On 17/09/2017 17:09, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:54:53 on Sun, 17 Sep
2017, Graeme Wall remarked
did they pick him up because they had managed to get a name/face for
the
person they were looking for

or did he give himself away

Â* Look at Train CCTV of man withÂ* with bag getting on at station xxx
look at CCTV at station xxx for the time period you expect someone on
thatÂ* train to have entered the station and see same man with same bag
touching in.
Strike lucky and find he used a registered Oyster card.

Or he's a minor criminal with a record and fingerprints/DNA on file.
Get a match from the bucket.

Very little hard information two days later. One arrest in Dover,
another in London; are either firmly linked to forensics from CCTV and
the bucket, or because of something else?

Doubt we will be told for a while yet. Threat level has been lowered
again so looks like they think no one else is involved.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

In message
-septe
mber.org, at 16:25:19 on Sun, 17 Sep 2017, Recliner
remarked:
Very little hard information two days later. One arrest in Dover,
another in London; are either firmly linked to forensics from CCTV and
the bucket, or because of something else?

Presumably information will remain limited if they're still looking for
more suspects, suppliers, funders, inspirers, etc.

But they've lowered the threat level.
--
Roland Perry

On 17/09/2017 17:41, wrote:

A friend who was in the police said many minor criminals aren't that
bright and often make one mistake which is all that is needed .

One I recall he mentioned was the interviewing of a suspect who had
previous form and had been brought in because of a torch dropped at
the scene.
Suspect was a getting a bit cockier as he got older and argued that no
way could they have found any prints on the scene because he had
learnt inside Prison always to wear gloves and the torch they said he
had handled would be clean and he had never seen it before.
"can you explain how your prints got on the batteries inside the
Torch ? was the next question.

A while back someone shared on a Facebook group a local newspaper story
about the police looking for someone who had run someone over. Someone
else then added a comment saying the story was unfair on her boyfriend
because his victim hadn't been watching out for people driving on the
footpath...

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On Sun, 17 Sep 2017 09:40:01 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 03:29:35 on
Sun, 17 Sep 2017, Charles Ellson remarked:
But instead of the early grainy, very low res, fuzzy, extended play VHS
images on worn-out tapes, it's now HD quality, sharp, clear, digital
images. Perhaps some are now 4k video quality?

How many would sir like ?
https://www.cctvcameraworld.com/4k-ip-cameras.html

I wonder how widely installed those are? Most installed cameras are well
behind the state-of-the-art.

At around 200 squid a time possibly roughly the same good/bad quality
spread among users applies as before when it seemed to be "TV" quality
v. something cheaper ?

The cost of CCTV systems is much more than just a consumer grade camera.
For public surveillance not only is there the backhaul, but they are
often able to pan and tilt, and need much better sensitivity/
illumination than those listed.

Have you actually installed and used those cheapo ones? They are OK for
the passageway down the side of a shop, but not much else.

There's not much point having pan and tilt if you haven't got someone
to operate it; the "do you know this person?" pictures generally seem
to come from fixed cameras. The need for moveable cameras is reduced
by siting fixed cameras at pinch points; each moveable camera is
likely to augment several fixed cameras depending on purpose. When you
get to the point of needing to track a specific target then you
probably are needing more moveable cameras (and zoom lenses).

On Sun, 17 Sep 2017 01:24:59 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Nobody wrote:
On Sun, 17 Sep 2017 00:12:50 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Nobody wrote:
On Sat, 16 Sep 2017 09:20:32 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
wrote:

On Sat, 16 Sep 2017 10:20:13 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Martin Edwards wrote:
On 9/15/2017 10:15 AM, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 15 Sep 2017 09:47:08 +0100
e27002 aurora wrote:
On Fri, 15 Sep 2017 08:19:08 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

Looks like it could be an improvised device, or some builders chemicals that
overheated. Hopefully the latter but seems unlikely to me.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41278545

There are reports of folks leaving the station with burns on exposed
flesh. It sounds like a chemical reaction. We can but hope it's not
"the religion of piece" proselytizing.

If it is terrorism then it'll almost certainly be down to followers of the
peaceful not in any way militant religion of islam.

It does appear to be terrorism.

Yes.

And they've now made an arrest, in Dover.

Don't these bombers realise that with all the surveillance videos,
they're going to get caught?

I dunno why youse guys in the UK aren't (constantly?) up in arms over
the seemingly massive surveillance you appear to live under.

If anything, people seem to want more of it, as they feel safer with it.

And 'they' don't really think/consider beyond, as to how it affects
their individual right to unobserved movement.

The state (in Canaduh anyway) has no right to know where I might or
might not be.

And please don't launch the "if you've done nothing wrong, you have
nothing to fear" defence at me.

Why not? It's exactly what most people think.

That's a surrender to un-involved citizenship. Big word:
acquiescence.



To an outsider, watching your exports of TV programming involving
fictional crime (e.g. the rather ancient series 'Scott and Bailey')
suggests that a mind-boggling Big Brother watch-it has been around for
more than a few years.

Yes, it's been around for many years.

Sad.

Your time will come: this is one area where Britain leads and the world
follows.

Interestingly, the crime rate in Canaduh has been dropping for
decades.

