A Crown Prosecution Service source has accused the Government of leaking against itself in the recent "cash for peerages" development. Whilst some may question the validity of an anonymous quote to the Screws, Guido offered an analysis last night which makes it the most logical source of the leak, even if it is the most improbable.
As the BBC doesn't pay for stories, whoever leaked it to them must have had a motive to do so. It wouldn't be the Met as they wouldn't ruin they're own investigation by leaking information that would be prejudicial to their own case.
We know that it was the Police that requested the injunction that the Attorney General placed on the email. It would be an odd state of affairs if the Police leaked an email for free then arranged an injunction to have have suppressed.
I guess there will be some out there who are utterly convinced that there has never been any wrongdoing and that the Police are just causing trouble because they have nothing. I've seen that line peddled by a few commentators who are in Downing Street's pocket before. It wasn't believable the first time round either.
If the Police didn't leak it then that leaves only one other source, Downing Street, where the email was originally found. IT would, as Guido pointed out, serves their purpose brilliantly if they leak against themselves. If they can get the Smoking Gun into the media then the CPS will say they - whoever it may implicate - cannot possibly have a fair trial.
7 comments:
I wonder who the culprit is. Would be hilarious if our PM is arrested.
This has been my reading of it Dizzy from when I first heard the news of the injunction.
That the BBC was being used in a "spoiling" move by certain parties connected with the "cash for Peerages scandal. Who reside not a stone's throw from SW1A.
I would just love to know what arm twisting move the good Inspector used on the AG to get him to act.
As I am sure the certain parties sought legal advice before considering this "spoiling" move.
Probably with a well known government lawyer not exactly regarded renowned for his impartiality.
The interest is now the cover up not the crime as in Watergate. Somebody is going to thrown to the dogs in a conspiracy to pervent the course of justice, whilst the 'leader' waves to crowds as he leaves office. There is simply a stench of death about the whole affair.
How did Yates know that the BBC had the email? Did the BBC check with Yates when considering whether to publish?
"...analysis...", "...logical..."
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
So, surprise surprise it clearly wasn't Downing Street that leaked. It couldn't possibly be the CPS could it? Surely not that happy band of disgruntled underachieving individuals. Nah, couldn't be.
If you eliminate the impossible, then whatever's left, however improbable will be printed on the Guido Fawkes site as gospel.
Amen.
"So, surprise surprise it clearly wasn't Downing Street that leaked."
How do you work that one out? Because they officially denied it?
Post a Comment