Donate SIGN UP

Big Brother is watching you, or maybe not.

Avatar Image
Gromit | 13:57 Tue 14th Apr 2009 | News
5 Answers
During an interview on Channel Four news last Thursday the head of the IPCC was asked, "why has no CCTV footage of the Mr Thomlinson incident been produced". His response was "there are no CCTV cameras in the area where the incident took place".

Strange then, that the Daily Mail today prints pictures from the scene and there are indeed CCTV cameras overlooking the spot where Ian Tomlinson died.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-116989 3/Riddle-missing-CCTV-film-G20-death-watchdogs -claim-cameras-proved-wrong.html

The IPCC have since issued a clarification:

LONDON (Reuters) - The police watchdog probing the death of a man during anti-G20 protests in London said on Tuesday its chairman had been wrong to say there was no CCTV film of the incident and that such footage might indeed exist.

A case of incompetance, or a cover-up in progress?
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 5 of 5rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Gromit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Incompetance as usual and cover up as always !

Toothless window dressing watchdog - as seems to be the case with all watchdogs !
Paul Revere, from Boston, Lincs made some good points.
Sorry to be frivilous, but did you see the text halfway down the Daily Mail article in blue:

"Doctor who said G20 protester died of natural causes was disciplined by watchdog"

You'd think he'd have enough on his hands with all them Daleks, Cybermen and whatnot.
What do you expect from a Government lead by a scottish control freak that can never say sorry.

We are in a dictatorship ther is no doubt about it.

McBottle and his cronnies must go, but whats the betting he changes the law by act of parliant to say no elections come election time.

far fetched ? not with Noo labour.
McBottle and his cronnies must go, but whats the betting he changes the law by act of parliant to say no elections come election time.

Extremely unlikely, actually. For one thing, Brown is not the first or the last unelected PM (Major in his first term, Callaghan, Macmillian in his first term, Churchill in his first term, Chamberlain).

Also the House of Lords can actually veto (not suspend, veto) any act that attempts to increase the life of a parliament. The last time such an act was passed though was during the war (which it didn't stop for obvious reasons). Consider on top of that the Lords isn't nearly as partisan as people think it is (unlike the Commons, which is). Plus Labour peers are far outweighed by total opposition peers.

1 to 5 of 5rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Big Brother is watching you, or maybe not.

Answer Question >>