Is Lord Levy lying through his back teeth?

Sabretache Blog

The report was actually in Monday's Times and I blogged it then.

Funny how no other media outlet has picked up on it though. They are clearly nervous about the whole thing. There's also the small matter of a possible black-arts project to facilitate claims that the Noble Lord's case has been thus prejudiced. It is potentially the biggest fraud case in 50 years and the masters of spin and agenda setting will undoubtedly be working overtime and bringing all their guile and cunning to bear.

It's called cooperating fully with the police I believe.

Hang on. Are you saying that if I'm arrested for some reason, theatrically or otherwise, I just have to say "no comment" or refuse to answer, and the police will move on? Or does one have to be a peer or a crony for that rule to apply?

John Sandell - no, you don't have to say anything when questioned by the police. However, whereas before no inference could be drawn from that in Court, Tone & Co changed the law to allow the Court to draw a negative interpretation of your silence, ie, that you efuse to answer because you're guilty.

Petard, hoist maybe?

It's a very good week to hide bad news isn't it? I mean, Who wants to know about Lord Levy when peeps are being murdered in the mid-east?

Extraordinary that he would claim to be co-operating fully and then stonewall. He really must be very worried indeed.

And this:

MPs loyal to Mr Blair are eager to portray the arrest of Lord Levy as a theatrical stunt. They fear there will be a temptation for the police to stage a similar event with the Prime Minister.

Does that mean MPs loyal to Blair fear he'll be arrested too? Can't see what else it could mean. Or is that wishful thinking on my part?

Could this just be a delaying tactic to avoid embarrasment at the Labour Party conference in September when there is a possibility that Blair may announce that he is stepping down and wouldn't want to give the impression that the Police investigation influenced his decision?

Davide,

I don't think this is a delaying tactic in preparation for the conference season.

I believe that the last thing that went through the upper reaches of the Labour Government when their colleagues were getting their collars felt were what the party members might think.

To me this has all the hallmarks of an organisation that has been caught red-handed and is now stonewalling to prevent any of the truth from reaching the public arena.

The fact that we have been spun a story (told what may have been a pack of lies) about Levey's "cooperation" feels like someone trying to create breathing space while they try to out-think the enemy.

Charge them

You do not have to say anything but it may harm your defence if you do not mention now something you later rely on in court.

What I want to know is if Tony Blair is 101% behind the police, like he was when innocent men were being shot and beaten up in Forest Gate.

I quite like the idea of a theatrical arrest. "And now its time for our special guest star. Yates of the Yard! Let's hear it for the boys in blue ladies and gentlemen!" Then he'd presumably pop up on a trapdoor in a cloud of smoke and incite the crowd to shout "Tony's behind it, err you!"

Alternatively, as the Lords are big on ceremony perhaps there could be a special formal procedure for arresting one. We could maybe have a suitable commentary from one of those the BBC get to fawn over royalty. "And now we see the ceremonial ball and chain of office being clipped to his ankle. The traditional handcuffs are ready and waiting as the arresting officers slip the ancient nylon blanket of no publicity over his head and bundle him roughly into the symbolic blue van with no windows."

I think it would make a marvellous spectacle, sure to bring in the tourists.