Showing posts with label DPA 1998. Show all posts
Showing posts with label DPA 1998. Show all posts

Sunday, 1 June 2014

When Survivors Attack (Part 3): Hardly-Veiled Threats, From Mr McFadyen

*****

"S.2 offence Harassment

The elements of the section 2 offence are:

>a course of conduct;
which amounts to harassment of another; and
which the defendant knows, or ought to know amounts to harassment of another.

As a summary only offence, the section 2 offence requires an information or complaint to be laid within 6 months from the time when the offence was committed, or the matter of complaint arose. The 6 months' limitation should run from the last date of the course of conduct alleged.

In determining whether the defendant ought to know that the course of conduct amounts to harassment, the question to be considered is whether a reasonable person in possession of the same information would think the course of conduct amounted to harassment of the other."

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/stalking_and_harassment/#a03b

*****
 (Embedded Tweets - click date)

*****

Mr McFadyen, once again, proceeded to post to each of those we follow (ca. 100, at the time)/followers, with this comment/link ...
(Embedded Tweet - click date)

... along with, a scattergun, of vigilante postings.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, 23 May 2014

One Word, Just One ... You Will Be Found And You Will Be Dealt With


You know who you are, so do we

Anything, any repercussions, at all - consequences ensue. We never make idle threats.

No other warnings, on this issue.

The OSC

*****

Data Protection Act, Journalism and the PCC Code  

"Are there any other rules on obtaining personal information?

The DPA also regulates the lawful disclosure of information. This note does not deal with how that might be relevant to disclosure to the media, or how journalists might use DPA information rights, or the DPA’s inter-relation with the Freedom of Information Act 2000, for which the Information Commissioner also has responsibility.

However, it is important for journalists to understand that in addition to the Act’s requirements about the way that personal data can be used, the rights of data subjects and the exemptions to them, it contains some other controls and prohibitions on the way that information can be obtained and disclosed.

There is a specific criminal offence of unlawful obtaining of personal data. A person must not knowingly or recklessly, without the consent of the data controller, obtain or disclose personal data or the information that it contains, or procure the disclosure to another person of the information contained in personal data.

Both individuals and companies can be prosecuted at the instigation of the Information Commissioner or the Director of Public Prosecutions. It is also an offence to sell or offer to sell information that has been obtained without consent."

http://www.pcc.org.uk/news/index.html?article=ODg

Data Protection Act 1998

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/contents
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, 7 May 2013

The Daily Mail+ - Struggling To Begin To Understand The Concepts Of Risk, Law And Rights

PUBLISHED: 23:57, 6 May 2013 | UPDATED: 23:58, 6 May 2013

Child rapists taken of Sex Offenders' Register [sic] in secret [sic] ... and police say it's to protect their human rights

">Sex attackers can be removed from register [sic] if they 'no longer pose a threat'
>43 applications for removal from Sex Offenders' Register [sic] approved in a year
>Successful applicants include eight rapists and 27 child sex attackers

Off the hook: Since the law changed last year, 43 applications for removal from the Sex Offenders' Register [sic] have been approved

Police have secretly [sic] removed dozens of convicted sex offenders, including paedophiles [sic] and rapists, from the Sex Offenders’ Register [sic], the Mail can reveal.

Following a human rights ruling, the law was changed last year to allow sex attackers [sic] to claim they no longer posed a threat and apply to be taken off the register.

Since then, 43 applications have been approved behind closed doors, at the rate of one every five days.

About half of those who apply have been successful – including eight rapists and 27 child sex attackers.

Each case was signed off by a mid-ranking police officer following a paper review of the case. With the stroke of a pen, each convict [sic] was removed from the list, and is now free to walk the streets with no monitoring of any kind [sic].

Those who are taken off the register no longer have to tell the police where they are living, even if they move near a school, or move in with a family with young children.

Nor do they have to tell the police about any overseas travel.

Forces are refusing to name those taken off the register [sic], citing Article 8 of the Human Rights Act – the right to a private and family life – and data protection rules. And they say it would ‘compromise the health and safety of these individuals’ to name them.

Some are even refusing to give details of the offences committed [well, how odd !!!], and victims are not routinely notified if their attacker has been deemed no longer a threat [well, how odd !!!].

Child protection charities said the use of the law was setting back child protection, and questioned whether sex offenders could ever be reformed." [well, they would]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2320483/Child-rapists-taken-Sex-Offenders-Register-secret--police-say-protect-human-rights.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Sex offenders secretly removed from register

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10040600/Sex-offenders-secretly-removed-from-register.html

 UK quietly shrinks sex offenders list 

http://gulfnews.com/news/world/uk-quietly-shrinks-sex-offenders-list-1.1180464

Suffolk: Rapists taken off sex offenders’ register after human rights challenge 

http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/suffolk_rapists_taken_off_sex_offenders_register_after_human_rights_challenge_1_2184621

Four removed from sex offenders register in Suffolk 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-22455072

Sex offenders taken off register secretly 

http://www.worksopguardian.co.uk/news/local-news/sex-offenders-taken-off-register-secretly-1-5695764 

07 May 2013

Concerns raised over removals from sex offenders register

"When the changes were accepted in 2011, the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) issued a statement, saying: “Protecting the public from harm is a fundamental role for the police service but we recognise that this must be balanced with the rights of individuals, as highlighted by the Supreme Court judgement. We have worked closely with the Home Office and other key partners to develop a robust review process that ensures a full assessment of the risks posed before an offender is removed from the notification requirements.

