Providing Knowingly False Data and Information in Media Press Releases (2018)

Response to this request is long overdue. By law, under all circumstances, Hampshire Constabulary should have responded by now (details). You can complain by requesting an internal review.

Dear Hampshire Constabulary,

Reference: Data & Information Issued by Hampshire Constabulary Via a Media Release in 2018.

I require under the Freedom Of Information Act that you disclose the following statements as made by you as being either (False) or (Accurate) as made by PC Richard Jewell (Investigating Officer). I require you to answer each of the points below separately, point by point, in response to my request.

Point 1: "Fantasist" jailed for creating extraordinary web of lies to avoid speeding ticket .

You state in the press release that Mr Henry was jailed for avoiding a speeding ticket. Please confirm (a) When was Mr Henry issued with a speeding ticket (b) When was Mr Henry heard in court in relation to your speeding ticket statement (c) Please confirm what the speeding ticket value was in (£'s). (d) When did you prosecute the driver of the vehicle in court that caused this speeding ticket. (e) In relation to this press statement and as a matter of fact, did Hampshire Constabulary ever take Mr Henry to court for any speeding ticket (e) Was Mr Henry ever prosecuted in court for speeding or even heard in court for a speeding offence.

Point 2: A motorist who created an extraordinary web of deceit to avoid a speeding ticket has been jailed for 12 months.

You state that Mr Henry created a web of deceit to avoid a speeding ticket. (a) Please confirm on what date you cautioned MR Henry for Speeding (b) Please confirm on what date you charged Mr Henry for speeding (c) Please confirm whether you took Mr Henry to court for speeding and in which court this speeding ticket matter was heard (b) What conviction did Mr Henry receive for specifically 'Speeding' in this Yellow Freelander and in what Court that Speeding Conviction was made.

Point 3: (1) Who was formally identified at the scene of the speeding offence in relation to speeding in the Yellow Freelander as being the driver. (2) Who was the person that was prosecuted in court for speeding in relation to this Yellow Freelander doing 35mph in a 30mph and how was this person formally identified as being at the scene of the speeding.

Point 4: You state that Christopher Henry went to extreme lengths to dodge the speeding offence. (1) Please confirm that Mr Henry was charged for this speeding offence (2) Was formally prosecuted for this speeding offence and (c) Who was the registered keeper of the Yellow Freelander with the DVLA at the time of the alleged offence (d) Was Mr Henry ever recorded as the registered keeper of the Yellow Freelander with the DVLA (e) Was Mr Henry ever recorded as the registered owner of the Yellow Freelander with the DVLA.

Point 5: The press statement as issued by PC Richard Jewell stated that by the dedication and determination of a Hampshire officer has finally seen the 52year-old behind bars following a two-year investigation into this speeding offence of 35mph in a 30mph zone. (1) Please confirm on what date and in which court Mr Henry was formally prosecuted for speeding at 35mph in a 30mph zone given that he was investigated for this offence for 2 years by PC Richard Jewell. (2) In fact has Hampshire Constabulary ever prosecuted Mr Henry for any speeding offence between 2000 and 2019 and please list which courts this prosecution(s) took place and what the offences were.

Point 6: The press statement says that this was a complex investigation which began back in February 2016 when Henry was caught speeding by a mobile camera van on the A343 Newbury Road, Hurstbourne Tarrant, driving his ex-wife’s Freelander. (1) Please confirm if this statement is accurate or false (b) Was Mr Henry caught speeding at the scene whilst driving this Yellow Freelander, Yes or No (c) Did the Yellow Freelander at the time of the offence belong to Mr Henry's Ex-Wife as stated in the press statement (Yes or No). (2) Was Mr Henry ever convicted in a court of law or heard in a court of law for the alleged speeding offence of travelling at 35mph in a 30mph zone on the A343 Newbury Road, Hurstbourne Tarrant (Yes or No).

