Have to say i disagree in blaming the service and dont agree that you can say their service is disgusting!
He may well have been asked and then the request chased up by the service.
If he chooses to not answer which is his right then they cannot even say his answer is NO. Under Data Protection as they have explained, its not possible to even confirm that because he hasnt given permission
It would have been easier if it was a flat out No but he has chosen not to reply. He probably isnt half as 'famous' as you think and most people if not connected to the case, wont even remember his name
The service works well. I have used it myself and received a reply within 2 weeks
Its easy to jump to conclusion and shout cover up etc. If that was the case, it would have been a polite no...
Not once did they acknowledge that the they had identified the prisoner whom she was inquiring about in their records. As his name is unique, and as he is so famous, this alone could have been done in 6 minutes, not 6 weeks. As he was convicted publicly in a Crown Court, this information is obviously NOT covered by the Data Protection Act.
Not once did they inform her of the prison where he is held, or has been held. As it is public knowledge that he has been held at both Long Lartin and Wakefield, they would have violated no rules by stating these facts. Omitting to do so to mrswah was just plain rude.
Not once did they confirm whether or not Vincent Tabak has been asked whether he wants to receive mail from strangers, as some other prisoners certainly do. This too was rude, as mrswah is entitled to know the facts that are obviously not covered by the Data Protection Act.
If you really got a reply to an inquiry about another, less famous, prisoner, after only two weeks, that is evidence brought by you, that Vincent Tabak is the subject of a special cover-up, and it is time you showed more respect for those of us who genuinely want to get to the bottom of this cover-up.