Avon & Somerset Chief Constable in High Court on Tues 16 Jun
south west |
policing |
news report
Tuesday June 16, 2009 02:47
by Tony Gosling

Jim Bates says it could be the biggest police scandal this country has ever seen
Bates: "The evidence I have collected over the six years since I first became involved in Operation ORE is extremely sensitive and undoubtedly includes information that the police (particularly CEOP) would prefer not to see revealed. It is likely that this evidence will eventually lead to exposure of the biggest police scandal that this country has ever seen."

Jim Bates
Original URL: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/10/ore_case/
Bates accuses porn cops of misleading public
Day of reckoning in Ore cases draws nearer
By John Ozimek
Posted in Policing, 10th June 2009 12:38 GMT
Live Event: TechNet Virtual Conference - 19th June 2009
Jim Bates, once recognised as one of the country’s leading computer forensic experts, has made the extraordinary claim that senior police officers in Avon & Somerset and in the Met’s Child Exploitation Online Protection Team (CEOP) have deliberately stirred up and misled public opinion, in an effort to distract attention from a scandal that could soon engulf them.
In a statement to the Reg Bates says that he is now going public unwillingly, but that the level of misinformation being fed to the national media by Avon & Somerset Chief Constable Colin Port is so significant that he has little option but to provide some balance.
Bates expresses the view that despite a long and distinguished career as a witness for the prosecution, his growing concerns over the quality of police forensics work eventually led to his exclusion from the inner circle. This was followed by "intimidation and bullying by the police and some of their misguided supporters", leading eventually to his conviction for perjury in respect of his academic qualifications.
The current controversy hinges on the status of hard copy images and hard drives seized by Avon and Somerset Police in September 2008: last month a court ruled that the seizure had been illegal, and that the material should be returned, in part to Jim Bates, in part to independent experts.
This was followed by some very high profile media comment by the Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset, to the effect that he would rather go to prison than hand the material over.
Bates now claims that he is "aware (and will prove) that those images had been "exhaustively" examined (unlawfully) by Avon and Somerset police in September 2008 and were identified as being within active and archived case".
Therefore, he goes on, Mr Port has either been "seriously misled by his own officers", or presented a misleading and "emotive story for public consumption".
Bates speculates that a number of elements are finally coming together. First, he observes that preliminary investigation of the drives relating to the case that sparked this train of events provided evidence that might have secured an acquittal: police actions (including their decision to apply for a warrant to a magistrate rather than a judge) disrupted his ability to present that evidence.
He also believes that these events finally link to fall-out from Operation Ore - perhaps the largest single operation by police against collectors of child porn in the UK - just as the likelihood of a class action against the police in respect of Ore cases nears the appeal courts. His view is that the investigation was hopelessly compromised by the presence of credit card fraud, and that a high proportion of the convictions were unduly influenced by a police tendency to interpret the evidence to fit their preconceptions.
"The biggest police scandal this country has ever seen"?
Bates told us:
The evidence I have collected over the six years since I first became involved in Operation ORE is extremely sensitive and undoubtedly includes information that the police (particularly CEOP) would prefer not to see revealed. It is likely that this evidence will eventually lead to exposure of the biggest police scandal that this country has ever seen.
Thus it appears that this may be a last ditch attempt by the police to cover up possible incompetence (or worse) by Avon and Somerset police and the shortcomings of Operation ORE. Colin Port may have been persuaded to make his stand on alleged child pornography to cloud the issues and retain the illegally obtained data.
I also feel that the recent support for [Colin Port’s] position offered by Jim Gamble of CEOP is extremely interesting given that Mr Gamble headed the Operation ORE enquiry and has more to lose than most when the appalling shambles is eventually exposed.
He concludes:
The relevant facts will be presented to Senior Judges at the High Court during the contempt proceedings scheduled for 16th June. Their decision is what counts, not the unsupported, misleading, inaccurate and emotive utterances of an embattled Senior Police officer.
The Register has asked the relevant police organisations for comment. Avon & Somerset have declined. A spokeswoman for CEOP stated that the allegations of credit card fraud were not new.
CEOP also provided the following statement:
Within the UK we put child welfare first. We are duty-bound to establish an investigation where there is an indication that children may have suffered abuse.
During the course of Operation Ore, more than 130 children have been safeguarded and over 2,500 perpetrators held to account. 700 people have been cautioned, meaning that they have accepted their guilt and are now on the sex offenders register.
Assessments came to the UK, cases were analysed and then passed to the local police force. Further assessments were then carried out as to the veracity of the information. Where there were reasonable grounds to suspect an individual, an independent assessment was carried out. Where there was evidence found to say that a person had visited an adult site no further action was taken.
