FITwatch takedown email

Below is the text of the email which the Met Police sent to FITwatch's hosting company, resulting in the FITwatch website being taken offline. Personally, I'd be very disappointed in any hosting company which folded after reading this email. As we said on Twitter last night, if anybody is in a position to offer well-informed legal advice to the FITwatch team right now, I'm sure they'd appreciate that.

(Email text as found on Indymedia)

APPLICATION FOR CLOSURE OF A UK BASED DOMAIN NAME
Fitwatch.org.uk - IP 69.175.66.250

To whom it may concern at Singlehop

Op Malone
In connection with our criminal investigation into registration or use of the domain name set out in this letter, we hereby confirm that:
* The domain is being used to undertake criminal activities.

Attempting to Pervert the Course of Justice, contrary to Common Law

We hereby request Singlehop to de-host this website for a minimum period of 12 months. Please note that this request will be also sent to the domain name registrar for the website. You should provide the following contact phone number, email address and reference number to the registrant: 0207 230 8100 pceu@met.pnn.police.uk

REASON FOR CLOSURE

This website are committing offences of attempting to pervert the Course of Justice under Common Law. The website is providing explicit advice to offenders following a major demonstration in Central London. The demonstration was marred by violence and several subjects have already been arrested with a major police operation underway to identify and arrest further offenders.

The person controlling these websites has posted material held to be contrary to Common Law within the UK. Therefore to prevent the domain names from being used in crime we request that the domain name is suspended for a minimum period of 12 months (or until expiry of the domain name if earlier).

This common law offence is committed where a person or persons:-
(a) acts or embarks upon a course of conduct
(b) which has a tendency to, and
(c) is intended to pervert,
(d) the course of public justice.

Registrant Information for fitwatch.org.uk
Registrant : [DELETED]
All other personal details withheld
Registered on : 17-Nov-2008

Authority to close the website and IP address given by
Will Hodgeson, Acting Detective Inspector
Metropolitan Police
CO11 Public Order Branch

Many Thanks in Advance

Yours faithfully

DI Paul Hoare
Police Central e-crime Unit (Computer Crime Unit)
SCD6 Economic & Specialist Crime Command,
Metropolitan Police.
1st floor, Indigo Block, Cobalt Square
1 South Lambeth Road,
London
SW8 1SU
0207 230 8100
pceu@met.pnn.police.uk

Share/Save/Bookmark

 

 

Due process
Posted by Anonymous (82.70.xx.xx) on Tue 16 Nov 2010 at 13:51
From the content of the letter, the police seem to be assuming the role of the judiciary.

As I understand the law, whether something is perverting the course of justice is determined by a court after due process and hearing both parties.
[ Parent | Reply to this comment ]

Re: Due process
Posted by Anonymous (213.121.xx.xx) on Tue 16 Nov 2010 at 13:56
Also, while I don't particularly agree with the advice they were handing out, I would dearly like to know how giving out any advice, under any circumstances, can be considered to be "perverting the course of justice". Knowledge is knowledge, they are not actively hiding someone.

The idea that the disemmination of knowledge, however disagreeable, can be interpreted by anyone as a crime, is a very worrying development IMHO.

Re: FITwatch takedown email
Posted by Anonymous (194.46.xx.xx) on Thu 18 Nov 2010 at 02:24
The fact that the dissemination of information "could be taken by anyone as a crime" has been around as long as mass communication.

Quite simply, if the 'authorities' don't want something said, they have the means to and will prevent it by whatever means they deem necessary.

In 1973 I was jailed for a total of 24 years for breaching a 'D' notice that was slapped up to cover the real cause of the Gartree prison riot of 1972. I served 3 and of course no charge mentioned anything about any 'D notice ....
[ Parent | Reply to this comment ]

Re: FITwatch takedown email
Posted by alshaw (86.172.xx.xx) on Thu 18 Nov 2010 at 11:51 [ Send Message ]
Wow. This is really scary, especially when you consider the other options open to the police:

1. Requesting the removal of the specific post related to the London demo

2. Securing a court injunction against publication of the controversial content

Instead, we have this disproportionate "request" for the closure of the entire site, made under what reads to a non-specialist like me as very vague legal grounds ("common law").

It looks like a blatant example of the police using the opportunity to take out a site they don't like.

I'm really shocked.
[ Parent | Reply to this comment ]

Re: FITwatch takedown email
Posted by Anonymous (86.159.xx.xx) on Tue 7 Dec 2010 at 19:22

'This common law offence is committed where a person or persons:- (a) acts or embarks upon a course of conduct (b) which has a tendency to, and (c) is intended to pervert, (d) the course of public justice.'

Surely 'public justice' demands that as many police officers as possible are dealt with as harshly as possible by the public?

[ Parent | Reply to this comment ]