he wasn't a terrorist or a nonce

[Orang Utan]

He's not really blind you know - it's just an act to pull the ladies - throw a tennis ball at him and watch him duck.

 

[bluestreak]

He's not really blind you know - it's just an act to pull the ladies - throw a tennis ball at him and watch him duck.

throw a fucking brick at the cunt instead.

 

[detective-boy]

However I'm prepared to bow to your superior knowledge of searching sectors at a sub-byte level using prebuilt libraries at a machine-code level of programming....which led to current programmes which can do it all 100 times faster because the data can be processed 10,000 times faster. The technology is better, the techniques are pretty much the same, I'm sure.

Thats the bit you don't understand - all the computers and phones would NOT just be given to the teccy lot (probably either the MPS Technical Support Unit or an external company, not well-meaning amateur cops). The senior investigator would ask for certain things to be looked at for certain reasns to do with the investigation. It would (probably) have just been stuff like contacts / e-mails initially. To ask for the whole lot in one go would (a) take far too long and (b) result in a shit-storm of information, most of which was irrelevant. That original examination could well have not found the porn, as they would not have been looking for it at that stage.

Once that original stage had passed, they would probably have put all the stuff in to a slower time "check it out for everything / anything" examination along with dozens of other bits and pieces ... which would explain why the porn wasn't found until weeks later.

It's not a question of technology - it's a question of managing the investigation, of prioritising tasks and of making best use of scarce technical resources.

 

[detective-boy]

btw...yet again you start swearing when someone disagrees with your defence of the police position.

My swearing is not at disagreement with my "defence" of the police position - it is not a defence, it is an explanation anyway - but at the apparent unwillingness to see the point I am trying to make.

 

[DexterTCN]

An unwillngness to accept it is not an inability to see it.

 

[likesfish]

weird thing in the indy claimed they did'nt belive the accused had the technical knowledge to be able to move files from the pc to the phone
probably reasoned even if gulity whole thing looked unbelivably convienent and no jury would belive them
although if it is really difficult to move images form a pc to a nokia phone i stand to be corrected

 

[detective-boy]

An unwillngness to accept it is not an inability to see it.

I do appreciate the difference. I accept that your position was maybe more of the former than the latter ... but it came after a long series of headbanging with others. Sorry.

 

[detective-boy]

probably reasoned even if gulity whole thing looked unbelivably convienent and no jury would belive them

That's why I went looking for a full statement on the CPS site - the BBC report doesn't give any indication they made a "public interest" decision (which I think could have been justifiable in the circumstances) or whether they took into account the point you make which would impact on the "likelihood of conviction" decision. I don't think they would, to be honest. If the evidence had been there, especially if the proveable images were of the more serious type, then I think they would have prosecuted - juries are actually quite capable of seperating different aspects of a case.

 

[DexterTCN]

No problem...I've had worse on U75