bickster Posted December 23, 2018 Moderator Share Posted December 23, 2018 Police now say they are doubtful if there ever was a drone The pair were arrested after a tip-off One suspects given the correct legal advice the pair will considerably better off than they currently are in a few years time, it's got wrongful arrest written all over it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 13 minutes ago, bickster said: Police now say they are doubtful if there ever was a drone The pair were arrested after a tip-off One suspects given the correct legal advice the pair will considerably better off than they currently are in a few years time, it's got wrongful arrest written all over it I thought this, because of the public humiliation here and lack of evidence they’ll make some money for sure. If it turns out there’s no drones then heads need to roll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted December 23, 2018 Moderator Share Posted December 23, 2018 This front page ought to cost Viscount Rothermere a fortune. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 I might be being a bit simple but I’d have thought the process would be: -> “we think we’ve seen a drone” -> someone checks for a drone -> if yes, take precautions (stop flights) -> if no, business as usual but keep an eye out. Must be me being a bit silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted December 23, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted December 23, 2018 There was definitely at least a drone there - it was photographed and videoed, people saw it. I've no idea why the police are saying there might not have been one. Presumably they don't turn up at a robbery and say 'in all honesty sir, there's no evidence you even had a TV'. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 56 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: This front page ought to cost Viscount Rothermere a fortune. Stupid headline but they haven't exactly said it's them. Just asked the question so I don't know if they can get done? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 15 minutes ago, Chindie said: There was definitely at least a drone there - it was photographed and videoed, people saw it. I've no idea why the police are saying there might not have been one. Presumably they don't turn up at a robbery and say 'in all honesty sir, there's no evidence you even had a TV'. This from the beeb suggests no footage? Quote Their release came as Sussex Police said they were relying on eye witnesses and there may have been no "genuine drone activity in the first place". Det Ch Supt Jason Tingley said no footage of a drone had been obtained. He said there was "always a possibility" the reported sightings of drones were mistaken. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-46665615 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post snowychap Posted December 23, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted December 23, 2018 11 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: Stupid headline but they haven't exactly said it's them. Just asked the question so I don't know if they can get done? They haven't just asked a question. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted December 23, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted December 23, 2018 23 minutes ago, Genie said: This from the beeb suggests no footage? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-46665615 There's videos of it on Twitter. Even the Heil had footage of it sent on to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 Just now, Chindie said: There's videos of it on Twitter. Even the Heil had footage of it sent on to them. Are they 100% the same place at the same time? I’ve not followed this that closely but if the police say no footage has been obtained it sounds a bit odd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 23, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted December 23, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, Genie said: I might be being a bit simple but I’d have thought the process would be: -> “we think we’ve seen a drone” -> someone checks for a drone -> if yes, take precautions (stop flights) -> if no, business as usual but keep an eye out. Must be me being a bit silly. With respect, you are being a bit silly, imo. A drone in an airport could have literally fatal consequences. Obviously getting accidentally sucked into a plane's engine during takeoff could be pretty deadly. But then there's also the assumption that if a drone is being deliberately flown around an airport then it could have very sinister intentions, to deliberately hurt or kill people. So if you just let everything run as normal while someone "checks for a drone", which could take ages, then you run the risk of that drone killing people before it's found. So yeah, I think it's absolutely right that if someone thinks they've seen a drone, you shut things down until you're sure there isn't one. Not the other way round. Think of it like a bomb scare or a suspicious package being sighted. You don't just carry on as normal while someone checks to see if it's a bomb. You get everyone the **** out of there and then check. Edited December 23, 2018 by Stevo985 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 23, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted December 23, 2018 1 hour ago, Demitri_C said: Stupid headline but they haven't exactly said it's them. Just asked the question so I don't know if they can get done? Imagine if the front page tomorrow had a big picture of you on it with the headline "Is this moron a paedophile rapist?" They're not saying you are one, they're just asking the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 13 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: With respect, you are being a bit silly, imo. A drone in an airport could have literally fatal consequences. Obviously getting accidentally sucked into a plane's engine during takeoff could be pretty deadly. But then there's also the assumption that if a drone is being deliberately flown around an airport then it could have very sinister intentions, to deliberately hurt or kill people. So if you just let everything run as normal while someone "checks for a drone", which could take ages, then you run the risk of that drone killing people before it's found. So yeah, I think it's absolutely right that if someone thinks they've seen a drone, you shut things down until you're sure there isn't one. Not the other way round. Think of it like a bomb scare or a suspicious package being sighted. You don't just carry on as normal while someone checks to see if it's a bomb. You get everyone the **** out of there and then check. It doesn’t say run as normal whilst you check... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted December 23, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted December 23, 2018 10 minutes ago, Genie said: It doesn’t say run as normal whilst you check... Isn't that what they did then? They took precautions while they checked... i.e. stopped flights? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: Isn't that what they did then? They took precautions while they checked... i.e. stopped flights? For a day and a half and the police are saying potentially never a drone there and no footage of one. They've blatantly gone OTT. Hold flights for an hour or so, if the police, army, locals, Gatwick staff don’t find anything solid then crack on with the schedule with a heightened security / observation level (like a bomb scare). They’ve acted as if they found evidence of drones even though they didn’t which is odd. I’m not sure what to make of it tbh. This statement by the police seems to be distancing themselves from it (maybe to bill Gatwick for their input?). Edited December 23, 2018 by Genie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted December 23, 2018 VT Supporter Share Posted December 23, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 31 minutes ago, Chindie said: But is there a video from a credible outlet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 9 hours ago, Stevo985 said: Imagine if the front page tomorrow had a big picture of you on it with the headline "Is this moron a paedophile rapist?" They're not saying you are one, they're just asking the question. I'm.not saying its right but I'm generally asking woild there be a case against them as they can claim they are just reporting the news? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 8 hours ago, Chindie said: Hmm can’t be sure if that’s Gatwick or last week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcRigo82 Posted December 24, 2018 Share Posted December 24, 2018 2 hours ago, Demitri_C said: I'm.not saying its right but I'm generally asking woild there be a case against them as they can claim they are just reporting the news? It's borderline false insinuation imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts