The four men arrested Wednesday night in what the authorities said was a plot to bomb two synagogues in the Bronx and shoot down military planes at an Air National Guard base in Newburgh, N.Y. were petty criminals who appeared to be acting alone, not in concert with any terrorist organization, the New York City police commissioner said Thursday.
The men were arrested in an elaborate sting operation at around 9 p.m. on Wednesday after planting what they believed to be bombs in cars outside the Riverdale Temple, a Reform synagogue, and the nearby Riverdale Jewish Center, an Orthodox synagogue. Once the explosives were planted, the men planned to drive to the National Guard base to shoot down military aircraft with a Stinger surface-to-air missile while detonating the bombs with a remote device.
The men did not know that the bombs, obtained with the help of an informant for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, were fake, and that the missile was incapable of being fired.
In a news conference at the Riverdale Jewish Center, one of the two synagogues said to be the targets of the plot, the commissioner, Raymond W. Kelly, offered new details about the four defendants — James Cromitie, David Williams, Onta Williams and Laguerre Payen — three of whom were arraigned in Federal District Court in White Plains, N.Y., on Thursday.
“It’s hard to envision a more chilling plot,” Eric Snyder, an assistant United States attorney, said at the arraignment. He added, “These are extremely violent men. These are men who eagerly embraced an opportunity” to “bring deaths to Jews.”
They were ordered to be held at a Westchester County jail, and their lawyers declined to file bail applications.
The men, all of whom live in Newburgh, about 60 miles north of New York City, had met in prison. Mr. Cromitie, 53, who authorities described as the plot’s leader, had lived in Brooklyn and had as many as 27 arrests for minor crimes both in upstate New York and in New York City, Mr. Kelly said. Mr. Cromitie, David Williams, and Onta Williams were native-born Americans, while Mr. Payen was born in Haiti and is a Haitian citizen.
The four men arrested are all Muslim, a law enforcement official said. Mr. Cromitie, whose parents had lived in Afghanistan before his birth, had told the informant that he was upset about the war in Afghanistan and that that he wanted to do “something to America.” Mr. Cromitie stated “the best target” — the World Trade Center — “was hit already,” according to the complaint.
Mr. Kelly said: “They stated that they wanted to commit jihad. They were disturbed about what was happening in Afghanistan and Pakistan, that Muslims were being killed. They were making statements that Jews were killed in this attack and that would be all right — that sort of thing.”
“It speaks to our concern about homegrown terrorism,” Mr. Kelly said.
In an interview on Thursday, Mr. Cromitie’s sister, Wanda Cromitie, said she was shocked to learn of her brother’s arrest while watching television this morning. She said she was unaware that her brother may have had extreme political views, and that she had last spoken to him about two years ago when she thought he was working at a Wal-Mart or Kmart store.
“Right now, to me he’s, like, the dumbest person I ever came in contact with in my life,” Ms. Cromitie said.
She added that as far as she knew, he was not a Muslim, but said “they do a little time in jail and they don’t eat pork no more.”
At the Masjid al-Ikhlas mosque in Newburgh where the men first met the F.B.I. informant, they were not considered devoted members, said an imam at the mosque, Salahuddin Mustafa. He also said that the man he believes was the informant showed up about two years ago and started inviting people to meals, where he would talk about jihad and violence. The imam and others believed the man was a government agent and steered clear of him, he said, but Mr. Cromitie apparently took the bait.
An assistant imam at the mosque, Hamin Rashada, said that another one of the four men, Mr. Payen, seemed disturbed. Mr. Payen often talked in circles, showed signs of paranoia and kept bottles of urine in a messy apartment.
“He has some very serious psychological problems,” Mr. Rashada said
1 2 3 The arrests capped what officials described as a “painstaking investigation” that began in June 2008, involving an F.B.I. agent who had been told by the federal informant of the men’s desire to attack targets in America. The informant had been cooperating with the authorities since 2002, when he pleaded guilty to taking part in an unrelated fraud scheme and was sentenced to five years of probation.
The charges against the four men represent some of the most significant allegations of domestic terrorism in some time, and come as President Obama grapples with the question of how to handle detainees at the Guantánamo Bay camp in Cuba. He laid out his policy in a speech Thursday in Washington.
According to the criminal complaint, Mr. Cromitie and the three other men, who were in their 20s and 30s, selected the synagogues and the air base as their targets in April. On May 6, the defendants traveled to a warehouse in Connecticut to obtain what they believed was a surface-to-air guided-missile system and three improvised explosive devices, all of which were actually incapable of being fired or detonated. The men then brought the weapons back to a storage facility in Newburgh, the criminal complaint said.
Rabbi Jonathan I. Rosenblatt, the senior rabbi at the Riverdale Jewish Center, said the police informed him on Wednesday evening that his synagogue was a target of the plot, as well as the Riverdale Temple, a short distance away, on Independence Avenue. Outside the synagogues on Wednesday night, the streets were eerily quiet.
Rabbi Rosenblatt said in a phone interview Wednesday that he took the news with “shock, surprise — a sense of disbelief that something which is supposed to belong to the world of front pages and the evening news had invaded the quiet world of our synagogue.”
Jonathan Mark, associate editor of The Jewish Week newspaper who grew up in Riverdale, said it would have been the third plot in the past decade against the synagogues in Riverdale.
