Actions of DS Nick Bailey on the 4th March 2018 (Salisbury Incident)

Peter Beswick made this Freedom of Information request to Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

The request was refused by Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

Actions of DS Nick Bailey on the 4th March 2018 (Salisbury Incident)

[I realise that Wiltshire Constabulary were involved in the management of this in the very early stages but it appears the Met have taken complete ownership of the matter, I therefore address the enquiry to you]

The public have been given a good deal of information by the police through official statements and media briefings about the involvement of DS Bailey on the 4th March, it is clear the police want the public to know what he did, when and why.

I certainly am interested to know. Sadly however many of the police statements released regarding DS Bailey are contradictory, conflicting and irreconcilable.

The statements set up confusion in the public’s understanding of events and I can find no corrections or clarifications of the facts. This FoIR is intended to give me (and hopefully others) a clearer understanding of what actually happened that day regarding events which involved Bailey.

On top of the confusing police accounts there have been many other “informed descriptions” of what transpired some from those who claimed access to police “sources” (eg BBC’s Panorama program and Mark Urban’s book – The Skripal Files), there are other media inputs and even Nick Bailey’s own account.

I shall not list all the conflicting versions of events here, there are too many but I do ask for confirmation of specific information regarding DS Baileys activities. The information I understand is available from various sources including CCTV, body worn cameras, reports, statements and witness evidence.

1. i) What time did Bailey go on duty that day? ii) What time was his shift due to end, iii) What time did he go off duty?

2. i) When did become aware of the incident in the Maltings, ii) Why did he attend? (Was he detailed or was it an act of initiative?)

3. Did anyone accompany him, if so how many and rank(s)?

4. At the bench scene, what did Bailey and / or his colleague(s) do?

5. Witness accounts say before the 4:15pm call was made to the emergency services (by a concerned member of the public) there were already police officers at the scene. Is this true and if so how many and rank(s)?

6. In a publicly aired CCTV recording taken within Market Walk (from Jenny’s Restaurant) we see a police car moving towards the scene. i) Was this PC’s Holloway and Collins arriving? ii) Was Bailey already present at the scene when these two arrived? iii) Was the police car in Market Walk caught on CCTV at 4:15pm? (it was reported as such).

7. It was also reported that police were present at the Skripal home at 5pm i) Is this true, if so how many police officers were present (during that afternoon/evening /night) and rank(s)? ii) Was Bailey one of these officers? iii) If there was a police presence at the Skripal home at 5pm why were they there and iv) What did they do?

8. i) At what time did Bailey attend the Skripal home, ii) What was his purpose for being there, iii) Did he (or anyone) have a warrant to enter the property?

9) i) Who else attended the Christie Miller Rd. scene with Bailey numbers and rank(s)? ii) Was the time he attended after his normal shift time? iii) If on overtime why did Bailey attend?

10. i) What activities took place in the Skripal home, ii) By what route was entry gained? iii) Were Mr Skripal’s house keys used to gain access? (how, where, when and why were these keys obtained) iv) How many officers entered the property? v) At what time did Bailey leave the Skripal home

11. Please give a detailed timeline of what Bailey did next, from leaving the Skripal residence, going to the police station, going to Salisbury and District Hospital for the Decontamination Process, returning home, becoming ill, returning to the hospital. Everything he did, everywhere he went and times and mode(s) of transport.

12. i) Did PC’s Holloway and Collins go to the hospital for the decontamination process, ii) What did the decontamination process entail? iii) How long did it last? iv) What tests were done to give the all clear? v) Did all police officers from the bench and house scenes go for decontamination? vi) Had any of those officers been to their homes first? And if so vii) What decontamination precautions were put into effect?

The police have recognised that this matter is of immense public interest and concern, it is therefore vital that any misconceptions, ambiguities and inaccuracies that are in the public perceptions are dealt with transparently and with utmost honestly.

I look forward to your response

Yours faithfully,

Peter Beswick

Cyclops on behalf of Peter Deja, Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

1 Attachment

 

OFFICIAL SENSITIVE

     

 

 

 

 

 

Information Rights Unit
PO Box 57192
  London
SW6 1SF
  United Kingdom

  Our Ref: 01/FOI/18/000469

  Date: 19/12/2018

   

 

 

 

Dear Mr Bewick

PLEASE NOTE - Your two requests have been aggragated and will be dealt on
this ref number (01/FOI/18/0000469)

 

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 01/FOI/18/000469

I write in connection with your request for information which was received
by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 16/12/2018.  I note you seek
access to the following information:

 

Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

Actions of DS Nick Bailey on the 4th March 2018 (Salisbury Incident)

[I realise that Wiltshire Constabulary were involved in the management of
this in the very early stages but it appears the Met have taken complete
ownership of the matter, I therefore address the enquiry to you]

The public have been given a good deal of information by the police
through official statements and media briefings about the involvement of
DS Bailey on the 4th March, it is clear the police want the public to know
what he did, when and why.

I certainly am interested to know. Sadly however many of the police
statements released regarding DS Bailey are contradictory, conflicting and
irreconcilable.

The statements set up confusion in the public’s understanding of events
and I can find no corrections or clarifications of the facts. This FoIR is
intended to give me (and hopefully others) a clearer understanding of what
actually happened that day regarding events which involved Bailey.

On top of the confusing police accounts there have been many other
“informed descriptions” of what transpired some from those who claimed
access to police “sources” (eg BBC’s Panorama program and Mark Urban’s
book – The Skripal Files), there are other media inputs and even Nick
Bailey’s own account.

I shall not list all the conflicting versions of events here, there are
too many but I do ask for confirmation of specific information regarding
DS Baileys activities. The information I understand is available from
various sources including CCTV, body worn cameras, reports, statements and
witness evidence.

1. i) What time did Bailey go on duty that day? ii) What time was his
shift due to end, iii) What time did he go off duty?

2. i) When did become aware of the incident in the Maltings, ii) Why did
he attend? (Was he detailed or was it an act of initiative?)

3. Did anyone accompany him, if so how many and rank(s)?

4. At the bench scene, what did Bailey and / or his colleague(s) do?

5. Witness accounts say before the 4:15pm call was made to the emergency
services (by a concerned member of the public) there were already police
officers at the scene. Is this true and if so how many and rank(s)?

6. In a publicly aired CCTV recording taken within Market Walk (from
Jenny’s Restaurant) we see a police car moving towards the scene. i) Was
this PC’s Holloway and Collins arriving? ii) Was Bailey already present at
the scene when these two arrived? iii) Was the police car in Market Walk
caught on CCTV at 4:15pm? (it was reported as such).

7. It was also reported that police were present at the Skripal home at
5pm i) Is this true, if so how many police officers were present (during
that afternoon/evening /night) and rank(s)? ii) Was Bailey one of these
officers? iii) If there was a police presence at the Skripal home at 5pm
why were they there and iv) What did they do?

8. i) At what time did Bailey attend the Skripal home, ii) What was his
purpose for being there, iii) Did he (or anyone) have a warrant to enter
the property?

9) i) Who else attended the Christie Miller Rd.  scene with Bailey numbers
and rank(s)? ii) Was the time he attended after his normal shift time?
iii) If on overtime why did Bailey attend?

10. i) What activities took place in the Skripal home, ii) By what route
was entry gained? iii) Were Mr Skripal’s house keys used to gain access?
(how, where, when and why were these keys obtained) iv) How many officers
entered the property? v) At what time did Bailey leave the Skripal home

11. Please give a detailed timeline of what Bailey did next, from leaving
the Skripal residence, going to the police station, going to Salisbury and
District Hospital for the Decontamination Process, returning home,
becoming ill, returning to the hospital. Everything he did, everywhere he
went and times and mode(s) of transport.

12. i) Did PC’s Holloway and Collins go to the hospital for the
decontamination process, ii) What did the decontamination process entail?
iii) How long did it last? iv) What tests were done to give the all clear?
v) Did all police officers from the bench and house scenes go for
decontamination? vi) Had any of those officers been to their homes first?
And if so vii) What decontamination precautions were put into effect?

The police have recognised that this matter is of immense public interest
and concern, it is therefore vital that any misconceptions, ambiguities
and inaccuracies that are in the public perceptions are dealt with
transparently and with utmost honestly.

And 

Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

CCTV footage of the Salisbury Incident March 4th 2018

Further to my previous refused FoIR (on the grounds of cost) I have a
pruned down this request for some footage that should come within the
allowed budget and for which other exemptions cannot sensibly apply

We have seen footage from the day taken from a CCTV camera at Step Fitness
Gym, Market Walk. It has been aired on television, the internet and stills
have appeared in newspapers.

The 1st shown was timed at 3:47pm and shows a couple who were initially
mistaken by the media as the Skripals, the police later asked for the
public’s help to identify them.

The 2nd was timed at 4:03pm and shows Freya Church leaving her place of
work (Snap Fitness), within a few seconds Ms Church had encountered the
collapsed couple on the bench.

We have seen the faces of all the people involved before, the crime
occurred several hours beforehand, the pair charged with the crime had
left Salisbury by this time by train. This was not a crime scene and we
have already seen partial footage from it.

From CCTV footage held by the Met from the Maltings area Salisbury on the
4th March 2018:

I would like to see the moving footage of the CCTV from the Council’s or
any other systems that captured it of the movement of the pair (mistaken
for the Skripals) as they emerge from Market Walk into the Maltings, I
want to see where they go, what they do, for as long as they were in the
Maltings area.

I would also like to see Ms Church’s encounter with the pair stricken at
the bench, Ms Church says no one else was around at the time. I would like
to see the encounter from any footage held by the police but especially
from the Council’s system that had cameras positioned above Market Walk
and on Sainsburys. I want to see Ms Church and the pair sat on the bench
for as long as Ms Church was present.

 

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.  

 

If you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please contact
us at [email address] or on the phone at 0207 161 3500, quoting the
reference number above. Should your enquiry relate to the logging or
allocations process we will be able to assist you directly and where your
enquiry relates to other matters (such as the status of the request) we
will be able to pass on a message and/or advise you of the relevant
contact details. 

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

Peter Deja

 

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

Information Rights Unit

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 www.ico.org.uk.  Alternatively, write to or
phone:

 

Information Commissioner's Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

Phone: 0303 123 1113

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: [1]https://m.facebook.com/metpoliceuk

Twitter: @metpoliceuk

References

Visible links
1. https://m.facebook.com/metpoliceuk

Cyclops on behalf of Charmine Gayle-Petrou, Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

1 Attachment

     

 

 

 

[1][email address]

  Our Ref: 01/FOI/18/000469

  Date: 16/01/2019

   

 

 

 

Dear Mr Beswick

 

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 01/FOI/18/000469

 

Please accept my apologies for the late notification. I write in
connection with your request for information which was received by the
Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 16/12/2018.  I note you seek access
to the following information:

 

Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

Actions of DS Nick Bailey on the 4th March 2018 (Salisbury Incident)

[I realise that Wiltshire Constabulary were involved in the management of
this in the very early stages but it appears the Met have taken complete
ownership of the matter, I therefore address the enquiry to you]

The public have been given a good deal of information by the police
through official statements and media briefings about the involvement of
DS Bailey on the 4th March, it is clear the police want the public to know
what he did, when and why.

I certainly am interested to know. Sadly however many of the police
statements released regarding DS Bailey are contradictory, conflicting and
irreconcilable.

The statements set up confusion in the public’s understanding of events
and I can find no corrections or clarifications of the facts. This FoIR is
intended to give me (and hopefully others) a clearer understanding of what
actually happened that day regarding events which involved Bailey.

On top of the confusing police accounts there have been many other
“informed descriptions” of what transpired some from those who claimed
access to police “sources” (eg BBC’s Panorama program and Mark Urban’s
book – The Skripal Files), there are other media inputs and even Nick
Bailey’s own account.

I shall not list all the conflicting versions of events here, there are
too many but I do ask for confirmation of specific information regarding
DS Baileys activities. The information I understand is available from
various sources including CCTV, body worn cameras, reports, statements and
witness evidence.

1. i) What time did Bailey go on duty that day? ii) What time was his
shift due to end, iii) What time did he go off duty?

2. i) When did become aware of the incident in the Maltings, ii) Why did
he attend? (Was he detailed or was it an act of initiative?)

3. Did anyone accompany him, if so how many and rank(s)?

4. At the bench scene, what did Bailey and / or his colleague(s) do?

5. Witness accounts say before the 4:15pm call was made to the emergency
services (by a concerned member of the public) there were already police
officers at the scene. Is this true and if so how many and rank(s)?

6. In a publicly aired CCTV recording taken within Market Walk (from
Jenny’s Restaurant) we see a police car moving towards the scene. i) Was
this PC’s Holloway and Collins arriving? ii) Was Bailey already present at
the scene when these two arrived? iii) Was the police car in Market Walk
caught on CCTV at 4:15pm? (it was reported as such).

7. It was also reported that police were present at the Skripal home at
5pm i) Is this true, if so how many police officers were present (during
that afternoon/evening /night) and rank(s)? ii) Was Bailey one of these
officers? iii) If there was a police presence at the Skripal home at 5pm
why were they there and iv) What did they do?

8. i) At what time did Bailey attend the Skripal home, ii) What was his
purpose for being there, iii) Did he (or anyone) have a warrant to enter
the property?

9) i) Who else attended the Christie Miller Rd.  scene with Bailey numbers
and rank(s)? ii) Was the time he attended after his normal shift time?
iii) If on overtime why did Bailey attend?

10. i) What activities took place in the Skripal home, ii) By what route
was entry gained? iii) Were Mr Skripal’s house keys used to gain access?
(how, where, when and why were these keys obtained) iv) How many officers
entered the property? v) At what time did Bailey leave the Skripal home

11. Please give a detailed timeline of what Bailey did next, from leaving
the Skripal residence, going to the police station, going to Salisbury and
District Hospital for the Decontamination Process, returning home,
becoming ill, returning to the hospital. Everything he did, everywhere he
went and times and mode(s) of transport.

12. i) Did PC’s Holloway and Collins go to the hospital for the
decontamination process, ii) What did the decontamination process entail?
iii) How long did it last? iv) What tests were done to give the all clear?
v) Did all police officers from the bench and house scenes go for
decontamination? vi) Had any of those officers been to their homes first?
And if so vii) What decontamination precautions were put into effect?

The police have recognised that this matter is of immense public interest
and concern, it is therefore vital that any misconceptions, ambiguities
and inaccuracies that are in the public perceptions are dealt with
transparently and with utmost honestly.

And 

Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

CCTV footage of the Salisbury Incident March 4th 2018

Further to my previous refused FoIR (on the grounds of cost) I have a
pruned down this request for some footage that should come within the
allowed budget and for which other exemptions cannot sensibly apply

We have seen footage from the day taken from a CCTV camera at Step Fitness
Gym, Market Walk. It has been aired on television, the internet and stills
have appeared in newspapers.

The 1st shown was timed at 3:47pm and shows a couple who were initially
mistaken by the media as the Skripals, the police later asked for the
public’s help to identify them.

The 2nd was timed at 4:03pm and shows Freya Church leaving her place of
work (Snap Fitness), within a few seconds Ms Church had encountered the
collapsed couple on the bench.

We have seen the faces of all the people involved before, the crime
occurred several hours beforehand, the pair charged with the crime had
left Salisbury by this time by train. This was not a crime scene and we
have already seen partial footage from it.

From CCTV footage held by the Met from the Maltings area Salisbury on the
4th March 2018:

I would like to see the moving footage of the CCTV from the Council’s or
any other systems that captured it of the movement of the pair (mistaken
for the Skripals) as they emerge from Market Walk into the Maltings, I
want to see where they go, what they do, for as long as they were in the
Maltings area.

I would also like to see Ms Church’s encounter with the pair stricken at
the bench, Ms Church says no one else was around at the time. I would like
to see the encounter from any footage held by the police but especially
from the Council’s system that had cameras positioned above Market Walk
and on Sainsburys. I want to see Ms Church and the pair sat on the bench
for as long as Ms Church was present.

 

I am sorry to inform you that we have not been able to complete our
response to your request by the date originally stated. 

 

Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act), we have 20 working
days to respond to a request for information unless we are considering
whether the information requested is covered by one of the 'qualified
exemptions' (exemptions which must be tested against the public interest
before deciding whether they apply to the information in question). 

 

Where we are considering the public interest test against the application
of relevant qualified exemptions, Section 17(2)(b) provides that we can
extend the 20 day deadline.  Please see the legal annex for further
information on this section of the Act.

 

For your information we are considering the following exemption:

Section 30 - Criminal Investigations

  

I can now advise you that the amended date for a response is 12/02/2019.

 

May I apologise for any inconvenience caused.

 

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please
contact me via email at [email address], quoting the
reference number above.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

C. Gayle-Petrou

Information Manager

 

LEGAL ANNEX

 

Section 17(2) provides:

 

(2) Where- 

 

a) in relation to any request for information, a public authority is, as
respects any information, relying on a claim- 

i) that any provision of Part II which relates to the duty to confirm or
deny and is not specified in section 2(3) is relevant to the request, or 

ii) that the information is exempt information only by virtue of a
provision not specified in section 2(3), and 

b) at the time when the notice under subsection (1) is given to the
applicant, the public authority (or, in a case falling within section
66(3) or (4), the responsible authority) has not yet reached a decision as
to the application of subsection (1)(b) or (2)(b) of section 2, 

the notice under subsection (1) must indicate that no decision as to the
application of that provision has yet been reached and must contain an
estimate of the date by which the authority expects that such a decision
will have been reached.

