Police drop BT-Phorm probe

[David Hansen]

On 23 Sep 2008 at 12:45, Igor Mozolevsky wrote:

> just
> because they sought advice from an incompetent party should not
> absolve them of responsibilities under the law.

Very much the case. The advice from the incompetent party is written in 
a very strange way too.

> > It does indeed sound extremely thin, and smacks of a police force
> > looking for an excuse to drop the case,  rather than one that merely
> > believes it might have difficulty winning one.
> 
> This just sounds like a simple cost-benefit analysis: the police and
> the CPS would probably have to spend thousands of pounds investigating
> the case (hiring experts, etc) which may or may not yield a
> conviction.

I suspect that the police are not keen to investigate criminals if they 
are inside the tent. In this case the criminals include a large company 
which the police are heavily involved with.




-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents 
me   
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54