The BBC can now say the e-mail that triggered the investigation into an alleged Downing Street cover-up was sent by Number 10 aide Ruth Turner. It
was sent to Tony Blair's chief of staff, Jonathan Powell, and concerned
Labour's chief fundraiser Lord Levy. The BBC is still barred from revealing
the contents of the e-mail. The injunction preventing the BBC from
broadcasting a story about this e-mail - granted on Friday night - was
amended on Monday afternoon.
It would be interesting to know why the injunction was relaxed and what implications this has for the police inquiry.
That the email was from Ruth Turner to Powell was in the public domain.
ReplyDeleteI would be surprised you didn't know, but anyone who thinks that Moron Mitt Romney stands a chance, . . ..
Er, the relaxation allows only the revelations already in the public domain via NOTW, MoS and ST as listed here on LoL - and that, out of my huge respect for the Attorney General, actually 12 hours after the first editions hit the streets. The other info in the NOTW - about decent golden pay offs - seems to belong as a Dale "exclusive" also.
ReplyDeletewhy havn't the gang of 4 been suspended on full pay?
ReplyDeleteIf someone at, say Herts county council or BP, was investigated for conspiracy to pervert the course of justice whilst at work, wouldn't they be suspended?
tone made me do it
ReplyDeleteI quite agree with your question.
Maybe Black Rod should have a look in his little black book.
Or should HM be informed, after all it is supposed to be "her government".
Be rather nice to see the Beef Eaters going around to Downing Street to escort the gang of four off the premises.
Who CAN comment on Mr Robinson's blog?I've never posted there(or tried to) before but received:'You can not post because-You are not allowed to post'.
ReplyDeleteI just wanted to post the nonsense of people criticising the Attorney General for applying for the injunction.HOW COULD HE REFUSE a direct request from the Police in accordance WITH HIS JOB!!I'm sure it was through GRITTED TEETH but he must have understood (what I believe) to have been No.10's intention to allow the defence of the possibility of a fair trial having been prejudiced.Someone should question the legitimacy of a blog author inviting comments and then disallowing them for no reason.(ie banning the first attempted post).
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete