Chris Huhne wants to strip the big six energy companies of their ability to impede action by regulator Ofgem under new plans Fresh powers to compensate consumers if they are the victims of anticompetitve practices by the big six energy companies will be proposed on Tuesday by the energy secretary Chris Huhne. Huhne is planning for energy companies to be stripped of their current ability to impede action by the regulator Ofgem by forcing it to seek a second opinion from the Competition Commission. Instead, Ofgem will have powers to impose its decisions and energy companies will have a right of appeal. Huhne is looking at giving Ofgem new powers to require energy companies to provide direct redress when consumers have lost out as a result of a company breaching a licence condition. The big six firms are EDF energy, British Gas, EON, Npower, Scottish and Southern Energy and Scottish Power. At present, Ofgem has powers to fine companies up to 10% of their annual turnover, which goes to the Treasury, But Huhne is to propose that the money could go direct to customers, either as compensation or in lower bills. He will also ask whether Ofgem should be given powers to prevent the big six freezing out new firms by offering excessively cheap online deals, making it hard for small firms to enter at a competitive rate. He will say it is not fair that energy companies can push their prices up for the vast majority of their consumers who do not switch while introducing cut throat offers for new customers that stop small firms entering the market: “That looks to me like predatory pricing. It must and will stop.” At the weekend Huhne was reported as describing consumers lazy for failing to shop around for cheaper energy. He will explain he did not regard consumers as indolent, but he will argue the average household could save £200 by switching to the lowest cost supplier. Consumers, he will explain, “still think that they face the same bill whoever they go to”. He is making it easier for consumers to change energy supplier so in future they will have a right to be switched within three weeks once a cooling-off period has elapsed. He is also to set up a working group on collective purchasing and switching in energy with Ofgem Consumer Focus and Whitehall to examine the potential for collective purchasing and switching in the energy market, and to review any barriers preventing consumers from coming together. EDF Energy was the last of the big six to raise prices last week increasing gas prices by 15.4% and electricity prices by 4.5% from 10 November. The firm said it had absorbed wholesale price rises for as long as possible before being forced to raise costs for customers. Energy industry Utilities Chris Huhne EDF Energy Scottish and Southern Energy Family finances Energy bills Household bills Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Chris Huhne wants to strip the big six energy companies of their ability to impede action by regulator Ofgem under new plans Fresh powers to compensate consumers if they are the victims of anticompetitve practices by the big six energy companies will be proposed on Tuesday by the energy secretary Chris Huhne. Huhne is planning for energy companies to be stripped of their current ability to impede action by the regulator Ofgem by forcing it to seek a second opinion from the Competition Commission. Instead, Ofgem will have powers to impose its decisions and energy companies will have a right of appeal. Huhne is looking at giving Ofgem new powers to require energy companies to provide direct redress when consumers have lost out as a result of a company breaching a licence condition. The big six firms are EDF energy, British Gas, EON, Npower, Scottish and Southern Energy and Scottish Power. At present, Ofgem has powers to fine companies up to 10% of their annual turnover, which goes to the Treasury, But Huhne is to propose that the money could go direct to customers, either as compensation or in lower bills. He will also ask whether Ofgem should be given powers to prevent the big six freezing out new firms by offering excessively cheap online deals, making it hard for small firms to enter at a competitive rate. He will say it is not fair that energy companies can push their prices up for the vast majority of their consumers who do not switch while introducing cut throat offers for new customers that stop small firms entering the market: “That looks to me like predatory pricing. It must and will stop.” At the weekend Huhne was reported as describing consumers lazy for failing to shop around for cheaper energy. He will explain he did not regard consumers as indolent, but he will argue the average household could save £200 by switching to the lowest cost supplier. Consumers, he will explain, “still think that they face the same bill whoever they go to”. He is making it easier for consumers to change energy supplier so in future they will have a right to be switched within three weeks once a cooling-off period has elapsed. He is also to set up a working group on collective purchasing and switching in energy with Ofgem Consumer