PI allegations and response

seadog wrote:

Come back Cerbs.

But leave your chums at the door.

Dougie wrote:

You can see why there was a call to regulate PIs this week. Who would take on or rather who should be allowed to take on such spurious work.

You are correct Dougie, the Home Affairs committee reported this week and their conclusion were expected. The prime one being licencing although there is still the thorny question of what consititues licencable activity. Add that to the imminent abolition of the Security Industry Authority to be replaced by ? Well, no one seems to know yet. You will note that Leverson will not be licencing jouralists to the same extent.

Yet all the while the civil and criminal law pertain as much to PIs as they do any other member of society.

Spurious work? Much of what I do and have done is as a direct result of the police not wishing/able to enter certain areas, for example: Theft of intellectual property, commercial theft, fraud, both by individuals and organisation.

I dont do criminal defence, but many colleagues do, I dont think I would describe that as spurious.

Threats to Jock and his family are unacceptable by whoever caused it.

End of.

Tony, how much would it cost us for you to find out who Windsor Boy was?

tonycholwell wrote:

Dougie wrote:

You can see why there was a call to regulate PIs this week. Who would take on or rather who should be allowed to take on such spurious work.

You are correct Dougie, the Home Affairs committee reported this week and their conclusion were expected. The prime one being licencing although there is still the thorny question of what consititues licencable activity. Add that to the imminent abolition of the Security Industry Authority to be replaced by ? Well, no one seems to know yet. You will note that Leverson will not be licencing jouralists to the same extent.

Yet all the while the civil and criminal law pertain as much to PIs as they do any other member of society.

Spurious work? Much of what I do and have done is as a direct result of the police not wishing/able to enter certain areas, for example: Theft of intellectual property, commercial theft, fraud, both by individuals and organisation.

I dont do criminal defence, but many colleagues do, I dont think I would describe that as spurious.

Threats to Jock and his family are unacceptable by whoever caused it.

End of.

The point is an investigator can choose who and what they investigate. Yes there is a moral judgement to be made and in this case I would call it spurious. Just as the PIs involved in Leveson had a choice if they had said no who knows where we would have been.

GOB wrote:

Tony, how much would it cost us for you to find out who Windsor Boy was?

Haha, I dont think Id want to quote on a public forum.

In fact, I would avoid it like the plague, if the account still exists (?) you would have to see what starting data you have and if the name has been used eleswhere.

Im guessing it was a custom name with little in the profile and not used before.. I woud say in those circumstances, you ought to save your money.

Peggy wrote:

Did you delete yourself, Jock, or have you been banned?

I copied all of the interesting comments and asked Cerbs to delete me.

Dougie wrote:

tonycholwell wrote:

Dougie wrote:

You can see why there was a call to regulate PIs this week. Who would take on or rather who should be allowed to take on such spurious work.

You are correct Dougie, the Home Affairs committee reported this week and their conclusion were expected. The prime one being licencing although there is still the thorny question of what consititues licencable activity. Add that to the imminent abolition of the Security Industry Authority to be replaced by ? Well, no one seems to know yet. You will note that Leverson will not be licencing jouralists to the same extent.

Yet all the while the civil and criminal law pertain as much to PIs as they do any other member of society.

Spurious work? Much of what I do and have done is as a direct result of the police not wishing/able to enter certain areas, for example: Theft of intellectual property, commercial theft, fraud, both by individuals and organisation.

I dont do criminal defence, but many colleagues do, I dont think I would describe that as spurious.

Threats to Jock and his family are unacceptable by whoever caused it.

End of.

The point is an investigator can choose who and what they investigate. Yes there is a moral judgement to be made and in this case I would call it spurious. Just as the PIs involved in Leveson had a choice if they had said no who knows where we would have been.

The point I was making is that what Glen Mulclaire, Id rather we called him a semi professional footballer rather than an Investigator, did was against the criminal law, he knew it when he did it and paid the penalty. Im not sure licencing would stop him iin future and thats if he bothered to get a licence.

The whole thing is now beyond parody including the completely guileless responses from naps

"The point I was making is that what Glen Mulclaire, Id rather we called him a semi professional footballer rather than an Investigator, did was against the criminal law, he knew it when he did it and paid the penalty. Im not sure licencing would stop him iin future and thats if he bothered to get a licence".[/quote]

Tony, I'd rather call Glen Mulclaire a cnut who hacks grieving familys phones. Semi professional footballer my arse.

Highwayman wrote:

"The point I was making is that what Glen Mulclaire, Id rather we called him a semi professional footballer rather than an Investigator, did was against the criminal law, he knew it when he did it and paid the penalty. Im not sure licencing would stop him iin future and thats if he bothered to get a licence".

Tony, I'd rather call Glen Mulclaire a cnut who hacks grieving familys phones. Semi professional footballer my arse.[/quote]

I agree with the first sentance without reservation.

I have never seen him play so no idea if he was any good.

I'm amazed so many people are behind the curve with private communication intercepts. It's been going for years, and even your local City Council, can legally intercept the phones etc of the poorer Plymouth citizens, isn't that right Tony ? god knows what will happen to all this information when certain government 'services' are put out to private companies, such as the credit rating bunch. No bit of official information will be £50 away from a prying eye. it's happening now.

The only reason this whole phone hack thing has caused such a furore is because it's rich and sometimes influential people being 'tapped'.

