Showing posts with label News. Show all posts
Showing posts with label News. Show all posts

Friday, 26 September 2008

Those OiNKing Cleveland SOCA cops!

p2pnet news view | Music:- “Read this if you like a good laugh,” says a Reader’s Write to our Online music royalties deal story.

The comment points to an item in The Register, which in turn links to Britain’s Evening Gazette in Teeside which has a write-up of a serious embarrassment centering on the Big 4 record labels and the Cleveland police — the very same department whose officers have been acting as corporate copyright cops funded by local taxpayers.

In Canada, it’s called SOCAN. Its job? To use legal threats to force the likes of dentists and hairdressers to pay exorbitant royalty fees every time they play music for their patients and customers.Cleveland oink

In Britain, it’s the Performing Rights Society (PRS) and, says the Gazette Live, “A police force that launched a crackdown against music piracy may itself be breaching music copyright laws, it has emerged.

“But Cleveland Police chiefs today claimed they would rather spend public cash on fighting crime than paying for music rights.”

Last October, “Cleveland Police’s Organised Crime Unit have been working closely with the Music Industry to uncover a massive piracy scam, the first such international operation in the country,” it boasted in an online statement, going on »»»

The organised crime unit, in conjunction with the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) and the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) have been working closely on the investigation for several months, and today arrested a 24 year old man in connection with Conspiracy to Defraud and Infringement of Copyright Law.

Detective Sergeant Tony Keogh was in charge and according to him, the site, OiNK, “specialized in sharing music and media including pre-release material, this is an infringement on copyright law that in financial terms causes immeasurable loss to the record companies.”

In the statement, “We have been working closely with Interpol and our Dutch colleagues in Amsterdam where the website server is based to ensure that it too was secured at the time of arrest,” he says.

And on behalf of the corporate music industry, “whilst some might view this type of act as a victimless crime there’s no such thing, as the cost of an enterprise such as this will be added to the cost of any legitimate purchases further down the line,” declares chief superintendent Mark Braithwaite, head of crime in Cleveland Police.

Said a p2pnet post on the bust »»»

“Strike, strtike, strike, going in,” says a tense, disembodied voice over a police radio in Britain.

Must be something serious.

And just before that, “The tactics were the same, but this time the target was very different.”

That’s from a reporter who, by an amazing coincidence, happened to find out about the Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG initiated raid on a 24-year-old man in England just in time to be included.

The man is accused of facilitating the non-existent crime of online file sharing on OiNK and, “The aim was to catch the man while he was logged on to the site,” the reporter continues in a video shot from inside a police car nearing the home of the ’suspect’.

But he’s not alone.

As the videoman follows the police into the man’s house, you see camera flashes popping off.

Next up is local cop enjoying his 15 minutes of fame as the Big 4 milk the situation they created bone dry.

“The police say it is no longer a victimless crime,” the reporter continues, “but they admit few feel sympathy for the multi-billion-dollar record companies being deprived of their profits.”

By another amazing coincidence, the video of the bust turned up on YouTube, as a p2pnet reader pointed out.

British taxpayers will no doubt be delighted to see their hard earned money is being well spent - by Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG.

Don’t bother to stay tuned.

“Alan Ellis the admin of OiNK, will appear in court along with five users accused of uploading music via the BitTorrent tracker. The six will appear before magistrates to learn if their cases will be sent on to a Crown Court,” says TorrentFreak.

And the apprehension of these wicked, file sharing P2P criminals is largely due to the sterling efforts of the Cleveland cops.

But wait!

“Music licensing authority the Performing Rights Society (PRS) claims many forces have no licence to allow the playing of music in their stations,” said the Gazette Online yesterday, going on:

“A PRS licence is required by law in many cases when music is played outside a domestic home.

“The licence fee - which for a whole police force could run from several hundred to thousands of pounds a year - is applicable to music played on a television, radio or CD player, music played in areas such as staff canteens or social areas, and during a presentation or social event.

“Cleveland Police is among dozens of forces that have not paid up.”

But no worries.