Focus and Whitehall to examine the potential for collective purchasing and switching in the energy market, and to review any barriers preventing consumers from coming together. EDF Energy was the last of the big six to raise prices last week increasing gas prices by 15.4% and electricity prices by 4.5% from 10 November. The firm said it had absorbed wholesale price rises for as long as possible before being forced to raise costs for customers. Energy industry Utilities Chris Huhne EDF Energy Scottish and Southern Energy Family finances Energy bills Household bills Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Chris Huhne wants to strip the big six energy companies of their ability to impede action by regulator Ofgem under new plans Fresh powers to compensate consumers if they are the victims of anticompetitve practices by the big six energy companies will be proposed on Tuesday by the energy secretary Chris Huhne. Huhne is planning for energy companies to be stripped of their current ability to impede action by the regulator Ofgem by forcing it to seek a second opinion from the Competition Commission. Instead, Ofgem will have powers to impose its decisions and energy companies will have a right of appeal. Huhne is looking at giving Ofgem new powers to require energy companies to provide direct redress when consumers have lost out as a result of a company breaching a licence condition. The big six firms are EDF energy, British Gas, EON, Npower, Scottish and Southern Energy and Scottish Power. At present, Ofgem has powers to fine companies up to 10% of their annual turnover, which goes to the Treasury, But Huhne is to propose that the money could go direct to customers, either as compensation or in lower bills. He will also ask whether Ofgem should be given powers to prevent the big six freezing out new firms by offering excessively cheap online deals, making it hard for small firms to enter at a competitive rate. He will say it is not fair that energy companies can push their prices up for the vast majority of their consumers who do not switch while introducing cut throat offers for new customers that stop small firms entering the market: “That looks to me like predatory pricing. It must and will stop.” At the weekend Huhne was reported as describing consumers lazy for failing to shop around for cheaper energy. He will explain he did not regard consumers as indolent, but he will argue the average household could save £200 by switching to the lowest cost supplier. Consumers, he will explain, “still think that they face the same bill whoever they go to”. He is making it easier for consumers to change energy supplier so in future they will have a right to be switched within three weeks once a cooling-off period has elapsed. He is also to set up a working group on collective purchasing and switching in energy with Ofgem Consumer Focus and Whitehall to examine the potential for collective purchasing and switching in the energy market, and to review any barriers preventing consumers from coming together. EDF Energy was the last of the big six to raise prices last week increasing gas prices by 15.4% and electricity prices by 4.5% from 10 November. The firm said it had absorbed wholesale price rises for as long as possible before being forced to raise costs for customers. Energy industry Utilities Chris Huhne EDF Energy Scottish and Southern Energy Family finances Energy bills Household bills Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Chris Huhne wants to strip the big six energy companies of their ability to impede action by regulator Ofgem under new plans Fresh powers to compensate consumers if they are the victims of anticompetitve practices by the big six energy companies will be proposed on Tuesday by the energy secretary Chris Huhne. Huhne is planning for energy companies to be stripped of their current ability to impede action by the regulator Ofgem by forcing it to seek a second opinion from the Competition Commission. Instead, Ofgem will have powers to impose its decisions and energy companies will have a right of appeal. Huhne is looking at giving Ofgem new powers to require energy companies to provide direct redress when consumers have lost out as a result of a company breaching a licence condition. The big six firms are EDF energy, British Gas, EON, Npower, Scottish and Southern Energy and Scottish Power. At present, Ofgem has powers to fine companies up to 10% of their annual turnover, which goes to the Treasury, But Huhne is to propose that the money could go direct to customers, either as compensation or in lower bills. He will also ask whether Ofgem should be given powers to prevent the big six freezing out new firms by offering excessively cheap online deals, making it hard for small firms to enter at a competitive rate. He will say it is not fair that energy companies can push their prices up for the vast majority of their consumers who do not switch while introducing cut throat offers for new customers that stop small firms entering the market: “That looks to me like predatory pricing. It must and will stop.” At the weekend