> because of anonymous tips makes it far too easy to smear people and to use the police as attack dogs in personal vendettas. I never said anonymous. (actually

> because of anonymous tips makes it far too easy to smear people and to use the police as attack dogs in personal vendettas. I never said anonymous. (actually it was somewhat a bad analogy because the Police are pretty much legally bound to investigate even if they feel it is a personal grudge etc. particularly if the accuser is a child). Anyway; I am not aware this was an anonymous tip. In a way those might be treated even more seriously. > but not concerned enough that they would make that report without being anonymous I think that is naive. People get scared; especially if the threat is real! But as I said Im not aware this was anonymous. > a simple letter that would state that the guy is because of this 'flagged' and if there is any indication that there is more to it then it might be time for doing something about it. Until then make sure that when he gets on a plane that his luggage gets some extra tlc. :( you really think that is a better approach. Firstly can you sere the media outcry about watchlists and targeting innocents without bother to investigate :) and I agree, it's very wrong. I think that would be a massive OTT step. Go round, knock on his door and talk to him about it - i.e. establish if you need to investigate or drop it. But I can see what might have happened (and I might have revised my opinion here); at some stage a police man was sat there and suddenly realised "shit, Im responsible for deciding if this guy is a threat" - and then the fear sets in that he might get it wrong and end up killing people. It's pretty irrational but people are like that :) so this copper makes a mistake - and needs to be disciplined ofc. Im still not convinced there isn't a little more to this than meets the eye; something to convince them either this guy might go ahead with this threat or that he had the capacity to bring it off (even if it is something simple like he works in a job associated with explosives etc. - say a chemistry teacher). 7 hours questioning is very excessive; either they were treating this as a really serious threat - or more likely he was non-cooperative (in which case he doesn't get any sympathy from me :P)