>[Mail: Downing Street police have given ‘extremely damning’ partygate evidence to Sue Gray](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10433445/Downing-Street-police-extremely-damning-Covid-party-evidence-Sue-Gray.html): ‘If Boris Johnson is still Prime Minister by the end of the week I’d be very surprised’ says source… as Dominic Cummings is expected to be quizzed TODAY
>
> * Police on duty when alleged gatherings took place have been interviewed
> * The testimonies come just days before Ms Gray releases the findings of report
> * Official inquiry by ethics chief Sue Gray is expected to be published this week
> * But Boris Johnson is still sticking to his story that he broke no lockdown rules
> * The Prime Minister is calling MPs to drum up support before report is revealed
>
>(mirror link: https://archive.is/QJC8P)
–
And:
>Telegraph live blog: [Sue Gray report into Downing Street ‘parties’ will not be published in full, suggests Nadhim Zahawi](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/01/24/boris-johnson-news-sue-gray-parties-nusrat-ghani/)
>
>Sue Gray’s report into allegations of parties at Downing Street during lockdown will not be published in full, the Education Secretary has suggested.
>
>Ms Gray, the Second Permanent Secretary at the Cabinet Office, has been tasked with investigating a number of accusations and is expected to come back with her conclusions this week.
>
>But Nadhim Zahawi emphasised that the terms of reference of her investigation mean her “findings” must be placed into the public domain, rather than necessarily a full report.
>
>”That is the terms of reference [and] that will ensure that her findings are made public,” he told Radio 4’s Today programme. “That will ensure public confidence. This is exactly what she should be doing.
>
>”She can follow the evidence wherever it takes her… The findings will be made public and the Prime Minister will submit himself to Parliament and make a statement and be scrutinised on those findings.”
>
>The conclusions could make or break Boris Johnson’s premiership after the Prime Minister apologised to MPs for attending a gathering in the Downing Street garden on May 20, 2020, but continues to claim he thought it was a “work event”.
>[Interview, with Caroline Slocock former private secretary to Margaret Thatcher and John Major on *Woman’s Hour* on Sue Gray’s position](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m00139c1) (first item in show)
The police should be conducting their own investigation, this proves they already have evidence of a crime.
Officers knowingly allowed a rule breaking party to proceed?
Heads need to roll, and I don’t mean the poor sap plonked in front of the door.
The police on the door should have reported it upwards the day it happened and someone senior should have given Johnson a call about it. There needs to be an investigation into the police now as well.
Just proves there’s rules for us and no rules for them if at the very least he isn’t removed as the Prime Minister.
I thought the police had no evidence that any parties took place.
This is utterly damning not just for Johnson but also for Cressida Dick. It proves she’s deliberately protecting Johnson for political reasons. She will have at hand exactly the same damning information from these officers that Sue Gray has, but has refused to act on it.
“Asked how significant the material they had disclosed was, they added: “Put it this way, if Boris Johnson is still Prime Minister by the end of the week, I’d be very surprised.”
Champagne is waiting in the fridge 😁
In light of recent news about government funding I suspect there was a conversation along these lines:
Police: we understand there is a party going on at No. 10, this is against regulations
Bojo/No. 10: we understand there is going to be a review of police funding
“Our investigation has found me guilty – but that does not mean that I broke the rules. We will have an investigation into the investigation, headed by Joris Bohnson.”
This is backwards. Why is a civil servant questioning police about a party that government employees and civil servants were at? Surely should be the other way round? Puts paid to the theory that there was no evidence. They didn’t even look.
17 comments
More:
>[Telegraph: Number 10 police questioned by Sue Gray over Downing Street parties](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/01/23/number-10-police-questioned-sue-gray-downing-street-parties/)
>
>Officers’ ‘extremely damning’ accounts of comings-and-goings in Westminster to form key part of civil servant’s report
>
>(mirror link: https://archive.is/QzFWj)
–
>[Mail: Downing Street police have given ‘extremely damning’ partygate evidence to Sue Gray](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10433445/Downing-Street-police-extremely-damning-Covid-party-evidence-Sue-Gray.html): ‘If Boris Johnson is still Prime Minister by the end of the week I’d be very surprised’ says source… as Dominic Cummings is expected to be quizzed TODAY
>
> * Police on duty when alleged gatherings took place have been interviewed
> * The testimonies come just days before Ms Gray releases the findings of report
> * Official inquiry by ethics chief Sue Gray is expected to be published this week
> * But Boris Johnson is still sticking to his story that he broke no lockdown rules
> * The Prime Minister is calling MPs to drum up support before report is revealed
>
>(mirror link: https://archive.is/QJC8P)
–
And:
>Telegraph live blog: [Sue Gray report into Downing Street ‘parties’ will not be published in full, suggests Nadhim Zahawi](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/01/24/boris-johnson-news-sue-gray-parties-nusrat-ghani/)
>
>Sue Gray’s report into allegations of parties at Downing Street during lockdown will not be published in full, the Education Secretary has suggested.
