Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Parsing the police | Main | Something's up »

++++Statement from Norfolk Police++++

This morning I contacted Norfolk Constabulary with a view to finding out if they had yet ascertained whether the breach at the Climatic Research Unit was a leak or a hack. I have just received a response which is frankly amazing:

Norfolk Constabulary continues its investigations into criminal offences in relation to a data breach at the University of East Anglia.  During the enquiry officers have been working in liaison with the Office of the Information Commissioner and with officers from the National Domestic Extremism Team. The UEA continues to co-operate with the enquiry however major investigations of this nature are of necessity very detailed and as a consequence can take time to reach a conclusion. It would be inappropriate to comment further at this stage.

The National Domestic Extremism Team? Words fail me.


PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (80)

I've posted this on Wattsupwiththat then came here to look at the source link, so apologies for the cross-posting -

Many of Norfolk Constabulary's top brass are Common Purpose graduates and they've resisted attempts under FOI to find out who they are.

If even half of what is claimed on the website below is true it would be totally logical for Norfolk Constabulary to call in the "Extremism Guys" to find and prosecute those trying to reveal the truth.

Jan 9, 2010 at 10:08 AM | Unregistered CommenterJockdownsouth

Norfolk police may have given you more information than you realise. From the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) website:

Can we impose penalties for breaching the Act?

We have a statutory power to impose a financial penalty on an organisation if the Information Commissioner is satisfied that:

* there has been a serious breach of one or more of the data protection principles by the organisation; and
* the breach was likely to cause substantial damage or distress.

The power to impose a financial penalty only applies if:

* the breach was deliberate; or
* the organisation knew (or should have known) that there was a risk of a breach which was likely to cause substantial damage or distress, but failed to take reasonable steps to prevent it.

This power will not come into force until we have published guidance on how it will be used. The intention is that financial penalties will only be imposed in respect of deliberate or reckless handling of personal data which seriously breaches the data protection principles.

From this (and the rest of the page) I read it as the ICO only investigates the holder of the information which in this case is the UEA. What they investigate is whether is was deliberate (eg. An internal leak) or the security surrounding the information was so poor as to be reckless. In other words it wasn't a crack team of Russian hackers it was either an internal whistleblower or the files where somewhere that an external person could access easily.

Jan 9, 2010 at 11:18 AM | Unregistered CommenterTerryS

“My.. how have the mighty fallen. Are these the same guys who forced the signing of the Magna Carta, who beat off the Spanish Armada, beat Napoleon, fought the Battle of Britain, who ruled an Empire over which the sun never set? Perhaps not”.

Richard …… forgot to mention Gido Fawkes and his gunpowder plot, credit where credit is due!

Jan 9, 2010 at 12:06 PM | Unregistered CommenterDarwinZero

Unfortunately, there is a reasonable chance the the CRU team have received some very nasty emails, and quite possibly some serious threats to their persons, and this activity would come under the remit of the extremism team.

An unfortunate side effect of the web.

Jan 9, 2010 at 12:14 PM | Unregistered Commentersteveta_uk

I say


Jan 9, 2010 at 12:32 PM | Unregistered CommenterJD

Terry S - I'm surprised he didn't ask you for a DNA sample at the same time.

Jan 9, 2010 at 12:40 PM | Unregistered Commenterasiaseen

Why is this not just a plain police investigation? The "Extremisim Unit" is generally called in only for "extreme" cases where genuine national security or official secrets are involved or where for example, animal rights activists are perceived to have been violent or threatening. Regarding "leaks", there is no supporting statute which clearly defines whistleblowers or leakers to have broken any law unless it is a breach of the Official Secrets Act, and nearly all previous arrests or investigations have evoked this Act.

Another worrying aspect is that the Climategate e-mails mention the seeking of "advice" from the UK Information Commissioner possibly in the context of resisting FOI requests. I find this extremely suspicious. Was Jones merely asking for advice on what his obligations were, or was he seeking advice on how to avoid servicing requests? This is crucial to know because any collusion between the CRU and Information Commissioner would be an extremely serious breach of public trust.