Point 7: PC Jewell stated in the press statement that Rather than accept the £100 fine and three points on his driving licence, Henry embarked on trail of deceit that lead to enquiries in the Outer Hebrides and with French Interpol. Please confirm the following (a) Was Mr Henry ever formally issued with a £100 fine for speeding (b) Was Mr Henry ever heard in any court in the UK for this speeding offence (c) Given that No Court ever heard any speeding allegation against Mr Henry, do you agree that he could not be held liable for any £100 speeding fine or ticket, as no such allegation in court was ever heard in relation to a speeding offence. (d) If a court did hear the speeding offence, please confirm which court heard the speeding offence that would have led to a £100 fine.

Point 8: Is accurate and correct that for the offence of speeding at 35mph in a 30mph zone as outline din this press statement would automatically lead to a £100 fine and is the amount of £100 accurate in any event by way of a fine for a £35mph speed in a 30mph zone. Is it not the case that an alterative offer may have been made for a speeding course had someone been formally identified as being the driver at the time of the alleged offence.

Point 9: As a matter of public record how many point did Mr Henry have on his DVLA licence at the time of the alleged offence in February 2016.

Point 10: As a matter of public record how many times had Mr Henry been prosecuted for speeding by Hampshire Constabulary between 2000 and 2019 in the Hampshire catchment area.

Point 11: Your press statement made by PC Jewell states that it took 2 years to prosecute Mr Henry for this speeding offence (a) Did PC Jewell within 2 years ever actually prosecute Mr Henry for any speeding offence inclusive this one relating to a Yellow Freelander (b) If PC Jewell and Hampshire Constabulary never actually obtained any speeding prosecution at all against Mr Henry in a y UK Court, as no court actually heard any speeding case against Mr Henry, is the statement made by PC Richard Jewell that it took him 2 years to prosecute MR Henry for speeding at 35mph in a 30mph zone simply a lie / false in fact.

Point 12: The press statement as made by PC Richard Jewell stated that that an Audi TT was registered to Mr Henry when it was caught speeding in August 2016.(a) Please confirm who the DVLA had the Audi TT registered against at the time of this second alleged offence (b) At the time of the second alleged offence can you formally confirm that on the date of the Offence the DVLA did not have Mr Henry registered at the vehicle owner or keeper (Yes or No).
(c) Please confirm if Mr Henry was ever prosecuted for speeding in this Audi TT by Hampshire or Somerset Police (d) Please confirm who actually received the fine and points for this speeding offence in the Audi TT - was this Mr Henry (Yes or No)

Point 13: The press statement as made by PC Richard Jewell from the Safer Roads and Summary Justice Unit, said: “Hampshire police and our Safer Roads team takes road safety very seriously. “It is not right that certain individuals will try and avoid their responsibilities under the Road Traffic Act by lying about who was driving to avoid police or court action.
“This case shows that such claims are investigated and, where evidence exists, prosecution will follow.

(a) Please confirm if PC Richard Jewell and Hampshire Constabulary ever prosecuted any driver for the offence of speeding at 35mph in a 30mph zone in February 2016 (b) If yes which court heard the speeding offence and (c) what penalty /fine and against who did the court register the speeding offence and fine against formally and on public record.

(b) Is it not a fact that PC Richard Jewell and Hampshire Constabulary never actually prosecuted anyone formally for the allegation of speeding at 35mph in a 30mph zone in a yellow Freelander, as this case was never brought before a UK Court and was never in fact heard in any UK Court in relation to speeding in a Yellow Freelander.

(c) If no one was ever formally prosecuted in a UK court and no case was ever heard in any UK court for this alleged speeding offence in a Yellow Freelander, how can the PC state that a speeding prosecution was made and that Hampshire Roads had been made safer as a result of No actual speeding prosecution in 2 years, in fact no one was ever prosecuted in a UK court of law for speeding in this Yellow Freelander, is that correct (Yes or No).

Can you con firm that this press release by PC Richard Jewell was false and inaccurate in relation to Mr Henry speeding as he was never in fact convicted of any speeding offence by PC Richard Jewell and that no court ever heard any speeding offence in relation to this vehicle as a matter of fact (do you agree that no speeding case in court was ever heard) and to publicise Mr Henry speeding and showing a picture of a Yellow Freelander that was never registered to hi or owned by him as confirmed by the DVLA is in fact misrepresentation of the facts

Yours faithfully,

Nia Day

Dear Hampshire Constabulary,

Prior to your reply to questions relating to the Formal and Public Press Statement as made by PC Richard Jewell that was provided to me by you recently in my other FOI request. I must bring to your attention and that of the public facts as stated by the judiciary and Courts in open and formal correspondence that I have dated 2018, which is as follows:

1. A formal written statement was issued by Basingstoke Law Courts dated (21/08/2018)
'At a single Justice procedure Hearing held on 14th July 2016 Mr Henry was convicted in his absence of
failing to provide information in relation to a vehicle that he id knot own and was not registered to him in
relation to vehicle registration S20 SYR. The allegation made by Hampshire Constabulary that Mr Henry
was speeding in a Yellow Freelander registration S20 SYR on the A343 was withdrawn and was never heard
in court. The only offence committed by Mr Henry as confirmed by this court was for failing to provide
information in relation to a Yellow Freelander S20 SYR that the Court and DVLA confirmed that Mr Henry
was never the registered keeper or owner of this vehicle. Question 1. (In summary No Court Case was ever
heard in any UK court between 2016 and today) in relation to Mr Henry being accused of driving this
vehicle (Is this factually correct) Yes Or No. Question 2. It is a fact is it not that PC Richard Jewell and
Hampshire Constabulary never took anyone to court for the case of Speeding in the Yellow Freelander
registration S20 SYR as a matter of public fact and record (Yes or No). Question 3. During the two year
investigation undertook by Pc Richard Jewell who was the investigating officer and the person that issued
the formal press statement on behalf of Hampshire Constabulary that he never prosecuted anyone in a UK
court for the offence of speeding on the A343 (Yes or No). Question 4. It is a fact of the court that Mr Henry
was never heard in court for the alleged offence of speeding in a Yellow Freelander registration S20 SYR on
the A343 and as such no one inclusive Mr Henry was ever prosecuted for the offence of speeding in any UK
Court. (Yes or No).

The above qualification to your formal press statement as issued by PC Richard Jewell requires
clarification on the points above.

2. The above facts have also been confirmed formally also by the CPS Victim Liaison Service in open
correspondence dated (06/11/2018). Do you confirm that the CPS view is (Accurate or False).

3. The above facts have also been confirmed formally by the DVLA who in open correspondence state that
according to their formal records that Mr was never a registered keeper or owner of the Yellow Freelander
Vehicle Registration S20 SYR. Do you confirm that the DVLA view is (Accurate of False).

4. The above facts were also confirmed formally b y the CCRC in open correspondence dated (11/11/2018)
whereby they confirmed in open correspondence that Hampshire Constabulary never prosecuted anyone
for the speeding offence on the A343 and that no case was ever heard in any UK court in relation to anyone
being heard in court for the alleged offence of speeding on the A343 in a Yellow Freelander in Februaru
2016.

5. Finally Hampshire Police confirmed in open correspondence in 2018 that (a) No One was ever fined £100
for speeding on the A343 as no £100 fine was ever issued to anyone (a) Is that Accurate or Not . That No
One avoided any points or fines as they were never issued to anyone (b) Is that Accurate or Not. (c) That
no case was ever heard in any UK court 'ever' from the date of the offence in February 2016 to todays date
in relation to anyone being charged, arrested or brought to a UK court for the alleged offence of speeding
in the Yellow Freelander Registration S20 SYR, Is that Accurate or Not.

In relation to the facts of the statement as made by PC Richard Jewell as issued to the press as the investigating officer of 2 years for this alleged speeding offence that his press statement was intended to pervert public opinion as it was false, not factually accurate, was misleading and that in fact he had not made Hampshire Roads safer as after 2 years he never prosecuted any person in court for the speeding offence itself. (Is that Accurate In your view). In effect PC Richard Jewell in releasing this press statement issued a statement that was knowingly false in relation to the Speeding element of the matter.

