The Crown Prosecution Service 10

Eventually we will find out something of the truth behind the alleged terror plot. The law prohibits me from commenting on the evidence: but as the police have already done so, I might say that so far nothing they said has contradicted my contention that no-one had purchased a ticket and nobody had assembled a bomb. It is also worth noting that the mother, Cossor Ali, has not been charged with conspiracy to murder, so the lurid story about her planning to blow up a plane and her baby with a bomb in a feeding bottle appears to be a fantasy.

The charges laid are extremely serious. We will wait to see what the trial brings – unfortunately, the BBC are saying that the prisoners could wait in jail for three years before a substantive trial. As with the “ricin plotters”, that is long enough that in the event of a not guilty verdict the public will have forgotten all about it and the media will be able to report it on page 22 in a single paragraph. Who doubts that if the ricin plotters had been found guilty, it would have been page 1 all over again?

Incidentally, my own straw poll indicates that most people don’t realise the ricin plot didn’t exist and the “plotters” were found not guilty. Hardly surprising when the disgraceful BBC News was today talking about the “Ricin plot” – without mentioning the not guilty verdicts – in a ridiculous scaremongering feature about “Agroterrorism”, claiming that terrorists could kill 250,000 people by introducing botulism into a milk tanker. Worth noting that the Head of News and Current Affairs at the BBC is Helen Boaden, whose brother was a New Labour candidate at the last election.

Of course, our still shiny independent Crown Prosecution Service will have impartially assessed the evidence and decided it was sufficient to go to trial – which effectively gave the CPS the power to lock these people up for three years before the evidence is tested by the defence. The CPS mission statement describes itself proudly as “an independent prosecution service”.

So, consider the statement by the Crown Prosecution Service at the police conference where the charges were announced on 21 August. I heard this on TV and sat up suddenly. I couldn’t believe my ears. I have just tracked down the quote to confirm I heard aright:

Susan Hemmings, Crown Prosecution Service:

“I was briefed in relation to these allegations before the arrest and asked to advise on some preliminary legal issues both before and just after arrest. Together with another senior CPS lawyer, I have been working with the police full time at New Scotland Yard for the last eight days.”


What? The CPS unit that took the decision was actually “embedded” with the police investigation in Scotland Yard? Was a party to the turmoil, excitement and indeed hype that has characterised this investigation?

That strikes me as very strange for the body that is meant impartially to assess the weight of police evidence and decide if there is a case for prosecution. Does anyone know if the CPS has ever physically moved itself to Scotland Yard before in any previous case?


Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

10 thoughts on “The Crown Prosecution Service

  • Adam Stanhope

    For your strawpoll…

    I was most certainly not aware that the ricin plotters were found not guilty. That case sounded like a "slam dunk!"

  • Craig


    Precisely. The police announced they had found ricin. Once in court, it turned out they had found the atmospheric norm – it is all round us in minute traces.

    The point is that the police claims at time of charging turned out in court to be crap. So all those who are crowing about the current case are seriously premature.

    Liberal Avenger – in this country you can't publish or broadcast anything that might influence a potential jury member. So unlike the US system, we don't have TV shows poring over the evidence. In fact the police statement at charging was called "Unprecedented" by the BBC. They meant "illegal". I'm pushing it too, but not as badly as the police.

  • Chuck Unsworth

    Hemmings is much hyped herself. The reality is that she's a shrewd cookie who is entirely on the make. The corporate statement that the CPS is 'independent' is completely inane. 'Independent' of/from what and whom precisely? Just follow the money and look at the career paths….

    Anyone who believes that this arm of the Home Office is neutral in any way should immediately make an appointment to see their GP. They are clearly seriously unwell.

    What's needed here is a series of actions against the Crown for wrongful arrest etc. Sadly they are unlikely to happen as the old claim of 'acting in good faith' will be made, but who can really believe that?

  • Paul


    I like what you write though I find the bits about their not having assembled bombs or bought plane tickets is a bit misleading. I imagine I could knock together a bomb in a few hours with the right ingredients, and I'm damn sure I could buy a plane ticket a whole lot quicker.

  • Adam Stanhope

    One of the US network evening news shows last night (CBS or NBC) had a story about where they clearly stated that it was very doubtful the bomb formula(s) that have been discussed would have worked on the plane. They talked about keeping it cool (we know that from the story linked to us this site) and they talked about the strong odor that would be produced – they said it would be like a hair salon's chemical odor.

  • Craig


    I could buy a ticket very quickly too if I didn't much care where I was going. But it is mid-August, and a lot of flights are full, and the allegation leaked to the police was that they planned to crash ten or so planes into different places in the US simultaneously, or over the space of a few hours. That would definitely take a good bit of advance planning.

    Let's wait and see what the so-called bomb making components were, before we decide how quickly a bomb could have been made. Not in fact as easy as you think – and to assemble a lot of bombs again would take quite some time.

  • Paul

    Thanks for responding.

    Maybe the simultaneous attacks thing is a bit of poetic license (to be euphemistic) on the part of the police and the politicians to scare us all. Who knows? Even so, such an attack could probably be arranged a week or two in advance allowing for busy flights at the moment, in which case it's probably as well to have moved now. If there was no such plot, then God help us all.

  • Bridget Dunne

    Hi Craig,

    In line with the ongoing lack of evidence behind alleged terror plots, I thought you and your readers might like to know that the July 7th Truth Campaign have launched a petition calling on the British Government to RELEASE THE EVIDENCE that conclusively proves the version of events outlined in the 'Report of the Official Account of the Bombings in London on 7th July 2005', as released by the Home Office on 11 May 2006.

    For the record, on 11 July 2006, just two months after the release of the report, the Home Secretary, Dr John Reid, admitted before Parliament that the official report was inaccurate, specifically with regard to the train the accused are alleged to have taken from Luton to King's Cross. If such a fundamental detail is inaccurate, how much faith can anyone have in anything else the report claims, especially without any evidence in the public domain to corroborate the claims made?

    In less than three weeks we have managed to collect almost 450 signatures, with no support from the mainstream media and only just a little support from dissident bloggers in the UK. We hope you will sign the petition and would be grateful if you could publicise its existence among your readership.

    The July 7th Truth Campaign Petition can be found here:

Comments are closed.