Huhne was reported as describing consumers lazy for failing to shop around for cheaper energy. He will explain he did not regard consumers as indolent, but he will argue the average household could save £200 by switching to the lowest cost supplier. Consumers, he will explain, “still think that they face the same bill whoever they go to”. He is making it easier for consumers to change energy supplier so in future they will have a right to be switched within three weeks once a cooling-off period has elapsed. He is also to set up a working group on collective purchasing and switching in energy with Ofgem Consumer Focus and Whitehall to examine the potential for collective purchasing and switching in the energy market, and to review any barriers preventing consumers from coming together. EDF Energy was the last of the big six to raise prices last week increasing gas prices by 15.4% and electricity prices by 4.5% from 10 November. The firm said it had absorbed wholesale price rises for as long as possible before being forced to raise costs for customers. Energy industry Utilities Chris Huhne EDF Energy Scottish and Southern Energy Family finances Energy bills Household bills Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Chris Huhne wants to strip the big six energy companies of their ability to impede action by regulator Ofgem under new plans Fresh powers to compensate consumers if they are the victims of anticompetitve practices by the big six energy companies will be proposed on Tuesday by the energy secretary Chris Huhne. Huhne is planning for energy companies to be stripped of their current ability to impede action by the regulator Ofgem by forcing it to seek a second opinion from the Competition Commission. Instead, Ofgem will have powers to impose its decisions and energy companies will have a right of appeal. Huhne is looking at giving Ofgem new powers to require energy companies to provide direct redress when consumers have lost out as a result of a company breaching a licence condition. The big six firms are EDF energy, British Gas, EON, Npower, Scottish and Southern Energy and Scottish Power. At present, Ofgem has powers to fine companies up to 10% of their annual turnover, which goes to the Treasury, But Huhne is to propose that the money could go direct to customers, either as compensation or in lower bills. He will also ask whether Ofgem should be given powers to prevent the big six freezing out new firms by offering excessively cheap online deals, making it hard for small firms to enter at a competitive rate. He will say it is not fair that energy companies can push their prices up for the vast majority of their consumers who do not switch while introducing cut throat offers for new customers that stop small firms entering the market: “That looks to me like predatory pricing. It must and will stop.” At the weekend Huhne was reported as describing consumers lazy for failing to shop around for cheaper energy. He will explain he did not regard consumers as indolent, but he will argue the average household could save £200 by switching to the lowest cost supplier. Consumers, he will explain, “still think that they face the same bill whoever they go to”. He is making it easier for consumers to change energy supplier so in future they will have a right to be switched within three weeks once a cooling-off period has elapsed. He is also to set up a working group on collective purchasing and switching in energy with Ofgem Consumer Focus and Whitehall to examine the potential for collective purchasing and switching in the energy market, and to review any barriers preventing consumers from coming together. EDF Energy was the last of the big six to raise prices last week increasing gas prices by 15.4% and electricity prices by 4.5% from 10 November. The firm said it had absorbed wholesale price rises for as long as possible before being forced to raise costs for customers. Energy industry Utilities Chris Huhne EDF Energy Scottish and Southern Energy Family finances Energy bills Household bills Patrick Wintour guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Conn. Justice ‘Apologizes’ to Susette Kelo for Eminent-Domain Decision, But Still Feels He Ruled Correctly
September 20, 2011 No Comment
It appears that it's not news anywhere but at the Hartford Courant , where ” Little Pink House ” author Jeff Benedict reported the development on Saturday, and at Reason.com (HT to commenter dscott), which linked to the Courant story earlier today. I suspect it won't get much coverage at other establishment press outlets. The development is that one of the four Connecticut Supreme Court justices in the 4-3 majority which ruled against Susette Kelo and the New London, Connecticut eminent-domain holdouts, ultimately sending the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled 5-4 against the plaintiffs in Kelo vs. New London , has apologized — quite emptily, as it turns out — to Ms. Kelo, face to face: … I faced that situation at a dinner honoring the Connecticut Supreme Court at the New Haven Lawn Club on May 11, 2010. That night I had