>
>Ms Gray, the Second Permanent Secretary at the Cabinet Office, has been tasked with investigating a number of accusations and is expected to come back with her conclusions this week.
>
>But Nadhim Zahawi emphasised that the terms of reference of her investigation mean her “findings” must be placed into the public domain, rather than necessarily a full report.
>
>”That is the terms of reference [and] that will ensure that her findings are made public,” he told Radio 4’s Today programme. “That will ensure public confidence. This is exactly what she should be doing.
>
>”She can follow the evidence wherever it takes her… The findings will be made public and the Prime Minister will submit himself to Parliament and make a statement and be scrutinised on those findings.”
>
>The conclusions could make or break Boris Johnson’s premiership after the Prime Minister apologised to MPs for attending a gathering in the Downing Street garden on May 20, 2020, but continues to claim he thought it was a “work event”.
which be on top of [Raab saying same yesterday](https://np.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/sasz3s/dominic_raab_refuses_to_confirm_full_publication/htvhyf2/)
Of which if you want to know how, on Sue Gray’s report:
>Prospect: [Sue Gray can’t make MPs’ decision for them](https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/sue-gray-cant-make-mps-decision-for-them-boris-johnson-partygate)
>
>The inquiry cannot absolve Conservative parliamentarians from exercising their judgment on “Partygate”
–
>[Interview on this with Jonathan Powell on BBC r4’s *World at One*](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0013953) (about ten or fifteen minutes in)
–
>[Interview, with Caroline Slocock former private secretary to Margaret Thatcher and John Major on *Woman’s Hour* on Sue Gray’s position](https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m00139c1) (first item in show)
Add the obligatory from early December 2021:
>[NT: Police find damning evidence of parties at Downing Street, after remembering they provided the security](https://newsthump.com/2021/12/10/police-find-damning-evidence-of-parties-at-downing-street-after-remembering-they-provided-the-security/)
The police should be conducting their own investigation, this proves they already have evidence of a crime.
Officers knowingly allowed a rule breaking party to proceed?
Heads need to roll, and I don’t mean the poor sap plonked in front of the door.
The police on the door should have reported it upwards the day it happened and someone senior should have given Johnson a call about it. There needs to be an investigation into the police now as well.
Just proves there’s rules for us and no rules for them if at the very least he isn’t removed as the Prime Minister.
I thought the police had no evidence that any parties took place.
This is utterly damning not just for Johnson but also for Cressida Dick. It proves she’s deliberately protecting Johnson for political reasons. She will have at hand exactly the same damning information from these officers that Sue Gray has, but has refused to act on it.
“Asked how significant the material they had disclosed was, they added: “Put it this way, if Boris Johnson is still Prime Minister by the end of the week, I’d be very surprised.”
Champagne is waiting in the fridge 😁
In light of recent news about government funding I suspect there was a conversation along these lines:
Police: we understand there is a party going on at No. 10, this is against regulations
Bojo/No. 10: we understand there is going to be a review of police funding
“Our investigation has found me guilty – but that does not mean that I broke the rules. We will have an investigation into the investigation, headed by Joris Bohnson.”
This is backwards. Why is a civil servant questioning police about a party that government employees and civil servants were at? Surely should be the other way round? Puts paid to the theory that there was no evidence. They didn’t even look.
Tabloid newspapers publishing anonymous statements.
Sounds legit.
Wait, so all these police have evidence of wrongdoing but didn’t bother to mention it until now?
Sounds like a case of gross incompetence at best and perverting the course of justice at worst.
What sort of bizarro world is this, that some Jessica Fletcher civil servant is doing the work of police?
Just waiting for a picture to leak of Cressida attending one of the parties. Surely that’ll be it.
Lol. Now it makes sense that Sue Gray is doing it. I mean who…in their right mind would rely on the police to do it?