The plot unfolded Wednesday night as one of the suspects placed what he believed were homemade bombs — each equipped with about 37 pounds of inert C-4 plastic explosives — into separate vehicles parked outside the synagogues. The other three suspects served as lookouts, Mr. Kelly said.
“There was a driver who was a cooperator, and there was the individual who placed the bombs in the vehicle, and then there were three lookouts,” Mr. Kelly said. “As everyone was going back to the car, that is when the signal was given to the emergency service officers to move in.”
An 18-wheel New York Police Department vehicle — known as a “low-boy” — blocked the suspects’ black sport utility vehicle at 237th Street and Riverdale Avenue. The F.B.I. informer also served as the driver of the suspects’ S.U.V., Mr. Kelly said.
Another armored vehicle arrived and officers from the department’s Emergency Service Unit smashed the blackened windows of the S.U.V., removed the men from the vehicle, and handcuffed them on the ground. None offered resistance.
Other police officers, along with members of the Joint Terrorist Task Force, the F.B.I., and the state police, were also on hand, and “moved in and took those individuals away,” Mr. Kelly said. Three of the four men were escorted by federal agents from Federal Plaza in Lower Manhattan around 1 a.m. Thursday. They were handcuffed and did not respond to reporters’ questions as they were loaded into the back of vehicles to be taken to the nearby Metropolitan Correctional Center. There, they emerged one by one.
Mr. Cromitie, who was wearing a dark blue shirt and jeans, gazed at the assembled reporters and photographers but again did not respond to questions. David and Onta Williams also did not answer questions as they quickly walked by, staring at the ground. A federal law enforcement official described the plot as “aspirational” — meaning that the suspects wanted to do something but had no weapons or explosives — and described the operation as a sting with a cooperator within the group.
“It was fully controlled at all times,” a law enforcement official said.
Mr. Kelly told Jewish leaders Wednesday evening that the attackers planned simultaneous attacks. After the men left the bombs in cars in front of the two synagogues, they planned to drive back to Newburgh and retrieve cellphone-detonating devices and then proceed with the attack on the air base — simultaneously shooting down aircraft while remotely setting off the devices in the carsStewart International Airport is used by the New York Air National Guard and United States Air Force, according to the complaint, and it stores aircraft used to transport military supplies and personnel to the military in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The shadowy figure of the F.B.I. informant is, in many ways, a driving force of the plot laid out by prosecutors. The informant, who has been cooperating with the F.B.I. for the past six years, first met with Mr. Cromitie at the Masjid al-Ikhlas, a mosque in Newburgh, in June 2008. At that time, Mr. Cromitie told the informant that he was interested in returning to Afghanistan. Mr. Cromitie spoke about how, if he were to die a martyr, he would go to paradise, the complaint said.
A month later, the informant lied to Mr. Cromitie, telling him that he was a member of Jaish al-Mohammed, a terrorist organization based in Pakistan. Mr. Cromitie said he would be interested in joining up “to do jihad.” The informant, who audio and video taped many of his meetings with the defendants, later told them that the surface-to-air missiles and explosives were provided by the terrorist group.
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and elected officials joined Mr. Kelly at the news conference on Thursday morning, which was held as worshipers arrived for morning services.
The mayor praised the Police Department, which worked with the F.B.I. and other agencies on the case, and described the disruption of the terror plot as a frightening but exceptional occurrence. “Most people in New York City want to live together, work together, and I think we’re as safe today as we’ve ever been before,” the mayor said.
Political leaders responded to the news of the arrests with statements expressing relief.
State Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz, a Bronx Democrat who represents Riverdale, and is a member of the congregation at the Riverdale Temple, also praised law enforcement authorities for their efforts.
“I think most people will agree that we’re very angry, but very sad, that this kind of plot would take place in our community,” he said. “There are people out there motivated by religious hatred, hatred against Jews frankly, but the good news is that the N.Y.P.D. and F.B.I. were on top of this from the very beginning.”
Thursday, May 21, 2009
First Labour MP quits over expenses
A Labour MP has announced he will stand down from the House of Commons at the next general election after allegations that he overclaimed £15,000 in expenses for mortgage interest.
Wirral South's Ben Chapman is the first Labour MP to quit Westminster as a result of the expenses controversy which has dominated politics over the past fortnight.
Mr Chapman insisted that he had done nothing wrong and said his decision was prompted by the "hurtful" impact of publicity surrounding his claim on his family and supporters.
In a statement issued by his office, Mr Chapman said: "I maintain that I have done nothing wrong and have acted in good faith and with absolute transparency throughout. The House of Commons Fees Office have expressed their apologies and regret that the advice they gave me was incorrect.
"But the publicity in the Daily Telegraph, and subsequently elsewhere, has been hurtful to my family, friends and local party members and supporters, and I have therefore decided to stand down at the next general election."
Earlier, PM Gordon Brown was forced to defend two more of his Cabinet ministers. He insisted there was "no problem" with financial arrangements which meant Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon and Work and Pensions Secretary James Purnell did not pay capital gains tax on second homes.
But he also lashed out at the "appalling" practices that were being uncovered at Westminster and expressed "surprise" at some of the MPs who had been taking part in them.
