Nobody is saying that the statement isn't accurate, as far as it goes. Although there is room for inaccuracies and ommisions with translations and third party statements
But interviews of 15 hours producing so little in statements, proves that not everything was mentioned
Kate attended interviews on 3 separate days.
I have no idea whether the 15 hours is accurate or not, so perhaps anyone relying on that should verify it.
The interview process is known, and it is obviously very slow. So I do not find 15 hours to be out of keeping with what we know.
What you are implying is libel. You are libelling Kate in that she supposedly failed to ensure this key piece of evidence was included in her statement(s) when she signed to confirm they were accurate. You are libelling the PJ officers who allegedly failed to incorporate this key piece of information in Kate's statements. You are libelling the translator, who either failed to pass this key information on in the first place, or forget it had been mentioned when reading the statement back.
The responsibility to confirm the veracity of the statements was Kate's.
Unless you have evidence that this was raised in one of the interviews, and none has been forthcoming so far, you are above all libelling Kate.
Any further non-evidenced posts to such effect are going to be removed.
And I'm willing to bet that when the senior moderators review this debate, a great deal of this discussion will disappear on the grounds that it is libellous.