Is it not the case that after 2 years of investigating the case of speeding on the A343 in relation to the Yellow Freelander Registration S20 SYR, that he failed to prosecute anyone in a UK court for speeding as no such court case was ever heard in court. Is that (Accurate or False).

Is it not the case that Mr Henry was only heard in court for the matter relating to failing to provide a response to a S172 9Is that Accurate or False) in relation to the alleged Speeding Offence in the Yellow Freelander as he was never heard in court in relation to speeding in this vehicle that he did not own and was never registered to him. 9Is that Accurate or False).

This public qualification to the Media Press Release as created by PC Richard Jewell as the Investigating Officer and as provided by you to me recently, needs the above qualifications of accuracy in relation to data, information release and in relation to attempting to pervert public opinion as press releases by Police Officers have to be Accurate in fact.

Yours faithfully,

Nia Day

Hampshire Constabulary

1 Attachment

Dear Ms Day

 

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST REFERENCE NO: HC/002546/19

 

The following request for information under the Freedom of Information Act
was received by the Public Access office at Hampshire Constabulary on the
date listed above:

 

Reference: Data & Information Issued by Hampshire Constabulary Via a Media
Release in 2018.

 

I require under the Freedom Of Information Act that you disclose the
following statements as made by you as being either (False) or (Accurate)
as made by PC Richard Jewell (Investigating Officer). I require you to
answer each of the points below separately, point by point, in response to
my request.

 

Point 1:  "Fantasist" jailed for creating extraordinary web of lies to
avoid speeding ticket .

 

You state in the press release that Mr Henry was jailed for avoiding a
speeding ticket.  Please confirm (a) When was Mr Henry issued with a
speeding ticket (b) When was Mr Henry heard in court in relation to your
speeding ticket statement (c) Please confirm what the speeding ticket
value was in (£'s). (d) When did you prosecute the driver of the vehicle
in court that caused this speeding ticket. (e) In relation to this press
statement and as a matter of fact, did Hampshire Constabulary ever take Mr
Henry to court for any speeding ticket (e) Was Mr Henry ever prosecuted in
court for speeding or even heard in court for a speeding offence.

 

Point 2: A motorist who created an extraordinary web of deceit to avoid a
speeding ticket has been jailed for 12 months.  

 

You state that Mr Henry created a web of deceit to avoid a speeding
ticket. (a) Please confirm on what date you cautioned MR Henry for
Speeding (b) Please confirm on what date you charged Mr Henry for speeding
(c) Please confirm whether you took Mr Henry to court for speeding and in
which court this speeding ticket matter was heard (b) What conviction did
Mr Henry receive for specifically 'Speeding' in this Yellow Freelander and
in what Court that Speeding Conviction was made.

 

Point 3: (1) Who was formally identified at the scene of the speeding
offence in relation to  speeding in the Yellow Freelander as being the
driver. (2) Who was the person that was prosecuted in court for speeding
in relation to this Yellow Freelander doing 35mph in a 30mph and how was
this person formally identified as being at the scene of the speeding.

 

Point 4: You state that Christopher Henry went to extreme lengths to dodge
the speeding offence.  (1) Please confirm that Mr Henry was charged for
this speeding offence (2) Was formally prosecuted for this speeding
offence and (c) Who was the registered keeper of the Yellow Freelander
with the DVLA at the time of the alleged offence (d) Was Mr Henry ever
recorded as the registered keeper of the Yellow Freelander with the DVLA 
(e) Was Mr Henry ever recorded as the registered owner of the Yellow
Freelander with the DVLA.

 

Point 5: The press statement as issued by PC Richard Jewell stated that by
the dedication and determination of a Hampshire officer has finally seen
the 52year-old behind bars following a two-year investigation into this
speeding offence of 35mph in a 30mph zone. (1) Please confirm on what date
and in which court Mr Henry was formally prosecuted for speeding at 35mph
in a 30mph zone given that he was investigated for this offence for 2
years by PC Richard Jewell. (2) In fact has Hampshire Constabulary ever
prosecuted Mr Henry for any speeding offence between 2000 and 2019 and
please list which courts this prosecution(s) took place and what the
offences were.