His comments came as a third Conservative MP, Peter Viggers, was effectively kicked out of the party after it emerged that he had claimed £1,645 for a "duck island" for his pond. David Cameron confirmed that Sir Peter had been told he could either stand down from his Gosport constituency at the next general election, or be expelled from the parliamentary party.
Meanwhile, Conservative MP for Mid-Worcestershire Peter Luff spent £17,000 of taxpayers' money on furniture and other items for his two homes during a four-year period, it has been reported.
Mr Luff made expenses claims for three lavatory seats, three food mixers, two microwaves, four beds, five tables, two ironing boards, three kettles and 10 sets of bed linen, according to the Daily Telegraph. Mr Luff insisted that his claims were "within the letter and spirit of the rules" and said he would repay any money found to have breached them.
courtsey:the guardian u.k
Wirral South's Ben Chapman is the first Labour MP to quit Westminster as a result of the expenses controversy which has dominated politics over the past fortnight.
Mr Chapman insisted that he had done nothing wrong and said his decision was prompted by the "hurtful" impact of publicity surrounding his claim on his family and supporters.
In a statement issued by his office, Mr Chapman said: "I maintain that I have done nothing wrong and have acted in good faith and with absolute transparency throughout. The House of Commons Fees Office have expressed their apologies and regret that the advice they gave me was incorrect.
"But the publicity in the Daily Telegraph, and subsequently elsewhere, has been hurtful to my family, friends and local party members and supporters, and I have therefore decided to stand down at the next general election."
Earlier, PM Gordon Brown was forced to defend two more of his Cabinet ministers. He insisted there was "no problem" with financial arrangements which meant Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon and Work and Pensions Secretary James Purnell did not pay capital gains tax on second homes.
But he also lashed out at the "appalling" practices that were being uncovered at Westminster and expressed "surprise" at some of the MPs who had been taking part in them.
His comments came as a third Conservative MP, Peter Viggers, was effectively kicked out of the party after it emerged that he had claimed £1,645 for a "duck island" for his pond. David Cameron confirmed that Sir Peter had been told he could either stand down from his Gosport constituency at the next general election, or be expelled from the parliamentary party.
Meanwhile, Conservative MP for Mid-Worcestershire Peter Luff spent £17,000 of taxpayers' money on furniture and other items for his two homes during a four-year period, it has been reported.
Mr Luff made expenses claims for three lavatory seats, three food mixers, two microwaves, four beds, five tables, two ironing boards, three kettles and 10 sets of bed linen, according to the Daily Telegraph. Mr Luff insisted that his claims were "within the letter and spirit of the rules" and said he would repay any money found to have breached them.
courtsey:the guardian u.k
Child abuse row goes on as Catholics get new leader
The new archbishop of Westminster faced continuing criticism from victims of child abuse today
as he was formally installed as the leader of the 4.2 million Catholics in England and Wales.
Child safety campaigners were outraged when the Most Rev Vincent Nichols said it took "courage" for religious orders and clergy to "face the facts from their past" in response to a report examining the systematic abuse of thousands of children by Ireland's religious orders and state-run institutions. The comment was made in an interview broadcast on Wednesday.
Judge Sean Ryan, who chaired the nine-year inquiry, only praised one order, the Rosminians, for attempting to understand the abuse as well as document it.
The Christian Brothers, who ran the largest number of institutions, agreed to drop legal challenges and give evidence only once a deal was agreed not to name guilty clerics. A spokesman for the Irish Survivors of Child Abuse, John Kelly, said: "The religious orders ran to the safety and sanctuary of the Ryan inquiry knowing their guilty evidence was granted privilege and immunity."
The archbishop sought to clarify his remarks before his investiture. On BBC 5 Live he said the "main use of the word courage" referred to victims and that anyone who overcame an addiction had to overcome "self deceit". He said: "It is a tough road to take, to face up to our own weaknesses. That is certainly true of anyone who has deceived themselves that all they have been doing is taking a bit of comfort from children."
The archbishop's spokesman reiterated an earlier call for perpetrators to face legal and police processes.
as he was formally installed as the leader of the 4.2 million Catholics in England and Wales.
Child safety campaigners were outraged when the Most Rev Vincent Nichols said it took "courage" for religious orders and clergy to "face the facts from their past" in response to a report examining the systematic abuse of thousands of children by Ireland's religious orders and state-run institutions. The comment was made in an interview broadcast on Wednesday.
Judge Sean Ryan, who chaired the nine-year inquiry, only praised one order, the Rosminians, for attempting to understand the abuse as well as document it.
The Christian Brothers, who ran the largest number of institutions, agreed to drop legal challenges and give evidence only once a deal was agreed not to name guilty clerics. A spokesman for the Irish Survivors of Child Abuse, John Kelly, said: "The religious orders ran to the safety and sanctuary of the Ryan inquiry knowing their guilty evidence was granted privilege and immunity."
The archbishop sought to clarify his remarks before his investiture. On BBC 5 Live he said the "main use of the word courage" referred to victims and that anyone who overcame an addiction had to overcome "self deceit". He said: "It is a tough road to take, to face up to our own weaknesses. That is certainly true of anyone who has deceived themselves that all they have been doing is taking a bit of comfort from children."
The archbishop's spokesman reiterated an earlier call for perpetrators to face legal and police processes.
New Zealand couple flee after finding £4m in their bank account
It might be time to end our cynicism towards cheery slogans peddled by the world's commercial banks. A couple from New Zealand, for example, now have every reason to believe their local bank's motto: making the most of life.
The pair, named in media reports as Leo Gao and Cara Young, could hardly believe their luck when they checked their account at Westpac bank on 5 May, hoping to find their request for a NZ$10,900 (£4,000) overdraft had been accepted.
Instead, the bank had deposited 1,000 times that amount: NZ$10m, or around £4m. With so many borrowers around the world constantly being told "no" by their creditors, here, finally, was a bank that liked to say "yes".
Last night the accidental millionaires from Rotorua, a tourist city on the north island overlooking, appropriately enough, the Bay of Plenty, are on an Interpol wanted list after fleeing with the bulk of their windfall two weeks ago.
While their whereabouts remains a mystery, local reports speculated they may have fled to China or South Korea after transferring as much as NZ$6m to an offshore account.
The local newspaper, the Rotorua Review, said a police official had been sent to China to search for the couple.
Police said they were treating the case as theft but offered only sketchy details. "We are currently conducting an investigation into the individuals that may have been involved in the withdrawal of the money," detective David Harvey told reporters in Rotorua, which until now was known mainly for its geysers and mud pools.
"The individuals associated with this account are believed to have left New Zealand and police were working through Interpol to locate those individuals," he said, adding that the bank had recovered some of the cash, thought to be about NZ$4m.
Westpac, an Australian bank with 10 million customers, said the overpayment had been the result of human error and it was "pursuing vigorous criminal and civil action" to recover the money.
Gao and Young, who ran a BP petrol station on the outskirts of the city, had reportedly been struggling financially for several months. The station was closed on 6 May and the couple vanished the following day. Twenty-four hours later, their business was put into receivership.
Though Gao and Young hardly qualify as a modern-day Bonnie and Clyde – they are thought to be armed with little more than a change of clothes, passports and an ATM card – the unlikely fugitives have become the topic du jour among Rotorua's 55,000 residents.
Neighbours described Gao as a "really nice guy" who lived with his mother and brothers, and Young and her daughter Lena, all of whom have vanished. "We thought he was pretty honest, but it turns out he's not," the manager of the neighbourhood's off-licence told 3 News. The saga has hurled New Zealanders into the kind of moral maze that Gao and Young appeared to have spent just a few seconds navigating before deciding to skirt around it altogether.
Given the battering the banking industry has taken over the past year, many admitted that, if gifted with a similar sum, they would rather live as wealthy fugitives than remain out of pocket but with a clear conscience.
"Best of luck to them," wrote one browser on the 3 News website. "The banks are as honest as the power companies."
But another was horrified by the level of support for the couple: "I can't believe the number of people that say they would keep the money. These people have taken money that wasn't theirs, no matter which way you look at it."
Experts do not expect it will take investigators long to catch up with the couple; the only question is how much they can splurge before they are found.
In a case in the US last year, a Pennsylvania couple quit their jobs and fled the state after withdrawing $175,000 (£110,000) that had mistakenly been credited to their account. They were arrested in Florida.
The pair, named in media reports as Leo Gao and Cara Young, could hardly believe their luck when they checked their account at Westpac bank on 5 May, hoping to find their request for a NZ$10,900 (£4,000) overdraft had been accepted.
Instead, the bank had deposited 1,000 times that amount: NZ$10m, or around £4m. With so many borrowers around the world constantly being told "no" by their creditors, here, finally, was a bank that liked to say "yes".
Last night the accidental millionaires from Rotorua, a tourist city on the north island overlooking, appropriately enough, the Bay of Plenty, are on an Interpol wanted list after fleeing with the bulk of their windfall two weeks ago.
While their whereabouts remains a mystery, local reports speculated they may have fled to China or South Korea after transferring as much as NZ$6m to an offshore account.
The local newspaper, the Rotorua Review, said a police official had been sent to China to search for the couple.
Police said they were treating the case as theft but offered only sketchy details. "We are currently conducting an investigation into the individuals that may have been involved in the withdrawal of the money," detective David Harvey told reporters in Rotorua, which until now was known mainly for its geysers and mud pools.
"The individuals associated with this account are believed to have left New Zealand and police were working through Interpol to locate those individuals," he said, adding that the bank had recovered some of the cash, thought to be about NZ$4m.
Westpac, an Australian bank with 10 million customers, said the overpayment had been the result of human error and it was "pursuing vigorous criminal and civil action" to recover the money.
Gao and Young, who ran a BP petrol station on the outskirts of the city, had reportedly been struggling financially for several months. The station was closed on 6 May and the couple vanished the following day. Twenty-four hours later, their business was put into receivership.
Though Gao and Young hardly qualify as a modern-day Bonnie and Clyde – they are thought to be armed with little more than a change of clothes, passports and an ATM card – the unlikely fugitives have become the topic du jour among Rotorua's 55,000 residents.
Neighbours described Gao as a "really nice guy" who lived with his mother and brothers, and Young and her daughter Lena, all of whom have vanished. "We thought he was pretty honest, but it turns out he's not," the manager of the neighbourhood's off-licence told 3 News. The saga has hurled New Zealanders into the kind of moral maze that Gao and Young appeared to have spent just a few seconds navigating before deciding to skirt around it altogether.
Given the battering the banking industry has taken over the past year, many admitted that, if gifted with a similar sum, they would rather live as wealthy fugitives than remain out of pocket but with a clear conscience.
"Best of luck to them," wrote one browser on the 3 News website. "The banks are as honest as the power companies."
But another was horrified by the level of support for the couple: "I can't believe the number of people that say they would keep the money. These people have taken money that wasn't theirs, no matter which way you look at it."
Experts do not expect it will take investigators long to catch up with the couple; the only question is how much they can splurge before they are found.
In a case in the US last year, a Pennsylvania couple quit their jobs and fled the state after withdrawing $175,000 (£110,000) that had mistakenly been credited to their account. They were arrested in Florida.
Council lawyers admit Baby P could have been put into care
There was probably sufficient evidence to justify taking Baby P into care days before he was brutally killed, council lawyers at the centre of the case have privately admitted, according to documents seen by the Guardian.
The admission contradicts the legal advice given to social workers a week before the toddler died that proceedings to remove him from his family could not go ahead because the risk "threshold" to trigger an application to take him into care had not been crossed.
Council lawyers later told an independent serious case review inquiry investigating the tragedy that the advice, given by a locum lawyer inexperienced in child protection, was flawed and not clearly expressed.
The revelations shed fresh light on the death of Baby Peter, who was found dead on 3 August 2007 after suffering horrific injuries, including a cracked spine and bruising to his face and body. His mother and her lover were convicted in November of causing his death. They will be sentenced today.
The details of the legal advice were set out in a serious case review into the death completed in 2008. But this original report was judged inadequate by ministers. A revised report by the new head of Haringey's local safeguarding children board, Graham Badman, will be released today. It is expected to say that the care threshold adopted by Haringey officials was too high. It will also criticise the lack of urgency and thoroughness of professionals involved in the case.
Documents seen by the Guardian show that a legal meeting on Baby Peter, who was on Haringey's child protection register, had been sought by police and social workers on 4 June 2007, three days after the discovery by social workers of marks and bruises to the boy's face. But administrative errors and workload pressures meant that the meeting did not take place for another for seven weeks.
When it was finally convened, the lawyer verbally advised safeguarding officers that the threshold was not met for legal proceedings. The formal written memorandum to social workers confirming this advice was, by bitter coincidence, prepared only on the morning of Peter's death.
Asked by the original serious case review inquiry to explain its actions, the legal department admitted that, in hindsight, it was "likely that the threshold criteria were met at the time [of the legal planning meeting]".
It justified the lawyer's decision not to apply for care proceedings on the grounds that it "may have not been appropriate" to do so "if there were adequate safeguards in place to protect [Baby Peter] pending the outcome of further investigations".
Haringey's legal department admitted that there had been serious shortcomings in its conduct of the case. The original serious case review report is understood to have noted that legal services had "difficulty commenting on the appropriateness of [the lawyer's] advice" because of "insufficient recording of the legal planning meeting".
Haringey legal services told the inquiry that it was "preferable" to ensure this kind of legal advice came from experienced child protection lawyers but this had not always been possible because of "recruitment difficulties".
The revelations came as Peter's mother apologised for the first time for failing to protect a child she called "my baby boy" from the violence meted out to him over several months by her live-in boyfriend.
In a handwritten letter presented at the last minute to an Old Bailey judge on the eve of her sentencing today, the 27-year- old mother, who cannot be named, asked for forgiveness. She has admitted causing or allowing her son's death. "I except [sic] I failed my son Peter for which I pleaded guilty," she wrote. "By not being fully open with the social workers I stopped them from being able to do a full job. As a direct result of this my son got hurt and sadly lost his short life. I am never going to see my lovely son grow into the lovely sweet man I believe he would have been. I have lost all I hold dear to me, now every day of my life is full of guilt and trying to come to terms with my failure as a mother."
The letter was written in black ballpoint pen on paper torn from an exercise book and submitted to the judge by the mother in a last-minute plea for leniency.
"I can only hope and pray my family and ex-husband included can one day forgive my mistakes however I can never forgive myself for my shortcomings. I am truly sorry."
It is the only expression of remorse she has made since being arrested after the death of her only son. Peter's lifeless body was found in his blood-splattered cot on 3 August 2007. He had suffered more than 50, injuries despite 60 visits from social workers.
He was gasping for breath in the last hours of his life but neither his mother nor her boyfriend took him to hospital or called a doctor.
The mother sat in the dock playing with her hair yesterday as her child's horrific injuries were rehearsed again in advance of her sentencing and that of her 32-year-old boyfriend and another man, Jason Owens, 37, both of whom were convicted last November of causing or allowing Peter's death. The mother's boyfriend will also be sentenced for the rape of another child who was on the council's child protection register.
The admission contradicts the legal advice given to social workers a week before the toddler died that proceedings to remove him from his family could not go ahead because the risk "threshold" to trigger an application to take him into care had not been crossed.
Council lawyers later told an independent serious case review inquiry investigating the tragedy that the advice, given by a locum lawyer inexperienced in child protection, was flawed and not clearly expressed.
