3 hours ago, poohy said:

Not a fan of police of any flavour  but it seems UK mob have made a right balls up of this!

Probably had good reason to suspect, seems the police have totally ruled them out rather than could not find evidence.

Sussex Police said: "The pair were no longer suspects"

Quote

A damaged drone found close to the airport on Saturday was being forensically examined, the force added.

Det Ch Supt Jason Tingley said it was "a working assumption" the device could be connected to their investigation, but officers were keeping "an open mind"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-46665615

 

 

Quote

Police admit ‘there may not have been drones in the first place’

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8050136/gatwick-drone-boss-arrested-soldier-reveals-agony/

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/gatwick-drone-latest-police-say-it-is-a-possibility-there-was-never-a-drone-a4024626.html

 

What a farce. An international airport closed for 3 days for a non-existent drone!

 

 

9 minutes ago, nkg said:

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8050136/gatwick-drone-boss-arrested-soldier-reveals-agony/

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/gatwick-drone-latest-police-say-it-is-a-possibility-there-was-never-a-drone-a4024626.html

 

What a farce. An international airport closed for 3 days for a non-existent drone!

 

 

There may have been something else going on .

They may have suspected a terror attack was about to take place and so they grounded all the flights ?

8 minutes ago, sanemax said:

There may have been something else going on .

They may have suspected a terror attack was about to take place and so they grounded all the flights ?

 

No need for a cover story if that was the case?

 

As Napoleon once said, "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

Edited December 23, 20187 yr by nkg
clarity

13 minutes ago, nkg said:

 

No need for a cover story if that was the case?

As Napoleon once said, "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

Making that information public may have exposed their source ?

7 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Making that information public may have exposed their source ?

 

They could close down the runways for more mundane reasons too, like ice on the runway or a "computer glitch". At this point, I don't think we're going to get a full explanation of what happened, and it's interesting to speculate.

 

I do wonder why the police would mention the possibility that there was no drone? Clearly there was no proof other than witness statements.

21 minutes ago, nkg said:

 

They could close down the runways for more mundane reasons too, like ice on the runway or a "computer glitch".

They've just closed Birmingham airport down due to an air traffic control fault 

Latest news, police now claiming that maybe there never was a drone at all, and they released the man and lady arrested yesterday without charge. Oh dear!

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1063232/gatwick-drone-chaos-airport-drone-exist-sussex-police-jason-tingley

6 hours ago, nkg said:

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8050136/gatwick-drone-boss-arrested-soldier-reveals-agony/

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/gatwick-drone-latest-police-say-it-is-a-possibility-there-was-never-a-drone-a4024626.html

 

What a farce. An international airport closed for 3 days for a non-existent drone!

 

 

Ripping a house apart a day before Christmas is a great way to gain the hearts and minds of the community; I would be spitting feathers! Let's hope plod don't go for the ol'"look what we found on his computer".

Idiots.

8 hours ago, Basil B said:

Probably had good reason to suspect, seems the police have totally ruled them out rather than could not find evidence.

Sussex Police said: "The pair were no longer suspects"

I hope the couple sue the paper(s) that named them .

Now it even seems there may not have been  a drone.. so this whole thing gets fishier by the minute.

I am not a conspiracy theorist by any means  but  either the police army gov etc are totally inept or this was a cover story for something else, probably that we will never know! 

I’ve suspected for some time that the government are intent on doing all they can to regulate drone technology to effectively restrict private use.

 

Christmas holiday chaos attributed to Drones in the hands of irresponsible individuals would be a perfect pretext for draconian legislation.

 

’Draconian’?!

 

 

Keep in mind the couple arrested have not been charged, apart from their names address and photos being plastered all over the news/net, their arrest included the taking of mugshots, fingerprints and DNA samples.

 

Despite not being charged with a crime their bio data is now on the national crime computer systems and it will never be removed.

 

They have the same police bio data records as a convicted criminal.

 

 

It is this that should shock people.

39 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Despite not being charged with a crime their bio data is now on the national crime computer systems and it will never be removed.

 

They have the same police bio data records as a convicted criminal.

 

 

It is this that should shock people.

Not true...