 

Point 6: The press statement says that this was a complex investigation
which began back in February 2016 when Henry was caught speeding by a
mobile camera van on the A343 Newbury Road, Hurstbourne Tarrant, driving
his ex-wife’s Freelander.  (1) Please confirm if this statement is
accurate or false (b) Was Mr Henry caught speeding at the scene whilst
driving this Yellow Freelander, Yes or No (c) Did the Yellow Freelander at
the time of the offence belong to Mr Henry's Ex-Wife as stated in the
press statement (Yes or No).  (2) Was Mr Henry ever convicted in a court
of law or heard in a court of law for the alleged speeding offence of
travelling at 35mph in a 30mph zone on the A343 Newbury Road, Hurstbourne
Tarrant (Yes or No).

 

Point 7: PC Jewell stated in the press statement that Rather than accept
the £100 fine and three points on his driving licence, Henry embarked on
trail of deceit that lead to enquiries in the Outer Hebrides and with
French Interpol.  Please confirm the following (a) Was Mr Henry ever
formally issued with a £100 fine for speeding (b) Was Mr Henry ever heard
in any court in the UK for this speeding offence (c) Given that No Court
ever heard any speeding allegation against Mr Henry, do you agree that he
could not be held liable for any £100 speeding fine or ticket, as no such
allegation in court was ever heard in relation to a speeding offence. (d)
If a court did hear the speeding offence, please confirm which court heard
the speeding offence that would have led to a £100 fine.

 

Point 8: Is accurate and correct that for the offence of speeding at 35mph
in a 30mph zone as outline din this press statement would automatically
lead to a £100 fine and is the amount of £100 accurate in any event by way
of a fine for a £35mph speed in a 30mph zone. Is it not the case that an
alterative offer may have been made for a speeding course had someone been
formally identified as being the driver at the time of the alleged
offence.

 

Point 9: As a matter of public record how many point did Mr Henry have on
his DVLA licence at the time of the alleged offence in February 2016.

 

Point 10: As a matter of public record how many times had Mr Henry been
prosecuted for speeding by Hampshire Constabulary between 2000 and 2019 in
the Hampshire catchment area.

 

Point 11: Your press statement made by PC Jewell states that it took 2
years to prosecute Mr Henry for this speeding offence (a) Did PC Jewell
within 2 years ever actually prosecute Mr Henry for any speeding offence
inclusive this one relating to a Yellow Freelander (b) If PC Jewell and
Hampshire Constabulary never actually obtained any speeding prosecution at
all against Mr Henry in a y UK Court, as no court actually heard any
speeding case against Mr Henry, is the statement made by PC Richard Jewell
that it took him 2 years to prosecute MR Henry for speeding at 35mph in a
30mph zone simply a lie / false in fact.

 

Point 12: The press statement as made by PC Richard Jewell stated that
that an Audi TT was registered to Mr Henry when it was caught speeding in
August 2016.(a) Please confirm who the DVLA had the Audi TT registered
against at the time of this second alleged offence (b) At the time of the
second alleged offence can you formally confirm that on the date of the
Offence the DVLA did not have Mr Henry registered at the vehicle owner or
keeper (Yes or No).

(c) Please confirm if Mr Henry was ever prosecuted for speeding in this
Audi TT by Hampshire or Somerset Police (d) Please confirm who actually
received the fine and points for this speeding offence in the Audi TT -
was this Mr Henry (Yes or No)

 

Point 13: The press statement as made by PC Richard Jewell from the Safer
Roads and Summary Justice Unit, said: "Hampshire police and our Safer
Roads team takes road safety very seriously.  "It is not right that
certain individuals will try and avoid their responsibilities under the
Road Traffic Act by lying about who was driving to avoid police or court
action.

