Thursday, 3 February 2011

The Death of David Kelly - Formal Request to Thames Valley Police to review their refusal to answer FOI requests

In the preceding post, The Death of David Kelly - Questions that Thames Valley Police have refused to answer, I listed questions which Thames Valley Police refused to answer.

The Freedom of Information legislation allows for a request for formal review to be made where an individual who requests information is not satisfied with the response given.

The following email (together with the text of the TVP email of 6th January 2011) was sent today to Malcolm Hopgood (TVP FOI officer) with copies to Sarah Thornton (Chief Constable), Francis Habgood (Deputy Chief Constable) and Helen Ball (Assistant Chief Constable).

The email title is here:
Re: RFI2010000848, 849, 850 & 857

The text is here:

Mr Hopgood,

I write formally to request that Thames Valley Police reviews its decision expressed in your email of 6th January 2011.

It is my position that the decision which your email expresses misapplies the relevant part of The Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004.

Further, if Thames Valley Police persists in what I view as a misapplication of the Regulations it is my intention formally to raise the matter with the Information Commissioner.

I am copying this email to Chief Officers for information and in the context of my concerns (already conveyed to Chief Officers) that one or more Thames Valley Police officers acted in such a way as to pervert the course of justice.

(Dr) Andrew Watt

1 comment:

  1. Keep the pressure on Andrew, you are doing a great job.

    The closer we get to Mr Grieve's announcement the twitchier these slime balls are going to get.

    One point though, there is clear and irrefutable evidence that the body was moved therefore there was a third party involvement in the scene where Dr Kelly was found therefore the police are lying.

    We know they are lying, they know they are lying, Mr Grieve knows they are lying (he's seen the photo's).

    So the sooner Mr Grieve sends this to the High Court the better and if he refuses to at least a legal challenge can begin. But Mr Grieve cannot hide from this responsibility much longer