Ask a Law Question, Get an Answer ASAP!
Would you like the full list of questions associated with this matter so that you may have a clear picture of the problem ? I can attach both documents if this is helpful
Detective Inspector Jon Gross
Specialist Crime Command
16th September 2014
Dear Mr McFadden,
Re. Issue raised regarding your case – reference *********** /strong>
This letter is sent as a follow up to my correspondence to you dated 23rd August, and the 4th and 8th of September, and also the emails sent to you by T/DS Harmer on 12th and 16th September.
I hope to be able to clarify a number of issues you have raised and think it beneficial to list them here:
In order to respond I have liaised with a number of colleagues who would be considered policy leads or subject matter leads for some of the areas of process your requests touch upon. I have done so in order that you can be assured my responses have the benefit of experience and perspective that is not just my own.
I anticipate you may wish to contest certain points further, and of course that is your absolute right. I refer back to my comments in my correspondence of 23rd August, my staff and I are acutely aware of the significant impact this investigation is having on you and as such it is important to be able to justify actions taken, and expedite matters where at all possible.
The rationale for imposing the current bail conditions is predominantly a safeguarding one. In any case where we are investigating a suspect for matters that indicate the possibility of a sexual interest in children we impose bail conditions that elevate the safeguarding of children connected with that individual to the fore.
While you remain under investigation we rely on colleagues from Children’s Social Care to update us that they have assessed whether you represent a risk of contact offending or not, and to what degree that risk might be manageable by an alternative to the bail conditions imposed.
To date our liaison with the Social Worker in the case indicates it has not been possible for them to conduct a risk assessment.
As there is no new information or assessment that I can refer to, as frustrating as it is for you, I am bound to err on the side of child protection. On the basis of the matters under investigation I cannot discount that you do have a sexual interest in children and as such you represent a potential risk of committing offences against your children, As such there is justification for the bail conditions remaining in place.
If you wish to contest this further then the next step is to make application to a Custody Sergeant at the custody centre at which the conditions were imposed.
Since you have made this request we have updated you as to our progress in arranging this. I can now report a copy has been made and we will now need to arrange getting this to you. Please advise a convenient time and location for this to be delivered to you.
I will attempt to deal with them in order:
The 15 requests raised in your email of 14th August:
I am Martin’s supervisor and my supervisor is DCI Pierre Serra.
Exemption to disclose under DPA Section 29(1) Crime and Taxation – whereby the disclosure of the information would likely prejudice the prevention, detection or prosecution associated with ongoing proceedings.
Sussex Police runs its own server.
It would be possible to establish this but haven’t prioritised this enquiry.
You would need to complete a Subject Access Request to the Force Records Bureau. Process is outlined on Sussex Police external website. As you know I have liaised with the manager of the Bureau and it is their advice that has informed my responses above.
Queries raised in your email of 19th August
Query raised in email of 12th September
Are you aware of the statements that have been made by Social Workers and at the Child Conference that connect the Bail Conditions to the issues to do with making me homeless and the Raid that you conducted ? I was wondering how this connection came to be made and if it was in fact the intention of this process; and thus the bail conditions to facilitate my removal from my home, making me homeless at 2.30 am , then using the bail conditions to try have have me arrested, then using the bail conditions to bring up an apparent 13 week Housing Benefit matter based on failing a “residence” condition, and so on. The list is all focused on this issue of the bail conditions and making me homeless. I have the recordings and the paperwork related to this matter. I was wondering if you could comment on this as we are actively pursuing the detail of how these bail conditions were set and who you set them in discussions with.
I have dealt with the bail conditions issue earlier in my response. The bail conditions are set in order to safeguard your children. No custody sergeant would authorise conditions for the purpose of making you homeless or to prejudice your housing benefit status. These are significant outcomes in your case, but never an objective of the police action taken against you.
Although in your last correspondence of 8th September you have stated that you would ‘like to address both the manner in which this case came about and the manner in which this case has been handled, and in particular the actions of officers in my command’, it is as yet still unclear what specific issues you wish to raise.
