Thu, 08 Feb 2007

Joining the dots - Department of potential evidences

Joining the dots is a game for children. And the Police doesn't seem to like children, dots or games.

Abu Bakr about his questionning during his detention following his arrest:

It was farcical. I was questioned for seven days but not once did they put these allegations about a plot to kidnap and behead a soldier to me. They were doing things like putting a piece of paper in front of me - a note, a scribble by one of my children, a jacket, a hat - and asking me about it. My solicitor advised me to make no comment so that's what I did. It felt a bit amateurish like they didn't really know what they were doing.

About one of the defendent in the alleged liquid bomb plot:

The box, Peirce said, also contained another of the items listed in the charge against her client, a crude map of Afghanistan--drawn years ago, Peirce says, by the boy's younger brother: "It's a child's map!"

During my Police interview:

It could be doodles but is it a plan of the station or anything like that?

Maybe it is the fear of the unknown, of the potential hidden meaning behind scribles and doodles? Is anything the Police doesn't understand, whether a behaviour, a scrawl, an item, a language, a drawing, a religion, an origin, etc. something to be afraid of, something to threaten someone's liberty with? Must we all conform and be rationale at all times?

Police paranoia is not a new phenomenon. Some sixty years ago:

Planned as a series of texts which would summarize the surrealist position at the end of the war, Free Unions was published 2 years after its conception, due to the arrest of the editors and the seizure of the proofs - thought to be coded messages of anarchists.

websiteblogblog archivenews feedfeedback