9 Jun
2011
9 Jun
'11
8:27 a.m.
On 10/06/11 9:51 AM, Michael Newbery wrote:
Very true, and the reason I'm far less interested in deeper background checks on the officers and more in favour of processes that reduce the vulnerability to the suborning of a single or even two officers.
That seems as good a time as any to address one of the other issues. You mentioned in one of your earlier emails "What ensures that the processes are followed?" I've also suggested that there be TCRs at least present if not involved. Might it help if Jay/Sebastian posted as much detail as they feel comfortable with around the proposed processes (a script would be great) and then people can give feedback. Regards Dean