Should Scotland Yard Have 'let Off' This Election Cheat?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4303250/Scotland-Yard-comes-fire-letting-mayor.html

Or has the quest for political correctness won once again?

/// Last year former local government minister Sir Eric Pickles suggested, in an official report, that political correctness may have been partially to blame for what he described as a lack of action by the Met. ///

[Samjenko]

Lock him up. (I say)

[ToraToraTora]

no, why is he exempt from the law?

[jackthehat]

No, they shouldn't and I think they ought to explain why they haven't prosecuted him.

[mushroom25]

according to Transparency International, Bangladesh is one of the most corrupt countries in the world. it could be argued that Mr Rahman was merely expressing the culture of the nation of his birth in a country that pretends to be the multi-cultural capital of Europe.

[jno]

at the end of that story it points the finger at the CPS, so it's not clear what part Scotland Yard played.

"witnesses who were prepared to give evidence in the Election Court but were unwilling to do so in criminal proceedings"

- that might have something to do with it. If witnesses won't talk, what sort of case can you present?

[Buenchico]

Police forces don't bring prosecutions. That's the job of the Crown Prosecution Service. If the CPS was provided with '27 files of evidence' then they could either have launched a prosecution directly (without involving the Met at all) or sought the involvement of the Met in 'firming up' the existing evidence in the case.

The fact they that they chose to follow neither of those paths must surely give good cause for criticising the CPS, rather than the Met.

[emmie]

he should have been prosecuted ages ago, election fraud is a very serious matter.

[anotheoldgit]

Buenchico

/// Police forces don't bring prosecutions. That's the job of the Crown Prosecution Service. If the CPS was provided with '27 files of evidence' then they could either have launched a prosecution directly (without involving the Met at all) ///

I am a little confused, if there was no need for the Met to be involved at all, who would have provided the CPS with the 27 files of evidence?

[Buenchico]

^^^ The evidence presented to the Election Court by those who brought the action against Lutfur Rahman was forwarded directly to the CPS. They chose not to pass it to the Met.

[anotheoldgit]

Thanks Buenchico,

[Gromit]

London Assembly Members have few functions, but one of them is to oversee governance of the Police.

Steve O'Connell, chairman of the Assemby's Police Committee, exemplifies their uselessness. Lots of whinging, but he can't or won't do anything about it.

He should be sacked along with the rest of the London Assembly. It is pointless and ineffective.

As for as Rahman not being prosecuted, the police can only go off evidence they can find, not heresay, so if they can't build a case, they can't prosecute.

[emmie]

gromit
27 cases of evidence that seems enough for anyone.
this man is a crook of the first order and its not the first time he has been caught out.

[jno]

27 files rather than cases, but we have no way of knowing what was in them. Presumably, the CPS for whatever reason thought there wasn't enough there to base a case on.

But for some reason the Mail has decided to point the finger at the Met, goodness knows why. It doesn't appear the Met had anything to do with it. Perhaps they should ask Katie Hopkins about the risks of identifying the wrong target.