What's with your unfunny misspellings? They just make your posts less
readable.

Oh please, lighten up!

They are at least deliberately consistent.

We gave up wearing bowlers while striding across London Bridge a
decade or few ago, Shirley. g

On Fri, 15 Sep 2017 17:54:43 +0100
"tim..." wrote:
"Basil Jet" wrote in message
news
On 2017\09\15 13:06, tim... wrote:


"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 15/09/17 09:47, e27002 aurora wrote:
On Fri, 15 Sep 2017 08:19:08 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

Looks like it could be an improvised device, or some builders
chemicals that
overheated. Hopefully the latter but seems unlikely to me.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41278545

There are reports of folks leaving the station with burns on exposed
flesh. It sounds like a chemical reaction. We can but hope it's not
"the religion of piece" proselytizing.


Seen a picture of the device on twitter with wires hanging out.

the device had a timer (apparently)

Maybe LU can find out how one works,
and fit them in their line control offices.

are we meant to understand that comment?

Makes perfect sense to me. LU timetables are just fiction. Someone should
invest in buying the drivers and signalmen some watches at least. Oh, and
sack the idiot who thought playing "There is a good service on all lines"
every 5 minutes was a way to stop people noticing that there hasn't been a
train for the last 10 and there are now 1000 people on the platform waiting.

--
Spud

In message , at 20:05:01 on
Sun, 17 Sep 2017, Charles Ellson remarked:
On Sun, 17 Sep 2017 09:40:01 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 03:29:35 on
Sun, 17 Sep 2017, Charles Ellson remarked:
But instead of the early grainy, very low res, fuzzy, extended play VHS
images on worn-out tapes, it's now HD quality, sharp, clear, digital
images. Perhaps some are now 4k video quality?

How many would sir like ?
https://www.cctvcameraworld.com/4k-ip-cameras.html

I wonder how widely installed those are? Most installed cameras are well
behind the state-of-the-art.

At around 200 squid a time possibly roughly the same good/bad quality
spread among users applies as before when it seemed to be "TV" quality
v. something cheaper ?

The cost of CCTV systems is much more than just a consumer grade camera.
For public surveillance not only is there the backhaul, but they are
often able to pan and tilt, and need much better sensitivity/
illumination than those listed.

Have you actually installed and used those cheapo ones? They are OK for
the passageway down the side of a shop, but not much else.

There's not much point having pan and tilt if you haven't got someone
to operate it; the "do you know this person?" pictures generally seem
to come from fixed cameras.

Tell that to the installers of the tens of thousands of cameras which do
pan and tilt.

The need for moveable cameras is reduced by siting fixed cameras at
pinch points;

The moveable cameras tend to be at strategic points where they can cover
may different routes. The panning and tilting can be automatic on a
timer. Such cameras are more for preventing crime than detecting it.

each moveable camera is likely to augment several fixed cameras
depending on purpose. When you get to the point of needing to track a
specific target then you probably are needing more moveable cameras
(and zoom lenses).

You've been watching too much "Spooks".
--
Roland Perry

This is a very personal issue for me.

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 17 Sep 2017 13:44:03 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


assuming that he is the actual wanted person and not just some random
person of the correct ethnicity (as in - the Birmingham Six)

I wonder if they identified him as a potential suspect:

a) from a name
b) from facial recognition
c) his general demeanor
d) a failed attempt to travel on false documents

anything else?

tim



I think police methods are now far more sophisticated.

ESP?

My question really is

did they pick him up because they had managed to get a name/face for the
person they were looking for

or did he give himself away

tim


Look at Train CCTV of man with with bag getting on at station xxx
look at CCTV at station xxx for the time period you expect someone on
that train to have entered the station and see same man with same bag
touching in.
Strike lucky and find he used a registered Oyster card.

Yes I do know how they could have found out the identity of the person

my question is

did they in fact manage this in the time available before they stopped the
guy at Dover

or

did they just get lucky because he gave himself away, some other way

My interest here (as a tech professional) is in assessing the state of the
art of the technology to do this in 12 hours, where previously it might have
taken them 3 weeks (or more)

tim

tim... wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Sun, 17 Sep 2017 13:44:03 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


assuming that he is the actual wanted person and not just some random
person of the correct ethnicity (as in - the Birmingham Six)

I wonder if they identified him as a potential suspect:

a) from a name
b) from facial recognition
c) his general demeanor
d) a failed attempt to travel on false documents

anything else?

tim



I think police methods are now far more sophisticated.

ESP?

My question really is

did they pick him up because they had managed to get a name/face for the
person they were looking for

or did he give himself away

tim


Look at Train CCTV of man with with bag getting on at station xxx
look at CCTV at station xxx for the time period you expect someone on
that train to have entered the station and see same man with same bag
touching in.
Strike lucky and find he used a registered Oyster card.

Yes I do know how they could have found out the identity of the person

my question is

did they in fact manage this in the time available before they stopped the
guy at Dover

or

did they just get lucky because he gave himself away, some other way

My interest here (as a tech professional) is in assessing the state of the
art of the technology to do this in 12 hours, where previously it might have
taken them 3 weeks (or more)

It seems he was arrested at Dover on other grounds. Only later did they
discover he was wanted fir the attempted bombing. So they got lucky.