What a tosser

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42151148
https://news.sky.com/story/damian-green ... d-11150979

Police said "thousands" of thumbnail images of legal pornography were on it.

Creepy use of the word 'legal'

Looks like more transparant spinned up sleaze. Stories of politicians being overly sexed with maybe a few traces of coke on the Westminister bog seats will get Joe publics indignation but not much more.

Brand and Clarkson type celebs can inform us that, power is an aphrodisiac, and we, the plebs, just wouldn't understand.
We can then shrug our shoulders and get back to work.

It can go alongside stories of politicians getting the boot because they touched someones knee a decade ago. Or that, these claims are being looked into after pressure from the Guido Fawkes group.

What kind of imbecile still trusts the BBC?

I assume the use of 'legal' is to make it clear that it wasn't child pornography.

What news channel do you trust Boiledclaret?

Just for balance like

Utterly bizarre that someone brings the BBC into this.

UpTheBeehole wrote:Utterly bizarre that someone brings the BBC into this.

It's written by the BBC.

Lancaster, I don't trust the BBC after the Saville/Rochdale/Rotherham cover up's. I think their style of news speak is extremely suspicious. Doesn't mean that I'm trolling through 'Info wars' though. I'm aware that everythings a minefield of spin/disinfo/ controlled alternative media etc.

This isn't even a newsworthy story if its 'legal' images. So why do they need to put it out there in the first place?

We'll probably have to agree to disagree but I just think the media are trying to put this type of thing into the publics conscious to cover up something a lot more serious.

Lancasterclaret wrote:What news channel do you trust Boiledclaret?

Just for balance like

News that tells it like it is and doesn't worry about wishy-washy things like reliable sourcing. Breitbart hasn't had to apologise for anything so they must be more accurate and trustworthy than the failing BBC who have.

This isn't even a newsworthy story if its 'legal' images. So why do they need to put it out there in the first place?

This is the key here (and I fully agree with you)

Its being pushed as a story by the likes of Guido Fawkes, who don't like Damien Green

And has already been said, if its not illegal, then what business is it of ours?

boiledclaret wrote:It's written by the BBC.

Lancaster, I don't trust the BBC after the Saville/Rochdale/Rotherham cover up's. I think their style of news speak is extremely suspicious. Doesn't mean that I'm trolling through 'Info wars' though. I'm aware that everythings a minefield of spin/disinfo/ controlled alternative media etc.

This isn't even a newsworthy story if its 'legal' images. So why do they need to put it out there in the first place?

We'll probably have to agree to disagree but I just think the media are trying to put this type of thing into the publics conscious to cover up something a lot more serious.

Was the Sky News report written by the BBC?

What about the story in the Telegraph, did the BBC write that too?

The Metro?

Independent?

Guardian?

Blooming heck, they must be busy over at the BBC writing all these stories for other news outlets

Do you think Green will get a golden handshake?

Lancasterclaret wrote:This is the key here (and I fully agree with you)

Its being pushed as a story by the likes of Guido Fawkes, who don't like Damien Green

And has already been said, if its not illegal, then what business is it of ours?

A lot of jobs would treat viewing pornography on a work machine as gross misconduct so I'd say it probably is relevant. Although by all accounts it was touted round to the papers a few years back and no-one was interested then.

However, the issue seems to be that there isn't any real evidence supporting this other than verbal representations, there is currently a lack of real evidence.

Lancasterclaret wrote:This is the key here (and I fully agree with you)

Its being pushed as a story by the likes of Guido Fawkes, who don't like Damien Green

And has already been said, if its not illegal, then what business is it of ours?

Perhaps because he's been doing this on public time and from his public office. That's an instant dismissal in pretty much any workplace - Government has a strict code of conduct and this blasts right through it.

Aggi/Babylon I get that, but they haven't being able to prove its his computer I think.

Deleted

Lancasterclaret wrote:Its being pushed as a story by the likes of Guido Fawkes, who don't like Damien Green

I sincerely hope you're right. Your theory involves an adult looking at other adults in their birthday suits. At least that means no kids involved.

