A question of grooming

James M

It is disgraceful that they should (deliberately) choose to use a term now invariably associated with those that prey on children in an attempt to smear Green. Even more people should resign.

Mark

If you are in a hole, keep spinning!

Andy Leeds

God this lot are pathetic.

Gawain

Isn't it obvious ? If a Labour politician is fed unsolicited information by a mole or cultivates an informant within a Government Department he is heroically struggling to exercise his democratic right to challenge the oppresive state. If any other party does this they are, like some seedy peodophile, furtively abusing the innocence of the benign state which, in everything it does, only looks to care for us all.

The word "grooming" is a classic piece of official "newspeak", designed to deflect and intimidate opposition. It is as oppresive as the police action itself.

The opposition parties must not be deflected by any smokescreens. Unless there is a real issue of national security, the leaks at the Home Office are a disciplinary matter for them. Whatever the case, Damian Green's office at Westminster should not have been searched.

Lord Elvis of Pailsey

Agree with James M. This word has been deliberately chosen due to it's connotations with paedophiles. How low can this malignant Government and it's agents go?

Ken

Careful you are on very shaky grounds. The reported police use of the term "grooming" was obviously deliberate -- it has highly emotive associations. There should be no distraction from the core of the crisis - "freedom under the law" parliamentary sovereignty has been transgressed by marxist Labour party supremacists. The call is and must be, remove those responsible, all of them, and now.

JR

The differences would be if Damian Green a) developed the relationship and gave instructions as to what to go after, or b) provided any incentive to leak.

As b) is heavily denied I assume the case rests on a). Personally I think this is a valid investigation.

If a political party were working a mole in the Home Office's private offices that is very serious given what passes through there (warrents for phone tapping of terrorist suspects etc).

The principle would be the same as if any political party or other organisation had established such a relationship - if they are working a mole with that level of access there is a serious threat to national security.

I've heard rumours before of the braying idiot Conservative researchers boasting of "what they know" in Westminister pubs - frankly I don't trust them not to have a 'dangerous talk costs lives' moment any more than I would if 80s era far left Labour MPs had such a relationship in place.

The potential consequences of a security breach of this nature (access to the Home Secretary's private office inbox) is only a couple of degrees off the worst possible. Should the police have the right to investigate (based on the evidence given by the civil service mole) the allegation that 'someone' has worked to incite the breach? And should whether the 'someone' being a politican should make a difference. Given the seriousness of the situation for me its a yes and no.

JONNY

Who was Brown grooming in the years 95-7?
Time for the anti-Terror squad to call him in for a 42 day grilling.

TrevorsDen

This accusation is so vile as to make me lose ALL faith in the workings of the police and government.

The two words on every conservatives lips today should be "No Quarter".

The fact that Green has not committed and offence and there is no crime committed seems only to encourage the police to invent offences.

Chuck Unsworth

How old is the person who was reportedly being 'groomed'? Is he not an adult? Is he in some way impaired?

Andy H

JR - you are either very naive, on the payroll or just indoctrinated by their spin. What security breach has occurred? The only think that has been revealed are that our government has tried to conceal that fact that they are incompetent. It is the fatal flaw in the socialist mindset that they believe that government does not have to answer to the people. They do and they will.

liz Brown

So, all the police can come up with at the moment is "grooming" how truly pathetic. And natch, the leftie hares are running with the hounds

The Bellman

McBroon has been grooming children for a lifetime of dependency on The State with his child trust fund nonsense.

Jane

The offence of grooming was introduced a few years ago (2003/4?)when the Sexual Offences Act was reviewed to take account of the behaviour of paedophiles. It is wrong for the police to use this term when interviewing someone not charged with an offence under the SOA.

Grooming was introduced as an offence to protect vulnerable children from the psychological actions of adults who intended to sexually abuse them. It involves such actions as befriending the child over a period of time, using chat rooms on the internet to engage children before abusing them etc etc. It was offensive to use such language in interview with Mr Green, an abuse of the term. and highly inappropriate given the nature of the charge and the age of the victim (25 yeara old civil servant).

I am appalled at the whole situation. Legislation to protect us from terrorism is being used inappropriately. Now we have legislation (Grooming is an offence) to protect children from paedophiles being used relating to government leaks. What sort of society do we live in when this can happen. It beggars belief. This has been a monumental error and I do hope that it resolves many issues which are of concern to us all.

We need to review legislation, exercise control over the police and bring to account those in Parliament who permitted the situation to occur. Why were the police brought in if national security was not at stake. I thought leaks were dealt with by internal disciplinary procedures. I do not accept that the Home Secretary/PM were unaware of events. They were probably unaware of when Mr Green was to be arrested. They have some explaining to do.

C Powell

The other context in which "grooming" is used is in relation to the indoctrination of young men into terrorism. The fact that this phrase is being used is indicative of an attempt to smear Green - not so subtly - by implying that the use of counter-terrorism officers/searches/arrest for 9 hours etc was somehow justified. Disgraceful.

strapworld

So when police officers/security services talk about use of informants we should insist that they are referred to as 'Grooming an Informant'

what is chalk for them must be the same for all of us.

It is a disgraceful use of the word and I urge everyone so disgusted to complain to the Independent Police Complaints Commission on the useage of such a word in official police press statements...citing the excellent 'Jane' who highlights the Act and Section the word 'grooming' came from.

It is an incredible and shocking word to use in this case and suggets to anyone that Green was almost abusing the whistleblower...This demands Cameron's urgent action...but I suppose he is still slagging off his colleagues!! ((Gosh how many open doors can there be infront of this blessed man before he actually pushes one?))

Tim Ireland

The word 'grooming' was, Green alleges via proxy, used by police at some stage during 9 hours of questioning.

It then hit the newspapers via unnamed senior Tories and 'close friends' of Green.

The (alleged) accusation of him 'grooming' someone (for any purpose) is only in the public domain because Green or his supporters chose to bring it - along with their outrage and association with sex offenders and suicide bombers.

My, the police are devilishly clever in the way they go about smearing someone, aren't they?

The complexities of this police state we live in boggle the mind.

Verity

I'd like to hear from other women, but the use of the word "grooming" to me smacks of some vicious (aren't they all?)socialist woman who thought this would be rather clever and devastating. It's the kind of cheap connection a socialist woman would make. I thought at first it might be Lord Rhumba of Rio, but then decided no, it was more town councilish self-regarding slyness. I just think it reeks of some stupid female cabinet minister who thinks this was rather clever. Any other women here have an opinion?