Extraordinary language policemen use - as though they have been educated in ways of expressing themselves incomprehensibly.

See Chief Inspector Littledick in the movie Vile Pervert: The Musical.

Incidentally - has anyone noticed how witnesses are heard time and again on trivial issues where serious questions appear deliberately avoided?

Chris Jefferies - the poor man suffered monstering at the hands of police and media. Get over it. But the Inquiry has heard from him twice so far.

Yet if the collusion had worked and he'd been (wrongly) tried and convicted - would the Inquiry have asked for him to have been brought from prison to examine the way the collusion had worked?

Answer - no.

Seems strange to me.

...and let's make no mistake Jefferies had already been found 'guilty' by the tabloids, because he looked 'odd'. The police did leak information to the press regarding Jefferies before he was arrested.

A clinical and almost perfect illustration of how injustice is delivered. The Chris Jefferies story is one that should be examined over and over.

JK2006 wrote:
Extraordinary language policemen use - as though they have been educated in ways of expressing themselves incomprehensibly.

See Chief Inspector Littledick in the movie Vile Pervert: The Musical.

Incidentally - has anyone noticed how witnesses are heard time and again on trivial issues where serious questions appear deliberately avoided?

Chris Jefferies - the poor man suffered monstering at the hands of police and media. Get over it. But the Inquiry has heard from him twice so far.

Yet if the collusion had worked and he'd been (wrongly) tried and convicted - would the Inquiry have asked for him to have been brought from prison to examine the way the collusion had worked?

Answer - no.

Seems strange to me.

good point about Jeffries. It's not as thought we are just discovering that coppers have been bent and verbaled people.

Yes; surely it is essential for any Inquiry to examine the ultimate results of media and police collusion - whether successful or unsuccessful.

I accept that successful collusion is harder to examine but I must say - even more vital.

Unless the Inquiry either wants to show both sides only in a bad light (many successful collusions may have been desirable and fair) or they have an agenda "Don't dig too deep".

Rupert seems to have lost the plot..I was thinking this very thing and then noticed this tweet in the Guardian:

11.02am: Tom Watson MP has responded to Rupert Murdoch's tweet:

@rupertmurdochYou comment on her horse but not on her insider knowledge of a criminal investigation into your company. Have you no shame?

— tom_watson (@tom_watson) February 29, 2012
^^^^^^^^^^

I;m just loving these recalcitrant cops who are being exposed as such brown nosers to News Int.

note how they consistently weave terrorism into the tale.

The inference is that there was a choice..all their resources will be used up investigating News Int or the terrorists ...you can't have both.

I reckon Murdoch's power was doomed the moment his hacks, hacked the Royal Family and politicians. Although they are only symbols the represent the 'establishment'. For hundreds of years people have fallen over when they take on the British establishment. Especially a Dirty Digger !

...and JK you highlight the problem with such a public media circus of an inquiry as Leveson is. That's the problem. Imagine the tabloid and public furore should convicted criminals be giving evidence of their own mistreatment? Which is why I argue the Jefferies case should be held up as a banner, because it is his story which can be identified by some in the past whom have gone on to be wrongfully convicted.

As you argue such an inquiry should be digging as deep as it is possible to go. But alas, Leveson immediately falls foul of the very establishments he is supposedly there to bring to book.

And why hasn't the Rachel Nickell guy (forget his name) been seen at this inquiry yet? His story too is one that is quite fascinating regarding the tactics of police combined with tabloid frenzy.

And Barry George...he's been overlooked too.

Well done Steve Coogan, who appears to have put away his noble sword of truth, retired from his fearless campaign against News International, pocketed a large sum of money from Rupert and signed on to make a series for...Sky. The first of many weak-willed buffoons ready to humiliate themselves, I guess.