The legacy of DCS Dave Cook.

As the dust settles concerning the Vian Brothers and Jonathan Rees’ victory over New Scotland Yard, it is time to look to the future. The fiasco of the many police attempts to find the murderer of Daniel Morgan have cost in excess of £140 million, not including a hoped for £4 million to Garry and Glenn Vian plus Jon Rees.

The Justice Secretary is unveiling some new strategy today.

Along with the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme, one ought to see the Metropolitan police cough up a record pay out, for DCS Dave Cook’s malfeasance in public office, perverting the course of justice, plus other offences. Cook was not alone in his actions. Can Old Bill recover from the immense damage inflicted?

About Ciaran Goggins

Defeated UK at ECHR over innocent folks DNA sample retention, spokesman in Justice for Ched Evans campaign, now researching who really murdered Daniel Morgan in 1987, also the Stephen Lawrence and Lord Lucan cold cases.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to The legacy of DCS Dave Cook.

  1. Fred Bassett says:

    Bureau wins landmark press freedom case at the European Court of Human Rights

    The UK government has violated the freedom of the press, the European Court of Human Rights ruled today following a four year case brought by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism.

    In a significant win, which has major implications for the UK government, the ECHR in Strasbourg ruled that mass surveillance by GCHQ and other intelligence agencies without adequate safeguards to protect the freedom of the press is unlawful.

    The case will force the government to review how it intercepts journalists’ communications and to put better safeguards in place to ensure that a journalist can continue to properly protect their sources.

    The Bureau’s case was part of a wider submission brought by human rights organisations including Amnesty, Privacy International, and Liberty following the revelations about the invasive surveillance by GCHQ and other agencies revealed by Edward Snowden in 2013.

    The Bureau was specifically concerned about the chilling effect that mass surveillance may have on whistleblowers seeking to reveal wrongdoing to investigative journalists, and the difficulty of guaranteeing a source’s anonymity when communications are being monitored in such a pervasive way.

    The Bureau’s Managing Editor Rachel Oldroyd welcomed the ECHR judgment: “The Bureau believes the freedom of the press is a vital cornerstone of democracy and that journalists must be able to protect their sources. We are particularly concerned about the chilling effect that the threat of state surveillance has on whistleblowers who want to expose wrongdoing, and this ruling will force our government to put safeguards in place. It is an extremely good day for journalism.”
    Bureau managing editor Rachel Oldroyd at the ECHR with Rosa Curling from Leigh Day and counsel Conor McCarthy of Monckton Chambers

    The court was particularly worried about the potential deliberate targeting of journalists work by security agencies without measures in place to protect confidentiality. The court “expressed particular concern” about the absence of any published safeguards relating to the circumstances in which confidential journalistic material could be selected.

    The court found that the UK government was in breach of Article 10, the right to freedom of expression, because of the “potential chilling effect that any perceived interference with the confidentiality of journalists’ communications and, in particular, their sources might have on the freedom of the press.”

    Rosa Curling of law firm Leigh Day, who represented TBIJ at the court, said: “It should put an end to our security services and police forces using the mass surveillance of communications to identify journalists’ sources.”

    Gavin Millar QC, also counsel for TBIJ, said: “The government must now rewrite the law as to how the security and intelligence service can look at and use journalists confidential communications and material. Secretive arrangements like these cannot continue. There must be a public interest which overrides the vital right to journalistic free speech before officials can scrutinise such material.”

    Founders of the Bureau David and Elaine Potter backed the case. “Holding the powerful to account is the most important duty of a free press,” they said. “To do so journalists need to be able to interrogate a wide range of sources as well as data in the knowledge that confidentiality promised can be delivered. Without that a free press would die.”

    The case was brought to the ECHR in 2013, following Edward Snowden’s revelations that GCHQ was secretly collecting, storing and analysing the private communications of millions of British citizens. Snowden also revealed that this information was being shared with foreign governments, including the US, in a mass surveillance programme with no basis in law or proper safeguards.
    Ciaran what do you make of these findings, could this be used to smoke out the Corrupt Met, and Co. Edit feel free to change anything in my name, Fred

Comments are closed.