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (8 of 8)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Avon & Somerset Chief Constable faces jail for defying High Court
http://bristol.indymedia.org/article/690400?&condense_c...44213
Detectives involved in Operation Ore discovered the owners of some pornographic websites were punching stolen credit card details through their sites to generate cash. But police didn't arrest these fraudsters, they raided - you guessed it - the credit card fraud victims.
June 16, 2009 - The Times
Police chief Colin Port forced to back down in hard drive stand-off
....Lord Justice Stanley Burnton said Mr Bates had held all the material “in a professional capacity” and that that Mr Port’s delayed compliance with a court order was “regrettable”. The judge added: “The conduct of the chief constable since the order was made has been of concern to us”.
Mr Bates, 68, is regarded as a pioneer of forensic computer examination and was widely used as a prosecution and defence expert witness for many years. But the Crown Prosecution Service stopped using him and in 2006 issued confidential guidance concerning him to prosecutors.
In March 2008, Mr Bates was convicted of four charges of making a false statement and one of perjury relating to claims he had made over many years about his qualifications.
Avon & Somerset police began a fresh investigation into him last September after he obtained a copy of the hard drive of a man charged with possessing child abuse images on computer. Mr Bates was given the material at a Bristol police station when he arrived in the capacity of assistant to another expert witness.
Police later raided his Leicestershire home and he was arrested on suspicion of conspiring to possess indecent images of children. That investigation has now been dropped.
Mr Bates has long contended that the actions against him are an attempt to discredit him because he now acts as a defence expert and is an outspoken critic of police investigations. He is particularly critical of the conduct of Operation Ore, a nationwide inquiry into online child abuse which led to thousands of arrests, convictions and cautions.
He claimed in court papers that he had been subjected to “intimidation, bullying and even threats of violence by the police and some of their misguided supporters”.....
Why should this person be handed back discs that allegedly contacin child porn?
II they do, i think that providing they are not needed for any criminal invetsiogation, they should be destroyed.
Rob Simpson
It would appear that this case is not about whether or not there is child porn on these disks but whether or not they were illegally seized by The Police.
Please can someone explain to me why such disgusting material should be returned to Jim Bates and what possible use he would have for it.
We should be focusing on the abused children in these 'photos rather than whether or not Jim bates civil rights have been abused.
I will retract these remarks only when I get a rational explanation of why Jim bates had these images on his disc, an explanation of why he wants them back and what he intends to do with them once returned.
Sophy Robinson, parent of Jim and Charlie
Is this not an example of why the police shouldn't be trusted either?
It would appear that were it not for a court order these disks that allegedly contain kiddie porn would still be off the streets and not in the hands of someone who has yet to explain what he is doing with them.
please can someone explain what Jim Bates is doing with this alleged kiddie porn and why not more of a fuss has been made over it.
Why not trust the High Court?
To those who wonder why this is important consider the following:
Our freedoms are guarded by a system known as 'the separation of powers'. Put simply there are three parts to the machine that governs us: Parliament, the civil service (which includes the police) and the courts. Each one keeps the others in check. It’s not a perfect system but its all we've got and on this occasion it worked. A policeman (colin port) tried to ignore a court order. The court found that he had acted illegally in grabbing Mr Bates hard drives etc. They did not arrive at that conclusion without hearing all the police evidence and they still ordered the return of the material. Given the controversy surrounding this matter you should wonder what Mr Port has not told you?
The constant call to delete images which the police already have in their possession (they were forensic copies supplied by the police) may well be part of a smokescreen to cover up what is going on. If anything is deleted from those hard drives they all cease to be of evidential value. Along with most pictures comes something known as metadata. People with forensic skills, such as Mr Bates, can learn a lot from metadata. like who uploaded the file, what kind of camera took the photo, when it was uploaded, and much more. Mr Bates appears to have found something in the metadata giving him cause for concern. Justice demands that he should be allowed to do his job. The consequence of him not being allowed to do his job is that innocent people go to prison.
You have to ask yourself who do you trust. Mr Ports public statements just dont add up. There is plenty of stuff out there which may help you discover what is going on. Try a google search on the following terms:
"Jim Bates" "Colin Port" "Operation Ore" and check out the results for further information.
Finally - my opinion - The police have mistaken a load of victims of credit card fraud for paedophiles. In the course of their "investigations" they have wrecked the lives of thousands of families. Kids have been wrongly separated from their fathers due to a mistake. And the police haven’t got the guts to admit the truth.
If i am wrong then the police should not prevent the examination of these discs nor call for their destruction. The disks, after all, will either clear them or not....
It’s the police who are on trial now.