delivered the keynote address on the U.S. Supreme Court's infamous 5-4 decision in Kelo v. New London. Susette Kelo was in the audience and I used the occasion to tell her personal story, as documented in my book “Little Pink House.” Afterward, Susette and I were talking in a small circle of people when we were approached by Justice Richard N. Palmer. Tall and imposing, he is one of the four justices who voted with the 4-3 majority against Susette and her neighbors. Facing me, he said: “Had I known all of what you just told us, I would have voted differently.” I was speechless. So was Susette. One more vote in her favor by the Connecticut Supreme Court would have changed history. The case probably would not have advanced to the U.S. Supreme Court, and Susette and her neighbors might still be in their homes. Then Justice Palmer turned to Susette, took her hand and offered a heartfelt apology. Tears trickled down her red cheeks. It was the first time in the 12-year saga that anyone had uttered the words “I'm sorry.” It was all she could do to whisper the words: “Thank you.” Then Justice Palmer let go of her hand and walked off. If you stopped reading there, you would walk away thinking that the judge made an unconditional apology. Nope, as Benedict learned when he began pre-publication follow-up with Judge Palmer, who responded as follows in a November 2010 “personal and confidential” (at the time) letter: “Those comments,” he wrote, “were predicated on certain facts that we did not know (and could not have known) at the time of our decision and of which I was not fully aware until your talk — namely, that the city's development plan had never materialized and, as a result, years later, the land at issue remains barren and wholly undeveloped.” He later added that he could not know of those facts “because they were not yet in existence.” So the only reason he's sorry is that the promised development emanating from what five foolish U.S. Supreme Court justices at the time of the ruling asserted was a “carefully formulated … economic development plan” didn't come to pass. Judge Palmer proved that he still doesn't get it in a mid-August interview with Benedict in his chambers, and at the same time exposed the fatal flaw in so much of what passes for jurisprudence: Q: Looking back at the Kelo decision (by the Connecticut Supreme Court), how do you see it now? In other words, has it led to good law? A: I think that our court ultimately made the right decision insofar as it followed governing U.S. Supreme Court precedent. Whether the Kelo case has led to good statutory law is not a question for me or my court; so long as that law is constitutional, its merits are beyond the scope of our authority. Of course, judges are also citizens and, therefore, we may hold a view on the merits, but that view should not interfere with or affect our legal judgment concerning the law's constitutionality. I'm sorry, Judge Palmer, that doesn't cut it. The primary question before your court was whether Connecticut's statute went beyond the Constitution's Fifth Amendment restriction of eminent domain to “public use” situations. It wasn't, or shouldn't have been, about what had been done in previous cases, while perhaps looking to the Constitution as an afterthought. You blew the ruling, because even if New London somehow had concocted the most wonderful and “successful” plan on earth with gleaming new buildings all around, it still would not have involved a “public use,” and still should never, ever have been allowed. Judges should not care at all whether statist proponents of eminent-domain expansion have been able to rack up 100, 500, or 1,000 “precedent-setting” cases in front of pliant judges invoking “public purpose” instead of “public use” while allowing property to be taken from private citizens and conveyed to other private citizens. The starting point should always be what the Founders wrote, and determining what the Founders meant. Then, and only then, should case law matter. In Kelo vs. New London , case law shouldn't have meant a darned thing. The Fifth Amendment's “public use” limitation could hardly be more clear. This exposes the fundamental flaw of the legal system's overdependence on case law. Previous rulings which vary from what the Founders prescribed become the new de facto legal standards, while the importance of the Constitution's original words and the Founders' original intent continually diminish. Judge Palmer isn't “sorry” in any beneficial sense, and his apology to Susette Kelo, while perhaps a nice surface gesture, is as substantively hollow as the day is long. Now that Ms. Kelo understands the judge's twisted “logic” as explained to Benedict in the Courant, the guess here is that she totally agrees. That said, high-profile “apologies” often make news. So far this one hasn't. I doubt that it will. The establishment prefers statism, and to portray judges, especially leftist judges (Palmer is a Democrat , and Benedict really should have identified his party affiliation), as our infallible betters. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .
Continue reading …Manchester City’s £100m plan to be the Barcelona of the Premier League
September 20, 2011 No Comment
Brian Marwood wants the 80-acre Etihad Campus to produce homegrown players like the Spanish club’s famed academy They are planning more calculated risks in east Manchester today. Where once new Labour proposed to meet the area’s regeneration needs with a Super Casino, Manchester City envisage the solution to sustained success in the Premier League and Champions League without recourse to the riches of Abu Dhabi in every transfer window. “This will be the most important investment this club has ever made,” City’s chief football operations officer, Brian Marwood, said. Marwood was describing City’s proposed youth development and first-team training centre, part of the stunning Etihad Campus facility for which, after three years’ research and six weeks of public consultation, the planning application was submitted on Monday. The scale and attention to detail are astounding. Eighty acres of brown field land opposite the Etihad Stadium have been earmarked for a project that will cost at least £100m and, City hope, deliver a production line of homegrown talent able to compete in the Champions League and a convincing riposte to accusations of paying lip-service to Uefa’s financial fair play rules. “It is part of our 10-year strategy for long-term, sustainable success,” said Marwood, sensitive to the criticism that City’s 10-year, £400m sponsorship deal with Etihad Airways attracted from Arsène Wenger and Liverpool, among others, and which Uefa has pledged to scrutinise. “Everyone has seen we have accelerated the recruitment process in terms of where the first team is now, which is three years into the owner’s tenure of this football club. We are fully aware of the commitment that we face but, equally, we talk about sustainability and that [paying large transfer fees] can’t be sustained, so we have to develop within. That is something that is paramount to the future of the club. Financial fair play gets talked about every week now, and everyone is looking to Manchester City to see whether we are going to conform to that. This is an element that will help us achieve the criteria people are looking at.” City’s project team visited 30 elite sports development centres in nine countries across four continents in the course of their research. The end result is a proposed home for 400 young players to train alongside the senior squad, 15 full-size pitches, on-site sleeping accommodation for 40 youngsters plus 32 members of the first team, a rehab centre and a 7,000-capacity stadium for youth-team games. The stadium is situated between the training hub and the Etihad Stadium so as to motivate academy players towards fulfilling their potential. The first-team training pitches will have different grass that match the varying types used across the Premier League. Whatever type City are playing on that weekend will dictate where the squad trains during the week. The grand tour included the Australian Institute of Sport, the LA Lakers, the Nike laboratories in Oregon, the New York Giants and Barcelona. “They are the benchmark for developing young talent,” said Marwood of the Spanish champions. “You talk about the DNA, the philosophy and the culture, and it is there at every level in terms of how they play. “Our under-19s played against them last week. You could close your eyes and see a young Iniesta or a young Xavi and that is something on which we need to work very hard here. What the coaching team has tried to do is develop a philosophy but also a consistency in terms of the way we play at every level right up to the first team. In the last Champions League final Barcelona had eight players that were home-grown, which is an incredible statistic. They have their youth stadium adjacent to the Camp Nou, and they also have their training complex close by as well. It gives players that aspiration and inspiration to go from the academy all the way through. “We have a proud history of bringing through players from our academy and that is something we want to enhance. What we have tried to do at every level is make it better, and develop it in a different way. We are trying to bring through young players that can play in the Champions League. That is what we are aiming for.” A decision on City’s planning application is expected in late December, with construction expected to take three to four years. City have purchased most of the 80-acre site but negotiations remain ongoing over the relocation of several businesses, while the club have allocated 5.5 acres for community facilities, including a sixth-form college, and will help fund a new swimming pool. Patrick Vieira, football development executive at City, insists the benefits will be widespread. “I don’t think England produces enough talent, certainly in relation to the number of people who love the game and play football,” he said. “I don’t know why, maybe it is the facilities, but it is disappointing England has not produced more. This football club wants to give people the opportunity to play for the first team and for the national team.” Marwood believes the facilities will ensure the next Ryan Giggs has no reason to leave City’s academy for Manchester United. He also claimed another loss to City was Garry Cook, the former chief executive who was forced to resign over an email he sent to Marwood ridiculing Nedum Onuoha’s mother’s cancer, and had overseen the Etihad Campus proposals. “It’s not a good time to lose your chief executive but we are all moving