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

 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

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.

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.