Quote Originally Posted by Heisenberg View Post
What police visit? I don't remember that part of the story, sorry. I only remember the police saying that they spoke to the family about self-isolating - number 10 said they didn't speak to the family - then the police said that they spoke to his dad about security matters. If I'm wrong, then I'll accpet that - but I'm having problems finding the reporting of a police visit.

But if I'm not wrong, then we're having this debate just because someone lied in one part of this story and the media printed it - because he made it look like it was accurate.

The papers couldn't verify the Barnard Castle visit btw - yet they printed what the witness had told them and after Number 10 vehemently denied it - Cummings came out and admitted it.

I don't see where the "spin" is in this story at all, sorry. All of the spin has been after the news broke and certain agendas have been trying to poke holes wherever they can so that they can say "if that bit wasn't true - none of it was".

Just my opinion.
The police said they attended the property, the media added the reason. The Durham police have now stated that they did not visit as a result of a complaint about Cummins' presence, and they did not speak to him and his wife. The actually visited the property at Mr Cummins senior's request to discuss security of the property. It had nothing to do with Cummins or anything connected to lock-down . Another point that bothers me about this is that the Durham Police could have corrected the suggestions regarding the visit immediately but that chose not to. I wonder who made that call?
Yes the Barnard castle visit was correct, the alleged second sighting was the lie. It seems to me that the media don't check too hard when what they hear suits their argument and do if it doesn't. It should have been easily proven that Cummins was in fact in London on the day of the alleged second visit.
Every time the do this kind of thing they just make me doubt the honestly of anything in the media.