Mr Brooks received three pages of intelligence reports from the Metropolitan Police. but they were so heavily redacted, which is clever-clever speak for censored, such that only four sentences were visible despite, as Mr Brooks says, “The Commissioner (of the Metropolitan Police) promised they would be open and transparent and said they would provide copies of documents held on me. Instead they sent me this stuff which is a waste of time.”
A Metropolitan Police spokesman is reported as saying: “We made an undertaking to disclose material held on Mr Brooks to his solicitor. As explained, it was redacted to protect sensitive information.”
Whatever the ‘sensitive information’ is I have no idea but the impression given by this failure to be ‘open and transparent’ in the disclosure of information can do nothing but reinforce the view that the police have something to hide.
In June 2013 on the Channel 4 TV program ‘Dispatches’, Peter Francis, who was said to be a member of the Met’s Special Demonstration Squad, claimed that as no ‘dirt’ could be found on the Stephen Lawrence family the SDS should instead attempt to ‘smear’ Mr Brooks.
The Herne Report, (Operation Herne, Operation Trinity, report 2) itself also ‘redacted’ and compiled on a ‘neither confirm or deny basis’ by the Chief Constable of Derbyshire Police, found that there was no evidence to support the allegation made by Peter Francis that he had been tasked to smear Mr Brooks, in which case why the need to censor so heavily the documents supplied to him?
In the Macpherson Report, Sir William Macpherson, said “seeking to achieve trust and confidence through a demonstration of fairness will not in itself be sufficient. It must be accompanied by a vigorous pursuit of openness and accountability.”
Goodness knows the Metropolitan Police did enough wrong in the Stephen Lawrence case without now adding to their ruined reputation by censoring material to the point where it is, as Mr Brooks says, “a waste of time”.
No comments:
Post a Comment