"The reality is that the risks posed by some offenders can never be completely eliminated, but we will continue to do all in our power to keep them to a minimum and believe that the proposed review process strikes the right balance between individual rights and public safety."

However, Diana Johnson MP, Shadow Crime and Security Minister, said: “These revelations are highly worrying. When a judge has put someone on the sex offenders register it means that they are a convicted sex offender who poses a real threat to the public – not least to children. These people need to be kept on the sex offenders register, helping the police to protect the public.

“It may be politically convenient for Theresa May to blame this on the Human Rights Act, but the truth is that she brought these new rules in before looking at alternatives and made it too easy for someone to be taken off the register. More worrying still, this could be the tip of the iceberg. There are more than 28,000 people on the sex offenders register indefinitely - all of whom are dangerous offenders."

A Home Office spokesperson said: "Sex offenders who remain a risk to the public will stay on the register, for life if necessary.

"The law changed following a Supreme Court ruling. We argued strongly that sex offenders should stay on the register for life. But the Supreme Court decided they should be able to apply for a review of their case to determine whether or not their names could be removed."

http://www.policeprofessional.com/news.aspx?id=16227

Email sent to Ms Johnson - still no reply, on 11/5/13.

*****

What The Future Holds: Sex Offender In The City [Updated]

http://thecampofthesaints.org/2013/05/09/what-the-future-holds-sex-offender-in-the-city/

Pervert [offensive and inflammatory] charter: Human rights for convicts [sic] but hell for people like Jimmy Tarbuck and Rolf Harris

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/pervert-charter-human-rights-convicts-1882623
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, 19 November 2012

We Are Pillars Of The Community - Clearly Not, You Are Stalkers In The Making

Keep your eyes peeled for this man

Published 19 Nov 2012 06:30

Councillor continues bid to find sex offenders in Windsor

 "A COUNCILLOR has vowed to track down the names and addresses of sex offenders in the Royal Borough after police turned down his request for their details.

Councillor Tom Bursnall, representing Clewer East, wrote to police in August requesting the names and addresses of all known sex offenders living in his ward and those bordering it.

However, police turned down his request saying it would breach the Data Protection Act to share the information.

Now, the UK Independence Party councillor has vowed to obtain the details of sex offenders in the Royal Borough by other means and told The Observer: "If I cannot get the information through official channels, I would look at obtaining it through unofficial channels."
[really Tom? how is that going work, pray tell? are you aware of the new laws on stalking?]

The councillor's next step will be to research and look for alternative sources. [really Tom? how is that going work, pray tell? are you aware of the new laws on stalking?]

The father-of-one made the request with the intention to pass the information to community groups working with children, including Scouts, sports clubs and nurseries, to raise awareness of 'dangerous' people living nearby.

Cllr Bursnall added: "I wanted to get the information for my residents' sake to let them know if they live near any offenders."

Cllr Phill Bicknell, representing Park, backed his fellow councillor's initial demand and told The Observer: "I'm disappointed that he hasn't got the information and the system needs to be looked at, as this withholding of information is too secretive. If you can't trust an elected councillor, who can you trust? We are pillars of the community." [hahahahahaha]

A Thames Valley Police spokesman confirmed the request was turned down on the grounds that it would breach the Data Protection Act."

http://www.windsorobserver.co.uk/news/roundup/articles/2012/11/19/64434-councillor-continues-bid-to-find-sex-offenders-in-windsor/
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, 16 July 2012

"We Had A Tip-Off"/"A Source Said"

Date - 16th July 2012

Officers 'Are Falling Foul Of Computer Misuse'

"Police Federation issues warning after reporting that it has been assisting in a "worrying numbers" of cases.

There are a worrying number of “nosy” West Yorkshire Police officers falling foul of computer misuse in the force, the federation warned last week.

Jon Christopher, Discipline Leader and Vice Chairman of West Yorkshire Police Federation, said the organisation currently has more than 40 live cases of this type looking into officers’ conduct.

In pointing out that this was far too many, he sent a direct message to fellow officers in the force: “Please don’t allow yourself to be the next one.”

Mr Christopher said everyone “should be aware of their obligations and personal responsibilities in the use of the force’s computer systems”.

He added: “Despite all the previous warnings that have been given via the force and West Yorkshire Police Federation as a result of misconduct proceedings taken against colleagues, there are still a worrying number of officers falling foul of computer misuse."

http://www.policeoracle.com/news/Officers-%27Are-Falling-Foul-Of-Computer-Misuse%27_51169.html
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)