on,” he said. “As the chairman said last week Garry has done a tremendous amount for this football club in the three years he was chief executive and he will always be welcome at this club. I’m personally saddened because I think everyone is aware of the relationship I had with him but we have to move on. He was a big player in this project.” Manchester City Premier League Premier League 2011-12 Andy Hunter guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Poll shows 28% of those studying apprenticeships, BTecs and GNVQs are missing out on careers counselling A quarter of teenagers say they have never received any careers advice, according to a poll. The survey of 1,620 15- to 19-year-olds found those on vocational courses were least likely to have been given guidance. Some 22% of those studying for A-levels and university courses said they had not received careers advice; this rose to 28% for those taking apprenticeships, BTecs and GNVQs. The survey, conducted on behalf of City & Guilds – an exam board for vocational courses – also found teenagers were far more likely to ask advice from parents if they had been to university. Just 30% of teenagers would turn first to their parents for advice if they had no more than GCSE-level qualifications. Some 45% would ask their parents for career help if they had degrees. Nick Grist, head of the City & Guilds Centre for Skills Development, said the survey showed deprived teenagers would be further disadvantaged in future. The government plans to create a new National Careers Service by April next year. However, it will not provide face-to-face guidance for those aged under 19. Instead, schools will be given a legal duty to offer careers advice to their pupils. Grist said this could lead to “computer-generated” advice replacing students’ face-to-face conversations with career advisers. “Young people depend on effective guidance to help them choose career and learning options that suit their interests, talents and aspirations,” he said. “It’s not enough to hope that a remote telephone operator or website will be able to give them the personalised support they need, or that hard-pressed head teachers will be able to find space in their budgets for top-quality, face-to-face guidance services.” A spokesman from the Department for Education said it was a “sad fact … that too much [careers advice] … is poor quality and patchy”. “That’s why we are giving schools responsibility for providing independent, impartial careers advice. Schools know their students best and they are the ones best placed to decide what provision is right. That’s why they have complete control over their budgets to buy in the face-to-face support that pupils need.” Careers Vocational education 14 – 19 education Further education Young people Jessica Shepherd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Four quakes ranging in magnitude up to 5.8 hit south of country, bringing down houses and triggering landslides Four earthquakes have struck southern Guatemala within two and a half hours, shaking buildings in the capital and killing three people. President Alvaro Colom called for calm after tremors were felt across much of the Central American country, the largest a 5.8 magnitude quake. All were centred in an area about 30 miles (51km) south-east of the capital, Guatemala City, according to the US Geological Survey. “There is no reason to think there will be anything bigger,” Colom said at a news conference. He said all rescue forces and government agencies had been activated to deal with the aftermath. The quakes struck near Guatemala’s south-western coast in the sugar cane growing region around Santa Rosa, forcing the evacuation of about 400 people and cutting electricity and telephone services, emergency services said. One woman was killed when her house collapsed in the town of Cuilapa, near the epicentre of the quakes, and two others died after their cars were buried in a landslide on the highway. “In Chiquimulilla there’s a landslide … where vehicles fell in and were buried. There are material damages to the vehicles and two fatalities reported so far,” said volunteer fire brigade spokesman Mario Morales. Thirteen people were taken to hospital and classes were cancelled in the Santa Rosa region, but emergency services said they did not expect further severe aftershocks. “It’s unlikely that there will be any more events bigger than what we have already experienced,” said Alejandro Maldonado, head of the country’s disaster co-ordination agency. “The situation is completely under control.” USGS geophysicist Rafael Abreu said all four quakes were connected to the same fault running through the area. Guatemala Natural disasters and extreme weather guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Met’s supergrass system called into question by dismissal of Gary Eaton
September 19, 2011 No Comment
