The reason for the delay in the commencement of the Operation Ore class action was that certain important developments, which if they worked out would greatly facilitate the action, were still underway. One was the obtaining of what had been called the HG (Holy Grail) evidence from America, while another cannot yet be fully revealed. But all the key evidence is now on hand.

The class action (which may not be called that in the UK as a more relevant form will be used) has been handled up to now by a group of volunteers, including those editing this web site. They are now in the process of preparing and passing over the case material to the solicitors. If you want to become involved, this is your chance, and no matter how much you have suffered, you must stand up now if you want your name and justice restored. You cannot expect the volunteers to come looking for you when the action is rolling.

If you are an Oree and want to join, email the editor below. Use a pseudonym if you must, although you will have to give the solicitor your real name. We are very keen also on leading with the really good cases, so if you believe that your case is exceptionally good, let us know as we can use it.

Contact the EDITOR.

ECHR could now also support the victims of Operation Ore

Report:

In an historic unanimous judgment handed down by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), the whole basis of the searches carried out under the auspices of Operation Ore in the UK has been rendered illegal.

The decision concerned a Gerard Keegan and his family and was not related to Ore but is very relevant. On the 21 October 1999, at 6 AM, the police, headed by a Sergeant Gamble smashed down Gerard Keegan’s door. They purported to have been looking for an armed robber, but through extremely sloppy detective work (i.e. probably none), they raided an innocent family’s house. The raid lasted only 15 minutes and Sergeant Gamble apologized and offered to pay for the door, and, as far as he was concerned, that was the end of it.

However, the family were traumatized and Gerard Keegan decided to sue the police. The case ran through the domestic courts and, not surprisingly, they all found in the police’s favour. But Keegan was nothing if not tenacious and he decided to take the case to the ECHR.

The case was deliberated by the ECHE until the judgment was handed down that the police acted illegally under articles 8 and 13 of the Human Rights Act and that the family should be awarded compensation.

The crux of their judgment was that the police didn’t put enough effort into determining whether the object of their search was indeed on the premises. They just handed a virtually blank form to the magistrate who, as always, didn’t bother to examine any evidence, but just signed the search warrant. This was what incensed the ECHR judges, because it was, in their learned opinion, a breach of the Keegan’s right to privacy. Because it fell outside the get-out clause in article 8 in that the action was neither legal (proscribed by law) nor proportionate.

The judgment basically states that the police should provide evidence to the magistrate that the person (or things) they intended to search for on the premises would actually be there and that they had reason to suspect a crime had actually been committed and they had evidence to support it.

Which brings us to Ore. There was no evidence - save for credit card names and addresses, which in themselves proved nothing, particularly in light of the fact that the police made no effort to determine whether card fraud was involved - that any crime had been committed - in other words, it was a blind fishing trip. And the sort of thing that is absolutely verboten under this new ruling.

To put it in a nutshell, the police acted illegally and I would urge ALL Ore victims to sue their local police for damages. Just print out the ECHR judgment and write down the details of your case then pop down to your lawyer or your local Citizens Advise Bureau. (Editor. As he wrote this, Kevin Kirk was unaware that the class action was about to move ahead.)

And in future the police will have to gather evidence enough to convince a magistrate who, at long last, will actually be required to view the evidence before a warrant is issued.

(More at  http://www.coe.int/T/D/Kommunikation_und_politische_Forschung/Presse_und_Online_Info/Presseinfos/2006/20060718-GH-434-UK.as