Metropolitan police denies being source of election bet leaks

The Metropolitan Police has denied being the source of leaks identifying individuals under investigation by the Gambling Commission for alleged bets on the date of the general election.

The Daily Telegraph reported that “a source close to the Cabinet Office” claimed Scotland Yard had informed journalists about those being scrutinized by the betting regulator.

Police sources told the BBC that the force views this as an attempt to divert attention and denies being responsible for disclosing any names.

The Met has not commented on the number of its officers being investigated by the Gambling Commission, other than the constable it acknowledged last week, who was arrested and questioned.

The BBC understands there are a “handful” of other officers being examined by the commission, but the exact number remains unknown.

The regulator has not disclosed the identities of those it is investigating, but the names of four Conservatives have surfaced, including two who are running for election.

In a statement, the Met Police said, “The allegations that the Met has leaked information are simply untrue.”

A senior source added, “This is a poor distraction technique.”

The same Daily Telegraph article revealed that the Gambling Commission has provided the Met Police with information suggesting more officers might be involved in the election betting scandal.

The Met stated, “We continue to liaise with the Gambling Commission and are assessing information they have provided.”

The BBC understands that the new information involves a “handful” of officers, but it is less detailed than the information that led to the arrest and questioning under caution of a member of the prime minister’s close protection team last week on suspicion of misconduct in public office.

The Met’s assessment of the new information is believed to be at a very early stage.

Any investigation into alleged cheating in bets on the date of the election will remain with the Gambling Commission.

Reviews

0 %

User Score

0 ratings
Rate This

Leave your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *