FOI,

Dear Ms Welsh

Reference No: RFI2012000438

I write in connection with your request for information dated 04/06/2012

which for clarity I repeat:

On Saturday 25th July 2009, I attended Slough police station and spoke

with your officers DC 5669 Pierce, and DC 5128 Deane. (Your Ref: URN 700

25/07/09)

I told them that in March of 1994 I was a serving officer in the

Metropolitan police, that I gave evidence at the Central Criminal Court in

the case of Malcolm Kennedy, and whilst I was in the

witness box I was asked a series of questions about what I knew about the

series of terrorist attacks that were going to happen in the USA on 11th

September 2001, the event commonly referred to as "9/11".

I complained to your officers that to my knowledge this intelligence was

never passed to the authorities in the USA, and consequently, the

terrorist attacks which were entirely preventable went ahead resulting in

the deaths of almost 3000 people.

I would be grateful if you would provide me with the followin

information:

1. What is the crime reference number for the crime (malfeasance) that I

reported to DCs Pierce and Deane ?

2. What are the names and ranks of any officers from the Metropolitan

police who have been arrested in connection with this inquiry ?

3. What are the names and ranks of any officers from the Metropolitan

police who have been charged with any offences inconnection with this

inquiry ?

4. What documents have been disclosed to attorneys representing Khalid

Sheikh Mohammed and his co-defendants who are about to go on trial for

their alleged involvement in the 9/11 attacks ?

5. When is somebody coming to take a statement from me ?It is now almost

three years since I reported the crime.

Thames Valley Police can neither confirm nor deny that it holds any

relevant data in accordance with Section 40(5): Personal Information and

Section 30(3) Investigations & Proceedings.

Section 40 is an absolute exemption which applies as any

confirmation/denial that information were/were not held would breach the

first principle of the Data Protection Act. We are not required to further

outline any public interest considerations or prejudice in

confirmation/denial that information is/is not held.

Section 30 is a qualified, prejudice based exemption for which Thames

Valley Police would ordinarily be obliged to outline the harm and public

interest in confirmation/denial that information is/is not held. However,

as in accordance with Section 17(4) of the FOIA, we do not have to outline

this reasoning as to do so may confirm/deny that we hold information in

this instance.

It should be noted that the FOIA is not an appropriate avenue to complain

or reopen issues already discussed. Should you wish to make a complaint

about Thames Valley Police then please contact us via:

[1]http://www.thamesvalley.police.uk/contac...

Our response should not be taken as any inference that information is/is

not held.

Please contact me quoting the above reference number if you would like to

appeal this decision.

Yours sincerely

Jane Shields

Public Access Officer

show quoted sections

References

Visible links

1. http://www.thamesvalley.police.uk/contac...