# UK MP arrested: something about this stinks. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 27, 2008, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741 "2008-11-27T21:50:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/21 "2008-11-28T15:09:00Z")
> [@Dead\_Badger](#): > > What it _also_ suggests is that the Met have recently acquired something of a taste for grandstanding with political cases, regardless of which party is involved. The head of that nail is well and truly bashed. At least it keeps them from executing random swarthy people on the Tube. ---
**Author:** ![Wiltshire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ea5d25/32.png) [@Wiltshire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wiltshire)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/22 "2008-11-28T15:22:04Z")
> [@Wallenstein](#): > > OMG!!!11!!!1! It’s totally like 1984 or Kafka or something No. “Stalinesque” according to Cameron. Up yours, too. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/23 "2008-11-28T15:33:49Z")
> [@Szlater](#): > > I think “arrest” has a different meaning in the US. In the US it means taken into custody – involunbtarily detained. It usually, but not always, is done in conjunction with being charged with a crime. Other times people are arrested upon suspicion that they have committed a crime. IANALawyer, so I couldn’t speak to where the line is btween having or not having sufficient evidence to make an arrest. ---
**Author:** ![Szlater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/90ced4/32.png) [@Szlater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Szlater)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/24 "2008-11-28T16:06:12Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > In the US it means taken into custody – involunbtarily detained. It usually, but not always, is done in conjunction with being charged with a crime. Other times people are arrested upon suspicion that they have committed a crime. IANALawyer, so I couldn’t speak to where the line is btween having or not having sufficient evidence to make an arrest. Here you are arrested on suspicion of an offence. Charges follow later, after a determination by the Crown Prosecution Service based on police inquiries and evidence. Arrest allows detention and questioning under caution. You can be questioned under caution without being arrested, but under those circumstances you are free to leave at any time. [Standard caution](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_do_not_have_to_say_anything,_but_it_may_harm_your_defence_if_you_do_not_mention,_when_questioned,_something_which_you_later_rely_on_in_court.#England_and_Wales) _You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention, when questioned, something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence._ It’s also worth noting that if you are not charged, there is no record kept of your arrest here. So a criminal background check doesn’t show up an “arrest record”, it would only be recorded if you are charged. Unlike in the US where records are kept of every arrest, which may lead to problems later on for even an innocent man. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/25 "2008-11-28T16:15:09Z")
> [@Szlater](#): > > [Here is some information on the arrest](http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/nov/28/damian-green-arrest-conservatives) > > This seems to be the reason for the arrest, it’s not _just_ that Green received leaked info. That article makes the allegation in the opening paragraph but offers no justification or evidence thereafter. Plus, it’s the Guardian - that doesn’t make it wrong, just highly suspect without external verification. ---
**Author:** ![Szlater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/90ced4/32.png) [@Szlater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Szlater)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/26 "2008-11-28T16:18:45Z")
> [@Szlater](#): > > if you are charged. Should read “found guilty”, doh. ---
**Author:** ![Szlater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/90ced4/32.png) [@Szlater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Szlater)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/27 "2008-11-28T16:21:27Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > Plus, it’s the Guardian - that doesn’t make it wrong, just highly suspect without external verification. As opposed to the Torygraph? Please. > [@BBC](#): > > Police say Mr Green was held on suspicion of “conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office” and **“aiding and abetting, counselling or procuring misconduct in a public office”** - an obscure and little-used offence under common law. There. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/28 "2008-11-28T16:30:03Z")
> [@Szlater](#): > > As opposed to the Torygraph? As similar to the Torygraph. Please note my OP gave two cites. > [@](#): > > There. No. That’s the name of the offence. It encompasses it all. Please give a cite which backs up the Guardian’s assertion. I’ll note that their own article - your cite - singularly fails to do this. ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/29 "2008-11-28T16:32:49Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > Plus, it’s the Guardian - that doesn’t make it wrong, just highly suspect without external verification. That is just a ridiculous statement and one that makes it impossible to take anything you say seriously. You wanna carp about the Telegraph too? No, I thought not. ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Badger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/848f3c/32.png) [@Dead\_Badger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Badger)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/30 "2008-11-28T16:34:02Z")
Well, negative reaction to this arrest and the way it was handled is coming from all parties: > [@](#): > > [From the BBC](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7753763.stm): > > Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg told the BBC that he was “really shocked” by Mr Green’s arrest. > > “This is something you might expect from a tin-pot dictatorship, not in a modern democracy,” he said. > > … > > There was also concern about the arrest on the Labour benches. > > Former minister Denis MacShane said that the Speaker should make clear that MPs were entitled to hold sensitive material in the same way as lawyers and doctors. > > “To send a squad of counter terrorist officers to arrest an MP shows the growing police contempt for Parliament and democratic politics,” he said. > > "The police now believe that MPs are so reduced in public status that they are fair game for over-excited officers to order dawn raids, arrests and searches of confidential files held by MPs or those who work for them. > > “I am not sure this is good for British democracy.” Like I say, I think this one is going to come back to bite the Met on the arse big time. ---
