InvisionFree gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
| QUOTE (curiouspiglet @ Jan 8 2007, 03:15 PM) |
| 14 views and no responses? This is data direct from the investigating team! |
| QUOTE |
| It is sobering to see the detailed analysis, conducted by persons with apparent authority, of the limited material released to the media |
| QUOTE |
| I've consulted with the Senior Investigating Officer, and the decision to withhold access is being re-examined. We also have another meeting with the Coroner in mid January, and will raise the issue of CCTV product at that meeting. |
| QUOTE |
| It is sobering to see the detailed analysis, conducted by persons with apparent authority, of the limited material released to the media |
| QUOTE |
| with respect to 'conspiracy theories', if a person has the view that the enquiry is less than transparent, it could be difficult to change this view. It is sobering to see the detailed analysis, conducted by persons with apparent authority, of the limited material released to the media. One of the many things that police have to prove is the 'evidential continuity' of exhibits, sometimes even from before they become significant as exhibits. This continuity is an issue which is subject of detailed scrutiny in legal proceedings. The whole process is carefully documented, and any break in this documentation immediately devalues the exhibit. Normal everyday problems affect the operation of CCTV systems, and can lead to gaps that can be exploited by those who wish to do so. I hope that exotic speculations are balanced against the fact that CCTV systems are operated by people just doing their jobs, they are collected by people just doing their jobs, and they are viewed by people just doing their jobs. |
| QUOTE (curiouspiglet @ Jan 8 2007, 03:15 PM) |
| 14 views and no responses? This is data direct from the investigating team! |
| QUOTE (curiouspiglet @ Jan 8 2007, 04:03 PM) | ||||
Was the DCI referring to us? Yes. Also here
|
| QUOTE (curiouspiglet @ Jan 8 2007, 04:04 PM) |
| ...with respect to 'conspiracy theories'... |
| QUOTE |
| there is an active criminal investigation seeking to identify others who may, or may not, have a criminal liability for the atrocities. Because of this investigation, there remain issues which are subject to investigation, and cannot be disclosed at this time. Also, there is an investigation being conducted in support of the Coroner, and we wouldn't want to do anything that might compromise the proceedings |
| QUOTE |
| Release of CCTV imagery in isolation will show what police say it shows. It would have to be accompanied by explanation and a sequence of events, involving other strands of the enquiry to enable those viewing the images to recognise their significance. This explanation and corroboration could amount to much of the material to be used in the Coroner's court. This may lead to intense media speculation, and the Coroner's inquest being conducted in advance by our rightly vigilant, necessarily intrusive, but sometimes speculative media. It may also compromise the criminal investigation. We have to take immense care with this. |
| QUOTE |
| It is not an easy decision to make. The needs of: the families, friends and loved ones of the deceased; families of others involved in the bombings; yourselves; the Coroner; and the criminal investigation, all have to be balanced. Difficult, however, doesn't mean we shouldn't recognise that there may be great benefits to those whose lives were deeply touched by the atrocities of 7/7, and who may wish to see the images. I've consulted with the Senior Investigating Officer, and the decision to withhold access is being re-examined. We also have another meeting with the Coroner in mid January, and will raise the issue of CCTV product at that meeting. I will write to this forum again about this issue |
| QUOTE (curiouspiglet @ Jan 8 2007, 04:26 PM) | ||
|
| QUOTE (curiouspiglet @ Jan 8 2007, 04:36 PM) |
| They might already know who the suspects are and be tracking them to see if they lead to further intel.... ...in which case, letting it be known that they have them on CCTV and are watching them isn't sa good idea. |
| QUOTE |
| Bombing mastermind Meanwhile, a British Al Qaeda suspect wanted in connection with the London suicide bombings and reportedly the mastermind behind the attacks has been arrested, it was claimed today. Haroon Rashid Aswat, who grew up in West Yorkshire, was detained last week in Zambia and is being held for his alleged role in setting up a terror camp in Oregon, according to the Los Angeles Times. He had reportedly been in London for two weeks before the attack and had apparently fled just hours before the explosions. He is also reportedly wanted by police in Britain after making some 20 calls from his mobile phone to two of the four suicide bombers. |
