How? By investigating a report of a crime, determining it was false, and releasing the guy?
[Edit: the article didn't say they charged him; I was wrong]
Well, that's how it looks to me, on the basis of a single report in a tech journal with a sort-of tabloid outlook. Maybe there will be more information in coming days.
The article explicitly says that the police did not charge him.
But they did arrest him.
Eh?
https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/cps-says-role-cps-deciding-w...
Basically Police arrest, looked at the evidence then took no action as Police decided no crime - therefore not charged.
Cooperative people accused of non-violent crimes should NEVER be taken into custody until proven guilty in a court with fair trial.
He was definitely in a jam
Uh, so if someone set fire to a bunch of homes in a neighborhood, and there's video of them doing it, but they did it knowing the homes were empty, they should just be left free until the trial is over? I'm sorry but I feel like a lot of online comments on criminal justice are very shortsighted
Financial crimes, no. Holding them hostage isn't useful or productive. As long as they are cooperative with investigation, let them be until a verdict is reached.
It's too easy for governments to accuse people on a whim of financial "crimes" that aren't really crimes. That sets a very bad precedent for misuse of power. Next thing you know they'll be randomly arresting people from their bedroom for suspected tax evasion instead of auditing them. Not good for those who did follow the rules.
There are real crimes, yes, but there is too much grey area and there is no danger to people or property to let financial crime suspects be at home.