You wish to be informed of the general and specific procedures for making a complaint and so I will reiterate the advice T/DS Harmer provided you with on 31st July – the best route is to direct your complaint to the Professional Standards Department of Sussex Police:
The Chief Constable, Sussex Police Headquarters, Malling House, Church Lane, Lewes, BN7 2DZ
Alternatively you could
Another option would be to contact the Independent Police Complaints Commission at: 90 High Holborn, London, WC1V 6BH. Tel: 0300(###) ###-####/p>
If your complaint is confined to my staff then I would be able to deal with that, and would suggest meeting to enable to record the matter and investigate the issues you raise. If your complaint also involves my handling of the matter it is best to communicate directly with Professional Standards Department.
Finally, please be assured that, within the confines of our resources and ongoing operational demands, we are doing all that is reasonable to expedite the investigation this end.
Detective Inspector CG810
26th October 2014
Re. Issues raised regarding your case – reference *********** /strong>
This letter is sent as a follow up to my previous correspondence to you on 16th September and is intended to address issues you have raised in emails to me between the 25th September and 21st October.
From the emails received it is my understanding that the collated outstanding issues you require me to address are as follows (I have placed my responses below each point):
I will discus this with Martin Harmer but at this stage they remain part of the forensic material for consideration of examination for the offences under investigation.
The warrant application was viewed and authorised by Detective Inspector Jez Prior. No other senior officers or jurisdictions were involved in that process.
The data will have been checked by DS Harmer and a summary of this will have been presented to Detective Inspector Prior on the warrant application.
No and no.
Previously responded to on 16th September - exemption to disclose under DPA Section 29(1) Crime and Taxation. The fact that this information is not being disclosed to you does not in any way prejudice your ability to raise a complaint. Should you do so those tasked with investigating any conduct issues will have access to all records and correspondence regarding this matter and will be able to identify all those involved in the preparation and investigation of this case.
See response at 9 below.
On 25th September I provided a figure of an overall contingent of fifteen police officers and police staff who were present at some stage during the execution of the warrant at your home. This included officers from my team, and officers from the local division.
Your home, phone and internet were not bugged regarding this investigation.
I have not been party to any information that indicates you or your children’s phones have been bugged.
All exhibits seized are logged, secured and managed according to the Sussex Police standard operating procedures governing the management and movement of property and evidence. In your case all property would have initially been taken to our offices in Brighton to be logged on the force wide property system. Items would have subsequently been moved between our office and the bulk property store in Brighton, as required.
It is a standard operating procedure for the team to bring persons under arrest to the custody centre adjacent to our office.
This was previously responded to on 16th September.
This is addressed in the answers to 2 and 3 above. I would consider the provision of any further detail exempt under DPA Section 29(1) Crime and Taxation.
I consider this information subject of exemption from disclosure under DPA Section 29(1) Crime and Taxation.
You are entitled to a copy of your custody record and can obtain that by attending any custody centre in Sussex and furnishing them with proof of identification and the custody reference number for your case: CR4714009441.
This was previously responded to on 16th September as information considered exempt from disclosure under DPA Section 29(1) Crime and Taxation.
I hope this response captures all the matters which you have forwarded to Martin Harmer and I for further clarity or consideration in recent weeks.
Once again, apologies for the delay in getting back to you on these points, as previously stated in my recent emails to you it has been a pressing time with a number of high priority operational matters requiring my attention.
I would again like to emphasise that we continue to press for the forensic work that is underway to be completed as soon as possible.
Fantastic. Many thanks.
Hello AJ, any update ?
Hello Alex. How are you. Have you seen the question and the documents related to the question. I have been out all day. AJ was handing this matter but it seems like it has been transferred to you
The first issue here is clearly am I being prevented from this information because it makes the case that the police have commuted a crime. I am sure Alex you remember the Housing Case IO discussed with you. The police are accused by me of attempted murder. They turn up an raid my home. Remove all digital drives. Take my child and hand him to his mother, use bail conditions to ban me from my home, claim I am downloading child porn. Make me homeless etc etc etc. After almost two years of trying to get people to take an interest in my situation I ended up in a cell in Brighton. What you are reading is my questions to the police on this whole matter. They have refused to give me any information I have requested. Have lied about some of the details. The set of questions you see are part of the preparation for a data request. But, because they are using section 29 I cannot make progress. So I need to know if the Data Officer of Sussex Police Julie Page is right to advise as you see above. I need to know if they are right to prevent me knowing this information before I do a data request. This is a big problem. If you want to read more of this issue you are welcom
The first issue here is clearly am I being prevented from this information because it makes the case that the police have commuted a crime. I am sure Alex you remember the Housing Case IO discussed with you. The police are accused by me of attempted murder. They turn up an raid my home. Remove all digital drives. Take my child and hand him to his mother, use bail conditions to ban me from my home, claim I am downloading child porn. Make me homeless etc etc etc. After almost two years of trying to get people to take an interest in my situation I ended up in a cell in Brighton. What you are reading is my questions to the police on this whole matter. They have refused to give me any information I have requested. Have lied about some of the details. The set of questions you see are part of the preparation for a data request. But, because they are using section 29 I cannot make progress. So I need to know if the Data Officer of Sussex Police Julie Page is right to advise as you see above. I need to know if they are right to prevent me knowing this information before I do a data request. This is a big problem. If you want to read more of this issue you are welcome
I have not. What I wanted to determine is if their actions were legal.
I would like your opinion on the issue of withholding the reports by the ASW and Doctors at the police station. This is the critical issue. I have not submitted a Subject Access Request to the Police because they are making it impossible to get a clear picture of what I need to know. I need to submit this request by next week.
Alex, thanks for that. Looking at the questions I have asked is there any information that is clearly not related to crime prevention. Also what determines the description " psychiatric condition" ? I was told to go back home at 2am+ in the morning and the Doctors said I was fine.
Sorry to delay this exchange. I just need to be prepared for the next stage of this matter.
Alex there are no documents apart from the bail conditions. What I have tried to do is simply get a picture of what they have done. What I know is that the issue of indecent images of children is a fraud. I accused them of attempted murder. They brought the doctors in to try and discredit me, that I was mentally unstable. This issue has been a theme throughout this process. I was not acting up at all. Thats why I asked them to say why I cannot have the reports related to this event. I want the audio and video footage so that I can watch and listen to what was said. I am convinced that they have set up a major part of this whole story. They have been unable to show any direct link between their raid and information related. I know for a fact that they will never be able to get any data to my computer attached to an IP address. This is a fraud. I will explain to you why at some other point as all my communications are monitored. However, this week I contacted the ministry of justice and asked to be put into contact with their staff. I am saying to them that the evidence or whatever they call it that they took to the magistrate is a fraud. I put it to the police officer that signed off the document that he must tell me that what he saw is what the warrant states. That in fact they have the detail of what they told the Magistrate and that in fact the magistrate saw this detail as described. So far not one single police officer, including very senior police have been willing to say ... yes I saw this information. Why? Because its a fraud. So next week I am going to confront the Ministry of Justice and tell them that in the fullness of time the fact that I told them this and they did not investigate will be an issue. I have nothing to loose.
On the issue of the ICO i need your guidance on how to approach this matter. I am happy to draft this and send it in by Sunday. Its that simple.
DO I copy the letter or just state the argument that I am not happy with the way this matter has been handled ? I do not want to do an incomplete job. Next week I am dealing with the custody issues that related to the children being removed and the related issues. I need to tackle this matter from the angle you have suggested with absolute accuracy. I guess I will have to go and read about their rules. I do not want to be told that there is a step I have missed. Administrative law is a nightmare as you know. Can I just go read about this for a few hrs and get back to you if uncertain before Sunday please. ?
Alex, I have had one hell of a problem with my computer. Its mainly sorted now. I will put the ICO document together and tell you about it in a few days. Sorry for the delay
All the best
Today I contacted the JCIO about the original warrant that I believe is fraudulent. A few days ago I contacted the Ministry of Justice. I am going to take this as high as I can. I am doing the ICO tonight and preparing for a child custody matter related to this for the 18th November. My life is hectic and stressful. Have not seen my baby son 6yrs old since June. My family is distressed.
Thanks for your help Alex, as you know you have been of great help to me and my family. I will get back to you when I have done with this part of the problem