| QUOTE (curiouspiglet @ Jan 8 2007, 02:59 PM) |
(4) Re: CCTV placing bombers in London Created By: C 16/12/2006 - 11:07:17 Updated By: C 16/12/2006 - 12:53:11 Response to: CCTV placing bombers in London by S Thank you for your question regarding CCTV images collected in the Op Theseus investigation. In any investigation, material is gathered and decisions made about the potential significance of the material with respect to legal procedures. These decisions are made for reasons considered to be appropriate at the time. I'd like to reassure you that there is an active criminal investigation seeking to identify others who may, or may not, have a criminal liability for the atrocities. Because of this investigation, there remain issues which are subject to investigation, and cannot be disclosed at this time. Also, there is an investigation being conducted in support of the Coroner, and we wouldn't want to do anything that might compromise the proceedings. Having said all that, circumstances change as the investigation progresses. It's right to say that we have identified a large number of CCTV images of the bombers on the 7th July, and of the earlier trip to London on the 28th June. It's also right to say that there will be gaps in this coverage for both days. Whilst there are a large number of CCTV cameras in public places, there are obviously many factors that affect their operation. with respect to 'conspiracy theories', if a person has the view that the enquiry is less than transparent, it could be difficult to change this view. It is sobering to see the detailed analysis, conducted by persons with apparent authority, of the limited material released to the media. One of the many things that police have to prove is the 'evidential continuity' of exhibits, sometimes even from before they become significant as exhibits. This continuity is an issue which is subject of detailed scrutiny in legal proceedings. The whole process is carefully documented, and any break in this documentation immediately devalues the exhibit. Normal everyday problems affect the operation of CCTV systems, and can lead to gaps that can be exploited by those who wish to do so. I hope that exotic speculations are balanced against the fact that CCTV systems are operated by people just doing their jobs, they are collected by people just doing their jobs, and they are viewed by people just doing their jobs. The process yields incredible results, but they are genuine results. For example, I remember the moment when David Copeland, the London Nail Bomber was first identified - our first breakthrough in that case. In addition to this, CCTV cannot be viewed in isolation - many strands of investigation are brought together to get the greatest evidential value from the images. Images of people entering a station are worked in reverse to find the vehicles they arrived in, potential routes are traced and images viewed to see whether the vehicles can be seen in other places, and so on, to the start of a journey. Financial and general enquiries can give insight into ownership, or hiring. Forensic work is used to add or detract from other findings. Documentary, technical and witness accounts are also added to lead to a formidable account of events. Release of CCTV imagery in isolation will show what police say it shows. It would have to be accompanied by explanation and a sequence of events, involving other strands of the enquiry to enable those viewing the images to recognise their significance. This explanation and corroboration could amount to much of the material to be used in the Coroner's court. This may lead to intense media speculation, and the Coroner's inquest being conducted in advance by our rightly vigilant, necessarily intrusive, but sometimes speculative media. It may also compromise the criminal investigation. We have to take immense care with this. It is not an easy decision to make. The needs of: the families, friends and loved ones of the deceased; families of others involved in the bombings; yourselves; the Coroner; and the criminal investigation, all have to be balanced. Difficult, however, doesn't mean we shouldn't recognise that there may be great benefits to those whose lives were deeply touched by the atrocities of 7/7, and who may wish to see the images. I've consulted with the Senior Investigating Officer, and the decision to withhold access is being re-examined. We also have another meeting with the Coroner in mid January, and will raise the issue of CCTV product at that meeting. I will write to this forum again about this issue. Hope this helps. 'C', DCI SO15 |
| QUOTE (numeral @ Jan 9 2007, 07:09 AM) |
| It's right to say ... This is a weakening of the plain statement "we have identified a large number of CCTV images of the bombers on the 7th July" Do I detect an edging away, a preparing of the ground for the disclosure of the weakness of the CCTV evidence? |
