DAVID BRET, HIDEHO AND OTHERS .... THE WORST HATER TROLLS


    OH DEAR, DOES HE NEVER READ THE FOI ANSWERS TO HIS STUPIDITY?

    Share
    avatar
    Sykes

    Posts : 6831
    Join date : 2011-07-17

    OH DEAR, DOES HE NEVER READ THE FOI ANSWERS TO HIS STUPIDITY?

    Post  Sykes on Fri Nov 14, 2014 7:26 am

     We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are Anthony Bennett please sign in and let everyone know.
    Information about Scotland Yard's handling of a dossier of internet tweets
    Anthony Bennett made this Freedom of Information request to Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

    This request has an unknown status. We're waiting for Anthony Bennett to read a recent response and update the status.

    From: Anthony Bennett

    6 October 2014

    Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

    Regarding action by the police with regard to a dossier of 'tweets'
    and alleged internet abuse about the disappearance of Madeleine
    McCann, handed to Scotland Yard on 9 September 2014, which has led
    to the reported suicide of one of those named in the dossier

    I write with reference to this statement by 'a Scotland Yard
    spokesman':

    QUOTE: A Scotland Yard spokesman said: "We can confirm we received
    a letter and documentation on September 9 which was passed to
    officers from Operation Grange. They are assessing its contents and
    consulting with the CPS and the McCann family."

    Please list all occasions on which officers from Scotland Yard
    'consulted with the McCann family' during the period 1 September to
    5 October inclusive about this dossier, stating in each case
    whether this was in person, by letter, by telephone, by e-mail, by
    video conference, or otherwise.

    Similarly, please list all occasions on which officers from
    Scotland Yard had any contact with staff or management at SKYNews
    during the period 1 September to 5 October inclusive about this
    dossier, stating in each case whether this was in person, by
    letter, by telephone, by e-mail, by video conference, or otherwise.

    Yours faithfully,

    Anthony Bennett

    Link to this
    Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

    8 October 2014

    Dear Mr Bennett

    Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2014100000281
    I respond in connection with your request for information which was
    received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 06/10/2014. I note
    you seek access to the following information:

    Regarding action by the police with regard to a dossier of 'tweets' and
    alleged internet abuse about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, handed
    to Scotland Yard on 9 September 2014, which has led to the reported
    suicide of one of those named in the dossier

    I write with reference to this statement by 'a Scotland Yard spokesman': "
    A Scotland Yard spokesman said: "We can confirm we received a letter and
    documentation on September 9 which was passed to officers from Operation
    Grange. They are assessing its contents and consulting with the CPS and
    the McCann family."

    1) Please list all occasions on which officers from Scotland Yard
    'consulted with the McCann family' during the period 1 September to 5
    October inclusive about this dossier, stating in each case whether this
    was in person, by letter, by telephone, by e-mail, by video conference, or
    otherwise.

    2) Similarly, please list all occasions on which officers from Scotland
    Yard had any contact with staff or management at SKYNews during the period
    1 September to 5 October inclusive about this dossier, stating in each
    case whether this was in person, by letter, by telephone, by e-mail, by
    video conference, or otherwise.

    Your request will now be considered in accordance with the Freedom of
    Information Act 2000 (the Act). You will receive a response within the
    statutory timescale of 20 working days as defined by the Act, subject to
    the information not being exempt or containing a reference to a third
    party. In some circumstances the MPS may be unable to achieve this
    deadline. If this is likely you will be informed and given a revised
    time-scale at the earliest opportunity.

    Some requests may also require either full or partial transference to
    another public authority in order to answer your query in the fullest
    possible way. Again, you will be informed if this is the case.

    COMPLAINT RIGHTS

    Your attention is drawn to the attached sheet, which details your right of
    complaint.

    Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please
    contact me on telephone number 020 7230 4019 quoting the reference number
    above.

    Yours sincerely

    Peter Royan-Posse
    Case Investigation Officer
    COMPLAINT RIGHTS

    Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the
    decision is incorrect?

    You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
    review their decision.

    Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome to discuss the
    response with the case officer who dealt with your request.

    Complaint

    If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
    the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
    access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
    decision reviewed.

    Complaints should be made in writing, within forty (40) working days from
    the date of the refusal notice, and addressed to:

    FOI Complaint
    Public Access Office
    PO Box 57192
    London
    SW6 1SF
    [email address]

    In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
    complaint within 20 working days.
    The Information Commissioner

    After lodging a complaint with the MPS if you are still dissatisfied with
    the decision you may make application to the Information Commissioner for
    a decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with in
    accordance with the requirements of the Act.

    For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner
    please visit their website at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
    Alternatively, phone or write to:

    Information Commissioner's Office
    Wycliffe House
    Water Lane
    Wilmslow
    Cheshire
    SK9 5AF
    Phone: 01625 545 700

    Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your
    communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are
    here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

    Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless
    absolutely necessary.

    NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to
    copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of
    the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please
    notify the sender and delete it from your system. To avoid incurring
    legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this
    email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are
    monitored to the extent permitted by law. Consequently, any email and/or
    attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are
    authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by
    email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements
    reached with other employees or agents. The security of this email and
    any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned
    but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur
    during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in
    this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
    represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

    Find us at:

    Facebook: Facebook.com/metpoliceuk
    Twitter: @metpoliceuk

    Link to this
    Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

    12 November 2014

    Dear Mr Bennett,

    Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2014100000859

    I respond in connection with your request for information which was
    received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 06/10/2014. I note
    you seek access to the following information:

    Regarding action by the police with regard to a dossier of 'tweets' and
    alleged internet abuse about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, handed
    to Scotland Yard on 9 September 2014, which has led to the reported
    suicide of one of those named in the dossier I write with reference to
    this statement by 'a Scotland Yard spokesman': QUOTE: A Scotland Yard
    spokesman said: "We can confirm we received a letter and documentation on
    September 9 which was passed to officers from Operation Grange. They are
    assessing its contents and consulting with the CPS and the McCann family."
    Please list all occasions on which officers from Scotland Yard 'consulted
    with the McCann family' during the period 1 September to 5 October
    inclusive about this dossier, stating in each case whether this was in
    person, by letter, by telephone, by e-mail, by video conference, or
    otherwise. Similarly, please list all occasions on which officers from
    Scotland Yard had any contact with staff or management at SKYNews during
    the period 1 September to 5 October inclusive about this dossier, stating
    in each case whether this was in person, by letter, by telephone, by
    e-mail, by video conference, or otherwise. .

