Dear me. If you watch the CCTV footage, you can see people passing by the gate outside. Since the quality is poor and the first set of footage that Mitchell released is from a distance it's not easy to see but on the second set of footage that Mitchell released (minus 40 seconds worth of footage in between the two) there can be seen at least 3 people outside the gate, either passing by or standing to watch/look down Downing Street. But if you want to just blindly believe that there's only 1 person there then that's up to you.

As for making things up well do you now admit that you made up the assertion that the police officers said there were "crowds" outside the gates?
Or making up that there was only 1 person outside the gates?
Something which even you have backtracked on and then made up again on this very thread!

The complete incident last roughly about a minute, 40 seconds of which is missing. On very poor quality CCTV footage with no sound released by the person who wants his job back.

Again, which part of the Mitchell released CCTV footage contradicts any central part of the police log?

You probably believe that as well.

It was a minor disagreement that has, in typical UK media style, been inflated out of all proportion and continues to escalate as though it's actually important. I'm no Tory lover but I'd have had no problem if he'd said "yes, lost my rag, a bit put out by the attitude of the copper, made a fool of myself, awfully sorry." But no...instead he's been forced to resign, a copper has been arrested and a major investigation has been launched. What. The. Merry. F*ck.

Who really cares if he said the word 'pleb'? It's an ancient word with an ancient meaning but I can think of far worse things you could have said. Do people really think these people DON'T see us commoners as, well, commoners? Of course they do.

I see the arguments over the CCTV footage. It's simply inconclusive. Yes, there are people around but you don't have the full 360 degree view, and there's no audio. It tells us very little. For me, he looks a bit stroppy, but that's my view of his body language.

It'll be interesting to see if the alleged [url=http://www.channel4.com/news/andrew-mitchell-email-letter-plebgate-pleb-policewitness who sent this email[/url ever comes forward. I don't see any reasonable explanation why the police would have fabricated the story, so it wouldn't surprise me if this version of events was factual.

If it wasn't so pathetically, desperately sad, I'd find the whole thing funny.

So why not go for a target more relevant to the Police Federation, like perhaps the Home Secretary ?

And why not release the evidence ?

The smokescreen and football supporter politics mentality has sucked you in good and proper hasn't it ?

You've not seen the footage filmed outside the gate looking down on it from a camera positioned in Whitehall ? It's really good quality - you can easily see the cracks on the empty pavement.

So, the e mail, which we now know came from an off-duty copper posing as a member of the public, was sent BEFORE the police log was leaked. We now know that this person was not present at the time of the incident and that their e mail was a complete and utter falsehood.

The contents of this e mail are strikingly similar to the police log. Enough so to suggest that there was collusion between the authors. With this in mind, if coppers are going to lie about being at the scene, they would probably think nothing of fabricating what Mitchell (allegedly) said.

It's looking more and more like a fit up every day. The police have lost all credibility, and if this was a court case it would have been binned by now.

Don't know what the fuss is about really.
The majority of coppers I've encountered over the years [iare[/i plebs.

The bentest of the bent.

As long as Mitchell wasn't playing cards with his mates beforehand he'll be ok.

Yes, playing card residue can be very explosive.



At least they always got their man (e)
Even though it was usually the wrong one(s).

[urlhttp://www.innocent.org.uk/misc/wmidlands.html[/url

Why do you think it even comes close to suggest collusion between the authors? Would it not be much more likely that the police officer who has been arrested had seen the police log rather than been involved in writing it?

Of course it's far more likely. But that wouldn't fit the agenda of the poster in question.

The lack of critical thinking ability displayed by a few on this thread is both laughable and depressing.

2 arrests made, dodgy CCTV and a team of 30 investigating what happened and somehow the people wanting truth and justice are the ones with 'an agenda' - baffling.

To be fair, its probably not much worse than is normal on Rlfans when the police are subject to criticism.

The second arrest has nothing to do with the original incident:



So no conspiracy there. In fact no evidence whatsoever of any conspiracy anywhere. And the people harking on about police conspiracies aren't after 'truth and justice'. They're just desperate to score political points.

Oh excellent news. With your so obviously superior critical thinking skills maybe you can contact Scotland Yard and let them know not to bother with the thirty person investigation. I'm sure they will realise once it's you that's called, they don't need to bother with an investigation.

That was sarcasm by the way. Just in case you thought I was being serious.

A cabinet minister was involved in the incident. If you don't think it's going to get political you are on a different planet. Labour certainly made enough capital out of it. But I assume that's OK is it?

My superior critical skills enable me not to see conspiracies where there is no evidence of any, and to realise that what's being investigated is (in one case) the conduct of a Police officer and (in the second) an unspecified offence that took place just a few days ago.


I always treat everything you post as a joke.


Where exactly have I suggested that it wouldn't get political?

The really fun thing about all of this is watching how Cameron handles the next few days and weeks.

Conservative governments have always courted the police, the Thatcher government were a prime example of bringing the police federation on board knowing that they would need them in times of civil unrest when their own brand of "economies" were put into place, and in turn, with individual exceptions noted, the police have always been supportive of whatever government has been in power, its that sort of service, very similar to the Armed Forces no matter what the individuals political thoughts they swear an oath to The Queen and her government and promise to follow her/their every instruction.

Its why you see police officers kettling demonstrators rather than joining them.

Now that the situation is festering with every new day, now that Mitchell and his not insignificant supporters, including the media who are hanging on his every new statement, have publically stated that they have no confidence in the Met Police Commissioner what will Cameron do ?

Does he follow Mitchells lead and use stronger words than the ones he used the other day when he suggested that the police MAY be culpable, dare he have a public row with the Metropolitan Police, dare he suggest that the armed police officers who stand at the end of his street shielding himself and his family from terrorism are corrupt and make up stories about his mates and colleagues in order to discredit them - will he employ a private security company to protect himself if he doesn't trust The Met?

Group 4 for instance ?

Good laugh these posh boys aren't they ?

Did you miss the last paragraph of the report you link to?

Clearly, at the time, yes.



Actually noticed that line later but could I be d going back and editing? No, instead I left it in the hope no-one would be so anal as to pick up on it.

Some hope that was!

What I am not understanding is why the CCTV footage is not being released - surely that would solve this once and for all?

Thats probably why the government won't release it, it will have the sanctimonious little scrote bang to rights.

Its how lawyers work, you only ever release evidence that supports your side of the story and then hope that the opposition don't have anything to counteract it, the opposition is quite entitled to keep their tinder dry until such a time as they can crush you with it.

I can't imagine that Cameron is happy with the situation or that he hasn't already demanded to see ALL of the evidence.

True, though I think the term 'pleb' is being kind to some of them....I'd say 'corrupt' and 'bent' fits quite a few...

Looks like Camoron was briefed long ago, [url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/plebgate-david-cameron-knew-andrew-mitchell-evidence-was-suspect-three-months-ago-8428041.htmlthree months ago in fact.[/url Seems like he had such faith in his Chief Whip that he sat on the evidence and let "nature" take its course