What I find more disturbing is that a life sentence for murder seems to be
about 11 years.
Brenda Scourfield
Team Leader
I.T. Division
Pembrokeshire County Council
County Hall
Haverfordwest
SA61 1 TP
Tel 01437 775380
> -----Original Message-----
> From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection issues
> [SMTP:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Nick Landau
> Sent: 08 January 2007 11:04
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Disclosure
>
> I am not sure if anyone has posted this but here is the BBC news item
> (containing photos) but which gives the background to the case, with
> comments of the Lord Falconer etc.
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/6234223.stm
>
> "'Danger to public'
>
> "When you are dealing with two convicted murderers, both of whom have
> absconded, it is utterly obvious that there is no public interest arising
> out of the Human Rights Act which prevents publication," he told the BBC.
>
> The Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA) also said that the photos
> should be published if the men are considered a danger to the public.
>
> The department said the Human Rights Act "explicitly" allows police to
> print
> "wanted" pictures if it is in the public interest."
>
> From Liberty:
>
> http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/news-and-events/1-press-releases/20
> 07/derbyshire-fugitive-prisoners-case.shtml
>
> "Derbyshire Police have revealed that although two convicted murderers are
>
> among 13 inmates who absconded from Sudbury open prison since November
> 2006,
> they would not publish the photos of the men due to factors including
> their
> human rights protections.
>
> In response, Liberty Director Shami Chakrabarti said:
>
> "Nothing in the Human Rights Act prevents publishing pictures to capture a
>
> fugitive - on the contrary, the rights of potential victims may create an
> obligation to do so. But ultimately this must be an operational policing
> decision, not a political one. There is a difference between naming and
> shaming versus the necessity of a manhunt."
>
> The Lord Chancellor has also dismissed the suggestion that the Human
> Rights
> Act prevented the publication of the photographs of the two murderers as
> "absolute nonsense.""
>
> Nick Landau
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tim Turner" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:27 AM
> Subject: Re: [data-protection] Disclosure
>
>
> >I doubt that the current situation is the same as this case - releasing
> > pictures of the escapees could reasonably be said to be proportionate,
> in
> > the sense that they have committed an offence (escaping from prison),
> and
> > one way in which their crime can be resolved is if they are recognised
> by
> > a
> > member of the public after their photograph has been released. It isn't
> a
> > matter of further punishment, but practical need.
> >
> > On first reading, the problem with the Essex case appears to be that
> they
> > could have done a similar campaign emphasising the sentences received
> for
> > certain crimes without identifying the individuals. There was no actual
> > need
> > to identify the individuals - not the same as the situation with the
> > escapees, continuing to commit a crime purely by virtue of the fact that
> > they aren't in prison where the court says that they should be.
> >
> > Tim Turner
> > Data Protection / FOI Officer
> > Legal and Property Services
> > Wigan Council
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection issues
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Alan Stead
> > Sent: Mon 08 January 2007 09:32
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: [data-protection] Disclosure
> >
> > Sorry to prolong the discussion but you may find the attached Case
> > interesting:
> >
> > R (On the application of ELLIS) v THE CHIEF CONSTABLE OF ESSEX POLICE
> > (2003)
> > [2003] EWHC 1321 (Admin) QBD (Lord Woolf of Barnes LCJ, Goldring J)
> > 12/6/2003 HUMAN RIGHTS - CRIMINAL LAW - CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - POLICE
> > OFFENDER
> > NAMING SCHEMES : PUBLIC INTEREST : REDUCTION OF CRIME : PREVENTION OF
> > CRIME
> > : DETECTION OF CRIME : PROTECTION OF RIGHTS OF OTHERS : PUBLICATION OF
> > PHOTOGRAPHS : DISPLAY OF POSTERS : DISCLOSURES OF IDENTITY : CONVICTED
> > PERSONS : NAMING AND SHAMING : PROBATION SERVICES : SOCIAL SERVICES :
> > LOCAL
> > AUTHORITIES : CIRCUMSTANCES OF OFFENDERS : RISK ASSESSMENTS :
> > REHABILITATION
> > OF OFFENDERS : RISK OF REOFFENDING : RISK OF HOMELESSNESS : RISK OF HARM
>
> > TO
> > FAMILY : PROTECTION OF CHILDREN : UNFAIRNESS : DISCRIMINATION : ART.8 :
> > RIGHT TO RESPECT FOR PRIVATE AND FAMILY LIFE : PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE
> :
> > EUROPEAN CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL
> > FREEDOMS 1950 : EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS : ECHR : CRIME AND
> > DISORDER ACT 1998 In terms of the right to respect for private and
> family
> > life under Art.8 European Convention on Human Rights, the legality of an
> > "offender naming scheme" operated by police could not be determined in
> > principle and would depend on how the scheme was operated in practice in
> > relation to each particular offender.