“The legal action is on hold while negotiations take place in a bid to reach a settlement,” the story adds.

After all, what are friends for?

Here’s a video of the bust referred to earlier on.

The Register - BitTorrent crackdown cops fail to pay music copyright fees, September 24, 2008
Evening Gazette - No licence for police, September 24, 2008

Wednesday, 24 September 2008

BitTorrent crackdown cops fail to pay music copyright fees

Six OiNK accused in court today

By Chris WilliamsGet more from this author

Cleveland Police, the force that will today bring six people to court for alleged involvement in the OiNK BitTorrent network, does not pay licensing fees to legally play music in its canteens, it has emerged.

Rumours that Cleveland Police was infringing copyright law have been circulating for several months. Yesterday the Middlesborough Gazette reported the force admitted the transgression and said it had not decided whether to pay its Performing Rights Society (PRS) subs.

The PRS collects royalties for artists and record companies from non-domestic performance of recorded copyright music.

A spokeswoman confirmed Cleveland Police's position to El Reg today.

A statement from Cleveland Police Deputy Chief Constable Derek Bonnard said: "We continue to assess the position and are seeking advice to determine if we are required by law to spend a significant amount of public money, which we consider is better committed to crime fighting, in this way." That Quote is priceless

The PRS argues that police forces are required to pay the same as other organisations. It issued a High Court writ against police in Lancashire earlier this year for the same infringment Cleveland has admitted.

PRS said only 11 forces nationwide have paid for the legal right to play copyright music in staff areas. Action against the Lancashire Constabulary has been suspended while the parties attempt to negotiate a settlement.

Depending on where and how it it plays copyright music, Cleveland Police can expect a PRS bill of between a few hundred and a few thousand pounds.

Alan Ellis, the 25-year-old administrator of OiNK, will face Teesside magistrates today on a charge of conspiracy to defraud. Five individuals who were arrested following last year's raids on Ellis and OiNK's servers will also appear, accused of criminal copyright infringement for uploading new trackers to the site.

All of the alleged offences could carry prison sentences. ® Corrupt Cleveland Police Officers.

Friday, 13 June 2008

Lords to rule on hacker Gary McKinnon's extradition

Lords to rule on hacker Gary McKinnon's extradition


McKinnon


Author:
Ian Grant
Posted:
17:07 13 Jun 2008

The US government accuses McKinnon of breaking into the
computer network at the Earle Naval Weapons Station, stealing computer
passwords, and shutting down the network in the immediate aftermath of
the 9/11 terrorist attacks.


A second indictment charges McKinnon with intentional damage to a
protected computer, with intrusions into 92 computer systems belonging
to the US Army, Navy, Air Force, Department of Defense and NASA.


McKinnon is also charged with hacking into two computers located at
the Pentagon and six private companies' networks. He is accused of
causing approximately £450,000 in damages to computers located in 14
states.


"As a result of the intrusions into the US military networks,
McKinnon rendered the network for the military district of Washington
inoperable," a US Attorney statementsaid.


McKinnon admits entering US computer systems without authorisation, but denies causing damage or non-operation of any of them.


If convicted, McKinnon could face 60 years in a US jail.


Members of the former National High Tech Crime Unit arrested
McKinnon in 2002, three years after he began looking for evidence of
extra-terrestrial beings and technologies on US computers, McKinnon
told Computer Weekly.


British taxpayers will pay both the CPS's costs and much of McKinnon's. The total so far is estimated to be close to £900,000.


Technorati Tags: , , , , , , ,

High Court certfies two points of law for the House of Lords to consider in the Gary McKinnon extradition to the USA case.


| | Comments (5)

The Administrative Court (one of the High Courts) has certified two questions on points of law, for the House of Lords (the highest Court in the the United Kingdom) to consider.