| QUOTE (postman @ Jan 11 2007, 02:24 PM) |
| The louder the silence the bigger the bang. |
| QUOTE (postman @ Jan 11 2007, 02:24 PM) |
| Numeral Item 4 was written (if it is a genuine inter office Police document) for a wider audience than the recipient. |
| QUOTE |
| As a brief aside, a J7 researcher highlighted the following: An interesting exercise is to compare two completely different investigative approaches. Contrast the information released in the quest for July 7th eye-witnesses with the appeals after the shooting of WPC Sharon Beshenivsky. In the latter case, precise details were given of times and locations as well as specifics about the car alleged to have been used, right down to the number plate. Rewards of £50,000 were offered for information about those responsible. In the case of July 7th, J7 researchers have been advised by a Detective Inspector at the Anti-Terrorist Branch of Scotland Yard that, with regard to July 7th, 'preciseness is not in the public interest'! Hard to believe, perhaps, in 'the largest criminal inquiry in English history', but here is the full quote: You refer to the witness appeal process being aided by precise times. In fact were we to follow that process, we would potentially lose witnesses who might for example think they had nothing to contribute as they caught the 0841, not the 0843. Similarly we could be said to be 'influencing' witnesses by providing details which could then be incorporated into their accounts. The witness evidence gathering process is intended to be as neutral and uninfluenced as possible. For example, if a police appeal said 'we are looking for a blue car' when later events showed it to be green, 'preciseness' would have been extremely unhelpful and 'not in the public interest'. Offers of a £50,000 reward for information and full disclosure of information in the hunt for the killers of one policewoman, yet no rewards for information, nor anything that vaguely resembles full disclosure of information - apparently because it is not in the public interest - when it concerns the deaths of 56 people and the injury of over 700. How strange. This, like many aspects of 7/7, is extremely illogical and the July 7th Truth Campaign continues to call on the government and the authorities to RELEASE THE EVIDENCE which conclusively proves the story outlined in the Official Report. |
| QUOTE (curiouspiglet @ Jan 8 2007, 02:59 PM) |
| This extract is from a private survivor/bereaved notice board whereby survivors/bereaved can talk to police about the investigation and share info and support. 'S' is a survivor 'T' is a Met officer and the site owner 'C' is a DCI on Operation Theseus in S015 ( created when SO12 and SO13 merged in October) 'J' was bereaved on July 7 .... (6) Re: CCTV placing bombers in London Created By: J 19/12/2006 - 09:26:12 Updated By: 'J' 19/12/2006 - 09:35:36 Response to: CCTV placing bombers in London by S Dear 'C', The victims of the bombing were identified by either DNA samples, Finger Prints or from Dental records i believe. Can you confirm this was also the case for the bombers. Like S, i have no time for conspiracy theories and the likes. If they did not travel on the trains, who's remains were taken to Pakistan to be buried as a martyr. Thanks 'J' (7) Re: CCTV placing bombers in London Created By: C 08/01/2007 - 09:37:11 Updated By: C 08/01/2007 - 09:39:05 Response to: Re: CCTV placing bombers in London by J Thanks for your question. Sorry for the delay in responding, I've only just seen this one. I will get back to you with the best answer I can as quickly as I can. Best wishes 'C ' |
| QUOTE |
| 18 July 2005 Detectives from the Met's Anti-Terrorist Branch, supported by police from a number of forces across the country, are continuing the lengthy and painstaking investigation into the detail of the attacks in central London on July 7. The police investigation into the four bombings has led to the discovery of a substantial amount of information and many leads are being actively progressed. We are determined to follow the evidence wherever it takes us as our understanding of what happened on that morning grows. The police continue to conduct searches at a number of addresses. We have now executed search warrants at a total of ten addresses in West Yorkshire and a further address in Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire. Searches have now been completed at three of the addresses in West Yorkshire, but the remainder are still ongoing. Any items found will be carefully assessed and investigated. Police have been granted a warrant of further detention at Bow Street MC for a 29 year old man arrested on July 12 in the West Yorkshire area on suspicion of the commission, instigation or preparation of acts of Terrorism under the Terrorism Act 2000. The man can