Earlier this morning I mentioned (here) that yesterday, Dorset Police had finally got around to responding to some Freedom of Information requests made to them by members of the public about the premature closing of the investigation into the poisoned white-tailed eagle found on a shooting estate in January 2022.
I said that the responses that I’d seen (the ones that had been forwarded to me by blog readers – thank you) seemed to be a cut and paste job, just repeating the rhetoric that the investigation was ‘full and proportionate’ (no, it was neither of these things) and that the post mortem results were ‘inconclusive’ (no, the pm report revealed the eagle’s liver contained 7 x the lethal dose of the rodenticide Brodifacoum, which can only be a result of (a) mis-use of the rodenticide or (b) deliberate abuse of the rodenticide. Either way, these are both offences).
I thought it’d be useful to publish the generic response so you can see how Dorset Police is dodging specific questions and at one point, denying that political interference was even a prospect (er, even though we all read MP Chris Loder’s tweets, suggesting the police shouldn’t be investigating this crime!). This is highlighted in red below:
I’m looking forward to receiving Dorset Police’s response to my request for a review of their decision to refuse my FoI original request made on 4th March 2022 (that response is now two weeks overdue), and also a response to my most recent FoI request to Dorset Police, which was due yesterday:
4 thoughts on “Dorset Police’s generic FoI response on poisoned eagle investigation is inaccurate and unsatisfactory”
Well Done Ruth. Persistance can pay off a lot of the time as it sets so muchon the record that it can become extremely useful in the future.
I used to work in Pest Control and Brodificoum rodenticides were “indoor only” as the risks from secondary poisoning was well known. I contacted a friend who is still a Pest Controller and he said they are now approved for use round the outside of buildings. The levels in the eagle seem very high to be from it picking up the odd dead rat, but the very fact that brodificoum can now be used outside will be like a get out of jail free card for people deliberately poisoning raptors.
One has to hope the SatNav tag shows where the bird was feeding. Also is there a requirement to dispose of the dead rats in some safe way?
I can’t help but see between the lines and just know that if the post mortem findings are accurate, and I don’t believe they can be wrong, or inaccurate for one second, then there is a case to follow up, and there is a culprit responsible, I suspect the mp had a lot to do with this cover up, and I hope and prey that he never gets another vote, xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx,but does this also mean there are also friends in the police community?, to just drop a case which has evidence, proof of wrong doing, with absolutely no explanation just smacks of money talking, or political corruption.
I believe that instead of wasting money checking to see who went to what party, that money should have been used to weed out the rotten eggs within the political world, and a new law should be created for use specifically against mp’s who brake the law, one they can not wriggle out of, and one that sees them as a normal person, and one that takes no notice of how much money they have or how many lawyers they have, if they are found guilty then throw the book at them, and make them pay for the costs.