Gatwick Drones- Aibu to think the police need to let the public know what is really happening

[Debbie99hastings]

I've been following this story with great interest because I'm a boring person with nothing better to do.
But I am now wondering several things

A. How can the police rule out terrorism when they don't know who is behind it. Im not saying it is But seems odd how you would rule out something without knowing who the perpertator is.

B. Why the couple who were arrested and named were so from only a tipoff.

C. Given the police are now offering a reward, does that mean they are unable to identify the perpetrators.

This whole thing is really strange.

They cannot release everything they know. You must see why l.

Or alternatively they may not know anything.

They said 'a possibility'. They did not say 'there was no drone'.

That's why I posted a quote.

juells in terms of the boarding of the ship and any other situation where military intervention might be needed in a civilian crisis, there is a raft of legislation to be observed before the military can be brought in, to protect civilian "rights". Believe me, its frustrating for all concerned!!!

We don’t know the ins and outs of the ongoing investigation so it’s impossible to make judgements on what the police do or don’t know.

I don't know.

I'm glad that guy who likes drones had an alibi, he was at work! Honestly, he was being scapegoated, can you imagine, police and reporters at your house - and he did nothing?

Other than that I don't particularly care now. Drones should be banned.

Thepink Actually no. Most posts aren't demanding to know the details of something that is a matter of National security. I don't need to wind my neck in but thanks for your advice.

Did anyone else think it was an odd coincidence that Birmingham had problems today as well?

I was startled that ‘no drine’ is a possibility. I had thought all of the coverage included video of a drone taken from an aircraft on the runway (I watched it) I heard police officers on an audio clip saying ‘there it is it’s coming right over you’ and so on. I had no idea ‘no drone’ was ‘a possibility’ in this case. Whole thing is very odd.

It's all very odd and sort of been ' airbrushed' out of the news with a quick ' we're looking into it' guise.
Not sure what to think!

I think it's a UFO, or a number of them.

The whole thing is odd and concerning!

In that case hope Dana Scully is investigating.

Let me think

Approximately 100% of the population carry a phone with them at all times that can take photos and videos.

Gatwick is littered with CCTV cameras, many of them watching incoming and outgoing planes, and others watching traffic, buildings and people. There are also spotters with binoculars and telephoto lenses.

Hands up anyone who thinks that if drones were repeatedly popping up, there'd be no footage. That's why there are so many amateur clips on Facebook and Utube. Even if they were suppressed on UK media, they'd be seen in less compliant countries. Remember Gatwick is full of people on their way to Foreign Parts.

"Airbrushed out of the news" in a "all over the front page of the BBC" sort of way?

Actually I think we might indeed see a quick change of tack by some outlets – the ones who are embarrassed at the way they treated that couple.

Juells I also thought it was an odd coincidence.

Piglet - what does Foreign Parts (excellent not heard that for ages) have to do with it in your view? (Wasn’t sure i understood that last bit)

in the comments about the arrest of the couple most posters were asking "Why have these people been named, where they live shown and photos of them published?"

Am I right in thinking the police didn't release any of that information? It was the media sniffing around - and no doubt neighbours tipping them off.

Re the ship being boarded, I was looking on Marinetraffic.com, and it appeared to be being shadowed by the Margate and Ramsgate lifeboats. But boarding it would presumably be a specialised job which couldn't be done by just anyone.

Actually I think we might indeed see a quick change of tack by some outlets – the ones who are embarrassed at the way they treated that couple.

Shades of the way that man was treated when Joanna Yeates was murdered, he sued the newspapers afterward and got damages.

This has nothing to do with you and is not your business. What the police and beyond are doing to keep our country safe is not for your nosiness or gossip.

What a totally bizarre comment!

Of course it's our business. The police have appealed for help, for one thing.

The police are public servants. Our taxes pay for them. We trust them and the security forces to keep us safe.

Are you suggesting we are idiots who don't deserve answers or to know what happened? Or to hold the police to account if they have made a complete mess of all of this?

Of course there are things they cannot divulge when an inquiry is going on. But to say we should not want to know is bollocks.

HeronLanyon

In the unlikely event that all the mass media haD Noticed they shouldn't publish, a person out of reach of UK influence, in a different country, would be unconstrained.

jingling agree fully.

The legal zone for drones is VERY close to the airport.

It is quite likely that some of the drones reported (unless they were hoax calls) were within legal limits.

But of course when the police looked for them they couldn't find any.

Which means either the calls about them were the hoax, or the drones were within legal limits, or the police had the wrong equipment and were not able to see them.

Choose one.