Been saying this for a while. It's an illusion. The sub judice rule doesn't apply. There are no charges and no chance for a jury to be prejudiced. Using the word 'prejudice' has created a pretence to avoid scrutiny.
Small 🧵
Small 🧵
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status/1487199540721721344
Never before has this type of report prejudiced a police investigation. There's no legal rule to prevent a factual report being published about matters under investigation by the police either.
2.
2.
Sue Gray's report isn't a criminal investigation and she cannot determine whether there is criminal liability. Neither can she determine whether any minister has breached the ministerial code.
3.
3.
The report was designed to find the facts. I always thought that the investigation was designed as a ruse to tell the press that MINISTERS have been ‘cleared’, rather than allow for accountability via scrutiny by parliament.
4.
4.
The fact that the police have decided to obstruct the ordinary process of publishing the reports findings is both bizarre & has no legal justification. The length of delay & the reasons for doing so are ominously missing.
5.
5.
So the question now is who do the police work for? The people of the UK or Downing St?
I'm a little concerned that it is the later and we are witnessing just more abuses of the Rule of Law and Separation of Powers i.e. our uncodified constitution:
END
I'm a little concerned that it is the later and we are witnessing just more abuses of the Rule of Law and Separation of Powers i.e. our uncodified constitution:
END
https://twitter.com/ByDonkeys/status/1487115634244788224?s=20&t=_KYFwrbmL1Kcs6Rz18aqUQ
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