I've no idea Boiled, but I'm one of these weirdos these days

I believe in Innocence till proven guilty

Lancasterclaret wrote:And has already been said, if its not illegal, then what business is it of ours?

I dont have an issue with anyone viewing or watching legal pornography of any kind in their own time and on their own devices. However, in this case, the chap is using a work's PC and is likely to be viewing the content in work time. HE is a public figure who is working for our government, and as such we are kind of his employer in this instance, hence the need to make the public aware of the issue.

I also have a problem with using a government PC for this - porn sites are well known for being a source of viral/malware infections and the thought of a government PC being infected with some spyware does make me wonder whether he actually understood how naive his actions are whilst fapping away to the porn he was viewing - which again brings into question his judgement as an MP.

From what I hear they have proven that it was his machine, in his office, and that he was logged on and emails were sent from his account at the same time as the images were being viewed. Can they prove 100% that it was Green at the keyboard? Probably not, but it seems pretty conclusive.

As for its relevance, I'd say it's perfectly relevant. I'd imagine there are very few jobs where viewing porn on company time, using company equipment, while hooked up to the company network aren't sackable. For a government minister, an employee of the public, it is very much in the public interest that those basic standards are seen to be applied. Aside from that, his job is based around dealing with important issues on behalf of the country. If his judgement can be demonstrated to be is so impaired that he thinks watching porn while doing it is acceptable then he is clearly unfit for office.

Bacchus wrote:From what I hear they have proven that it was his machine, in his office, and that he was logged on and emails were sent from his account at the same time as the images were being viewed. Can they prove 100% that it was Green at the keyboard? Probably not, but it seems pretty conclusive.

As for its relevance, I'd say it's perfectly relevant. I'd imagine there are very few jobs where viewing porn on company time, using company equipment, while hooked up to the company network aren't sackable. For a government minister, an employee of the public, it is very much in the public interest that those basic standards are seen to be applied. Aside from that, his job is based around dealing with important issues on behalf of the country. If his judgement can be demonstrated to be is so impaired that he thinks watching porn while doing it is acceptable then he is clearly unfit for office.

"The computer was in Mr Green's office, on his desk, logged in, his account, his name," said Mr Lewis, who at the time was working as a computer forensics examiner for SO15, the counter-terrorism command.
"In between browsing pornography, he was sending emails from his account, his personal account, reading documents... it was ridiculous to suggest anybody else could have done it."
Similar material had also been accessed on Mr Green's laptop, he claimed.

Police are investigating Mr Lewis now, according to the Telegraph.

If its proved its his, and its his work machine, and he was on it during work time*, then no question, he's got to go btw.

*and I think this is the issue, being an MP is a long job, and its not 9-5 so what constitutes work time?

Just for clarity, it was before he was in government. Doesn't change the fact that if true it's something that pretty much everyone else would get the sack for.

Our firewall at work doesn't let me access Facebook let alone Pornhub. Which is probably for the best.

Lancasterclaret wrote:Police are investigating Mr Lewis now, according to the Telegraph.

If its proved its his, and its his work machine, and he was on it during work time*, then no question, he's got to go btw.

*and I think this is the issue, being an MP is a long job, and its not 9-5 so what constitutes work time?

Maybe it wasn't in work time. It sounds like he knocked off early.

brigante wrote:Our firewall at work doesn't let me access Facebook let alone Pornhub. Which is probably for the best.

And any machines that are linked to a Government network are similarly firewalled - probably even more so - so I expect that this machine in question isn;t an official machine (it's not clear). What is clear though is that it was located in official premises and based on the testimony it's hugely unlikely Green wasn't the person accessing the material.

Question is whether this was done on official premises or during work hours or not.

That's the issue here. If material has been accessed from official premises or whilst working then I'd say it's gross misconduct

Lancasterclaret wrote:Police are investigating Mr Lewis now, according to the Telegraph.

If its proved its his, and its his work machine, and he was on it during work time*, then no question, he's got to go btw.

*and I think this is the issue, being an MP is a long job, and its not 9-5 so what constitutes work time?

I'd be amazed if it was a work machine Lancaster - if so he'd already be gone. That stuff is locked down to official accounts etc.

I'm at work, looking at the following on the internet:

• UptheClarets
  Amazon
  AFC Fylde (just out of curiosity)
  A plumbing website

All of which is legal, none of which is remotely related to my job and all of which is personal and therefore could result in my sacking. And not one shiny sh!tting piece of it is any the Plod's business.

Technically, if Damien Green had made an Ocado order from his work computer it would have been against the Parliamentary code. And, again, it would be none of the police's business.

Personally, I don't care if my local MP scuffs one out in his parliamentary office. If that's how he relieves stress rather than knocking seven shades out of his kids or beating his wife, or trying to seduce his secretary and destroying his family's lives in the process, then he's similar to 99 per cent of other red-blooded males, me included.

I seem to remember reading a report a while back that the House of Commons IT system was horribly out of date in terms of firewalls, access control, etc so this may well have been an official machine.

Realistically though I'd say it's a HR issue, not a police issue.

Sausage wrote: If that's how he relieves stress rather than knocking seven shades out of his kids

Like Damian Green's mate Craig Whittaker, the dishonourable member for the Calder Valley

https://www.halifaxcourier.co.uk/news/n ... -1-4213896

Sausage wrote:I'm at work, looking at the following on the internet:

• UptheClarets
  Amazon
  AFC Fylde (just out of curiosity)
  A plumbing website

All of which is legal, none of which is remotely related to my job and all of which is personal and therefore could result in my sacking. And not one shiny sh!tting piece of it is any the Plod's business.

Technically, if Damien Green had made an Ocado order from his work computer it would have been against the Parliamentary code. And, again, it would be none of the police's business.

Personally, I don't care if my local MP scuffs one out in his parliamentary office. If that's how he relieves stress rather than knocking seven shades out of his kids or beating his wife, or trying to seduce his secretary and destroying his family's lives in the process, then he's similar to 99 per cent of other red-blooded males, me included.

So you don’t think that what he is alleged to have done is misconduct in a public office which is a criminal offence?

There's a few things about this story that seem strange.

Firstly, the bloke who's saying that Green had this stuff on his computer - surely he is not allowed to disclose this private information in the public domain? Why is he doing it? Surely he is going to be in trouble.

Secondly, Green is denying it and has continued to deny it. This must mean that he's telling the truth or that he's really naive - because it is going to be a million times worse for him if it comes out as true when you've denied it for the past few months. If he admitted it was true straight away I'm sure he would have to resign but it could have been fairly quickly forgotten - now Green is inviting a big investigation and is creating a media circus that will only cause the govt more damage.

But then again, I suppose it isn't as bad as running through a field of wheat.........

PaintYorkClaretnBlue wrote:So you don’t think that what he is alleged to have done is misconduct in a public office which is a criminal offence?

I wouldn't think so.

Imagine if, in the late 80s it came to light that a minister had some jazz mags in his office ten years previously. Would anyone give a toss?

Lancasterclaret wrote:I've no idea Boiled, but I'm one of these weirdos these days
I believe in Innocence till proven guilty

This hits the nail on the head ... or at least it should. However, in these febrile, tribal times in politics and society all reason and justice seem to go out of the window. There are few things worse than being accused of something you haven't done - the result can be catastrophic - ask the family of Carl Sargeant AM for Flintshire! Today people are often accused, judged and convicted before due process is allowed to take place and this is wrong.

The ex policeman is recounting this as a matter of public interest. I think that’s fair enough as Green is a minister, who is denying the allegation. We the public should be allowed to see how honest or not so our most senior politicians are.

PaintYorkClaretnBlue wrote:So you don’t think that what he is alleged to have done is misconduct in a public office which is a criminal offence?

No, I don't. And if you carry out even a cursory bit of research on the matter you'll realise how ridiculous is it to suggest he's guilty of such an offence.

