Windows guru requested - Securing Windows

[Owen Lewis]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ukcrypto-admin@chiark.greenend.org.uk
> [mailto:ukcrypto-admin@chiark.greenend.org.uk]On Behalf Of Tom Thomson
> Sent: 13 June 2006 18:20
> To: ukcrypto@chiark.greenend.org.uk
> Subject: RE: Windows guru requested - Securing Windows
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ukcrypto-admin@chiark.greenend.org.uk
> [mailto:ukcrypto-admin@chiark.greenend.org.uk] On Behalf Of Owen Lewis
> Sent: 13 June 2006 17:20
> To: ukcrypto@chiark.greenend.org.uk
> Subject: RE: Windows guru requested - Securing Windows
>
> Owen Lewis wrote:
> >
> > OK. We are clear then that it was the doctor that was doing the
> assessment
> > and the sectioning and the police were in support because of the
> > possibility of serious violence from the interviewee.
> >
> > And the end of the story is? Did the interviewee use the respite to take
> > unto himself, from under the bed, a Thompson and several spare clips,
> > climb to the top of a petrol storage tank next door and go to
> his God in a
>
> > hail of .45 cal lead and a fireball crying out, "Top of the
> world, Ma!!"?
> > Or did he have the 'little chat' that was required of him?
>
> Haven't you missed out the third possibility: that the target of an
> unwarranted invasion lived happily ever afterwards, without becoming an
> "interviewee", the magistrate having sent the ASW away with a flea in his
> ear when he applied for a section 135 order?  Given the usual incompetence
> of senior social workers and the quite atartling publicity that has been
> given to the folly of magistrates who gave them the orders they
> asked for in
> various alleged devil-worship and child-abuse cases in recent years, some
> magistrates have become just a little more careful to look at the evidence
> than they used to be.  Or would you say that in suggesting that
> possibility
> I am displaying too great a faith in the ability of magistrates to behave
> sensibly?

Not at all. But I think Peter might tell us the end of the tale and not
leave us all guessing.

But to pass the time until then, let's looks at what has been stated and see
where it may lead.

A chap is believed by some possibly to be a serious danger to himself or
others (we know not which). To this end, some doctor at least and possibly a
SW wish to speak with him. He refuses any discussion with them. It's
reasonable to assume here that they did not arrive on his doorstep,
mob-banded and doubtless with back-up on call, without several other
invitations to conversation by appointment having been first extended and
refused - though no doubt the magistrate will be concerned to check that
this is indeed the case.

For the sake of the argument, take the foregoing as 'given's'. What then is
the poor magistrate supposed to do, except check that the formalities are
all properly complied with and that said poor chap's rights are receiving
all proper attention - and then sign the warrant. Either there is pressing
need to interview the chap so that he can be assessed with respect to any
requirement to section him or there are not. If there are grounds for
requiring such an assessment, what else is the poor magistrate to do except
say OK?

Owen