How do you know he's guilty of keeping records illegally? A constant insinuation in all this is that the porn didn't even exist at all. He can't be guilty of illegally keeping records if there were no records to keep. He could be guilty of lying, but, as far as I know, he hasn't made his allegations under oath. He can only be legally adjudicated to have lied if Green sues him. In any case, if he did glean some proof that he decided to hang on to that the porn existed, how is that illegal?   Murky waters, innit? Green is known to have been the serial recipient of leaked documents damaging to Labour, which kicked all this off in the first place. His lackey supplier was sacked. Is leaking illegal? How is that any better than a cop noting Green's pornography supply? Is it OK when a politician leaks embarrassing stuff but not OK if a cop does it?