If you want chapter and verse on the subject, I suggest you read the judgment at the following link: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2004/868.html Para 44 makes for interesting reading:

"A public official culpably misconducts himself if he wilfully and intentionally neglects or fails to perform a duty to which he is subject by virtue of his office or employment without reasonable excuse or justification. A public official also culpably misconducts himself if, with an improper motive, he wilfully and intentionally exercises a power or discretion which he has by virtue of his office or employment without reasonable excuse of justification. Subject to two qualifications, this statement of the elements of the office accords with the respondent's submission."

Knocking one out on a work computer is neither illegal nor an abuse of the power conferred to him as either an MP or minister.

Sausage wrote:No, I don't. And if you carry out even a cursory bit of research on the matter you'll realise how ridiculous is it to suggest he's guilty of such an offence.

If you want chapter and verse on the subject, I suggest you read the judgment at the following link: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2004/868.html Para 44 makes for interesting reading:

"A public official culpably misconducts himself if he wilfully and intentionally neglects or fails to perform a duty to which he is subject by virtue of his office or employment without reasonable excuse or justification. A public official also culpably misconducts himself if, with an improper motive, he wilfully and intentionally exercises a power or discretion which he has by virtue of his office or employment without reasonable excuse of justification. Subject to two qualifications, this statement of the elements of the office accords with the respondent's submission."

Knocking one out on a work computer is neither illegal nor an abuse of the power conferred to him as either an MP or minister.

Ok, we’ll agree to disagree. I can just imagine the reaction of MPs if another public servant was caught with his pants down, so to speak.

It’s fair game for nurses, police, firefighters etc to use work computers to access porn during work hours is it?

"he was logged on and emails were sent from his account at the same time as the images were being viewed."

Tossing and emailing at the same time - impressive !!!!

It's a sackable offence but it's not illegal and therefore not misconduct in public office. You do realise that you're talking about a criminal offence with a maximum sentence of life imprisonment? For accessing legal pornography?

AndrewJB wrote:The ex policeman is recounting this as a matter of public interest. I think that’s fair enough as Green is a minister, who is denying the allegation. We the public should be allowed to see how honest or not so our most senior politicians are.

Sounds like you've already made your mind up. The ex-policeman in his interview on BBC alludes to the fact that he can't categorically say that Damian Green either put the images on line or accessed them. Regardless of how likely something 'may seem', this can and should only be validated by due process not the baying mob.

Sausage wrote:I'm at work, looking at the following on the internet:

• UptheClarets
  Amazon
  AFC Fylde (just out of curiosity)
  A plumbing website

All of which is legal, none of which is remotely related to my job and all of which is personal and therefore could result in my sacking. And not one shiny sh!tting piece of it is any the Plod's business.

Technically, if Damien Green had made an Ocado order from his work computer it would have been against the Parliamentary code. And, again, it would be none of the police's business.

Personally, I don't care if my local MP scuffs one out in his parliamentary office. If that's how he relieves stress rather than knocking seven shades out of his kids or beating his wife, or trying to seduce his secretary and destroying his family's lives in the process, then he's similar to 99 per cent of other red-blooded males, me included.

Do you know what the parliamentary policy is around personal internet use of office computers? I’d be surprised if it extended to not using Amazon or Ocado, a lot of organisations, including in government, allow that sort of personal use. It will definitely preclude looking at porn though.

martin_p wrote:Do you know what the parliamentary policy is around personal internet use of office computers? I’d be surprised if it extended to not using Amazon or Ocado, a lot of organisations, including in government, allow that sort of personal use. It will definitely preclude looking at porn though.

See Page 12 of the Members Handbook: https://www.parliament.uk/documents/com ... ndbook.pdf

No mention of porn. Admittedly no mention of Ocado either. Or Amazon. Or any site where you could legitimately purchase something for private use that might be the norm for one person, riqué to another, and downright offensive to someone else. Would buying a dildo from the Anne Summers website be an abuse of the code? Who knows?

The whole reason Damian Green had his computer confiscated was because he'd been leaking sensitive government information.

He's a full on w*nker

Sausage wrote:It's a sackable offence but it's not illegal and therefore not misconduct in public office. You do realise that you're talking about a criminal offence with a maximum sentence of life imprisonment? For accessing legal pornography?

