What compensation? They've only been arrested on suspicion of and are being questioned, they've not even been charged yet.
Drones over gatwick..
- Thread starter Screeeech
- Start date
What compensation? They've only been arrested on suspicion of and are being questioned, they've not even been charged yet.
Soldato
It's a little unfair for their faces to be all over the media until there is clarity.
Soldato
Exactly this country is a joke on privacy laws, to have them plastered on the bbc, sky, daily mail, the sun plus all the other media outlets being seen by millions and millions of people when it may well turn out they have done nothing wrong, yet you have proper charged criminals who identify remains secret.
My bet..
Working at Gatwick, known drone enthusiast.
His neighbour reported him.
They pulled his phone track data, shows him going to Gatwick a lot recently.
Arrested on suspicion?
Would make sense. Probably nothing to do with him
Working at Gatwick, known drone enthusiast.
His neighbour reported him.
They pulled his phone track data, shows him going to Gatwick a lot recently.
Arrested on suspicion?
Would make sense. Probably nothing to do with him
Soldato
But wasnt Grayling told about these things happening , and he ignored it ?
It does seem unthinkable that one couple are behind this? As others have said it's appaling they've been named by the police prior to being charged. Especially since this has been front page news for the last week.
Privacy laws here are weird. You have situations where cases can't be reported on and people named even though they've been charged and are in court. Also you have wealthy individuals able to obtain injunctions to prevent and form of publicity when it suits their purposes.
How is it in anyone's interest for these people to be named until they're charged? Surely it would also be better for the police investigation if they just said "we're interviewing 2 suspects" rather than spooking any accomplices they may have had and risking losing evidence?
Privacy laws here are weird. You have situations where cases can't be reported on and people named even though they've been charged and are in court. Also you have wealthy individuals able to obtain injunctions to prevent and form of publicity when it suits their purposes.
How is it in anyone's interest for these people to be named until they're charged? Surely it would also be better for the police investigation if they just said "we're interviewing 2 suspects" rather than spooking any accomplices they may have had and risking losing evidence?
Last edited:
Soldato
This is sounding more and more like deflection tactics to me
Yup. Evidence of how serious the military take it - the Arc Royal (aircraft carrier) radar can track 3000+ tennis ball sized objects for this reason..
After reading various articles i can't help but agree. I'm hoping the police have something on him we don't know about otherwise this is just going to erode public trust even further.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 45,702
And of course pictures have been plastered all over the media - that should not be allowed. Innocent until proven guilty, in theory. If they are innocent they are due a big pay day.
would never have happened in the first place if the police had acted on the multiple reports from the legitimate gun owners. and of course their own officers.
I expect it's better to officially announce who they've arrested before the social media pitchforks and revenge is handed out.
Not that it makes it right
Not that it makes it right
Soldato
I for one certainly hope that if they are innocent they screw everyone they can for compo - the more the better - especially London police - then go for the newspapers -
Soldato
Not if this is true:
In a move known as "buzzing the tower", it emerged the perpetrator had taunted airport staff by circling the drone around the building and flashing its lights, an industry source told The Telegraph.
Src.https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...ne-chaos-man-woman-arrested-passengers-brace/