The police don't investigate crimes after they have occurred - only the police can do that!
I don't think Cressida Dick fully appreciated the response she might have received from the general public when she indicated that the Met would not investigate the Prime Minister's illegal party around the Christmas period in 2020.
The reason, according to the Met, is that the police do not investigate retrospective breaches of COVID guidance and at the time, nobody had reported the breach - which is lovely, although if you're counting on your neighbours to 'dob you in' as Priti Patel suggested we do on December 17, a day before the party took place, then asking Rishi Sunak to do the honest thing and report his neighbour [the Prime Minister] might have been a bit too much to ask of the Chancellor.
Of course, there's every possibility the Chancellor may have been at the party himself. This is speculation.
The Chancellor may not have been there at all and rather at one of his wife's many, many multi-million pound properties.
That’s beside the point.
But when the Prime Minister does it, then it is not illegal
Unsurprisingly, many took to social media to announce their intention to belatedly report the breach - albeit retrospectively - including Dr. Rachel Clarke, who asked health professionals to sign a letter reporting it, which gathered the support of over 3,000 individuals.
And what’s more remarkable about this defence - that the Met wouldn’t investigate on the grounds of ‘retrospection’ - is that nobody appears to have come forward until the Daily Mirror first published the story on December 1 this year.
Further beside the point…
By contrast, the flagrant breach of coronavirus restrictions committed by Dominic Cummings was known about for roughly 3 weeks before The Guardian and The Daily Mirror published their respective articles; followed by widespread public outrage that is believed to have contributed to a dissolution of trust in the government and the general public abiding by the guidelines - which as a new variant takes hold in the UK, doesn’t bode well for when the Prime Minister inevitably asks us to do it all over again.
By similar contrast, there's this video from the Metropolitan Police:
You may notice the date that the video was published - December 17, a day before the party took place in Downing Street.
There are numerous others, too - including Nicola Sturgeon who was the subject of a Scottish Sun hit-piece that pictured her maskless [in breach of coronavirus regulations] at a wake on the exact same day the party in Downing Street took place.
Reflecting back to Priti Patel, and yet another example of COVID guidance being flouted, Bournemouth MP Tobias Ellwood attended a Christmas Party around the same time as the Downing Street party.
When asked by ITV News whether or not Patel agreed that this was an egregious breach of regulations, she agreed that it was.
As for the general public, just a day before the party in Downing Street took place - and just two miles away from the Prime Minister’s residence - police were “astounded” when they shut down a party in Kensington that was being attended by around 30 people, and consequently fined the organisers £10,000.
And yet silence on Downing Street.
Omerta?
One of the small [but important] aspects that this page is finding extremely difficult to convey is the concept of an ‘Omerta’ or ‘Code of silence’ - possibly involving the media; mostly the Metropolitan Police.
I spoke briefly at the beginning on how this story was revealed on December 1 2021. The party took place on December 18 2020 - there were other parties, too.
Naturally, and as a result, people will ask [rightly]:
‘So why sit on it for so long?
‘Surely somebody saw something at the time?’
‘Were there no reports?’
And so on.
Criticism in this case could feasibly be directed at the Mirror if they knew before, and indeed other media figures, too.
Indeed, the press, media and photographers are present at Downing Street and it is guarded 24 hours a day.
Yet nobody at the time saw or heard anything untoward involving over 30 people coming and going from the building; many of them probably inebriated.
When the conduct of those who were literally writing the rules is under such close scrutiny [and particularly after Cummings’ breach back in March/April] in the build-up to a Christmas - a Christmas, by the way, that was clouded by such uncertainty over restrictions - you would think that it would be apposite for the media to have a watchful eye on what Downing Street is doing at the time.
The Financial Times, for instance, reported a story on December 22 of how Boris Johnson and his now-wife Carrie could exploit a support bubble loophole.
Later, the Prime Minister did just that.
If you pursue this line of questioning, however - on the media’s code of silence - it casts doubt on the veracity of the story first reported in The Mirror on December 1 2021, and this one in the Financial Times from shortly after.
The risk is that this plays into the narrative as set by the government who - according to Dominic Raab, at least - say the reports are “unsubstantiated”.
Sajid Javid, the health secretary, went further several days earlier - he simply dismissed award-winning journalist Pippa Crerar and the Daily Mirror altogether.
In relation to Raab’s comments, however, they’re not unsubstantiated - the Prime Minister’s reassurance on the matter [as per PMQs dated December 1 2021] was that “all guidance was followed,” which isn’t a denial that any party had occurred.
Dominic Raab: Precrime Secretary!
Raab later went on to say that the Police “don’t look back” suggesting at this stage that we live in a ‘Minority Report’ style system of justice where prosecutions can only occur when the police know a crime is about to be committed rather than after the crime has been committed and/or in retrospect.
For justice secretary Dominic Raab, he might like to consult CPS guidance which states:
Indicating, in short, that prosecutions could be brought now if the evidence is newly revealed to the prosecutor.
Barrister Adam Wagner argues that a prosecution could be brought forward as a matter of “public interest”, quoting the guidance as noted above
The issue here, however, is that faith in the police when it comes to criminal investigations of the government is somewhat diminished. There was…
…the one where the police were called to investigate a possible instance of domestic abuse involving the Prime Minister, and news on the matter fell silent.
…the one where the police stalled an investigation into whether Boris Johnson campaigned using a publicly-funded jet.
…the one where the police refused to investigate the cash-for-hours scandal on the grounds of insufficient evidence.
…the one where the police were reluctant to re-open any investigation into the Prime Minister’s alleged abuse of his position while Mayor of London after overruled the advice of his staff and attended an event promoting Jennifer Arcuri’s business venture.
These are arbitrary examples that show a pattern of reluctance on the part of the police force to investigate Boris Johnson and as such, brings the system for criminal justice into disrepute where clear egregious breaches have been established - even if retrospectively.
Will they pursue it following the inordinate number of complaints that have been made - and what might it say about the police if they simply do nothing?
It remains to be seen - although just for a laugh, it might be worth seeing how they tie themselves in knots with the recent reports of rampant drug abuse in the Houses of Parliament.
Of course, if any crime has already occurred, there’s nothing they can do about it, is there? That would be ridiculous.