Is he performing his duty, ie doing his job whilst he is looking at porn?

PaintYorkClaretnBlue wrote:Is he performing his duty, ie doing his job whilst he is looking at porn?

I refer you to my earlier answer. Was he doing his job? Clearly no. But in the time he was looking at bongo on the net, did anything untoward happen within the remit of his parliamentary responsibilities that wouldn't otherwise have happened? No. Hence it's possibly a sackable offence for misuse of parliamentary equipment but it is not misconduct in public office.

But if you want to lock him up - which is what you're advocating by calling for a charge of misconduct in public office - then please do tell how you would a) define the criminal act; b) grade the seriousness of the offence; and c) decide the sentence.

Rick_Muller wrote:I dont have an issue with anyone viewing or watching legal pornography of any kind in their own time and on their own devices. However, in this case, the chap is using a work's PC and is likely to be viewing the content in work time. HE is a public figure who is working for our government, and as such we are kind of his employer in this instance, hence the need to make the public aware of the issue.

I also have a problem with using a government PC for this - porn sites are well known for being a source of viral/malware infections and the thought of a government PC being infected with some spyware does make me wonder whether he actually understood how naive his actions are whilst fapping away to the porn he was viewing - which again brings into question his judgement as an MP.

Hi Rick, weren't there some new laws concerning pornography being discussed in parliament around this time? If so, I'd want all MPS to be knowledgeable about the proposed legislation they were discussing and passing into law. So, maybe what was being viewed was "work related."

In terms of "employment" - the thing with parliament is it is a workplace, but the MPs aren't employees - and, until last few weeks their assistants haven't been employed other than directly by the MPs. Hence the absence of HR training on the "does and don't" of working relationships. Yes, of course, we all want our MPs to be properly qualified to do their jobs - and this goes a long way beyond how they relate to each other and the people they have contact with.

I understand the retired police office mention that emails were being sent in Green's name on the same computer. I guess a lot of us are familiar with giving access to an assistant to deal with emails and other work on "our" computer - and, it wouldn't surprise me if many MPs "share" their passwords with members of their staff.

Agree, the vulnerability to virus/malware - and, perhaps, if the porn pics were continuously refreshing, it may be as simple as the user (who, maybe, viewed the site for parliamentary research) had no idea that the site was still live or how to switch it off.

I've no idea. But, it would be great if the media reporting could cover some of these questions.

Paul, always a pleasure to discuss things with you on here as you are often open minded and have a good balanced viewpoint.

The scenario you describe is entirely possible, but I would be wary whether he was “investigating” anything. As someone who has had to do this type of thing in the past, there are clear guidelines about declaring what you are doing and why, and recording what you are doing.

The defence of giving his password is also not necessarily valid as this breaches any code of connection agreements he will have been made aware of - that’s not to say it didn’t play out like that, but he would be naive to think it was acceptable for the very reason we are discussing it.

Sausage wrote:See Page 12 of the Members Handbook: https://www.parliament.uk/documents/com ... ndbook.pdf

No mention of porn. Admittedly no mention of Ocado either. Or Amazon. Or any site where you could legitimately purchase something for private use that might be the norm for one person, riqué to another, and downright offensive to someone else. Would buying a dildo from the Anne Summers website be an abuse of the code? Who knows?

It doesn’t mention porn explicitly, but it’ll be covered under the term ‘indecent’ whether legal or not. Buying stuff online is fine, although admittedly buying stuff from
Ann Summers would be a grey area, but that’s not what he’s done so not particularly relevant.

He’s watched a bit of porn. Big deal.

Two kinds of people say they have never watched internet porn at work. Those without internet access, and those who tell lies.

The images that police found included several pictures of one man trying to screw an entire country.

[quote="bobinho"...people say they have never watched internet porn at work.[/quote]

I think most people would get the bums rush from their employers for this. It also brings into question the judgement of someone in this level of authority.

Damian Green would face very strong competition from Boris Johnson as "liar in chief" so better he be labelled as "head of porn".

Theresa May is so weak that she can be threatened by any parliamentary colleague not to take effective action for fear of a leadership challenge.