The House of Lords is not automatically bound to consider this final appeal, e.g. they chose not to do so in the case of the the NatWest 3 bankers

Media statement from Gary's solicitors Kaim Todner:

We are pleased to report that the Administrative Court have certified two questions of being of public importance in the case of Gary McKinnon. These questions relate to the diplomatic note confirming that Mr McKinnon will not be treated as a terrorist under Military Order No. 1 by the American Government and secondly the conduct of the American Government in offering Mr. McKinnon a plea bargain but only on the basis that if he did not accept it he would subsequently not be repatriated if extradited to the USA.

We will now be applying for leave to the House of Lords for these points to be argued in full.

Kaim Todner LLPTechnorati Tags: , , , , , ,

Friday, 6 June 2008

Time runs out! Should this happen with no evidence?

Time runs out!



Family await appeal verdict
Family await appeal verdict

Published Date: 06 June 2008
A COCKROACH-INFESTED cell in a tough Arizona jail could be home to Bo'ness businessman Brian Howes for three years as he awaits trial in the United States.
This week, Scottish justice minister Kenny MacAskill gave his approval to demands that Mr and Mrs Howes should be extradited to the United States.

Mr Howes is appealling that decision. If the appeal fails he could be in an American jail within 28 days.

The father of six then faces a lifetime behind bars if claims he illegally supplied chemicals which are used to create the deadly illegal drug crystal meth are substantiated.

Also facing a miserable future is Mr Howes' bride of three months, Kerry-Ann Howes (30).

Mr Howes (44), of Bridgeness Road, told the Journal: "I don't think either Kerry-Ann or myself is strong enough to withstand the Arizona penal system which is said to have the worst human rights record in the United States.

"Temperatures hit 140° Fahrenheit, there are chain gangs and racism. Saughton prison, where I spent seven months on remand, is a holiday camp in comparison!"

The couple, who have no funds, will have to rely on a public defender to plead their case in the US. That could mean a three-year wait before their case goes to trial.

"Cases taken by the public defender, the equivalent of our legal aid system, are seen as low priority," said Mr Howes.

"I have it on good authority that, if I had £30,000 to pay our legal costs then, if our appeals fail and we're extradited, the case could be heard within a year."

Mr Howes said he did not blame the justice minister for signing the extradition warrant.

"My information is that he was sympathetic towards us but that it was not in his power to refuse," he said.

Mr Howes insisted no firm evidence has yet been produced to link his businesses with the production of crystal meth in the United States.

He said: "I have asked Kenny MacAskill and Alex Salmond if they would, in an independent Scotland, support an extradition treaty that can see people stand trial without prima facie evidence. I have not had a reply from either of them."

He went on: "I can't envisage the damage extradition would do to our whole family.

"Our two youngest children would be take into care and the elder two would also be farmed out. As it is, my bail conditions prevent me from seeing my two children in England."

Mr and Mrs Howes face 82 charges of supplying chemicals over the internet to people believed to be involved in producing methamphetamine, commonly known as "crystal meth".

The couple were arrested in January 2007 by officers from Central Scotland Police acting on behalf of the US Drug Enforcement Agency.

At Edinburgh Sheriff Court in April, Sheriff Isabella McColl said she was satisfied the US request met the requirements of the Extradition Act. The court heard claims that chemicals supplied by the couple were traced to more than 80 illegal laboratories in the US.

The court was also told that, between August 2004-06, the couple's business was alleged to have supplied 653lb of red phosphorous and 97lb of iodine to the US.

Use of methamphetamine can lead to depression, paranoia, violent behaviour, kidney failure and internal bleeding.

Mr Howes has a son, Ryan (11), and daughter, Jessica (9), in England from a previous relationship.

He and Kerry-Ann, who were married in Bo'ness Registry Office just days before they learned that they were to be extradited, have two children, Ellie (5) and Leela (2).

Mrs Howes has two daughters, Denni (10) and Bethany (9) from a previous relationship.
Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

Thursday, 5 June 2008

Human Rights Doubts over terror law safeguards

An armed police officer
The government hopes its concessions will head off a Commons defeat

The government has still not done enough to protect individual liberty in its anti-terror plans, an influential committee of MPs and peers says.

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith unveiled a series of amendments earlier this week aimed at heading off a Commons defeat.

