Most of the 12 minutes is just him protesting that he supports the police, plus there are things he can legally say. He ran an initial vid and this is the update. The small part relevant to us is at 08:12, after his advertising is seamlessly slipped in.
His conclusion ... and remember he says all through that there are aspects he cannot divulge and how wonderful the police are ... is that the two "officers" were out of order barging in, then asking for the filming to stop, with no warrant. And especially seizing the child's phone.
You yourselves are restricted by English law about commenting, as am I ... it reminds me very much of the superinjunctions brought by Giggs and Clarkson, where everyone knew but no one could say. Also TR reporting outside a courtroom while the BBC did ... MSM knew of the injunction, TR was not aware he could not report ... so he says.
Many commenters have done so over at his youtube account, the BBB, expressing their opinions on the whole matter.
Whole thing reminds me of a can of worms.
......
Sorry me, laze and gem, I'm going to have to insist that comments on this post have some sort of moniker attached somewhere.
The pro-police accounts at Twitter are relying on the admission that the vid was edited, when what they know they cannot brush away is the state of, and lack od professionalism of, the two DEIhires at the door.
ReplyDeletePrecisely. That's the bit we're up in arms about.
Delete