Once more we return to the subject of the Police Information Notice, or 'harassment warning' issued to me by Dyfed Powys police in August 2016 in relation to this blog. The complainant was council chief executive Mr Mark James. This blog has recorded the details of the complaints, the police investigations and their decision to charge following his second complaint. It has also recorded the CPS decision to drop the case in July last year and my unsuccessful efforts, throughout, to have the PIN removed, and subsequently, to have my details removed from police systems.
This eventually evolved into a Data Protection issue and led me to appeal to the Information Commissioner that Dyfed Powys Police were retaining information about me, on their records, longer than was necessary. As you can see from the letter below, this was also unsuccessful.
A PIN is essentially a letter warning that your actions (in this case writing a blog about the council), if repeated, could amount to harassment. It stays 'live' for 14 months before it is reviewed. There is no avenue to defend oneself against the allegations made by the complainant and the only options available are to ask the chief constable to remove it or a judicial review - it is a verdict without trial. The chief constable refused and a judicial review carried a cost risk and would have required specialist legal representation. I understand that some police forces have now scrapped the use of PINs altogether, but not Dyfed Powys.
Mr James' second complaint led to threats of arrest, police questioning and a summons to court. At the last minute the CPS decided to discontinue the case stating that the comments were not oppressive, did not amount to a 'course of conduct' and as a public figure, Mr James should expect to receive some criticism. This second raft of complaints included, bizarrely, publications by Private Eye, the Carmarthenshire Herald, and representations made by Assembly Member Adam Price. As I mentioned, further details of the allegations can be found by searching the blog, most recently here.
The retention of information in not the same as a criminal record but is, in effect, a marker and has a similar effect - despite not being convicted of any crime nor having had a legal right to defend myself against the PIN. Though I can only assume that Mr James' details are similarly held on the records of Gloucestershire police after the criminal investigation in 2014 for misconduct in public office...it'd be strange if they weren't, wouldn't it?
Anyway, I will be making enquiries as to how, or if, I can take this further.
This eventually evolved into a Data Protection issue and led me to appeal to the Information Commissioner that Dyfed Powys Police were retaining information about me, on their records, longer than was necessary. As you can see from the letter below, this was also unsuccessful.
A PIN is essentially a letter warning that your actions (in this case writing a blog about the council), if repeated, could amount to harassment. It stays 'live' for 14 months before it is reviewed. There is no avenue to defend oneself against the allegations made by the complainant and the only options available are to ask the chief constable to remove it or a judicial review - it is a verdict without trial. The chief constable refused and a judicial review carried a cost risk and would have required specialist legal representation. I understand that some police forces have now scrapped the use of PINs altogether, but not Dyfed Powys.
Mr James' second complaint led to threats of arrest, police questioning and a summons to court. At the last minute the CPS decided to discontinue the case stating that the comments were not oppressive, did not amount to a 'course of conduct' and as a public figure, Mr James should expect to receive some criticism. This second raft of complaints included, bizarrely, publications by Private Eye, the Carmarthenshire Herald, and representations made by Assembly Member Adam Price. As I mentioned, further details of the allegations can be found by searching the blog, most recently here.
The retention of information in not the same as a criminal record but is, in effect, a marker and has a similar effect - despite not being convicted of any crime nor having had a legal right to defend myself against the PIN. Though I can only assume that Mr James' details are similarly held on the records of Gloucestershire police after the criminal investigation in 2014 for misconduct in public office...it'd be strange if they weren't, wouldn't it?
Anyway, I will be making enquiries as to how, or if, I can take this further.
0 Response to "ICO response - Police will retain my details for six years"
Post a Comment