The revelations shed fresh light on the death of Baby Peter, who was found dead on 3 August 2007 after suffering horrific injuries, including a cracked spine and bruising to his face and body. His mother and her lover were convicted in November of causing his death. They will be sentenced today.
The details of the legal advice were set out in a serious case review into the death completed in 2008. But this original report was judged inadequate by ministers. A revised report by the new head of Haringey's local safeguarding children board, Graham Badman, will be released today. It is expected to say that the care threshold adopted by Haringey officials was too high. It will also criticise the lack of urgency and thoroughness of professionals involved in the case.
Documents seen by the Guardian show that a legal meeting on Baby Peter, who was on Haringey's child protection register, had been sought by police and social workers on 4 June 2007, three days after the discovery by social workers of marks and bruises to the boy's face. But administrative errors and workload pressures meant that the meeting did not take place for another for seven weeks.
When it was finally convened, the lawyer verbally advised safeguarding officers that the threshold was not met for legal proceedings. The formal written memorandum to social workers confirming this advice was, by bitter coincidence, prepared only on the morning of Peter's death.
Asked by the original serious case review inquiry to explain its actions, the legal department admitted that, in hindsight, it was "likely that the threshold criteria were met at the time [of the legal planning meeting]".
It justified the lawyer's decision not to apply for care proceedings on the grounds that it "may have not been appropriate" to do so "if there were adequate safeguards in place to protect [Baby Peter] pending the outcome of further investigations".
Haringey's legal department admitted that there had been serious shortcomings in its conduct of the case. The original serious case review report is understood to have noted that legal services had "difficulty commenting on the appropriateness of [the lawyer's] advice" because of "insufficient recording of the legal planning meeting".
Haringey legal services told the inquiry that it was "preferable" to ensure this kind of legal advice came from experienced child protection lawyers but this had not always been possible because of "recruitment difficulties".
The revelations came as Peter's mother apologised for the first time for failing to protect a child she called "my baby boy" from the violence meted out to him over several months by her live-in boyfriend.
In a handwritten letter presented at the last minute to an Old Bailey judge on the eve of her sentencing today, the 27-year- old mother, who cannot be named, asked for forgiveness. She has admitted causing or allowing her son's death. "I except [sic] I failed my son Peter for which I pleaded guilty," she wrote. "By not being fully open with the social workers I stopped them from being able to do a full job. As a direct result of this my son got hurt and sadly lost his short life. I am never going to see my lovely son grow into the lovely sweet man I believe he would have been. I have lost all I hold dear to me, now every day of my life is full of guilt and trying to come to terms with my failure as a mother."
The letter was written in black ballpoint pen on paper torn from an exercise book and submitted to the judge by the mother in a last-minute plea for leniency.
"I can only hope and pray my family and ex-husband included can one day forgive my mistakes however I can never forgive myself for my shortcomings. I am truly sorry."
It is the only expression of remorse she has made since being arrested after the death of her only son. Peter's lifeless body was found in his blood-splattered cot on 3 August 2007. He had suffered more than 50, injuries despite 60 visits from social workers.
He was gasping for breath in the last hours of his life but neither his mother nor her boyfriend took him to hospital or called a doctor.
The mother sat in the dock playing with her hair yesterday as her child's horrific injuries were rehearsed again in advance of her sentencing and that of her 32-year-old boyfriend and another man, Jason Owens, 37, both of whom were convicted last November of causing or allowing Peter's death. The mother's boyfriend will also be sentenced for the rape of another child who was on the council's child protection register.
Markets fall as debt worries rise
Global stock markets have fallen after a warning that the UK's top credit rating is at risk.
UK shares were hit after ratings agency Standard & Poor's (S&P) changed the UK's outlook to negative.
The move sparked fears that other economies, such as the US, might face a similar fate.
The Dow Jones index ended the day down 1.5%, while the UK's FTSE 100 fell 2.8%, France's Cac 40 lost 2.7% and Germany's Dax shed 2.7% by their close.
A credit rating downgrade would make it more expensive for the UK to borrow on international markets and could jeopardise spending plans.
Governments worldwide are borrowing more as they try to stimulate their economies.
"It raises questions about our own situation (in the US) in terms of our deficits and our national debt," said Alan Skrainka, US-based chief market strategist at Edward Jones.
Asian shares also ended the day lower with the Nikkei down 1%.
'Downbeat'
Meanwhile there was more pessimism about the US economy
Claims for unemployment benefits set a record for the 16th straight week, data released earlier showed.
On Wednesday the Fed said it expected the economy would contract between 1.3% and 2% this year.
Earlier in the year, the bank predicted the economy could contract between 0.5% and 1.3%.
It also warned that US unemployment could reach 10%.
"Minutes of the last meeting painted a downbeat outlook for global economies and the financial sector, suggesting that any feelings among traders that the worst was behind us could prove premature," said David Jones, chief market strategist at IG Index.
"This combination of news over the last 24 hours has resulted in a predictable knee-jerk sell off - the question from here is whether it is the start of a more sustained slide to correct the impressive gains seen since mid-March," he added.
Debt concerns
S&P cited rising UK debt levels as a major concern.
UK public debt hit a record £8.46bn in April compared to £1.84bn in the same month last year.
