Originally Posted by bose-x
First for me as well, never heard of an IFR transit being refused anywhere especially in marginal conditions.
But I am with IO540, I would also suggest that "he who is without sin cast the first stone".
Applying IFR separation may not have been possible, so a VFR transit may have been the only option available to the controller of Class D.
The "problem" with that is that the controller is reliant upon the transit requester not telling lies about met conditions - which, according to FFF, may not be the case here...
Whether in a past life someone else has lied to get an expedient clearance is interesting but irrelevant.
If FFF truly believes that the transit-er was in IMC at the time and, therefore, unable to separate themselves visually, he should CHIRP it if nothing else...