Penz wrote:

I'm amazed so many people are behind the curve with private communication intercepts. It's been going for years, and even your local City Council, can legally intercept the phones etc of the poorer Plymouth citizens, isn't that right Tony ? god knows what will happen to all this information when certain government 'services' are put out to private companies, such as the credit rating bunch. No bit of official information will be £50 away from a prying eye. it's happening now.

The only reason this whole phone hack thing has caused such a furore is because it's rich and sometimes influential people being 'tapped'.

It is Penz

And access to your phone, mobile and email records.

And DWP

Full access to the DVLA

HMRC so your tax records are available.

The list is pretty endless.

Most of it is contained in anti terror legislation, which LAs use for all sorts of frivilous reasons.

I know it all Tony, we're just all such naughty terrorists.
You want to be involved in perfectly legal political demonstrations over the years, and see how the anti terror stuff is used routinely on ordinary citizens going about their lawful rights.

Ho hum... probably not the place here.

tonycholwell wrote:

Penz wrote:

I'm amazed so many people are behind the curve with private communication intercepts. It's been going for years, and even your local City Council, can legally intercept the phones etc of the poorer Plymouth citizens, isn't that right Tony ? god knows what will happen to all this information when certain government 'services' are put out to private companies, such as the credit rating bunch. No bit of official information will be £50 away from a prying eye. it's happening now.

The only reason this whole phone hack thing has caused such a furore is because it's rich and sometimes influential people being 'tapped'.

It is Penz

And access to your phone, mobile and email records.

And DWP

Full access to the DVLA

HMRC so your tax records are available.

The list is pretty endless.

Most of it is contained in anti terror legislation, which LAs use for all sorts of frivilous reasons.

Absolutely, TC - including 'investigating offenders' who leave their wheels bins out for too long...

I've posted about the eternal conflict of the wonder vs the horror of the Internet on a number of occasions, but one thing I am certain of is that we all have far too much access to far too much information. The development in technological advances is outpacing the development of our societal norms by some rate.

Without judging the rights & wrongs, even on the Argyle Fan's forums alone, there is much posted that would ping a 'vetters' search & stop - without right of appeal - many a job offer or service provision....

Worrying really.

Jon

Penz wrote:

I know it all Tony, we're just all such naughty terrorists.
You want to be involved in perfectly legal political demonstrations over the years, and see how the anti terror stuff is used routinely on ordinary citizens going about their lawful rights.

Ho hum... probably not the place here.

It may not be, PP. but you're right.

Jon

JonB wrote:

Penz wrote:

I know it all Tony, we're just all such naughty terrorists.
You want to be involved in perfectly legal political demonstrations over the years, and see how the anti terror stuff is used routinely on ordinary citizens going about their lawful rights.

Ho hum... probably not the place here.

It may not be, PP. but you're right.

Jon

And yet, if you have been arrested and charged and wish to contest, its a bit late to rely on a duty solicitor to save you. My few friends who still engage in legal defence may be your last hope.

Oh and most PIs dont touch legal defence because the budgets are too small and solicitors are notoriously slow/late payers.

JonB wrote:

Penz wrote:

I know it all Tony, we're just all such naughty terrorists.
You want to be involved in perfectly legal political demonstrations over the years, and see how the anti terror stuff is used routinely on ordinary citizens going about their lawful rights.

Ho hum... probably not the place here.

It may not be, PP. but you're right.

Jon

Says Jon, idly flicking through Penz's file

Well I hope whoever was paid to dig any dirt on me went through my bins, with all the shitty nappies in there

I've only got up to 'G' at the moment (thanks to my classic 'pretending to stand for the PASB' sting), so P is some way in the future yet.....

As for you, Charlie.........

Greenjock wrote:

Peggy wrote:

Did you delete yourself, Jock, or have you been banned?

I copied all of the interesting comments and asked Cerbs to delete me.

Fair enough.

I do hope you kept the one where he said he 'doesn't do nasty'.

Peggy wrote:

Greenjock wrote:

Peggy wrote:

Did you delete yourself, Jock, or have you been banned?

I copied all of the interesting comments and asked Cerbs to delete me.

Fair enough.

I do hope you kept the one where he said he 'doesn't do nasty'.

I kept them all. Like I told him I learned that from him. Keep any scrap of info which could be used in future, store it somewhere safe, I SAID SAFE IAN, and if anyone tries telling Porkies about things in future, it can be dragged up in a second

I wonder who told GHOST it had all gone mad on Cerbs site earlier, when he was "away" for a few hours, when all the incriminating posts had been deleted long before

Been doing a bit of PIing myself. I walked the rain strewn streets in leather soled shoes which let the water wearing an old beige mac with my trusty notebook to a jazz soundtrack (heavy on the sax) This is what I've come up with. Struggling to come up with the final bit of the jigsaw.

Excellent, Dougie.

A bit big, but excellent.

(Good job Droly doesn't post on here.)

If only someone could fill in the missing link Dougie. Or is that where you've been putting your pint glasses down whilst doodling?

Greenjock wrote:

Peggy wrote:

Greenjock wrote:

Peggy wrote:

Did you delete yourself, Jock, or have you been banned?

I copied all of the interesting comments and asked Cerbs to delete me.

Fair enough.

I do hope you kept the one where he said he 'doesn't do nasty'.

I kept them all. Like I told him I learned that from him. Keep any scrap of info which could be used in future, store it somewhere safe, I SAID SAFE IAN, and if anyone tries telling Porkies about things in future, it can be dragged up in a second

I wonder who told GHOST it had all gone mad on Cerbs site earlier, when he was "away" for a few hours, when all the incriminating posts had been deleted long before

Can't disagree with any of that............ beware the deleters !