Originally Posted by
Thoughtful_Flyer
It also transpires that the police had, contrary to a court order, retained copies of the video!
"The Chief Constable, represented by Mr Downs, has apologised to the Court for the failure to abide by the terms of the order of this court; and has provided assurances in evidence that processes have now been put in place to ensure that such a breach does not occur in the future."
I wonder if the Coroner will write to the Home Secretary expressing a ‘matter of concern’ over this unseemly trend?
In the Jon Bayliss case (Red Arrows Hawk XX177, 2018), the police’s retention of Jon’s iPhone was only revealed when MoD’s QC misled the court, claiming MoD had it and it was damaged beyond any data retrieval. (Which is very specific, and he was briefed beforehand as he answered immediately). The Coroner didn’t believe a word and demanded to know the details. MoD had to admit it didn’t have it, and her investigators tracked it down in plod HQ. All data was retrieved. The same claim (outright lie) was made about Jon’s GoPro, yet 24 videos of the day in question and 89 images were retrieved.
In the Mull of Kintyre case, the families still await the return of personal electronic devices and watches. It will be clear to any followers what the latter might reveal, given MoD lied about the entire timeframe. The police have exercised their right to ‘neither confirm nor deny’ possession, citing ongoing terrorism risks. Similarly MoD, who say evidence in an ongoing (!) investigation cannot be returned.
Given this failure to disclose, one wonders how the pilot can receive a fair hearing in any future civil case. Or indeed anyone affected by an accident where the police have at some point held primacy and been allowed to trouser key evidence at will.