 

They can apply to have them removed.

https://www.acro.police.uk/Early_Deletion_of_Biometric_Information.aspx#

Edited December 24, 20187 yr by Basil B

4 hours ago, Basil B said:

Not true...

 

They can apply to have them removed.

https://www.acro.police.uk/Early_Deletion_of_Biometric_Information.aspx#

Read the Acro page and two things are clear ‘one can apply’, no guaranteed removal is given.

 

The criteria for removal of DNA does not include ‘Arrested but not charged’.

 

 

20 hours ago, nkg said:

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8050136/gatwick-drone-boss-arrested-soldier-reveals-agony/

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/gatwick-drone-latest-police-say-it-is-a-possibility-there-was-never-a-drone-a4024626.html

 

What a farce. An international airport closed for 3 days for a non-existent drone!

 

 

  Typical of UK, nothing new .

14 hours ago, evadgib said:

Ripping a house apart a day before Christmas is a great way to gain the hearts and minds of the community; I would be spitting feathers! Let's hope plod don't go for the ol'"look what we found on his computer".

Idiots.

     Agree , however let us not forget our modern day Police officers, are highly educated academics .

         Nuff  said .

Edited December 24, 20187 yr by elliss

So who reported the drones in the first place ? Was it fake news ?

On 12/23/2018 at 11:07 PM, bartender100 said:

I hope they sue every paper that plashed double page features of their lives across the pages today

 

On 12/24/2018 at 9:53 AM, poohy said:

I hope the couple sue the paper(s) that named them .

Plus the Sussex Constabulary for wrongful arrest.

On 12/24/2018 at 5:20 AM, TopDeadSenter said:

Latest news, police now claiming that maybe there never was a drone at all, and they released the man and lady arrested yesterday without charge. Oh dear!

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1063232/gatwick-drone-chaos-airport-drone-exist-sussex-police-jason-tingley

So, presumably, the busted drone that was supposedly found was either the pure figment of someone's imagination or a plant?

It seems the conspiracy theory nutjobs have been having a field day over a cherry picked quote from an admittedly poorly worded remark from the police: Gatwick 'no drone' police comment 'miscommunicated'

Quote

A spokesman said: "We are clear that there were multiple confirmed sightings of drone activity at the airport.

"Therefore we took the necessary actions to ensure the safety of passengers using our airport. Safety will always be our number one priority.

"We continue to support the police with their investigations into this illegal and deliberate act to disrupt the airport's operations."

 

On ‎12‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 4:17 AM, OJAS said:

 

Plus (sue) the Sussex Constabulary for wrongful arrest.

 

The treatment of the former Gatwick drone suspects shows up harmful media shortcomings

Quote

According to former officers, people are wrongly arrested all the time – we just never hear much about it. Yet in the case of Mr Gait and Ms Kirk, their case attracted so much attention because it was the first concrete thing to have happened in 48 hours of drone chaos at Gatwick. It was a story with huge implications and yet very few facts – and into that vacuum were thrown this innocent couple.

 

It is clear now that Sussex Police made a terrible mistake in arresting and then holding them for so long, particularly because Mr Gait had a rock-solid alibi as he had been fitting windows at the time of the drone activity. The police say that they were acting on credible information, and that the alibi provided by Gait’s boss didn’t reach them for hours due to the deluge of calls they were receiving about the incident.

 

But from that, and many other articles from media who didn't name them at first, it is not the police with whom the couple are angry; it is the media, mainly tabloids, which did name them such as The Daily Mail which called them "the morons who ruined Christmas!" 

 

One cannot sue the police for wrongful arrest merely because one is innocent. To sue the police for wrongful arrest the couple need to show that the police had no justifiable cause to arrest them. Obviously we do not know what cause the police had and whether that cause was justifiable or not. But I suspect that solicitors specialising in this area have already contacted the couple!

 

For more on this, see Wrongful arrest / False imprisonment (Note: this is a commercial site, I have provided the link for information only. I neither endorse nor recommend their services in any way.)

On 12/24/2018 at 2:55 PM, Chomper Higgot said:

Read the Acro page and two things are clear ‘one can apply’, no guaranteed removal is given.

The criteria for removal of DNA does not include ‘Arrested but not charged’.

 

I was once unlawfully arrested, police paid me 5,000 pounds compensation and issued an apology (a year later), never managed to get my biodata removed from the system. I actually asked their chief why they appeared to have a policy of arrest and worry about the law later?

The (deputy) chief said, most people give up after a few months, and the few people (like you), who do pursue us to the bitter end, are so few it's cost effective to arrest, even if unjustified or unlawful.

 

Edited December 27, 20187 yr by BritManToo

5 hours ago, 7by7 said:

It seems the conspiracy theory nutjobs have been having a field day over a cherry picked quote from an admittedly poorly worded remark from the police: Gatwick 'no drone' police comment 'miscommunicated'

 

 

Conspiracy theory nutjobs? Here is the quote:

 

Quote

 

But Detective Chief Superintendent Jason Tingley told the BBC that there was "no available footage" of the drones and it was "always a possibility" that sightings were wrong.

"[There is] always a possibility that there may not have been any genuine drone activity in the first place," he said.

"Of course, that's a possibility. We are working with human beings saying they have seen something."

 

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/gatwick-drone-latest-police-say-it-is-a-possibility-there-was-never-a-drone-a4024626.html

 

There is no conspiracy there. There were no photos or videos of the drones, therefore they may not have actually been there.

 

 

19 hours ago, nkg said:

 

Conspiracy theory nutjobs? Here is the quote:

 

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/gatwick-drone-latest-police-say-it-is-a-possibility-there-was-never-a-drone-a4024626.html

 

There is no conspiracy there. There were no photos or videos of the drones, therefore they may not have actually been there.

 

 

 

As I said, it was

On ‎12‎/‎27‎/‎2018 at 9:34 AM, 7by7 said:

a cherry picked quote from an admittedly poorly worded remark from the police

about the possibility of there not being any drones. Possibility, not probability; a remote possibility. A possibility now discounted following the many reported sightings and discovery of the damaged drone.

 

But the conspiracy theorists had a field day. There are some examples earlier in this topic and here's another: Gatwick Airport drone could have been ALIEN UFO – shock claim after flight chaos

Quote

Prominent conspiracy theorist Scott C Waring says a UFO using a cloaking device could be the cause of the chaos which has shrouded Gatwick this Christmas, and the reason why it has been so elusive.

Mr Waring wrote on his blog UFO Sightings Daily: “Here is an important question; were UFOs seen over the Gatwick Airport down played as drones to control the situation?

 

 

Edited December 28, 20187 yr by 7by7
Correct typo

I love these conspiracy theory guys, a ufo flies God knows how many light years to earth just to disrupt flights at Gatwick ,you couldnt make it up ,oh forgot you can and these nutters dolol

Sent from my SM-A720F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

9 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

As I said, it was

about the possibility of there not being any drones. Possibility, not probability; a remote possibility. A possibility now discounted following the many reported sightings and discovery of the damaged drone.

 

 

 

 

What does the discovery of a damaged drone prove? How long had it been there?  Nowhere do the police claim that it was one of the drones involved in the incident.

 

I am aware that there were 67 witness sightings of a drone - how come none of these 67 witnesses were equipped with a camera phone to corroborate their sighting?

 

Thousands of people claim to have seen the Loch Ness monster, but unsurprisingly there is zero photographic evidence. If you believe in drones that cannot be photographed, perhaps you are also a believer in Nessie, Bigfoot and dragons?

 

 

 

 

Edited December 28, 20187 yr by nkg
clarity

So tell us, @nkg, what in your opinion caused the disruption; aliens?

3 hours ago, 7by7 said:

So tell us, @nkg, what in your opinion caused the disruption; aliens?

 

I think that it's entirely possible that the first sightings were of drones, or of some objects/animals/craft that resembled them.

 

Once the airport was closed you had thousands of people in the airport looking for drones, and keen to report anything they thought they may have seen. So there were several mistaken sightings.

 

So tell us, 7by7, why weren't there any pictures or video footage of the drones?

Drone flyers don’t look intelligent like Model Plane builders n flyers, more like peeping toms with mobile phones


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect