JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for DATA-PROTECTION Archives


DATA-PROTECTION Archives

DATA-PROTECTION Archives


data-protection@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

DATA-PROTECTION Home

DATA-PROTECTION Home

DATA-PROTECTION  2004

DATA-PROTECTION 2004

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Astonishing excuses for less than competent policing?

From:

Tim Trent <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Tim Trent <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 25 Feb 2004 23:25:08 -0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (145 lines)

The Daily Telegraph was hammering on about this today.  The simple question
is this:  Why does ACPO not use common sense?"

I have quoted the article coz I had to register to see it, and it;s truly
not worth the bother.  By the way, WHY is my Date of Birth and my Gender
collected by the paper?  It seems to be to be "Excessive" data!

Article Begins
The most senior police officers in the country condemned the Government's
Information Commissioner yesterday, accusing him of undermining the safety
of children by ordering the destruction of valuable criminal intelligence.

The Association of Chief Police Officers said Richard Thomas had demanded
that police forces delete convictions for violence and allegations of sexual
assault from computer and intelligence files in the interests of data
protection and civil liberties.

Acpo said the commissioner's repeated interventions in record-keeping showed
that he "clearly misunderstands" everyday police work. It had been "frankly
absurd" for him to claim after the Soham murders trial that he never
interfered with police record-keeping.

"He wants fewer offence details recorded on the police national computer,
not more," it said.

"The Police Service has clearly indicated that this would inhibit the safety
of vulnerable persons, children in particular, and the public in general."

Acpo's fierce attack was made in written evidence to the Bichard inquiry
into the failures in vetting that allowed Ian Huntley, the Soham murderer,
to become a school caretaker despite a long history of suspected sexual
offences.

After Huntley's conviction for the murders of Holly Wells and Jessica
Chapman, Humberside constabulary said it had deleted intelligence
information about him in
<http://www.dailytelegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/12/19/nsoh19
.xml> an effort to comply with the Data Protection Act.

Mr Thomas said in his inquiry submission, also published yesterday, that
Humberside's decision to delete intelligence "of such obvious value for the
prevention and detection of crime" was "astonishing".

He said: "There was nothing in the Data Protection Act, in the Acpo code or
in the guidance from my office from which Humberside police could reasonably
conclude that they were required to delete intelligence information on Ian
Huntley within a very short timescale.

"It appears that Humberside's approach to the weeding of criminal
intelligence records was out of step with the practice in most, if not all,
other police forces."

David Westwood, the Humberside chief constable, is to appear at the inquiry
next week. He will be relieved that Acpo has sprung to his defence. In its
submission, the association says that the commissioner intervenes in police
work "to the detriment of the Police Service in general and vulnerable
members of the community in particular".

It cites examples where the data protection watchdog has taken enforcement
action against police forces, demanding that they delete records from their
database. All these have occurred since the Soham murders in August 2002.

In one case, in July 2003, the commissioner demanded that South Yorkshire
police delete from a woman's record a juvenile conviction for actual bodily
harm dating from 1979. The commissioner's office said the woman could be
"harmed or embarrassed by the disclosure of information relating to a minor
offence many years ago".

Acpo said it strongly disputed the commissioner's view and said a conviction
for actual bodily harm "is not minor or irrelevant data . . . especially if
the individual is seeking employment with vulnerable persons or children".

In September 2003 a similar request was made of West Yorkshire police over a
man who wanted juvenile convictions that carried a three-month custodial
sentence to be "weeded out" of his record.

In a case with echoes of Huntley, the commissioner asked an unnamed police
force to delete intelligence relating to allegations that a man sexually
assaulted young males in 1991 and 1998.

The commissioner questioned the force's retention of the intelligence "if it
were only being held for employment vetting purposes".

Acpo retorted: "This statement clearly misunderstands the need to process
such information for the purposes of operational policing and the subsequent
requirement to prevent crime through the employment process."

The police chiefs were "surprised" at Mr Thomas's claim after the Soham
trial in December 2003 that his office did not give formal instructions or
directions to any police force about retaining information.

Their statement says: "All the evidence shows the Information Commissioner
to be very active and influential in this area. Any suggestion to the
contrary is, in our opinion, frankly absurd."

The statement calls on Sir Michael Bichard, the chairman of the inquiry, to
establish firm rules on record keeping and vetting.

It says that criminal records should be retained for the lifetime of the
individual and issues a call for the establishment of a national policy on
holding "non-conviction data".

The inquiry begins taking evidence tomorrow when James Eadie, the inquiry
counsel, makes his opening statement.

Article ends





Tim Trent - Consultant
Direct: +44(0)1344 392644 Mobile:+44(0)7710 126618
email: [log in to unmask]
<blocked::mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Marketing Improvement Limited, Abbey House, Grenville Place, Bracknell,
United Kingdom, RG12 1BP <blocked::http://www.marketingimprovement.com/>
http://www.marketingimprovement.com



This message is for the intended addressee's use only. It may contain
confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. No
confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mis-transmission. If
you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all
copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the
sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute,
print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended
recipient. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender, except where the message states otherwise and the sender is
authorised to state them to be the views of any such entity.



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
       All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
      available to the world wide web community at large at
      http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
      If you wish to leave this list please send the command
       leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
            All user commands can be found at : -
        http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
  (all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager