The police can be trusted ...

[Owen Lewis]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian G Batten" <I.G.Batten@ftel.co.uk>
Newsgroups: mail.ukcrypto
To: <ukcrypto@maillist.ox.ac.uk>
Sent: 04 July 2000 15:07
Subject: Re: The police can be trusted ...

>> affairs of those they deal with. That said, the *responsible* official
>> (almost certainly a lawyer) should have been both severly reprimanded and
>> sacked from his job.

>But, oddly, wasn't.

Yerrsss..

>> Nevertheless, the confidentiality or lack of it afforded that enquiry's
>> witness list (normally a document of public record?) has nowt to do with

No, it wasn't the enquiry's witness list, if you mean ``the witness list
of the McPherson inquiry''.  The disputed list was of the people who
spoke to the police inquiry into a murder with possible gangland
implications.

Thank you for reminding me.

>Is that really a matter of public record?

Not, as far as I know, until the witnesses give their names and addresses in
open court.

But it was as a part of the McP enquiry report that the list was published,
was it not?
If so who the h*ll appended it there? And who authorised that it remain
there? The report's
author? Surely not?

But if the report's author did not append it, are we then to believe that
the report as published over his signature was not perused in toto and
signed off by him for
release in the form perused?  I think we should be told.

Owen Lewis