Some of the very worst of British policing described by @LukeSGittos1986 With the pro-Palestine demonstration set to go ahead on the 7th of October, British police are likely to be under yet more scrutiny. @ #BattleFest 2026 we'll be discussing "WHY IS POLICING BRITAIN SO DIFFICULT?" & "NHS, POLICE, BBC… IS POLITICISATION CORRUPTING PUBLIC SERVICES?" DETAILS - battleofideas.org.uk/program… TICKETS - battleofideas.org.uk/battle-…

“I'm afraid allegations against the Government's Covid regulations and vaccine programs are not a matter for the Met police to investigate as allegation of a criminal offence.”

WHAT EXACTLY WAS THE METROPOLITAN POLICE TELLING THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT? The documentary contradictions surrounding crime report 6029679/21 now raise a question extending beyond the Metropolitan Police (@metpoliceuk @MetCC), NPCC (@PoliceChiefs), DHSC (@DHSCgovuk) and SRA (@sra_solicitors). They reach the Administrative Court. In 2023, Mark Sexton (@XPCBirmingham) and Philip Hyland (@pjhlaw) sought judicial review of the Metropolitan Police's refusal to investigate. The Commissioner resisted that claim. The MPS's Summary Grounds of Resistance presented the position to the High Court in remarkably clear terms. The Court was told that: “If the police decide to record the incident as a crime, then a criminal investigation will be commenced.” Conversely: “If the police decide not to report the incident as a crime, then a criminal investigation will not be commenced.” The MPS then drew what it expressly called an “important difference” between reviewing material to determine whether a crime should be recorded and commencing a criminal investigation. And then came the crucial representation: “In the claimants’ case, the defendant undertook a review but declined to commence a criminal investigation...” Later, the MPS put the proposition even more starkly: “the defendant determined that the allegations made by the claimants did not amount to complaints of criminal misconduct and so he declined to institute a criminal investigation into them.” That was the case advanced to the Administrative Court. Now compare it with what Metropolitan Police Professional Standards recorded in September 2026, having reviewed crime report 6029679/21: “I have reviewed crime report 6029679/21 and can confirm that an investigation was opened in relation to the matter recorded.” Read those two propositions together. 2023, before the Administrative Court: “declined to commence a criminal investigation”. 2026, following review of the crime report itself: “an investigation was opened”. That is not a semantic difference which can simply be waved away. It goes directly to the factual distinction upon which the MPS itself expressly relied when resisting the judicial review. And the position becomes still more interesting when the contemporaneous evidence is added: the 12 January 2022 Chief Constables' Council record indicating that the Met crime report's “final assessment” should be completed the following week; the Op Talla peer-review process; the subsequent Tor Garnett correspondence acknowledging that the allegations were being “reviewed/investigated”; and the investigative material we now know existed. The MPS went so far as to invite the Court to characterise the judicial review as: “totally without merit”. So a rather more serious question now arises. Precisely what did the Metropolitan Police understand had happened to crime report 6029679/21 when it placed its Summary Grounds of Resistance before the Administrative Court in 2023? And, critically: Did the Administrative Court have before it the complete contemporaneous documentary picture that we now possess when it was asked to determine the claim? Because courts decide cases upon the evidence and representations placed before them. Four years of disclosure are making those representations increasingly important to revisit. The documents are no longer merely contradicting each other outside the courtroom. They now raise questions about what was said inside it.