Month: April 2011

Last week’s police raid on a sporting estate in Perthshire was widely reported in the media. We were told that three week’s earlier, two poisoned buzzards and poisoned bait had been discovered on the estate, and that this had led to the issuing of a police warrant to search various properties on the estate. What we weren’t told was the name of the estate in question. Was this omission just a genuine oversight? Apparently not. According to an article published in The Courier on 8 April 2011, Tayside Police ‘refused to disclose the exact location of the estate’. This suggests that the journalist from The Courier had specifically asked for the name of the Estate but Tayside Police decided to keep it a secret. Courier article here: http://www.thecourier.co.uk/Living/Outdoors/article/12730/inquiry-into-discovery-of-poisoned-birds-of-prey-on-a-perthshire-estate-continues.html

Similarly, the other agencies involved with the raid (reported to be the RSPB, National Wildlife Crime Unit and the Scottish Government Rural Payment Inspections Directorate) have remained tight-lipped about the operation.

Let’s contrast this silence with the report of another police raid that Tayside Police undertook last week. According to a news item on the Tayside Police website, they raided six properties across Dundee last Friday ‘as part of a pre-planned operation aimed at disrupting a serious and organised crime group believed to be involved in a number of offences including drug dealing, money laundering and mortgage fraud’. Were they silent about the locations of the raids and the on-going inquiries? Were they heck. They named the actual streets where these properties were located, the type of property searched and even disclosed what they’d found so far. See news item here: http://www.tayside.police.uk/default.aspx.locid-013new0k8.Lang-EN.htm

Let’s also contrast the silence with the reporting of the two poisoned peregrines that were discovered at the base of a block of flats in Motherwell in February. The SSPCA, who are leading that particular investigation, immediately released the location of where those poisoned birds had been found. And quite right too. See their press release here: http://www.scottishspca.org/news/571_warning-after-falcons-poisoned

So, why would Tayside Police, the RSPB, NWCU and SGRPID not want to reveal the name of the Estate where they have discovered poisoned birds and poisoned bait? They might argue that revealing the Estate’s name is likely to defeat the ends of justice, for example, that evidence could be destroyed or removed. That would be a perfectly legitimate concern BEFORE the raid took place, but their news release was made AFTER the raid and AFTER they had collected potential evidence, so that particular argument doesn’t wash here.

This silence is also an interesting strategy considering the recent launch of the Tayside Policing Plan 2011-2014 (available for download on the Tayside Police website). This Policing Plan sets out the Force’s ‘high level aims for serving and supporting local communities, the local economy and the environment over the next three years. The plan focuses on two Community Priorities – Public Safety and Public Reassurance’. So, how does keeping quiet about the location of potentially lethal poison (which could kill humans and pets, as well as the wildlife it has already killed), fit in with this new Policing Plan? Does this secrecy benefit public safety? Does this secrecy benefit public reassurance? That’s for the local community to decide – although hang on, they can’t decide because they haven’t been told that this poison was found within their community.

Imagine if Tayside Police had discovered a car bomb in, say, Perth town centre. Would they be so coy about revealing the location? Would we see a press release along the lines of ‘We have discovered a car bomb but we’re not telling you where it is and we’re keeping its location a secret’?

I think not. It would obviously be in the public’s interest to be informed about such a threat. So why does Tayside Police and these agencies think that it’s ok not to tell the public where poisoned birds and poisoned bait has been discovered, regardless of whether they can or cannot identify the individual who laid the bait? It’s all very curious.