being used as a litigation strategy"
#spycops
Perry: I offer no defence for the unlawful behaviour that took place. All of the submissions we have made are to the circumstantial inferences to be made based on the materials. The Tribunal can draw the inference it wishes to make.
#spycops
Judge: Do you want to respond on the lack of witness statements presented in this case? Perry: Our position is that the documents are available and they are the primary evidence. The absence of witness statements should not be taken against the Defendants.
In Dec 2018 the police lawyers wrote to #spycops officers with questions saying "you are not required to give evidence" thus making it clear that there would be no oath and that they could lie.
Perry: in the UCPI there is an undertaking that #spycops witnesses can give evidence and nothing they say can be used against them. Without that undertaking they could be unwilling to give evidence here. Not for any sinister reason
No, nothing sinister about that at all!
Judge: But we have questions no one in court can answer. What was done with the #spycops contact logs? You present a witness who by your own declaration has *no knowledge of the events at all* & has not spoken to the officers involved. That is a very odd witness statement indeed
And on that point the police close their case. We'll be back tomorrow with closing remarks from Charlotte Kilroy QC
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
