How can the police say there were fewer Grenfell Tower deaths, based on this?

In the shadow of Grenfell [Image: David Levene for the Guardian].

This Writer honestly does not understand how the police can claim there were fewer deaths in Grenfell Tower, based on fraud investigations.

This was about finding and identifying bodies, I thought – and, where no body has been found or identifiable, using other methods to check whether residents were still alive.

I don’t see how allegedly-fraudulent claims for money can equate to false claims that a person is dead. If somebody claimed cash because they said another person had died (and I don’t know why they would), then it is still incumbent on the authorities to verify the claim.

Any ideas?

The number of people who died in the Grenfell Tower fire may be a little lower than the previous estimate of 80, police have said.

The police say the estimate “may come down a little bit” because of some potential cases of fraud.

It emerged that the force is investigating eight cases in which people may have fraudulently claimed money, as well as four allegations of theft from Grenfell Tower – one involved a “considerable” sum of money.

In the initial weeks following the fire on 14 June, police were unwilling to speculate on the final death toll.

That left some convinced that the eventual figure would be much higher than officially confirmed.

The Metropolitan Police, in a briefing, said 60 of the estimated 80 people killed have been formally identified.

Source: Grenfell death toll ‘may be below 80’ – BBC News


Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.


The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

6 thoughts on “How can the police say there were fewer Grenfell Tower deaths, based on this?

  1. Ann Ford

    How can fraud make a difference in a death? If they are dead from the Grenfell Fire the fact that they committed fraud should not matter as the person died in the fire.

  2. Roland Laycock

    The police are run by the tory party and as Mrs Mat tells lies so do the police its all part of the system, Glenfell will go under the carpet with the rest including the pedophiles, no one will pay for what as been done.

  3. marcusdemowbray

    Could it be that if all the Authorities agree that there far fewer than expected deaths, then a big chunk the money raised for victims could be channelled into bosses accounts, to cover their fees, remunerations, expenses, disbursements and bonuses?!

  4. Barry Davies

    I have heard they are using DNA to find who died, and the fraud emanates from there being more claims than bodies so far found. No doubt we will have to wait and see what the eventual death toll is and whether or not all the claims are valid.

  5. wildthing666

    How many renters sub-let the property to others with no checks on if they had a right to be in the UK? Maybe two or three families sharing a home meant for one family! Residents having guests staying. You name it and it could be a possibility.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      My guess is: Not many.
      I think you’re trying to distract attention away from the main issue here.

Comments are closed.