28 January 2010

One down, two to go

I blogged earlier expressing the argument that the climategate gang should be subject to an open, clear and transparent investigation with a view to prosecuting them for 1) freedom of information offences; 2) misconduct in public office; and, 3) fraud.

See, The Royal Society and The Royal Society of Chemistry v Phil Jones and the poll, Climategate Prosecution?.

The BBC has just reported that, "A university unit involved in a row over stolen e-mails on climate research breached rules by withholding data, the Information Commissioner's Office says.

Officials said messages hacked in November showed that requests under the Freedom of Information Act were "not dealt with as they should have been".

But too much time has passed for action against the University of East Anglia.

See, "Climate e-mails row university 'breached data laws' ".

So, I ask again, why aren't the climategate 'scientists' being investigated with a view to prosecuting them?

Two offences (that I can think of) are outstanding. How are the climategate scientists supposed to clear their names in the absence of a court case?

No comments:

Post a Comment