    EXTENT OF SEARCHES TO LOCATE INFORMATION

    To locate the information relevant to your request searches were conducted
    within Specialist Crime & Operations (SC&O).

    RESULT OF SEARCHES

    The searches located records relevant to your request.

    DECISION

    Having located and considered the relevant information, I am afraid that I
    am not required by statute to release this information.

    This email serves as a Refusal Notice under Section 17(1)(a)(b)(c) of the
    Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act).
    __________________

    Before I explain the reasons for the decisions I have made in relation to
    your request, I thought that it would be helpful if I outline the
    parameters set out by the Act within which a request for information can
    be answered.

    The Act creates a statutory right of access to information held by public
    authorities. A public authority in receipt of a request must, if
    permitted, confirm if the requested information is held by that public
    authority and, if so, then communicate that information to the applicant.

    The right of access to information is not without exception and is subject
    to a number of exemptions, which are designed to enable public authorities
    to withhold information that is not suitable for release. Importantly, the
    Act is designed to place information into the public domain, that is, once
    access to information is granted to one person under the Act, it is then
    considered public information and must be communicated to any individual
    should a request be received.

    Under the Act, there are two types of exemptions that can be applied to
    information considered unsuitable for public release. These exemptions are
    referred to as absolute exemptions and qualified exemptions. When an
    absolute exemption is applied to information, a public authority is not
    required to consider whether release of that information is in the 'public
    interest'. When a qualified exemption is applied to information, a public
    authority must establish whether the 'public interest' lies in disclosing
    or withholding the requested information. The public interest is
    determined by conducting a 'Public Interest Test' (PIT).

    Both absolute and qualified exemptions can be further divided into
    class-based or prejudice-based exemptions. Class-based exemptions are
    those in which it is assumed the disclosure of information would result in
    harm. There is therefore no requirement to demonstrate what that harm may
    be. Prejudiced-based exemptions are those where firstly, it is necessary
    to establish the nature of the prejudice/harm that may result from
    disclosure and secondly, to determine the likelihood of the prejudice
    occurring.
    [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] ... land_yards


    _________________
    Truth is the Daughter of Time
    avatar
    Sykes

    Posts : 6831
    Join date : 2011-07-17

    Re: OH DEAR, DOES HE NEVER READ THE FOI ANSWERS TO HIS STUPIDITY?

    Post  Sykes on Fri Nov 14, 2014 8:41 am

    I have considered your request for information within the provisions set
    out by the Act and can confirm that the requested information is held by
    the MPS.

    Having located and considered the relevant information, I am afraid that I
    am not required by statute to release the information requested. This
    email serves as a Refusal Notice under Section 17 of the Act.

    This information has therefore been fully exempted pursuant to the
    provisions of Section 30(1)(a) of the Act.


    Section 30(1)(a) of the Act states that information should be exempt if
    the question asked refers to information gathered for the purposes of an
    investigation
    .


    _________________
    Truth is the Daughter of Time
    avatar
    Sykes

    Posts : 6831
    Join date : 2011-07-17

    Re: OH DEAR, DOES HE NEVER READ THE FOI ANSWERS TO HIS STUPIDITY?

    Post  Sykes on Fri Nov 14, 2014 2:07 pm

    Tigerloaf:
    There are only two options as to what Halfwit Bennett is doing here.

    Either

    a) He is completely clueless as to the law. He has simply not got the intelligence to look up the law which applies to Freedom of Information Requests or does not understand them and does not realise that information pertaining to ongoing investigations is exempt. It would take an office junior in a Solicitor's practice about three minutes to work out what Section 30 meant. They could do it with a couple of GCSE's and a few stickers for reading ability. They would not need 'O' Levels, 'A' Levels, a degree in Geography and some training as a Solicitor to work it out.

    b) He actually does understand Section 30 and knows that his requests will be refused because they relate to information which is part of a current investigation. This would mean that his requests are a deliberate waste of taxpayers' money, that they are a deliberate waste of police time and that they are, as previously described, 'vexatious' in purpose.

    So which is it Mr. Tony Bennett from Harlow? Are you a complete halfwit, a genuine legal lackbrain who simply cannot understand such a specific and clearly written legal phrase?

    Or are you, as the Police have previously suggested. just a nasty, money-wasting, time-wasting, vexatious idiot?

    Should it actually be the latter and should you ever be challenged in a court as to why you are deliberately wasting the time of the police in an ongoing investigation, I can assure you that the Judge will not take kindly to somebody with even basic legal training such as yourself ignoring such an easily understood phrase. Remember Mr. Justice Tugendhat was also angered by the fact that you seemed to be unaware of / unable to understand similar basic and clear legal phrases.


    _________________
    Truth is the Daughter of Time

    Sponsored content

    Re: OH DEAR, DOES HE NEVER READ THE FOI ANSWERS TO HIS STUPIDITY?

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Oct 23, 2017 3:27 am