by charles the moderator
I received the following this morning,
Dear Mr Rotter
I am part of the enquiry team who are investigating the theft of data from the UEA in Norwich last year.
As part of the investigation we would like to speak to everyone who has made any requests for information relating to the CRU at the UEA.
Records indicate that you made such a request last year and as a result I would like to discuss this and any other knowledge you may have with you at a convenient time.
Please can you contact me (I would suggest initially by e mail) leaving a contact number so that we can have a chat.
Kind regards
Sean Baker
Sean Baker
Detective Constable
Joint Major Investigation Team
Norfolk Constabulary
Lowestoft Police Station
Old Nelson Street
Lowestoft
Suffolk
NR32 1PE
Tel: xxx
Mobile: xxxx
This e-mail carries a disclaimer [this was a dead link. Put here for reference. ~ ctm]
Go here to view Norfolk Constabulary Disclaimer
I responded within a few hours with this:
I can be reached at xxx. I work nights so please don’t call before noon PST. I’m in San Francisco. Between noon and 1 PM is the best time to contact me.
I have previously posted my entire involvement with the CRU leaked emails and files online here:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/13/climategate%E2%80%94the-ctm-story/
I’m not sure what else you would like to know. I’ll see if I can cover it in advance.
1. I have never received any money for my volunteer services at wattsupwiththat.com
2. I met Steve McIntyre once for dinner two years ago when he was in town for AGU. I paid for the dinner.
3. I read Climate Audit.
4. [personal info]
5. [personal info]
6. [personal info]
7. I am 51, turning 52 next month.
I understand that you are diligently performing your investigation, and I’m not sure how well you understand the perspective from this side of the fence.
The multiple FOI’s were submitted in response to Phil Jones’s obstruction of the scientific process of verification and replication. Had he behaved as any scientist should, no FOI requests would have been required and it would have been ten minutes work to respond to the original request. The CRU began moving the goal posts, making up more and more unbelievable reasons why they should not give data to perceived critics, thus causing the subsequent FOI’s and escalation, in which I participated. It seems likely that soon after Steve McIntyre’s appeal was denied, someone at the University of East Anglia, disgusted by what he or she witnessed, subsequently leaked the files. I have no knowledge or direct evidence that this is the case, but it is the explanation that makes the most sense.
If you would like more information on the escalation of FOI requests and the obstruction by CRU, as confirmed by your own ICO, I can dig up the relevant threads.
Now isn’t the CRU the Criminal Records Unit, and the IPCC the Independent Police Complaints Commission?
I think they may be feeling threatened.
Your email was from “Joint Major Investigation Team” and the one I received was from “Protective Services” and we know the “National Domestic Extremism Team” is also involved. I wonder how many other branches of Norfolk Constabulary are investigating?
Evidently no one ever taught Charles that in dealing with law enforcement, less (talking) is more.
They just want you to answer some questions, Charles. They aren’t interested in your theory of the crime.
You’re screwed! (Oy Inspecta’ !, I nicked the ‘acka. It’s this cheeky Yank over ‘ere), Just remember, in the UK, judges are referred to as “M’ Lord” not “Your Honour”—this might shave a few years off your sentence.
Sad to say, despite the obviousness of it all, my read is that the fix is in. They’re looking for the lime to complete the whitewash. It would appear that it’s in the “established best interest” to maintain status quo ante bellum. I mean, despite what our parents told us, when did we ever win as children when we told the truth?
Sorry to be so cynical…
The Google ad:
“Master of Arts in Diplomacy
Norwich University”
BTW, 51 going on 52? How old is that photo?
Reply: I saw the same ad and thought it was hysterical. The photo is a couple months old. Most people think I look in my mid to late 30’s. This is good because I am very immature for my age. ~ ctm
Let me get this straight. You are a US Citizen, being investigated by a a local British Constable? Have they contacted the State Dept.? Or bothered to coordinate with a US Police Dept. that has jurisdiction? If not, I’d tell them to piss off.
Carbon Market Update
Wrapped in the Man-made Climate Change Meme, the money to fund the worldwide global governance carbon tax is being financed through offshore island wealth funds. It seams the elite of the world are still hell bent on implementing the global carbon tax despite the climate change hoax being exposed.
“Islands of money
At present, almost US$13 trillion in secrecy-protected wealth is held offshore and out of reach. If moderately taxed, these funds would yield over $250 billion. Such funds could more than finance the Millennium Development Goals, which are estimated by the World Bank at $40 billion to $60 billion annually through 2015. They could also go toward the adaption and mitigation funds needed by developing and emerging nations, which the UN puts at $4 billion to $86 billion annually.
The recovery of this illicit capital will be difficult. The islands that host these accounts are dependent on this revenue. The economy of the Seychelles is dependent on the financial sector for 11% of its GDP. This puts the Seychelles not far behind the notorious Cayman Islands, the world’s fifth-largest financial center, where financial services account for 14% of GDP. Switzerland, which launders one-third of all illicit capital, depends on financial services for 15% of its GDP. ”
“Meanwhile, Group of 20 (G-20) governments subsidized fossil fuels to the tune of $300 billion in 2009. So, as the G-20 spends its time creating a carbon trade market that does little to reduce carbon emissions, multinationals continue to expand their extractive enterprises, dictators continue to siphon off capital, financial firms cash in on pollution credits, and this illicit capital continues to flow into offshore locations that are themselves threatened by the rising waters associated with global warming.”
Climate Change’s Secret Weapon
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/LB26Dj02.html
Lee Kington (16:04:08) :
It was the CRU team that made the original claim of hack and theft. The police got involved because of the claimed “theft”. The police investigation may go on for a long time; they will be thorough and bring charges only when they have sufficient evidence to prosecute.
Whitewashing can only be done by the University itself, the police are a red hearing in all this and their final outcomes are unpredictable at this point in time. Though it should also be remembered, they are investigating the reported hack and theft, not the science.
steven mosher (15:47:00) : “How long have you been public with the facts of the case and they are just contacting you.”
The wheels of justice may grind slowy, but they grind…uh…slowly.
Mr. Plod is still investigating “The Theft”. Hmm, it’ll be a long time before they uncover anything, I think. Possibly they will cover it up before they uncover it :-^
Clue Game!
It was Jones, in the washroom, with his portable!
[quote Pascvaks (16:03:00) :]
Sounds like the beginning of an Agatha Christy mystery.
[/quote]
And a new mystery cliche for the technology age:
The moderator did it!
As a Brit, we do sort of like the “slowly slowly catchee monkey” approach of our “plod” (cops). Despite the attempted politicisation of the UK police by the “guv’mint” there are still some good guys out there.
Take it for what it is, answer the questions, tell the truth and put the boot in, where it belongs.
You might be surprised.
Believe it or not some of them don’t believe in AGW either, especially the ones in my neighbourhood. (600 feet above sea level, overlooking Loch Ness with 3 foot snow drifts outside). Nothing new, it was worse in the 1970s. Worse still in the 1960s, but i was just a “waen” then!
Best wishes
Ian
No- it was Mann, in the common room with the hockey stick!
Pascvaks (16:03:00) :
Sounds like the beginning of an Agatha Christy mystery
*************************************
Or an episode of “Mystery!”
You know, something tells me Climategate is the absolute last thing the Norfolk PD wants to investigate.
I would guess they call it a theft because that’s what they were asked to investigate by CRU. Not sure the police would have the authority to investigate a whistleblower. Their investigation may come to the conclusion that it was not theft.
One should be very suspicious of detectives. They told you it’s a criminal case (theft). They’re not asking you questions just to fill in their story but, imho, looking at you as a person of interest or at least potential person of interest. You should have asked a lawyer before responding and had the lawyer email them. You should not have responded via email. You should have dropped a note in the mail to their address, made a copy, and got a receipt from the postal service. Consider:
They may want you to respond by email so they can track your MAC address so they can use that for tracking and use, if needed, as circumstantial evidence against you. It’s sort of like asking for your DNA. If that’s what they wanted and to confirm the MAC and tie it to you, the noose is tightening for whatever crime/infraction/et al the UK penal code and international treaties may yield.
The request, especially the “any other knowledge” is about as broad as they get and is potentially dangerous. if you’re foolish enough to talk to them without a lawyer present at least get a really good recorder and make 100% certain that you tell them you’re recording the conversation and be sure to get a device that does the “beep” periodically.
You should ask, directly, if you are under suspicion of any crime, wrongdoing, ethics breach or responsible in any legal manner to their knowledge. Ask how many other FOI requests they’re checking out, whether you’re the first, whether there is any special reason for them talking to you versus the dozens of other that filed FOI, etc. Ask if they consider you a material witness. Ask if they’re considering charges. I.E., you should question them to the same extent they question you. They won’t likely tell you but it will sound better on the record and may help if you need to consider entrapment. Plus, you are not compelled to answer any question, period. It’s ok to just say “see what I wrote”. After all, perjury is a possibility – don’t forget what happened to Scooter Libby.
You’re a player in the publication of the subject matter of the theft. If you were my client, I’d just refer them to the what you’ve already written and simply not talk to them at all unless and until they gave you a legally binding written statement that you will not be prosecuted. Period.
I’d ignore the rather cavalier/libertarian advise and comments on this thread. Extreme caution should be your guide. It’s a lot easier to avoid a charge that to defend one. And it’s your skin, not theirs.
Your joking Sharon!!!
This is the most exiting thing to happen in Norfolk in years!
Gary Hladik (16:31:50) :
The wheels of justice may grind slowy, but they grind…uh…slowly.
They grind exceedingly fine… yielding a light powder that gets into the air and spreads everywhere… then comes a spark…
“Pascvaks (16:03:00) :
Sounds like the beginning of an Agatha Christy mystery.”
Is that John Christy’s mother perhaps?? 😉
I’was the janitor what done im in!
Didn’t think about the jurisdiction issue – should have told him you’ll help them out with their hacking as soon as they hand over the DoD assburgers hacker 😛
For Norfolk, think endless miles of carrot fields. An endless vista of agricultural flatness as far as the eye can see.
Antique dealers with insecure loads on their roof racks is pretty much the extent of law breaking in this corner of the Queen’s realm. 🙂
From someone who has some involvement with the legal system, this investigator is just doing his job. It is altogether proper that he not just copy files from the internet, but that he personally contact everyone who may have some input and ask them what they have to say, including people in other countries than his own. I would be very surprised if this man will make the decision about where to go next; typically several people will work tracking down information and after it is accumulated a decision about where to go next will be made one or two levels up the organization.
Understand that he is just a researcher, in the same way that scientists are researchers. At this stage it is his job to make sure that the questions are asked all the way around, and that all of the answers are as complete as possible.
and a handy thing to remember if you are ever involved in *any* investigation, in the US or the UK – very often the investigator does indeed know most of the facts of the story already. He is asking not just to seek confirmation, but more importantly to observe the reaction he gets. Someone who freaks out at a set of completely ordinary questions is someone who is sending up huge red flags that there is something more to look at. Always cooperate, always be calm, just as CTM was here.