Friday 14 May 2010

Sounds familiar !

Dealing with the police, locally.

I too am finding that it is not straightforward to have samples and information erased.

I wonder how many less persistent individuals also have their details held on the national data base when they have no business being there?

Given half a chance the national police seem to want to collect and hold onto all the data they can lay their hands on.

At present I'm still trying to assess the situation but the signs are not encouraging.

There are clear glimpses of a police state.

I'm not too happy - things are not the way I thought!

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

I am sorry to hear of your case Geoff though not suprised.
I was that disgusted that I swore not to help the boys in blue though when it came to it I did.
There is talk of having to pay to have Info remove !
Hidden Fines ?

Anonymous said...

You have been targeted dont blow your nose and lose your hankey near any crime scenes.
I realised you had been conned when you said you had an agreement over the data being returned
" Who shall guard the guards themselves?"
Perhaps you are considering standing for local council?

Anonymous said...

if one continues to "kick a dog", that dog will one day bite you !!

Anonymous said...

A step change here from you Geoff, a few months ago you were lecturing us on being pro-active with the police and what a good relationship you had with them.

You critised me for not being prepared to testify against those who had threatened my family.

You invited Sgt Rupert to chastise us all for our non co-operation.

I wish you every success in getting your prints and DNA removed, but be prepaired for a long frustrating struggle.

Perhaps in twelve months you will publish your conclusions?

Ian C said...

Geoff, you disappoint me. Taking a story in the Evening Mail at face value! Reading between the lines it appears clear that this man had become a suspect and probably just reported this incident to the Police to get his side of the story regarding the ‘altercation’ in first. The supposed quote in the letter from Cumbria Police “This is due to the fact you were not actually arrested or detained at the police station upon your attendance, and you state you did not consent to the DNA sample/fingerprints being taken.” is rubbish. Having worked within the criminal justice system and having studied the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) which governs such practices you do not need to be arrested or detained. You do however have to consent in writing for which in this case will be a matter of record. As you have recently been through this system I would have anticipated that you were asked prior to your ‘voluntary’ interview if you would like to have a solicitor present. If you do not have your own solicitor the option should be given for a duty solicitor at no cost to you and is independent from the Police. I would suggest that the man in the news paper would have been afforded the same right but left out that bit as it makes for a more sensational story. Again there will be a record of this as the Police must get a suspect to sign that he understands his right to legal representation. Did you sign for consent for your fingerprints/DNA to be taken and for your other rights? I would think if the Mail had tracked down the second man whom the police clearly did; the story would have been very different.
Your comments ‘Given half a chance the national police seem to want to collect and hold onto all the data they can lay their hands on’. It is not the Police that want this but the government legislators who insist on its taking and retention. The Police just get to do as their instructed but they will certainly make use of any legally held data and they often do with great success. As always it’s easy to give the police a kicking as it makes for good stories and pub banter. How often do you hear ‘Well I deserved that, I was wrong’. People recall accounts of incidents in such away so to divert blame from them. That’s human nature, so let’s not blindly believe everything we read in the press or on blogs, it may not be correct and is rarely balanced.

A R. said...

I lived in Spain for quite a few years and as an official resident was obliged to have ID complete with photo and fingerprints. I don't see much wrong with this and the card has many uses as absolute proof of identity. The other side of the coin is when you call the police they come immediately ,armed and ready to deal with any situation. People respect the police for that. In this country we have the officious side of policing as has been applied to you Geoff but we do not have the efficient response to requests for help.

Geoff Dellow said...

It's good to have your comments.

The wider perspective is often difficult to assess. It's important to keep a measured amount of skepticism in the back of one's mind. At times it's difficult to know where to draw a line particularly when one is in new territory.

At the moment "the jury is still out" and I'm waiting for more information. I shall be writing something when I have some.

Geoff Dellow said...

And yes, Ian, I was given opportunities and gave all the permissions that you indicated.

What I had not anticipated was the time it would take to retrieve and remove evidence that was given on the understanding that it could be retrieved. There's often a lot more to a situation like this than one expected.

I have no regrets so far and would repeat my actions and decisions. My view of our local police is still very positive, in spite of what some might think!

Anonymous said...

"If you really want to enslave people, tell them
that you're going to give them total freedom." - Steve Jobs

Geoff Dellow said...

Thanks for the quote.