How did they know the handwriting matched?
I'm missing something, the only way they could know if the handwriting matched was if they went through the letters and searched for a match, no?
I'm missing a step here. How did they know that he had in his possession a letter with handwriting that matched the letter sent to Ed Balls??? Or did they simply visit, take a look around his in-tray, see a letter and say it matched and demand it? In which case how do you know it matched?... because of the brief glance?
Was the letter opened or closed? Did they let the rozzers grab a closed letter?
Why would an threatening letter be sent to Ed Balls AND IN THE SAME HANDWRITING to the conservative MP? Wouldn't they cover their tracks?
Oh, and the Houses of Parliament really should get themselves a legal rep, allocate a meeting room for all visits between officers and MPs, get the solicitor to attend the meeting and determine the legality of the request. THEN let the MP decide with advice whether to comply, or whether a warrant or further verification is needed.
@"Any idiot knows to ask to see the warrant."
Not in Britain they don't. What you see now in the USA, with the NSA whistleblower revealing journalists (and presumably other groups like politicians) were spied on, that would be legal in the UK. The rozzers have made it clear the Wilson Doctrine means squat.
Also if you refuse their request, there are a large number of discretionary powers they can use to punish you. Which is why all such meetings should be recorded.