Jan 9, 2010 at 1:29 PM | Unregistered CommenterHotandCold

This sounds ominous. I wonder what the UK and the EU are going to come up with in the way of a new law to protect their precious UN, IPCC, and AGW theories. You can bet we are not going to like it.

It's way past time to wake up all of the world's citizens and get them to see what is really going on. It ain't much yet, but I am trying to do my part through this Global Freedom Day Project.

It may already be too late to save the citizens of the EU.

Jan 9, 2010 at 3:41 PM | Unregistered CommenterJohnAZ

So if I understand what is going on here. Hitler was not killed by his own hand in the bunker back in 1945? He is living in the UK and running everything? You may not be fighting him this time because you are all so old now... at least you still write some good posts. Who wrote the first letter to Hitler, to cease and desist; Neville? Time wounds all heels.

Jan 9, 2010 at 3:48 PM | Unregistered CommenterTom

Anyone actually made a formal complaint to the police about alleged FOI lawbreaking, etc. yet?

Clif C (07:52:45 Jan 9)

Jan 9, 2010 at 4:13 PM | Unregistered CommenterClif C

Redefining "peer reviewed literature"? No need, just call it "pal reviewed literature" henceforth.

Jan 9, 2010 at 5:38 PM | Unregistered Commenterc.w. schoneveld

The political elites seems to have learned a lot from fascism and George Sorel on how to define "social myths" - the creation of the reality of the masses - through brutal action.

Jan 9, 2010 at 8:14 PM | Unregistered CommenterNyx

Richard …… forgot to mention Gido Fawkes and his gunpowder plot, credit where credit is due! January 9, 2010 | DarwinZero

True - and to think, though we even celebrate it here, I didn't remember, didn't remember, the 5th of November.

But I wonder if the happy chance of catching a guy (the Guy), trying to blow up Parliament, is in the same league as the battle of Waterloo, or the Charge of the Light Brigade?

Will the names of the failed shoe bomber or the failed Nigerian bomber live in posterity? I've forgotten them already.

Jan 9, 2010 at 8:21 PM | Unregistered CommenterRichard

Seems to me I remember Jim Hansen climbing cooling towers along with the people trying to shut down power stations a bit ago. Maybe the AGW tribes are on the local watch lists!

Jan 9, 2010 at 9:05 PM | Unregistered CommenterIan

Hot and Cold above -

"Another worrying aspect is that the Climategate e-mails mention the seeking of "advice" from the UK Information Commissioner possibly in the context of resisting FOI requests."

yes, agreed. This runs absolutely contrary to the stated purpose and intent of FOI/EIR.

Jan 9, 2010 at 10:32 PM | Unregistered Commenternot banned yet

The British police are absolutely useless at best and at worst like the Stasi under this present government. I actually know someone who works/worked for the Norfolk Constabulary and they have now found out after years what a lying bunch of shites they are. However this is a concerning but staggering indictment of just how crap they have become in supporting left wing policies dictated to them by the Labour Party

This latest indictment of their corruption when it comes to doing what they are meant to do comes from today’s Telegraph

A whole new slant on Klass warfare

Jan 10, 2010 at 2:14 AM | Unregistered CommenterLawrence Jenkins

For a look at what the Home Office mandarins drop on authors when we really piss them off go look at:

follow the links and watch the video of nazi book burnings.

Luty is something of a canary in the coal mine

There is plenty of international precedent for going after bloggers too

Jan 10, 2010 at 2:28 AM | Unregistered CommenterWe seek the truth

I hope the police dogs don't freeze their goolies off, considering East Anglia's current weather.

Jan 10, 2010 at 8:11 AM | Unregistered Commenterandycanuck

January 9, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterJohnAZ

This sounds ominous. I wonder what the UK and the EU are going to come up with in the way of a new law to protect their precious UN, IPCC, and AGW theories. You can bet we are not going to like it.
... It may already be too late to save the citizens of the EU.