 "This case shows that such claims are investigated and, where evidence
exists, prosecution will follow.

 

(a) Please confirm if PC Richard Jewell and Hampshire Constabulary ever
prosecuted any driver for the offence of speeding at 35mph in a 30mph zone
in February 2016 (b) If yes which court heard the speeding offence and (c)
what penalty  /fine and against who did the court register the speeding
offence and fine  against formally and on public record.

 

(b) Is it not a fact that PC Richard Jewell and Hampshire Constabulary
never actually prosecuted anyone formally for the allegation of speeding
at 35mph in a 30mph zone in a yellow Freelander, as this case was never
brought before a UK Court and was never in fact heard in any UK Court in
relation to speeding in a Yellow Freelander.

 

(c) If no one was ever formally prosecuted in a UK court and no case was
ever heard in any UK court for this alleged speeding offence in a Yellow
Freelander, how can the PC state that a speeding prosecution was made and
that Hampshire Roads had been made safer as a result of No actual speeding
prosecution in 2 years, in fact no one was ever prosecuted in a UK court
of law for speeding in this Yellow Freelander, is that correct (Yes or
No).

 

Can you con firm that this press release by PC Richard Jewell was false
and inaccurate in relation to Mr Henry speeding as he was never in fact
convicted of any speeding offence by PC Richard Jewell and that no court
ever heard any speeding offence in relation to this vehicle as a matter of
fact (do you agree that no speeding case in court was ever heard) and to
publicise Mr Henry speeding and showing a picture of a Yellow Freelander
that was never registered to hi or owned by him as confirmed by the DVLA
is in fact misrepresentation of the facts

 

 

Your request will be considered in accordance with the legislation and you
will receive a response within the statutory timescale of 20 working days,
subject to the provisions of the Act.  In the unlikely event that
Hampshire Constabulary is unable to meet the 20 working day deadline, you
will be informed as soon as possible and given a revised time-scale for
response.

 

To be accepted, any clarification(s) to your request must be submitted in
writing directly to the Public Access team at Hampshire Constabulary. 

 

If your request requires either full or partial transference to another
public authority, you will be informed.  Should you have any further
enquiries concerning this matter, please write or contact Public Access on
telephone number 02380 479 580 quoting the reference number above.

 

Kind regards

 

 

Rosalind Howell | Public Access Assistant
Joint Information Management Unit | Hampshire Constabulary & Thames Valley
Police

Telephone 02380 479580 | Internal 4631754

Address: Hampshire Constabulary, Mottisfont Court, Tower Street,
Winchester, Hampshire SO23 8ZD.

 

Information Management Helpdesk:

Hampshire :[1][email address] / 02380
479580 (Int 463 1754)

Thames Valley: [2][email address] /
01865 542051 (Int 300 329)

 

 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. mailto:[email address]

Hampshire Constabulary

1 Attachment

 

 

Rose Gaunt | Public Access Officer
Joint Information Management Unit | Hampshire Constabulary & Thames Valley
Police
Telephone 02380 479580 | Internal 463 1759
Address | Hampshire Constabulary, Mottisfont Court, Tower Street,
Winchester, Hampshire, SO23 8ZD

 

Information Management Helpdesk:

Hampshire - [1][email address] / 02380
479580 (internal 463 1760)

Thames Valley - [2][email address] /
01865 542051 (internal 300 6329)

 

 

 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. mailto:[email address]

Dear Hampshire Constabulary,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Hampshire Constabulary's handling of my FOI request 'Providing Knowingly False Data and Information in Media Press Releases (2018)'.

I believe that Hampshire Constabulary are 'avoiding releasing information by using my abusing my request for information clarification by naming it a vexatious request.

As Hampshire Constabulary have issued a copy of the formal press release to me and this is in the public domain. I have a right to question the accuracy of the data made available to me via further questioning and analysis, it appears that the police are avoiding scrutiny via my request for further clarification upon data already released. this is an abuse of power and an abuse of the FOI Act.

Clarification on data already released to me is not an abuse, it is a right to establish the accuracy of the information provided.