But in a new report the joint committee on human rights said the safeguards were "inadequate".

And plans to hold terror suspects for up to six weeks without charge would "almost certainly not be lawful".

Ms Smith told The Spectator she thought the government would win next week's crunch Commons vote on 42 day detention.

But she also stressed that defeat would not bring down the government, as some commentators have predicted.

"I think if it was turned into a vote of confidence there would be massive support of the government, I don't think it would be a problem," she told the magazine in an interview to be published on Thursday.

'Grave threat'

Ms Smith has unveiled a series of amendments to the Anti-Terror Bill aimed at winning over critics.

This report takes paint-stripper to the government's claims that it is installing adequate safeguards
Chris Huhne
Liberal Democrats

These include greater Parliamentary oversight and the stipulation that extra detention powers could only be used in the event of a "grave exceptional threat".

The government argues that the scale and complexity of terror plots mean police will inevitably need longer to hold suspects in the future.

But Lib Dem, Conservative and up many Labour MPs are still thought to be planning to vote against the plans on civil rights grounds.

It had been thought as many as 50 Labour MPs would vote against the plans, but some are thought to have changed their minds after studying the amendments.

The government's case will not be helped by a report by the joint committee on human rights published on Thursday, which said the plans could breach European human rights laws.

The report adds that the amendments offered were "inadequate to protect individuals against the threat of arbitrary detention".

The committee said the description of a "grave exceptional threat" was not tight enough.

'Heavily circumscribed'

Committee chairman Labour MP Andrew Dismore said: "The government has talked of a major emergency, the 'nightmare scenario' of simultaneous plots across Britain or two 9/11s at once.

"Yet the amendments tabled by the government provide for possible events falling well short of that."

The report also said requiring the home secretary to declare publicly there was a serious enough emergency to justify the powers was not much of a safeguard without independent scrutiny.

And allowing Parliament to vote on the individual case within seven days - another concession - would make little difference as any debate would be "heavily circumscribed by the risk of prejudicing future trials".

The committee says the proposals should be abandoned and instead the government should set out how it would opt out of human rights obligations, should there be an "emergency threatening the life of the nation".

It concluded: "No amount of additional parliamentary or judicial safeguards can render the proposal for a reserve power of 42 days' pre-charge detention compatible with the right to liberty in Article 5 of the ECHR (European Convention of Human Rights)."

For the Liberal Democrats, Chris Huhne said: "This report takes paint-stripper to the government's claims that it is installing adequate safeguards for the use of 42 days of detention without charge."

He said the extension would be "draconian" and "nearly four times as long as in comparable English-speaking countries". Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Monday, 2 June 2008

UK cops arrest six alleged BitTorrent music uploaders

Surprise new arrests in OiNK investigation

Published Monday 2nd June 2008 14:29 GMT

Updated Cleveland police have today confirmed that six people have been arrested for allegedly sharing music files via the defunct BitTorrent tracker OiNK.cd.

Five men aged between 19 and 33, and a 28-year-old woman were detained "in relation to uploading pre-release music", the force said in a statement. Three of the arrests were made on Friday 23 May, and three on Wednesday 28 May.

All have been bailed without charge, pending further inquiries. A spokeswoman for Cleveland police was unable to provide details of which specific criminal law or laws the six are under suspicion of breaking.

The swoop comes more than seven months after OiNK.cd was shutdown by a widely-publicised raid at the Middlesbrough home of its adminstrator, 24-year old IT worker Alan Ellis. A coordinated move by Dutch police also seized the invitation-only website's servers, which were later returned wiped.

Ellis remains on police bail under suspicion of conspiracy to defraud and infringement of copyright law. His bail has been repeatedly extended, with the next deadline set for 1 July.

Reports of further arrests in the investigation emerged on Friday 30 May on the filesharing blog Torrentfreak. Today it cites sources saying that the majority of those arrested did not know Alan Ellis. It's claimed they have been asked to hand over details of their OiNK.cd accounts, including passwords.