**Author:** ![Szlater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/90ced4/32.png) [@Szlater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Szlater)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/31 "2008-11-28T16:34:18Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > No. That’s the name of the offence. It encompasses it all. Please give a cite which backs up the Guardian’s assertion. I’ll note that their own article - your cite - singularly fails to do this. What part of “counselling or procuring” do you not understand? ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/32 "2008-11-28T17:09:42Z")
> [@Szlater](#): > > What part of “counselling or procuring” do you not understand? That’s part of the title of the offence. Please provide a cite which backs up the Guardian’s precise claim. I’ll note that the Guardian’s own article - _again, your own cite_ - fails to do this. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/33 "2008-11-28T17:31:29Z")
> [@Szlater](#): > > _You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention, when questioned, something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence._ So, in effect, you are forced to respond to police questions? This is very different from American law. Here, the “caution” is “whatever you say may be used against you in a court of law.” You never have to respond, and the general advice I’ve heard is that one should _never_ talk to the cops in the absence of a lawyer. > [@Quartz](#): > > That article makes the allegation in the opening paragraph but offers no justification or evidence thereafter. Plus, it’s the Guardian - that doesn’t make it wrong, just highly suspect without external verification. I’m confused by this as well. Why should a newspaper have to justify this? Isn’t that the government’s responsibility? It’s not the newspaper who questioned someone under suspicion of a crime. ---
**Author:** ![Szlater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/90ced4/32.png) [@Szlater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Szlater)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/34 "2008-11-28T17:36:02Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > So, in effect, you are forced to respond to police questions? No, you have the right to remain silent and you have right to be questioned only in the presence of your legal representative. It’s just that if you choose to remain silent when asked a specific question, the fact that you did remain silent to that question can be reported in court if you later rely on an answer to that question in your defence. Police: Did you stab your wife? Suspect: \>Silence\< later in court… Prosecution Barrister: Did you stab your wife? Defendant: No, I was in Cardiff that day and could not have stabbed her. Prosecution Barrister: Why did you not tell the police this when they questioned you? Defendant: Umm… The jury can then draw inferences from the fact that the defendant didn’t give the police that answer when he was questioned. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/35 "2008-11-28T17:39:53Z")
> [@Szlater](#): > > efendant: No, I was in Cardiff that day and could not have stabbed her. > > Prosecution Barrister: Why did you not tell the police this when they questioned you? > > Defendant: Umm… > > The jury can then draw inferences from the fact that the defendant didn’t give the police that answer when he was questioned. What inferences other than he was exercising his right not to answer? ---
**Author:** ![Szlater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/90ced4/32.png) [@Szlater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Szlater)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/36 "2008-11-28T17:42:03Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > What inferences other than he was exercising his right not to answer? That he had a straight forward answer and chose not to provide it. The jury can infer that he’s concocted the answer afterwards. I’m not a lawyer, but that’s my interpretation of it. ---
**Author:** ![Szlater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/90ced4/32.png) [@Szlater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Szlater)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/37 "2008-11-28T17:49:32Z")
> [@Szlater](#): > > That he had a straight forward answer and chose not to provide it. The jury can infer that he’s concocted the answer afterwards. > > I’m not a lawyer, but that’s my interpretation of it. [Look here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_silence_in_England_and_Wales#Adverse_inferences_from_silence). It’s up to the court to direct the jury as to what they can draw inferences from. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/38 "2008-11-28T17:50:58Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > What inferences other than he was exercising his right not to answer? He didn’t know what alibi to go with yet, presumably. If his solicitor isn’t there yet, he can wait for him to show up. If his solicitor IS there, he can object to the form of the question or whatever. He doesn’t have a right not to answer (although the principle of a right to not incriminate oneself does exist in English law). ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/39 "2008-11-28T18:03:11Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > I’m confused by this as well. Why should a newspaper have to justify this? Isn’t that the government’s responsibility? It’s not the newspaper who questioned someone under suspicion of a crime. For the benefit of non-U.K. Dopers, The Guardian is a very left-wing U.K. newspaper, and therefore cannot be fully trusted when reporting on Conservative MPs. Hence my insistence on verification. Similarly, The Telegraph is a right-wing U.K. newspaper, and therefore similarly cannot be fully trusted in such matters, which is why I gave both it and the BBC as cites in my OP. And FWIW, the BBC has its own biases… ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2008, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741/40 "2008-11-28T18:09:21Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > For the benefit of non-U.K. Dopers, The Guardian is a very left-wing U.K. newspaper, and therefore cannot be fully trusted when reporting on Conservative MPs. Hence my insistence on verification. Similarly, The Telegraph is a right-wing U.K. newspaper, and therefore similarly cannot be fully trusted in such matters, which is why I gave both it and the BBC as cites in my OP. And FWIW, the BBC has its own biases… Is [this](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGscoaUWW2M) still true? (Go to about 1:00 in) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-mp-arrested-something-about-this-stinks/474741.md?page=3)