I'd rather not be "saved" the USA way (Iraq, Afganistan, Cuba, Vietnam to name a few) thanks very much!

The police are looking at misuse of computer crimes (check it out using google) i.e. hacking or accessing information to which access not been given. They are not equiped to look at veracity of scientific research.

The National Domestic Extremism Team (as others have said) will most likely be looking at threatening emails sent to CRU personnel. They are not equiped to look at veracity of scientific research.

As I mentioned on another Blog, hotmail addresses registered to "minnie mouse" do not hide your identity - if you check the view message source in hotmail you will find the ip address of the sender. This is traceable to a users physical address unless anonymised.

Jan 10, 2010 at 1:55 PM | Unregistered Commenterthefordprefect

Jeff Id wrote: "They've contacted me as well."

And did you tell them the truth?

Jan 10, 2010 at 3:45 PM | Unregistered CommenterHank

Well, I guess that rules "the Russians" out.

Jan 10, 2010 at 3:58 PM | Unregistered Commenterscp

"Domestic extremism" - "dissent.

Yet another New Labour catch all phrase. There is no offence named "domestic extremism". There is no legislation defining what is and is not "domestic extremist", yet suddenly we have a "domestic extremist" squad foisted on us.

New Labour at their very nastiest. Get the state police in the stir things up.

Jan 10, 2010 at 9:26 PM | Unregistered CommenterJeremy Poynton

January 10, 2010 | thefordprefect
"I'd rather not be "saved" the USA way (Iraq, Afganistan, Cuba, Vietnam to name a few) thanks very much!"

So, thefordprefect has no problem with brutal dictatorships that abuse their own citizens and attempt to export thier style of government by both armed force and terrorist action but has a real problem with attempting to contain these regimes. Take your anti-Americanism and stuff it,ford. You aren't even aware that you are occupying the moral low ground.

Jan 10, 2010 at 10:55 PM | Unregistered CommenterRobert E. Phelan

OK, let's get the thread back on topic shall we?

Jan 11, 2010 at 7:49 AM | Registered CommenterBishop Hill

It's not clear to me what's wrong with bringing in this resource as long as their investigation is fair and by the book. Knowing how this information was disseminated is relevant, especially since it would be very telling if the release was a leak and not a hack. This group apparently has the technical expertise to follow the data trail so their involvement is understandable on that basis.

If this means that the focus of any investigation is solely the source of the leak and not the integrity of the underlying data (what was hidden, what was withheld, what was scrubbed?), then there is a problem. But there's no evidence of that so far.

Jan 11, 2010 at 3:10 PM | Unregistered CommenterDavid L.

"National Domestic.."

Isn't that a tautology?

Jan 13, 2010 at 10:02 AM | Unregistered CommenterJames P

In a lengthy academic paper, President Obama's regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein, argued the U.S. government should ban "conspiracy theorizing."

Among the beliefs Sunstein would ban is advocating that the theory of global warming is a deliberate fraud.

So the view AGW denialism as sedition.

Jan 15, 2010 at 4:17 PM | Unregistered Commenteranon

USA PATRIOT Act: United & Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools to Intercept & Obstruct Terrorism
Am Erica: i Am; eternal world ruler(fem.) name root....We live in the time spoken of in II Timothy 3 & II Peter 2. Read your Bible. Light & Darkness. I never would have thought this possibe fifty years ago and yet here we are. Truth or Lie?

Jan 15, 2010 at 8:09 PM | Unregistered CommenterTom

Sorry, I left out the R; it stands for Required

Jan 15, 2010 at 8:13 PM | Unregistered CommenterTom

The CRU works closely with the MET (the British Weather Service) which is part of the UK Department of Defense. The British consider climate change a national security issue, so it is natural that they will be investigating who hacked into a computer that holds information about their national security,

May 18, 2010 at 3:38 AM | Unregistered CommenterSnapple

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>