In Touch Of Evil, one of
the last great examples of film noir, crooked Police Captain Hank Quinlan
finally gets caught planting evidence and framing suspects, although it turns
out that the suspect arrested for the car-bombing, seen at the end of the long
tracking shot at the film’s opening, actually did the deed. The ends may have
appeared to justify the means. But they did not.
Fart in lift inquiry covers over the cracks
A similar line is now being taken by the perpetually thirsty
Paul Staines and his newly anointed teaboy Alex Wickham following the Sun’s revelation that Tory MP Brooks
Newmark, formerly the subject of a Sunday
Mirror splash on his sending an explicit photo to someone he thought was a
young woman, had sent another explicit photo to another young woman (this time
a real one).
But, as Captain Blackadder might have observed, there was
only one thing wrong with this: it was bollocks. For starters, it does not
explain why Wickham’s fictional creation “Sophie
Wittams” went after at least six other (then) Tory MPs. Mark Pritchard,
Nick de Bois, Charles Elphicke, Mark Reckless, Robert Jenrick and Jesse Norman
may still be looking for an explanation for that.
And unless Wickham had anything to do with the Sun’s story today, there is little point
in him citing it in his defence – although he appears to do just that. This
time, the woman concerned was a genuine presence, and so “consent” can be assumed to have been given by Newmark: no claim of
entrapment would be entertained. The means behind two stories appear to be
totally different.
This has not occurred to Staines, who declared “Stick that up your complaints line [IPSO].
Told you he was a wrong ‘un”. The Great Guido still doesn’t get it: it is
not Newmark who IPSO wish to investigate. It
is the manner of the sting on him.
Wickham is also away with the fairies on this most basic of
principles: “Hopefully now people will
start to realise the reasons behind the original investigation. Narrow
legitimate target, clear public interest”. And to that I call bullshit. The
end still does not justify means which may have breached the IPSO code – and the law.
Staines seems to believe that what his teaboy did was right:
“We knew and I believe the whips knew
what a creep with women Newmark was – he is getting psychiatric help now FFS,
we did a public service”. And, as Jon Stewart might have said, two things
here. One, nobody is defending Newmark’s conduct. That is not what is in doubt.
It is about how the Fawkes blog achieved its ends.
And two, it’s dispiriting to see that Staines and his rabble
take the same cavalier attitude to mental health issues as they did with David
Ruffley. Newmark has signed himself into psychiatric care for several weeks.
That is not something to treat lightly. The Great Guido is bang out of order. Another fine mess, once again.
"Mark Pritchard, Nick de Bois, Charles Elphicke, Mark Reckless, Robert Jenrick and Jesse Norman may still be looking for an explanation for that"
ReplyDeleteBut are the Great Guido Gang of Four claiming that "Told you he was a wrong ‘un” applies to all those targetted above?
Or are they just innocent bystanders of a fishing expedition that eventually turned up one they could use to exploit their agenda?
So did they do their "research" before or after the entrapment brought results? (The Leveson question).