Standard & Poor's said UK debt could be close to 100% of gross domestic product, and remain at that level in the medium term.
S&P's change of view on the UK economy led to a brief fall in the value of the pound against the dollar.
Immediately after the outlook change, sterling fell 3 cents to a low of $1.5519.
But the currency later recovered to hit a fresh 6-1/2 month high of $1.5890 as the dollar bore the brunt of selling pressure.
"No one wants to admit it but there might be investors nervous enough with the extreme levels of indebtedness of the US government so that just the thought of a downgrade would provide an excuse to sell dollars," said Matt Esteve, a trader at Tempus Consulting in Washington.
"If such a thing happened, the impact would be huge."
UK shares were hit after ratings agency Standard & Poor's (S&P) changed the UK's outlook to negative.
The move sparked fears that other economies, such as the US, might face a similar fate.
The Dow Jones index ended the day down 1.5%, while the UK's FTSE 100 fell 2.8%, France's Cac 40 lost 2.7% and Germany's Dax shed 2.7% by their close.
A credit rating downgrade would make it more expensive for the UK to borrow on international markets and could jeopardise spending plans.
Governments worldwide are borrowing more as they try to stimulate their economies.
"It raises questions about our own situation (in the US) in terms of our deficits and our national debt," said Alan Skrainka, US-based chief market strategist at Edward Jones.
Asian shares also ended the day lower with the Nikkei down 1%.
'Downbeat'
Meanwhile there was more pessimism about the US economy
Claims for unemployment benefits set a record for the 16th straight week, data released earlier showed.
On Wednesday the Fed said it expected the economy would contract between 1.3% and 2% this year.
Earlier in the year, the bank predicted the economy could contract between 0.5% and 1.3%.
It also warned that US unemployment could reach 10%.
"Minutes of the last meeting painted a downbeat outlook for global economies and the financial sector, suggesting that any feelings among traders that the worst was behind us could prove premature," said David Jones, chief market strategist at IG Index.
"This combination of news over the last 24 hours has resulted in a predictable knee-jerk sell off - the question from here is whether it is the start of a more sustained slide to correct the impressive gains seen since mid-March," he added.
Debt concerns
S&P cited rising UK debt levels as a major concern.
UK public debt hit a record £8.46bn in April compared to £1.84bn in the same month last year.
Standard & Poor's said UK debt could be close to 100% of gross domestic product, and remain at that level in the medium term.
S&P's change of view on the UK economy led to a brief fall in the value of the pound against the dollar.
Immediately after the outlook change, sterling fell 3 cents to a low of $1.5519.
But the currency later recovered to hit a fresh 6-1/2 month high of $1.5890 as the dollar bore the brunt of selling pressure.
"No one wants to admit it but there might be investors nervous enough with the extreme levels of indebtedness of the US government so that just the thought of a downgrade would provide an excuse to sell dollars," said Matt Esteve, a trader at Tempus Consulting in Washington.
"If such a thing happened, the impact would be huge."
US 'bomb gang extremely violent'
Four men accused of plotting to bomb New York synagogues and fire missiles at aircraft have been described as "extremely violent men" by prosecutors.
Charged with weapons and conspiracy charges at their first court appearance, they were detained until 5 June for a preliminary hearing.
They were arrested after planting what they allegedly thought were bombs at two synagogues.
Prosecutor Eric Snyder said they were "eager to bring death to Jews".
'Best target'
James Cromitie (also known as Abdul Rahman), David Williams (aka Daoud and DL), and Onta Williams (aka Hamza) appeared together in shackles at court in White Plains, New York.
Mr Snyder said Mr Cromitie had "complained" that the "best target" - the World Trade Center destroyed on September 11, 2001 - had already been targeted.
The fourth man, Laguerre Payen (aka Amin and Almondo), appeared later in court, with a bandage on his head.
Mr Payen's lawyer Marilyn Reader said he had been injured during his arrest.
She also said he suffered from schizophrenia and bipolar disorder and could not read or write in English.
He is a Haitian citizen, and the other three are Americans.
Before the court hearing, New York Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, visiting one of the synagogues, said all four "wanted to commit jihad".
The men had allegedly agreed to buy explosives from FBI agents posing as Islamic militants.
The four are charged with conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction within the US and conspiracy to acquire and use anti-aircraft missiles, officials said.
The charges carry jail terms of between 25 years and life imprisonment.
A senior FBI official in New York said three were US citizens and one was from Haiti.
BBC defence and security correspondent Rob Watson says the case appears to be a classic sting operation against suspected home-grown militants rather than a plot with any links to known international terrorism.
'No risk'
Speaking outside the Riverdale Temple, one of the intended targets, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg praised the work of New York's police and the FBI.
The alleged plot served as a reminder to New Yorkers to remain vigilant "at all times", the mayor said.
"The bottom line is that we have to be constantly vigilant and we have to constantly be sure that we have the best police department in the world, that they are well led and well trained."
Mr Kelly, the police commissioner, stressed that the arrests were the result of a lengthy operation and that despite the serious nature of the charges, no-one was ever actually put at risk.
According to prosecutors, the men planned to detonate cars packed with C-4 plastic explosives outside the Riverdale Temple and the Riverdale Jewish Center in the Bronx district of the city.