> > Application concerning the lawfulness of an "offender naming scheme"
> > operated by the defendant ('Essex police'). The scheme was introduced
> with
> > a
> > view to reducing burglary and car crime in the Brentwood area, and was
> > implemented in an attempt by Essex police to perform its duties under
> the
> > Crime and Disorder Act 1998 to implement strategies for reducing crime.
> It
> > involved displaying posters at some 40 sites showing the name and face
> of
> > a
> > selected offender, the nature of his offence and the sentence he was
> > serving. Essex police's protocol governing the scheme required that only
> > offenders serving at least 12 months in prison would be selected for
> > inclusion in the scheme and that the offender and his legal
> representative
> > were to be given written notice on the day of sentencing and given seven
> > days in which to register an objection. The selection would then require
> > approval from a senior officer after a risk assessment carried out in
> > consultation with the probation service and social services. The
> probation
> > service had expressed reservations about the Brentwood scheme, the local
> > authority had expressly disapproved of it, and NACRO had stated that it
> > would interfere with the rehabilitation of offenders and would be
> > ineffective in reducing the reoffending rate. The claimant ('E') was
> > selected by Essex Police to be the first offender used in the scheme.
> The
> > probation service concluded that to use E would, on his release from
> > prison,
> > increase his risk of homelessness, drug misuse, re-offending and
> > non-compliance on licence, and was likely to increase the risk of harm
> to
> > the public. They also concluded that there was a risk of harm to E's
> > parents, ex-partner and young daughter who all lived in the locality.
> > Essex
> > police took the view that there would be no such adverse consequences of
> > including E in the scheme, as his conduct on release was unlikely to be
> > affected, his crimes had already been reported in the press, his
> > ex-partner
> > and daughter had changed their names, and E had indicated that he
> intended
> > to move away from Essex. However, Essex police subsequently decided to
> > withdraw E from the scheme and the court was left to rule on the
> > lawfulness
> > of the scheme in principle rather than E's case in particular. It was
> not
> > disputed that the scheme involved an interference with private and
> family
> > life contrary to Art.8(1) European Convention on Human Rights but Essex
> > police argued that any interference was justified under Art.8(2) as
> being
> > necessary in the interests of the prevention or detection of crime or
> the
> > protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
> >
> > HELD: (1) There was a general presumption that information should not be
> > disclosed by the police, in view of the potentially serious effect on
> the
> > ability of convicted people to live normal lives and the risk of
> violence
> > towards such people, but there was a public interest in favour of
> > disclosure
> > where necessary for the prevention or detection of crime or the
> protection
> > of vulnerable people, and each case must be considered on its particular
> > facts. There should only be disclosure where there was a pressing need,
> > and
> > the police must first obtain as much information as reasonably
> > practicable,
> > including from other agencies. It was a principle of law that the police
> > were not entitled to punish and that they should not seek to do so by
> > "naming and shaming" offenders. It was also a principle of law that a
> > convicted person retained all his rights that were not expressly taken
> > away
> > by law. Hellewell v Chief Constable of Derbyshire (1995) 1 WLR 804 and R
> v
> > Chief Constable of North Wales Police & Ors, ex parte Thorpe & Anor
> (1999)
> > QB 396 applied. (2) Had it been necessary to rule on E's individual
> case,
> > the court would have done so in E's favour. There was concern as to
> Essex
> > police's superficial reaction to the risk factors identified by the
> > probation service. Damage could have been done to E's family and child
> > despite their change of name, and they also had rights under Art.8. It
> was
> > particularly important to safeguard the rights of E's child and there
> was
> > a
> > real question as to whether it could ever be appropriate to nominate the
> > father of a young child for inclusion in the scheme. The scheme also
> > involved a degree of unfairness in that it discriminated between those
> > offenders who were included and those who were not, and the former would
>
> > see
> > inclusion as a form of additional punishment. (3) However, it was not
> > desirable in this case to rule that the scheme in principle was either
> > lawful or unlawful, because its legality depended on the particular
> > circumstances of each offender included in it and how the scheme was
> > operated in practice. Accordingly, the court would not grant a
> declaration
> > that the scheme was incapable of being operated lawfully.
