FOI Refusal by Thames Valley Police re communication of fingerprint evidence to the Hutton Inquiry

This post consists largely of a Freedom of Information Refusal by Thames Valley Police dated 1st April 2011 in relation to a request relating to whether or not Thames Valley Police withheld fingerprint evidence from the Hutton Inquiry.

The text of the Refusal by Thames Valley Police follows:

Dear Dr Watt

Reference No: RFI2011000175

I write in connection to your request for information dated 06/03/2011 which for clarity I repeat below.

For each of the listed items was the absence of fingerprints on the item concerned communicated to the Hutton Inquiry and, where such evidence was communicated, on what date it was communicated to the Hutton Inquiry together with the Hutton Inquiry reference number for the document in which such information was communicated?

1. The knife found at Harrowdown Hill

2. The water bottle found at Harrowdown Hill

3. The blister packs for co-proxamol found at Harrowdown Hill

4. The mobile phone found at Harrowdown Hill

5. The watch found at Harrowdown Hill

As Thames Valley Police is aware it is my view that a number of individuals including Thames Valley Police officers may have perverted the course of justice with respect to the death of Dr. David Kelly. Such considerations apply, in my view, in 2003 and in 2010/11.

We regard your request for information as vexatious and by virtue of section 14(1) of the Act we are therefore not obliged to comply with it.

In reaching this decision, we have taken into account guidance on “Vexatious or repeated requests” issued by the Information Commissioner on 3 December 2008. We have also considered your request in the context of numerous previous requests on this subject made by you (19 including this one since 27 October 2010). In that context, we take the view that your current request can fairly be seen as obsessive, that complying with it would impose a significant burden on police officers and staff and that it lacks serious purpose or value. In our refusal notice dated 6 January 2011 in respect of other requests, we asked you to note that further requests by you on this subject may be treated as vexatious.

This letter represents a refusal notice under section 17 of the Act.

I have attached our Complaints Procedure to this email as the first stage of appealing this decision is by writing to me and requesting an Internal Review, detailing why you believe our decision is not in accordance with the FOIA.