| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
lamps
Forum Admin
United Kingdom
48 Posts |
 Posted - 01/11/2007 : 12:43:00
|
Live TV coverage meeting blast for police
By Edward Chadwick
Landlords have blasted police who failed to attend a meeting to discuss the controversial screening of live TV coverage of football matches in pubs.
Licensees across Bolton have formed a group to fight "unfair" seizures of satellite equipment which they use to show games not screened on UK stations.
Police and the company Media Protection Services (MPS), which represents broadcasters Sky and Setanta, claim the equipment allows pubs to screen games illegally.
Despite several court cases, the law remains unclear and Landlords Against Media Protection Services (LAMPS) invited police to explain the situation at their second meeting at Hardy Hall, Little Lever.
More than 60 licensees attended the meeting, chaired by Mike Birchill whose company Foreign Satellite Systems installs the equipment in pubs.
Mr Birchill said: "We've made several approaches to the police licensing department but they have declined our invitation."
He said officers had again been invited to the group's next meeting on November 22.
Ivan Whittaker, landlord of The Volunteer, Darcy Lever, said: "We are not any clearer on the situation. It's still a grey area.
"This is a national issue but for some reason MPS seem to have targeted Bolton."
However, PC Garry Lee, licensing officer for Bolton, said police involvement in the situation ended once the evidence was handed over to MPS: "There is nothing else I can tell the landlords that they don't know already. There will not be a representative at the meeting on November 22."
Bolton South-East MP Brian Iddon had hoped to get written clarification on the legal situation from culture secretary James Purnell in time for last week's meeting but said he was yet to receive a reply.
Cllr Sean Hornby, who represents Little Lever, is backing the landlords and has written to PC Lee and head of Bolton Council's licensing unit Andrew Fisher to ask that they attend the next meeting.
He said: "The last meeting would have been far more productive had Bolton's licensing officer been in attendance. Questions now remain unanswered."
Bolton evening news 31st Oct 2007
|
|
|
Head Lamp
Administrator
12 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2007 : 23:39:06
|
At a Pubwatch meeting last Tuesday, Bolton's licensing, Officer PC Garry Lee, refused to answer any questions relating to the raids on Bolton Pubs. He has also refused point blank, to attend any of the LAMPS meetings.
He says he cannot tell us anything we do not already know.
Well, here are a few questions we would like answers to.......
On what grounds did Garry Lee apply for the search warrants?
Why is Garry Lee's name on the search warrants as the complainant if the Police are not involved?
Why has Garry Lee given Seized evidence to a third party (Media Protection sevices) when it is obvious that this third party has a biased interest in the outcome of these raids?
How can the courts be sure that any evidence seized will not have been tainted by allowing this evidence to be kept by a biased third party?
These are just a few of many questions that we would like to put to Garry Lee.
And the big question?
WHY IS GARRY LEE AVOIDING ANSWERING LAMPS' QUESTIONS?
The police have a duty to act within the law and they also have a duty to be seenacting within the law.
|
 |
|
|
digidude
Starting Member
30 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2007 : 14:51:29
|
If any equipment the police illegally sieze is 'evidence' than as soon as they hand it over to MPS then that 'evidence' is no longer admissable in ANY court for any sort of prosecution what so ever. 'Evidence' has to be siezed in connection with a criminal act (or alledged) and has to be logged and photographed BEFORE being moved. This then has to be placed in a sealed evidence container and the serial number of the seal logged. This seized, sealed, searial numbered and logged item of evidence then has to be kept safe by 'the crown' to ensure nothing about it gets contaminated, compromised or doctored. If the evidence requires further investigating then a totaly new independant party is brought in to do so.
If the police catch a drug dealer with his 'stash' do they give this 'evidence' to another drug dealer to check what it is?
Garry Lee is refusing to answer any questions or attend any meetings as he is just a puppet, he has no idea why he is carrying out these actions in this way except that what he is part of is wrong, when all this comes out into the public will he be seen as trying to uphold the law or as another corrupt copper? If he says nothing then he cant really be labeled as either.
Click here for the only digital information site you will ever need |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Bolton Evening News 30/10/2007