 

 
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 we invite you to email any queries to
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

Information Rights Unit

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 www.ico.org.uk.  Alternatively, write to or
phone:

 

Information Commissioner's Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

Phone:  0303 123 1113

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: [2]https://m.facebook.com/metpoliceuk

Twitter: @metpoliceuk

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. https://m.facebook.com/metpoliceuk

Cyclops on behalf of Charmine Gayle-Petrou, Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

2 Attachments

 

OFFICIAL SENSITIVE

     

 

 

 

Dear Mr Beswick

 

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 01/FOI/18/000469

 

Please see the attached in respect of your Freedom of Information request
referenced above.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

C. Gayle-Petrou

Information Manager

 

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 we invite you to email any queries to
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

Information Rights Unit

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 www.ico.org.uk.  Alternatively, write to or
phone:

 

Information Commissioner's Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

Phone: 0303 123 1113

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: [1]https://m.facebook.com/metpoliceuk

Twitter: @metpoliceuk

References

Visible links
1. https://m.facebook.com/metpoliceuk

Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)'s handling of my FOI request 'Actions of DS Nick Bailey on the 4th March 2018 (Salisbury Incident)'.

And a 2nd separate request that the Met decided to tag onto the end of this one https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c...

Detail of Complaint

This FoI Response is dishonest

Its sets out to hide information by the mal-application of an Exemption within the Act

The Exemption has been applied unreasonably and therefore unlawfully.

The Met have already indicated that they do not have problem giving out the details of Bailey’s activities before, during and after the Incident and have already released such information. Unfortunately parts of that information has been found to be dishonest, false and contradictory.

The Met has put that information out via several routes “Informed Sources”, Formal Statements, Interviews and Media Announcements.

I have asked for a definitive and honest account it has been refused on the grounds of Ongoing Investigation.

If that was an honest reason for hiding the information you should not have put any out in the first place and certainly not dishonest information.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/a...

Yours faithfully,

Peter Beswick

Cyclops on behalf of Rozmarie Loizou, Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

1 Attachment

     

 

 

 

Information Rights Unit
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF
  United Kingdom

  Our Ref: 01/FOI/19/001228

  Date: 21/02/2019

 

 

 

 

Dear Mr Beswick

Freedom of Information Review Reference No: 01/FOI/19/001228

 

I write in connection with your request for a review of the handling
and/or decision relating to 01/FOI/18/000469 which was received by the
Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 16/12/2018.   

 

A review will now be conducted in accordance with the Code of Practice
issued under Section 45 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act).
 The reviewing officer will reconsider the original request before
responding to you with their findings.

 

There is no statutory time limit in relation to the completion of an
Internal Review.  However, the MPS aim to complete Internal Reviews within
20 working days or in exceptional cases, within 40 working days.  This is
based upon guidance published by the Information Commissioner.

 

If it is not possible to complete the Internal Review within this
timescale you will be informed at the earliest opportunity. 

 

If you are unhappy with the outcome of an Internal Review you may wish to
refer the matter to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO).

 

For information on how to make an application to the Information
Commissioner please visit their website at www.ico.org.uk.  Alternatively,
write to or phone: 

 

Information Commissioner's Office 

Wycliffe House 

Water Lane 

Wilmslow 

Cheshire 

SK9 5AF 

Phone:  0303 123 1113

 

Yours sincerely 

 

R. Loizou

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: [1]https://m.facebook.com/metpoliceuk

Twitter: @metpoliceuk

References

Visible links
1. https://m.facebook.com/metpoliceuk

Cyclops on behalf of Yvette Taylor, Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

3 Attachments

 

OFFICIAL SENSITIVE

     

 

 

 

Dear Mr Beswick

 

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 01/FOI/19/001228

 

Please see the attached in respect of your Freedom of Information request
referenced above.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Yvette Taylor

 

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

Information Rights Unit

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 www.ico.org.uk.  Alternatively, write to or
phone:

 

Information Commissioner's Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

Phone: 0303 123 1113

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: [1]https://m.facebook.com/metpoliceuk

Twitter: @metpoliceuk

References

Visible links
1. https://m.facebook.com/metpoliceuk