Section 49 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act can be used by police to force suspects to disclose encryption keys and passwords. Failure to comply with with a section 49 order carries a prison sentence of up to five years.

At the time of the shutdown, investigators took over the OiNK.cd domain, posting a warning to the site's users. It said: "A criminal investigation continues into the identities and activities of the site's users." Many BitTorrent users had believed further arrests were unlikely, however.

Control of the domain has since returned to its owner.

OiNK.cd was reckoned by many filesharers to be the internet's most complete music source. It focused on high quality files and featured trackers for pre-release material, which drew it special attention from record industry anti-piracy investigators. ®

Update

The BPI, which represents major record labels in the UK, sent us this statement in response to the news:

The BPI and IFPI worked with the police in order to close down the OiNK tracker site last October. The illegal online distribution of music, particularly pre-release, is hugely damaging, and as OiNK was the biggest source for pre-releases at the time we moved to shut it down. We provided the information to assist this investigation, but this is now a police matter and we are unable to comment further at this stage.
Technorati Tags: , , ,

Blunkett: Labour at rock bottomThe end of Labour


Gordon Brown's government has "hit rock bottom", but defeat over
anti-terror plans would not be a "knockout blow", ex-home secretary

David Blunkett says.

Attempts to extend the limit to 90 days in 2005 ended in defeat for Labour
An armed police officer









He told Simon Mayo on BBC Five Live that Labour's present unpopularity meant things could not get any worse.


Mr Blunkett backs the plan to extend from 28 days to 42 days the time terror suspects can be held without charge.


Mr Brown says he will not retreat on the issue despite the number of Labour rebels threatening to inflict defeat.


Mr Brown says the extension from 28-days is needed because of the complexity and sheer number of plots.






















We've hit a rock bottom in my view and we can only climb out of it












David Blunkett
Sheffield Brightside MP















But he faces opposition from about 50 Labour MPs, in addition to Lib Dems and Tories amid fears over civil liberties.


Mr Brown says he has "tried to build a consensus" on the plans - due to
be subject to a Commons vote next week - and urged MPs to back him.


He also refused to be drawn on whether defeat would mean a vote of confidence on his leadership.


Mr Blunkett said he did not believe losing the vote would spell the end for the prime minister.


Civil liberty concerns

"We've hit a rock bottom in my view and we can only get... climb
out of it, so I think that, whilst it would be yet another knock, it
would not be a knockout blow," he said.

He insisted there was no alternative to keeping suspects in
custody, despite claims by some critics the measure would infringe
civil liberties.

"I really don't understand how anyone can believe that you can
pat a terrorist on the head and say: 'Don't worry, we won't hold you
while we investigate these multiple links across multiple boundaries
across the world - we'll let you out, so we're being ultra-careful not
to infringe your rights, even though you might well infringe our
lives'," he said.

"We're trying here to ensure that when evidence is available of
the threat of terrorist action, we don't allow the very act of having
an open, democratic, civil rights based society to undermine our
ability to protect ourselves - that would be very foolish."

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith is set to meet Labour backbenchers
on Monday evening in a bid to try to persuade them of the need for the
42 day plan.Technorati Tags: , , ,

Friday, 11 April 2008

Three more years of torment - Queensferry Today

Three more years of torment



An anxious wait for news
An anxious wait for news
An anxious wait for news
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image


A BO'NESS man this week spoke of the strain on his family as the courts considered a request for his extradition to America to face criminal charges.
Sheriff Isabella McColl has ruled that Brian Howes (44) and his wife, Kerry-Ann (30), who were married on April 1, should be extradited but the final decision lies with Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill.

The couple face an 82-charge indictment alleging conspiracy to supply chemicals which are illegal in the United States.

But with an appeal pending it could be years before the family knows its fate.

Said Mr Howes, of Bridgeness Road: "The last months have been extremely stressful for me, my wife Kerry-Ann, and my family. Our businesses have been destroyed and we have been unable to work.

"It will be at least a year before our appeal is heard in the High Court and if that fails we'll take it to the European courts.