now be detained until Tuesday 19.7.05, and he continues to be interviewed at a central London police station. We have also taken more than 800 witness statements and have received 3,500 calls from the public through the anti-terrorist hotline. We are analysing more than 6,000 CCTV tapes and this number is still growing dramatically. Together with the material being gathered from examination of the explosion scenes and the other searches being conducted this is providing us with a large amount of information. Further detailed analysis will take many months of intensive and detailed investigation. After continued forensic work we now believe we have identified the four men who travelled from Luton and were later seen on CCTV at King's Cross shortly before 8:30am on Thursday 7th July. We can now confirm the identity of a third man who travelled from West Yorkshire and who died in the explosion at Edgware Road. He was Mohammed Sidique Khan, aged 30. We believe that he was responsible for carrying out that attack. We can also now confirm the identity of a fourth man who arrived in London with the three men from West Yorkshire and then died in the explosion between King's Cross and Russell Square underground stations. He was Germaine Lindsay, aged 19. We believe that he was responsible for carrying out that attack. We have previously named Hasib Hussain, aged 18, who died in the explosion on the bus in Tavistock Square, and Shahzad Tanweer, aged 22, who died in the explosion at Aldgate. We believe that they were responsible for carrying out these respective attacks. Formal identification for all of these people is a matter for the Coroner. DAC Peter Clarke, head of the Anti-Terrorist Branch, said today: "The investigation continues on many fronts, but we have been very grateful for the contribution made by the public in response to our previous appeals. However we still need to find out more about these four men and their movements, both on the morning of the bombings, and in the days and weeks beforehand. "We are this evening releasing a CCTV image showing the four men at Luton train station at approximately 7.20am. We know they travelled together from here on a Thameslink train to King's Cross in central London. "I would like to appeal to anyone who may have information that could prove useful to the investigation to contact us. Did you see these four men together travelling between Luton and King's Cross on 7th July? Did you see these four men together in the days before the attack? Do you have information on any of these four men?" Anyone who has information that could help the investigation is asked to contact police on the confidential Anti-Terrorist Hotline on 0800 789 321, or electronically online via www.police.uk |
| QUOTE |
| New CCTV unit tackles UK crime [13 Jan 2007] [BBC News, news@cctvinfo.com] Viido is being tested in Southwark, London A new police unit is radically improving the way that CCTV footage is processed. The eventual aim is to turn the gathering of video evidence into a third forensic specialism alongside DNA analysis and fingerprinting. There are 4.2 million cameras in the UK but until now there has been no dedicated police unit to deal with the collection and dissemination of CCTV evidence. If the new Visual Images, Identifications and Detections Office (Viido), based at Southwark Police Station, is judged to be a success it could soon lead to the development of specialist CCTV units across the country. Viido has a small team made up of police officers, civilian staff and members of the public drawn from a Metropolitan Police volunteering scheme. Although it was only set up in September, Deputy Chief Inspector Mick Neville, who heads the unit, is pleased with its progress. He says: "We have produced more images of street robbers in one-32nd of Metropolitan Police than the whole force put together" Although gathering CCTV might appear no more difficult than programming the video recorder, obtaining images can require specialist knowledge. DCI Neville explains: "With all CCTV it is not as simple as an officer grabbing a tape. If it's not a simple VHS player they may have to get CDs, or even worse, a hard-drive has to be recovered. Often footage is in multiplex format where there'll be 12 or 20 cameras on the same tape" New CCTV systems on buses which store images on hard drives have been particularly problematic, and the Viido team has significantly increased the use of this material. According to Mr Neville there have even been issues with playing evidence gathered via CCTV in court: "DNA was funded end-to-end with scientists and police officers trained. With CCTV the vast majority of the funding went on producing images and there was very little equipment in the courts. We've now received Home Office funding and to put additional DVDs and CD players in court" CCTVInfo |