They also intended to target military planes at the New York Air National Guard base at Stewart Airport, 60 miles (85 km) north of New York City.
See a map of alleged targets
In their efforts to obtain weapons for the attack, the men dealt with an informant from the FBI, who is said to have provided the group "with an inactive missile and inert explosives."
"This was a very tightly-controlled operation but these individuals did place bombs - or what they thought were bombs - right in front of the building in which we are standing and the temple a few blocks away," Mr Kelly said.
'Sought weapons'
Outlining the charges on Wednesday night, law enforcement officials said the group set up what they believed to be 30lbs (14kg) of explosives.
According to prosecutors, Mr Cromitie told an FBI informant in June 2008 that he was angry over the US-led war in Afghanistan
He "expressed an interest in 'doing something to America"'.
From October 2008, the informant began meeting him regularly along with the four others at a house in which the FBI had concealed video and audio equipment.
The group allegedly "expressed desire" to attack targets in New York and Mr Cromitie "asked the informant to supply surface-to-air guided missiles and explosives", prosecutors say.
In April 2009, the group agreed on the synagogues they intended to attack and proceeded to conduct surveillance, including taking photographs of the warplanes at the military base, prosecutors say.
Mr Cromitie allegedly pointed out Jews in the street, saying "if he had a gun, he would shoot each one in the head", according to the district attorney's statement.
According to the statement, he told the informant that attacking the Jewish community centre would be a "piece of cake".
He also said he would be interested in joining Jaish-e-Mohammed - a Pakistan-based group considered a terrorist organisation by Washington - "to do jihad".
Charged with weapons and conspiracy charges at their first court appearance, they were detained until 5 June for a preliminary hearing.
They were arrested after planting what they allegedly thought were bombs at two synagogues.
Prosecutor Eric Snyder said they were "eager to bring death to Jews".
'Best target'
James Cromitie (also known as Abdul Rahman), David Williams (aka Daoud and DL), and Onta Williams (aka Hamza) appeared together in shackles at court in White Plains, New York.
Mr Snyder said Mr Cromitie had "complained" that the "best target" - the World Trade Center destroyed on September 11, 2001 - had already been targeted.
The fourth man, Laguerre Payen (aka Amin and Almondo), appeared later in court, with a bandage on his head.
Mr Payen's lawyer Marilyn Reader said he had been injured during his arrest.
She also said he suffered from schizophrenia and bipolar disorder and could not read or write in English.
He is a Haitian citizen, and the other three are Americans.
Before the court hearing, New York Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, visiting one of the synagogues, said all four "wanted to commit jihad".
The men had allegedly agreed to buy explosives from FBI agents posing as Islamic militants.
The four are charged with conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction within the US and conspiracy to acquire and use anti-aircraft missiles, officials said.
The charges carry jail terms of between 25 years and life imprisonment.
A senior FBI official in New York said three were US citizens and one was from Haiti.
BBC defence and security correspondent Rob Watson says the case appears to be a classic sting operation against suspected home-grown militants rather than a plot with any links to known international terrorism.
'No risk'
Speaking outside the Riverdale Temple, one of the intended targets, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg praised the work of New York's police and the FBI.
The alleged plot served as a reminder to New Yorkers to remain vigilant "at all times", the mayor said.
"The bottom line is that we have to be constantly vigilant and we have to constantly be sure that we have the best police department in the world, that they are well led and well trained."
Mr Kelly, the police commissioner, stressed that the arrests were the result of a lengthy operation and that despite the serious nature of the charges, no-one was ever actually put at risk.
According to prosecutors, the men planned to detonate cars packed with C-4 plastic explosives outside the Riverdale Temple and the Riverdale Jewish Center in the Bronx district of the city.
They also intended to target military planes at the New York Air National Guard base at Stewart Airport, 60 miles (85 km) north of New York City.
See a map of alleged targets
In their efforts to obtain weapons for the attack, the men dealt with an informant from the FBI, who is said to have provided the group "with an inactive missile and inert explosives."
"This was a very tightly-controlled operation but these individuals did place bombs - or what they thought were bombs - right in front of the building in which we are standing and the temple a few blocks away," Mr Kelly said.
'Sought weapons'
Outlining the charges on Wednesday night, law enforcement officials said the group set up what they believed to be 30lbs (14kg) of explosives.
According to prosecutors, Mr Cromitie told an FBI informant in June 2008 that he was angry over the US-led war in Afghanistan
He "expressed an interest in 'doing something to America"'.
From October 2008, the informant began meeting him regularly along with the four others at a house in which the FBI had concealed video and audio equipment.
The group allegedly "expressed desire" to attack targets in New York and Mr Cromitie "asked the informant to supply surface-to-air guided missiles and explosives", prosecutors say.
In April 2009, the group agreed on the synagogues they intended to attack and proceeded to conduct surveillance, including taking photographs of the warplanes at the military base, prosecutors say.
Mr Cromitie allegedly pointed out Jews in the street, saying "if he had a gun, he would shoot each one in the head", according to the district attorney's statement.
According to the statement, he told the informant that attacking the Jewish community centre would be a "piece of cake".
He also said he would be interested in joining Jaish-e-Mohammed - a Pakistan-based group considered a terrorist organisation by Washington - "to do jihad".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)