• Supergrass use described as ‘dancing with the devil’ • Gary Eaton’s evidence dismissed by second judge • Key witness in Daniel Morgan case mishandled by Met, report shows Scotland Yard’s supergrass system is in disarray after a judge ruled a key criminal witness was a “pathological liar” for the second time in six months. Full details of the handling of the man – a career criminal with psychiatric problems and convictions for bribing police, blackmail and firearms offences – and how tens of millions of pounds have been spent on cases based on his flawed evidence have been revealed for the first time. Gary Eaton was used in a failed prosecution of four men for the murder of the private detective Daniel Morgan. Now a leading police officer has warned of the inherent dangers in using such so-called “assisting offenders”. Chief Constable Jon Murphy, head of crime for the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo), says using supergrasses is akin to “dancing with the devil”. “The use of a supergrass … demands some really informed, critical decision-making by experienced people who fully understand all of the implications and who aren’t just focused on the end result for that particular investigation,” he said. The story of how Eaton, 51, was used can be revealed after a crown court judge ruled he was a “pathological liar”. The judge excluded his evidence from a second criminal case. The decision to drop him from the case – which was based solely on his supergrass evidence – came six months after the judge in the Morgan case ruled that he was a liar who had been “prompted and coached” by a senior police officer into providing a crucial part of his testimony. The Crown Prosecution Service said the decision to continue using Eaton was made by a senior lawyer with the knowledge of the director of public prosecutions. It refused to say how much the latest case had cost, but the Morgan case cost in excess of £30m. It is understood some senior police officers opposed the use of Eaton as a supergrass after revelations during the Morgan hearings about his violence, history of lying and serious psychiatric problems. They felt they could have no further dealings with such a tainted witness. The Guardian can now publish details of a document written by the judge in the Morgan trial that reveals how he was mishandled. The report shows: • Eaton was taken by a senior police officer to a covert location, left alone in a vulnerable state and eventually prompted into implicating two brothers in the Morgan murder. • Eaton and his girlfriend were paid £72,000 in 11 months as officers tried to manage his heavy drinking, erratic behaviour and violent threats. • Officers failed to pass on his history of serious psychiatric problems to a separate team who were debriefing him. • Eaton had a 27-year sentence for 51 crimes including conspiracy to murder, bribery, supplying drugs, blackmail and possession of firearms reduced to three years. He remains at liberty, living as a protected witness under a new identity. Eaton was the one of the first supergrasses to be recruited by the Metropolitan police under the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act, which came into force in 2006 and was designed to clean up the supergrass system after it came into disrepute in the 1980s. He is one of 158 supergrasses used since 2006, primarily by the Met, Merseyside police and the Police Service of Northern Ireland. In his report on Eaton, Mr Justice Maddison finds that he was prompted and coached by Detective Chief Inspector Dave Cook, the officer investigating the murder of Morgan. He finds that Cook repeatedly contacted Eaton after he had signed an agreement to be an assisting offender, and in doing so the officer breached guidelines in supergrass cases that a “sterile corridor” must be put up between the investigating officers and an independent team who handle the witness and take his statements. Maddison found that an appropriate adult should have been present when police interviewed Eaton during a lengthy debriefing process over 16 months between August 2006 and December 2007 because of his history of serious psychiatric problems. Without this appropriate adult in place the whole process should have ceased. It did not. One of the most “concerning” events for the judge came on 5 September 2006, a month after Eaton was recruited as a supergrass and while officers were still taking his witness statements. Eaton was taken by DCI Cook to a “covert location” near Reading, and left alone in the bedroom of a hotel. He became very distressed and broke down. Half an hour later Cook – who had been trying to get Eaton to implicate two brothers, Glenn and Garry Vian, in the Morgan murder – sent him a text message that the officer then deleted from his mobile phone, according to the judge’s ruling. An hour after Eaton had been put into the hotel room he changed his story and prepared a statement implicating the Vian brothers in the murder for the first time. His evidence was eventually thrown out of the Morgan murder trial and the case collapsed in March of this year . Despite this he was put forward as the star witness in the second criminal case, but on Friday his evidence was thrown out by the trial judge who said it was “not just unreliable but false and highly dangerous”. Scotland Yard and the CPS are carrying out a review of the use of “tainted witnesses” but no officers have been disciplined as a result of the Eaton revelations. The attorney general’s office said the use of such witnesses was constantly under review and regular conversations were held with prosecutors on the issue. Senior police officers appear to be split on the issue of supergrasses. Assistant Chief Constable Andy Cooke, Acpo lead for witness protection, defended their use. “It can be seen as a high-risk practice, because of the nature of the people you are dealing with who are involved in criminal behaviour, but it does have a real place in tackling crime,” he said. Sir Hugh Orde, the president of Acpo, was more sceptical, saying in Northern Ireland not one supergrass case during the Troubles has stood the test of time. Crime Metropolitan police London Police Sandra Laville guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …