Originally Posted by
Jackonicko
The difference is that there was NO EVIDENCE OF ANY WRONGDOING BY BAE in this case
That's not at all the case. The truth is that the investigation was not completed - and unless you were helping the police conduct their investigation and were privvy to their files, you simply cannot say definitively that there was 'no evidence'.
Originally Posted by
Jackonicko
our most senior law officers judged that there were no charges to answer, and that there was no chance of a prosecution.
No, they didn't. Political pressure led our AG (a man who, incidentally, has already been called into question about the sudden change in legal advice he gave Tony Blair on the eve of the Iraq war) to call-off the investigation; it certainly does not appear as though the SFO and senior police officers got together and said, 'let's call it a day, because we can't find any wrong doing' - they were told what to do.
As someone here has already pointed out, you can't state that there was 'no chance of prosecution'. Why? Because the investigation a) was not concluded, and b) because you have absolutely no idea what the SFO had, or had not, found up until the point they were ordered to cease investigating (and nor do I).