[ GIVE DETAILS ABOUT YOUR COMPLAINT HERE ]

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

Yours faithfully,

Nia Day

Hampshire Constabulary

Dear Nia day,

 

I refer to your email dated the 14 October 2019, requesting that Hampshire
Constabulary review the response to your request for information under the
Freedom of Information Act.

 

The internal review will be conducted by Jason Russell, Senior Public
Access Manager and a response will be issued to you within 20 working
days.

 

Should you have any further queries in the meantime, please do not
hesitate to contact this unit.

 

Kind Regards

 

 

Sue Adcock | Public Access

Joint Information Management Unit | Hampshire Constabulary & Thames Valley
Police

Telephone 02380 479580 | Internal 463 1754

Address: Hampshire Constabulary, Mottisfont Court, Tower Street,
Winchester, Hampshire SO23 8ZD.

 

Information Management Helpdesk:

Hampshire :[1][email address] / 02380
479580 (Int 463 1754)

Thames Valley: [2][email address] /
01865 542051 (Int 300 329)

 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. mailto:[email address]

Hampshire Constabulary

1 Attachment

 

show quoted sections

Dear Hampshire Constabulary,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Hampshire Constabulary's handling of my FOI request 'Providing Knowingly False Data and Information in Media Press Releases (2018)'.

The request for information is proportionate to the press statement content as released by Hampshire Constabulary. as the press statement was very detailed the requests for clarification on points in that statement are consequently detailed.

There is no vexatious request being made. a detailed request is not a vexatious request under the data protection laws in the UK.

Hampshire Constabulary should not abuse the data laws to fail to respond to a detailed data clarification request simply because it is seeking to avoid the detailed explanations required.

As the requests for clarification on the press statement are proportionate to each entry made on the press statement as released to the press, the request is neither vexatious or disproprortionate in nature given the extensive comments made in the police statement that are false and misleading.

To mislead the public with false statements is illegal and to avoid responding to those challenges is an abuse of police power under the data protection laws in the UK.

Hampshire Constabulary must account for the volumous and inaccurate facts as made in the press statement. Avoidance evidences guilt on your behalf.

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

Yours faithfully,

Nia Day

Hampshire Constabulary

Dear Ms Day

 

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST – INTERNAL REVIEW CM/PA/003036/19

 

I refer to your email dated the 19 November 2019, requesting that
Hampshire Constabulary review the response to your request for information
under the Freedom of Information Act.

 

The internal review will be conducted by Jason Russell, Senior Public
Access Manager and a response will be issued to you within 20 working
days.

 

Should you have any further queries in the meantime, please do not
hesitate to contact this unit.

 

 

Sue Adcock | Public Access

Joint Information Management Unit | Hampshire Constabulary & Thames Valley
Police

Telephone 02380 479580 | Internal 463 1754

Address: Hampshire Constabulary, Mottisfont Court, Tower Street,
Winchester, Hampshire SO23 8ZD.

 

Information Management Helpdesk:

Hampshire :[1][email address] / 02380
479580 (Int 463 1754)

Thames Valley: [2][email address] /
01865 542051 (Int 300 329)

 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. mailto:[email address]

Hampshire Constabulary

Dear Ms Day,

 

Following our confirmation response to your email relating to an internal
review, there is nothing further for us to add to our previous response.

 

If you are unhappy with our response, you can refer the matter to the
following;

 

ICO (Information Commissioners Office)

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

SK9 5AF

 

01625 545700.

 

Kind Regards

Sue

 

Sue Adcock | Public Access

Joint Information Management Unit | Hampshire Constabulary & Thames Valley
Police

Telephone 02380 479580 | Internal 463 1754

Address: Hampshire Constabulary, Mottisfont Court, Tower Street,
Winchester, Hampshire SO23 8ZD.

 

Information Management Helpdesk:

Hampshire :[1][email address] / 02380
479580 (Int 463 1754)

Thames Valley: [2][email address] /
01865 542051 (Int 300 329)

 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. mailto:[email address]