Political interference into cash-for-honours police inquiry.

An unnamed Blairite, political intermediary, thought to be Lord Goldsmith, cautioned the police against their desire to question Tony Blair as a suspect, stating that the Prime Minister would have to resign if he was questioned, under caution, as a suspect as opposed to merely being questioned as a potential witness. Why did the police allow themselves to be subjected to political blackmail? Their response to the submission that Tony Blair would have to resign should have been "So, what?". We already know that Tony Blair has been caught out telling lies. The whole point about amending the caution is to deny the defence an opportunity to spring a trap on the prosecution by relying upon something said in court which was not brought out during police questioning. Because Tony Blair was not questioned under caution, any lies he may have told will not later harm his defence. If Tony Blair is allowed to get away with this, it is tantamount to saying that he is above the law. I don't like the sound of that.

The Sunday Telegraph has the story. And, it appears that Downing Street is putting out a different version of events than that given by Scotland Yard. As I understand it, if the police are not happy about the answers given to their questions, they tend to revisit the scene of the crime to re-examine the details to try and determine why their results and what they are being told are different.

I think that it is time to stop pandering to the whims of politicians. I think that it is just wasting police time. Question Tony Blair again, this time under caution, and if he decides to evict himself from the Big Brother house, then, so be it.