> Notwithstanding
> > this, there was at least a doubt whether the possible benefits of the
> > scheme
> > were proportionate to the intrusion into an offender's Art.8 rights, and
>
> > the
> > police would have to undertake considerable care in the investigation of
> a
> > selected offender's circumstances, and in the operation of the scheme,
> if
> > it
> > were to be lawful. Until that happened, however, the legality of the
> > scheme
> > remained uncertain.
> >
> > No order.
> > Tim Owen QC & Paul Mylvaganam instructed by Sanders Witherspoon for the
> > claimant. Anne Stud instructed by the Solicitor for the Police Force
> > (Essex)
> > for the defendant.
> > LTL 16/6/2003 : (2003) 2 FLR 566 : (2003) ACD 350 : Times, June 17, 2003
> >
> >
> > I hope this helps a bit
> >
> > Alan
> >
> >
> > Alan Stead
> > Service Manager-Information Governance
> > Nottingham City Council
> > Guildhall
> > Burton Street
> > Nottingham NG1 4BT
> > Tel 0115.9154943
> >
> >
> > If you'd like to receive online news alerts from Nottingham City
> Council,
> > visit www.nottinghamcity.gov.uk/noticenottingham/news_feeds.htm
> >
> > This e-mail message has been scanned for Viruses and Content
> > and cleared by NetIQ MailMarshal.
> >
> > This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain
> personal
> > views which are not the views of Nottingham City Council unless
> > specifically
> > stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your
> > system,
> > do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in
> > reliance
> > on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that Nottingham
> City
> > Council monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will
> > signify your consent to this.
> >
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > 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
> > Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list
> > owner
> > [log in to unmask]
> > Full help Desk - please email [log in to unmask] describing your
> > needs
> > To receive these emails in HTML format send the command:
> > SET data-protection HTML to [log in to unmask]
> > (all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> >
> > **********************************************************************
> > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> > intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
> > are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
> > the system manager.
> >
> > This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
> > MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses using Sophos
> > anti-virus software.
> >
> > www.mimesweeper.com
> > www.sophos.com
> > **********************************************************************
> >
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > 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
> > Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list
> > owner
> > [log in to unmask]
> > Full help Desk - please email [log in to unmask] describing your
> > needs
> > To receive these emails in HTML format send the command:
> > SET data-protection HTML to [log in to unmask]
> > (all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 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
> Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list
> owner
> [log in to unmask]
> Full help Desk - please email [log in to unmask] describing your
> needs
> To receive these emails in HTML format send the command:
> SET data-protection HTML to [log in to unmask]
> (all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
**************************************************************************************************************
This document should only be read by those persons to whom it is addressed, and be used by them for its intended purpose; and must not otherwise be reproduced, copied, disseminated, disclosed, modified, distributed, published or actioned. If you have received this email in error, please notify us immediately by telephone on 01437 775882 and delete it from your computer immediately. This email address must not be passed on to any third party nor be used for any other purpose.
Pembrokeshire County Council Website - http://www.pembrokeshire.gov.uk
This signature also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses and malicious code.
***************************************************************************************************************
Dim ond y sawl y mae'r ddogfen hon wedi'i chyfeirio atynt ddylai ei darllen, a'i defnyddio ganddynt ar gyfer ei dibenion bwriadedig; ac ni ddylid fel arall ei hatgynhyrchu, copio, lledaenu, datgelu, addasu, dosbarthu, cyhoeddi na'i rhoi ar waith chwaith. Os ydych chi wedi derbyn yr e-bost hwn trwy gamgymeriad, byddwch cystal a rhoi gwybod i ni ar unwaith trwy ffonio 01437 775882 a'i ddileu oddi ar eich cyfrifiadur ar unwaith. Ni ddylid rhoi'r cyfeiriad e-bost i unrhyw drydydd parti na'i ddefnyddio ar gyfer unrhyw ddiben arall chwaith.
Gwefan Cyngor Sir Penfro - http://www.pembrokeshire.gov.uk
Mae'r llofnod hwn hefyd yn cadarnhau bod y neges e-bost hon wedi cael ei harchwilio am fodolaeth firysau cyfrifiadurol a chod maleisus.
***************************************************************************************************************
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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
Any queries about sending or receiving messages please send to the list owner
[log in to unmask]
Full help Desk - please email [log in to unmask] describing your needs
To receive these emails in HTML format send the command:
SET data-protection HTML to [log in to unmask]
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|