Of course, it's possible there is in fact ironclad evidence for the official story that we're not being told. But it seems to me there's lots of incentive for the police to share all they know, and huge incentives not to admit that it was all a cock-up.
> "We are [..] carrying out a forensic examination of a damaged drone found near the perimeter of the airport.
Sounds like some evidence of at least one drone. But regardless this is still likely a culmination of panic over a potentially one-off sighting.
The cynic in me suspects that the result of this will be zero convictions, but legislation taking all but the smallest drones out of consumers hands.
We'll see what it amounts to.
Yes: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1828378/Video-D...
Either this is all monumental incompetence, or the real story isn't being released.
Coincidentally, Birmingham airport was shut for a couple of hours today after an air traffic control failure.
If that's the end of the story, it's fair to assume there's no connection.
If there's a spate of air traffic control and/or other failures over the next few days, it's going to be hard not to wonder if something else is going on.
67 independent reports and a damaged drone near last sighting.
It's not in the public interest for us to know exactly who they are unless they're actually found guilty of a crime. Publishing their names and pictures before _even being charged_ does nothing but open potentially innocent people up to danger.
Whoever caused the Gatwick chaos needs to be brought to justice, but this is beyond reckless
The press always say that naming people who've been arrested is an important measure against authoritarian regimes. It allows the public to know whether police powers of arrest are being misused or not.
They appear to have lost this argument, because this is in tension with people's right to privacy and rights to a fair trial by the courts not by the media.
There's some interesting info here about different approaches: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/100634...
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/apr/21/press-intrusio...
In the justice system it's the judge which rules a sentence. Years – or even decades – of public shaming doesn't seem fair to me. Committing a crime doesn't mean you're no longer dealing with a person with real feelings. Publishing names and photos strikes me as "2 minutes of hate", and not "news".
Also note that it doesn't just affect the person(s). Family members or even completely unrelated people with similar names can get threatened.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/22/world/europe/gatwick-airp...
I think it's a very British whoopsie, they're plastered over the papers and they didn't do anything.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/13/world/asia/china-fan-bing...
On the contrary, the commonly-acknowledged right of habeas corpus essentially requires the government to make the fact that someone is being detained public, at least if the prisoner himself so chooses. Privacy is a red herring here - habeas corpus is about preserving basic freedoms.
Absolutely, along with all of these clowns who are perpetuating the chaos.
Good ol' British press logic. I wonder where they get their journalists from. Is there an education to be a heartless bastard with no sense of ethics? Or do they train them in-house?
Really sad - I'm guessing that as drone users they will now receive the inevitable nut-job drone hatred.
[0] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/23/gatwick-dron...
But, seeing what the man will do unbribed, there's no occasion to."
-- https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Humbert_Wolfe , 1930
The lack of ethics is definitely imposed from the top, by people like Rupert Murdoch and Piers Morgan.
I wish I was joking.
Perhaps the saddest part of this whole business is knowing that there are so few British journalists committed enough to get murdered: you could silence most just by breaking the fingers they use to do select all, copy, paste. Nobody’s going to flay you to death just for barking offers of money through the letterboxes of recently bereaved parents, or trawling for offensive tweets with your free hand. Of course, there are a lot of good journalists. Perhaps journalist is now just too broad a term, in much the way the word actor encompasses everyone from Meryl Streep to Sooty.
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/22/frankie-boy...
The press could have been responsible for the two of them walking free even if there were evidence they had done it.
So, does that now make them perfect suspects?
For me a "perfect suspects" is a hard core hobbyist or someone who does it for a living.
What's the next step after perfecting a hobby or being bored because it's a forced job other than taking it to the next level?
Given the limited info it wasn't just a kid popping a drone over given how hard it seemed to be to catch them so that leaves someone who knows what they are doing.
Who cares about "social death" over prison time? If anything it makes them heroes to many/most people, a good FU to the system.
Is it possible that this has been done by someone within the police or intelligence community in order to create a pretext for pushing through drone licensing laws?
But it could also just be some random asshole. There are a lot of random assholes all over the place.
I bet you could get cover for Gatwick with TDoA equipment for less than $10k easy, say another $10k to have it installed.
Hell, you could probably get some amateur radio people to install it for free, but paying $10k is more CYA.
Anyway, my point is that now they sure as hell will prepare, so next time (well... give it a year for them to get their thumbs out of their asses) it will not work as well.
Though, the accidental explanation is arguably more ominous/terrifying. It reminds of the episode "Autofac" from the "Electric Dreams" series.
I await the out of court settlement with interest
I wonder if it could be a government researcher worried about a lack of funding/preparation for this kind of attack (similar to the FBI's conclusion regarding the anthrax attacks)?
It doesn't seem like a protest, so unless it's economic terrorism or a state-backed attack, what else is it likely to be? A former pilot with a grudge?
Although I have no idea if it is real.