"If that fails and we are, eventually, extradited to the United States we could face another two years on remand before appearing in court.

"If we survived two years of State Prison we could each face up to 98 years in jail if the authorities were able to prove we were involved in a conspiracy to manufacture illegal drugs.

"By that time our four children would be either in care or fostered out, possibly even adopted."

Mr Howes is adamant that he did not knowingly distribute red phosphorus and iodine to customers in the United States who were manufacturing methamphetamine, commonly known as crystal meth.

He alleges that the American authorities included the word "conspiracy" in the key charge, in the belief that it would force a reaction from their British counterparts.

And he said: "We've got no chance of a fair trial in the United States."
But Mr Howes, who is from the Cleveland area of northern England, had praise for the
Scottish legal system, and particularly for Sheriff Isabella McColl.

"The Procurator Fiscal was again pushing for us to be taken into custody but Sheriff McColl was strong enough to resist that and let our family stay together," he said.

He emphasised: "We took legal advice and were told that we were not breaking any laws.

"We did not know that the chemicals were being misused.

"No evidence was ever produced to extradite us and I believe extradition without evidence is wrong. We're going to take this fight as far as we have to."

However, Detective Super-intendent Dave Duffey of Cleveland Police, who led Operation Enfield – which investigated the supply of chemicals over the internet – said: "The Sheriff's decision constitutes a significant step towards finalising the extradition process."

allan@journalandgazette.co.uk

Wednesday, 19 March 2008

BBC NEWS | England | Tees | Wrongly jailed Pc denies speeding

Wrongly jailed Pc denies speeding
Sultan Alam (courtesy Northern Echo)
Mr Alam continued to protest his innocence after being jailed
A Teesside police officer, wrongly jailed when colleagues suppressed evidence is facing a charge of speeding on the day his conviction was quashed.

Pc Sultan Alam was allegedly clocked breaking a 40mph speed limit on the A66 in Middlesbrough on 19 November.

The 45-year-old of Church Lane, Acklam, pleaded not guilty in writing at Teesside Magistrates' Court on Tuesday.

He had a 1996 conviction for conspiracy to steal motor vehicle parts quashed on appeal also on 19 November last year.

Pc Alam, who joined Cleveland Police in 1984, was dismissed upon conviction and served nine months of his 18-month jail term.

'deliberately misled'

At his appeal court hearing, Lord Justice Moore-Bick ruled that police officers had "deliberately misled" the court "in order to suppress evidence".

The father-of-two has said he was targeted by fellow officers when he brought a racial discrimination case against the force in 1993.

Pc Alam returned to work with the Cleveland force on 3 March and was welcomed by Chief Constable Sean Price - the same man who has taken his speeding case to court.

In a statement Acting Deputy Chief Constable Derek Bonnard, of Cleveland Police, said: "I can confirm that Sultan Alam was stopped for exceeding the speed limit and served with a summons.

"I understand he pleaded not guilty on the basis that the information put before the court was incorrect.

"It is now a matter for the Crown Prosecution Service as to whether a summons is re-issued."

Pc Alam said a administration error was to blame. A trial has been set for May.

Tuesday, 18 March 2008

US legal system 'worse than Russia' - Times Online

US legal system 'worse than Russia' - Times Online: "From Times Online
March 18, 2008
US legal system 'worse than Russia'
A survey shows that European in-house lawyers would rather face litigation in China and Russia than in America
Michael Herman

Fear of the American legal system has created an atmosphere in which lawyers working for European businesses would prefer to face a major dispute in Russia or China than the US, a study has revealed.

A survey of 180 in-house counsel working in five European countries identified the US as the jurisdiction they were keenest to avoid, with 29 per cent naming it the country they were most concerned about facing a major dispute in.

The US attracted almost twice as many votes as Russia and China. Despite fears of political interference and corruption in their legal processes, both were named by just 16 per cent of in-house counsel as their most feared jurisdiction.

The survey, commissioned by Lovells, the international law firm, noted that “while in-house lawyers are relatively comfortable with managing disputes in their own countries, there is great concern regarding the unknowns in different markets”.
Related Links

* Beware the long arm of American law

* Partial win for Norris in US extradition battle

* Long arm of US could put Britons in prison"

Thursday, 13 March 2008

Comment is free: Taking liberties




Taking liberties Fighting terror and preserving freedom are only contradictory aims if the government insists on permanent measures without safeguards. AC Grayling Articles * Latest * Show all Profile Webfeed All AC Grayling articles About Webfeeds November 13, 2006 11:45 AM | Printable version Perhaps the most pressing political problem we face in contemporary Britain is: how do we preserve our civil liberties while effectively combating terrorism? The conjunction of two things - the chilling survey of the current terrorist threat given by the head of MI5 last week, and the impending Queen's Speech which is sure to contain proposals for yet more civil-liberty-reducing legislation - makes finding an answer yet more urgent. Here is a suggested one. In a time of genuinely serious threat, it is justified to place temporary and careful limits on certain civil liberties, if a good case can be made for doing so. The stress lies on the words "genuinely", "temporary", "careful" and "if a good case can be made for doing so". Assume that the threat is indeed serious. Then it would be justified for the government to institute a temporary and limited regime of emergency powers - temporary in the strict sense that they lapse after 12 months, but are renewable for a further 12 months on advice provided, after examination of the need for their continuance, by two separate bodies: a panel of judges, and a committee of both houses of parliament. The proposal to renew the powers should then be debated in parliament, and voted upon. Renewal might occur every year for a number of years; some powers might be found unnecessary and allowed to lapse, and others adopted, on the same annually lapsing basis, as the nature of the threat evolves. Eventually, the threat will dissipate, and the powers can then die a grateful and automatic death. With the safeguard of annual renewability on these terms, such aids to security as monitoring of financial transactions, use of intercept evidence in court, and longer periods of remand, can be temporarily justified given the threat posed by increasingly sophisticated people intent on mass murder. What is totally unacceptable is permanent reduction of civil liberties, as currently envisaged by the government. The government's probable next leader also appears to be committed to the false proposition that security matters above all else. It matters all right - but not above liberty and justice. Those who care about the latter are unlikely to be persuaded that liberty and justice have had their day and that we must now take ourselves permanently hostage, thus in any case doing what the mass murderers are themselves bent on doing, by breaking our polity and remaking it closer to their own desire. If the government wishes to forge a consensus on the question of how to enhance security while protecting civil liberties, something close to this suggestion must be right. What possible reason, in any case, could there be for making civil-liberty-reducing measures permanent? The head of MI5 says that the terrorist threat might last a generation; a generation is a blink of an eye in historical terms. What purpose does our government think will be served by permanent limitations of liberties once the threat has passed - unless the purpose in question is the convenience of governments even in unthreatening times? For governments are ever on the alert for ways to make life easier in the face of pesky citizens who will insist on having minds of their own.

Wednesday, 12 March 2008

US duo celebrate key Lords extradition ruling - Legal Week, legal news, comment, events and legal jobs



US duo celebrate key Lords extradition ruling - Legal Week, legal news, comment, events and legal jobs
US duo celebrate key Lords extradition ruling

Author: Claire Ruckin

Published: 12/03/2008 14:31

Email article | Comment on this article | Sign up to News Alerts
White & Case and Jones Day are celebrating after the House of Lords blocked an attempt by the US to extradite a British citizen accused of price-fixing, bringing to an end one of the most high-profile white-collar crime investigations of recent years.

The Lords ruled this morning (12 March) that White & Case client Ian Norris (pictured left) could not be extradited over his alleged involvement in the price-fixing of carbon products before the Enterprise Act 2002 made price-fixing a criminal offence in the UK.

White & Case head of dispute resolution Alistair Graham, who represented Norris, commented: “We’re absolutely delighted that the House of Lords has upheld what we’ve been saying for more than two years: namely, that no criminal offence for price-fixing existed in the UK prior to the enactment of the Enterprise Act 2002 and that price-fixing in itself cannot be characterised as the old English common-law offence of conspiracy to defraud.

“[The] attempts to extradite Ian on this basis were of grave concern to the UK business community at large, human rights organisations and the political opposition parties. Today’s ruling lays those concerns to rest.”

Jones Day client Goldshields had intervened in the case after contesting a similar point on conspiracy to defraud amid Serious Fraud Office allegations that it was involved in the price-fixing of drugs provided to the NHS.

Litigation partner Craig Shuttleworth led the Jones Day team, with Blackstone Chambers’ David Pannick QC and Thomas de la Mare instructed as counsel.

Despite today’s ruling, Norris could still be extradited on the lesser charge of obstructing justice. That matter has been referred back to the district court.
Related Articles

Ian Norris wins appeal against US extradition - Telegraph



Ian Norris wins appeal against US extradition - Telegraph
Ian Norris wins appeal against US extradition

By Russell Hotten
Last Updated: 12:26pm GMT 12/03/2008

Businessman Ian Norris, wanted in the US on charges of price-fixing, spoke of his relief today after winning a House of Lords appeal to halt his extradition.

Mr Norris, 65, former chief executive of engineering company Morgan Crucible, has been charged in the US with conspiring with other executives to rig prices of components in the 1990s and trying to obstruct an ensuing investigation.

Ian Norris, the former chief executive of engineering company Morgan Crucible, has won his Hiuse of Lords Appeal against extradition to the US over price-fixing charges
Ian Norris will not be extradited to the US

But the House of Lords today upheld his appeal, saying that price-fixing was not a crime in the UK at the time of the alleged misconduct and so he should not be extradited.

Mr Norris said: "The ruling has at last given some light at the end of the tunnel, in what has been a very unfair and difficult situation for my family and me.

"Even with the decision today, I still remain deeply concerned about the one-sided extradition arrangements we have struck up with the USA. It's a deeply frightening situation to be in and I'm relieved that the UK justice system has stood up for its citizens."

Charges that Mr Norris tried to obstruct the US investigation are being referred back to the courts, though the House of Lords judgement made clear that this was a subsidiary issue. Lawyers said it was unlikely that Mr Norris would ever be extradited on this point.
advertisement

Norris retired from Morgan Crucible in 2002 after battling prostate cancer. US prosecutors claim he colluded with rivals to fix prices on carbon parts, to avoid undercutting each other on sales. The cartel, which originally operated in Europe, spread to the US in 1989 and continued until 2000, according to a U.S. indictment.

Morgan Crucible and its North Carolina subsidiary, Morganite, agreed to pay a total of $11m in fines to settle related antitrust charges in November 2002. But Mr Norris was not covered by that agreement and has been fighting the charges since his arrest in London in January 2005.

The British government first authorized Mr Norris's extradition in September 2005, after a lower court ruled it would be appropriate for the businessman to be tried in the US.

Mr Norris's solicitor, Alistair Graham, of White & Case, said today: "We're absolutely delighted that the House of Lords has upheld what we have been saying for more than two years: namely, that no criminal offence for price-fixing existed in the UK prior to the enactment for the Enterprise Act in 2002.

"The US Department of Justice's attempts to extradite Ian on this basis were of grave concern to the UK business community at large, human rights organisations and the political opposition parties. Today's ruling lays those concerns to rest," Mr Graham said.

Brian Howes Family Extradition Fight.

Tuesday, 11 March 2008

Taking Liberties Part 11 Posted by Brian Howes


Taking Liberties Part 11 Posted by Brian Howes

Taking Liberties Part 10 Posted by Brian Howes


Taking Liberties Part 10 Posted by Brian Howes

Taking Liberties Part 9 Posted by Brian Howes



Taking Liberties Part 9 Posted by Brian Howes

Taking Liberties Part 8 Posted by Brian Howes


Taking Liberties Part 8 Posted by Brian Howes

Taking Liberties Part 7 Posted by Brian Howes



Taking Liberties Part 7 Posted by Brian Howes

Taking Liberties Part 5 Posted by Brian Howes