Woman stripped and left topless in a cell!

[Dovetail40]

This is disturbing to read. I hope a proper investigation is carried and the missing time videos are found so she knows exactly what happened to her.

Sky news Greater Manchester Police

That's not what I am saying. I am saying that its not okay to sit there and go "Oh well software errors happen never mind" which appears to be your attitude

According to you the police station may have had multiple faulty cameras, poor hardware, failing software, no data backups and its all okay because "IT issues happen to everyone"

It's the attitude that is the issue. The shrugging it off as if its not a "real" issue that you, a representative of the police force, thinks its absolutely possible for all of these systems to be faulty and doesn't think that consistites a major incident.

But as it happens you are right I have never worked for Lloyd's, Bank of Scotland or the Halifax. But as far as I am aware all of the incidents you are referring to are data breaches not data loss. You are talking cyber security and data protection not data quality and storage. These aren't even the same thing at all. Defending against a cyber attack and ensuring data isn't corrupted are two very different processes, but then I've already pointed this out to you once so I'm not sure why we are back at cyber security again.

Unless you think the police were also hacked.

I genuinely feel like you haven't got a clue about these things. And thats okay, there's no reason for you to. I just don't understand why you have decided to set yourself up as an expert on them.

AnSolas
Err no..
I think that the data policy should be that if the police have any footage which is requested by a data subject that such data is is not overwritten for a reasonable period of time (and if requested that 30/31 days is not a reasonable period).

So, it depends when it was requested. Was it requested at 30 days, 60 days, 90 days?

In my opinion, we should have a system that keeps all the footage indefinitely. And all BWV devices are constantly on and recording all the time. So it captures everything you do from the start to the end of the shift. So anyone making a complaint can do so when ever they want.

The downside is that it will cost the public and absolute fortune for the storage costs.

You have not got a clue about DP.

So, it depends when it was requested. Was it requested at 30 days, 60 days, 90 days?
Not a single clue

In my opinion, we should have a system that keeps all the footage indefinitely. And all BWV devices are constantly on and recording all the time. So it captures everything you do from the start to the end of the shift. So anyone making a complaint can do so when ever they want.

The downside is that it will cost the public and absolute fortune for the storage costs.

If you did you would understand why the idea of creating a State held database is one of the reasons the DPA exists

Catchasingmewithspiders
No, I never said its OK and I only said perhaps it was two cameras. Perhaps its only one camera that was faulty.

Or perhaps the cameras were totally fine and this is one huge cover up by the entire senior management to make sure a sexual offending cop isn't brought to justice.

And I never said that it was all of the systems have failed at once. I have said perhaps its a software issues, perhaps it a hardware issue - not necessarily both at the same time.

But, its OK - you seem to suggest data breaches at banks are OK and you can shrug it off, so long as its not data loss.

And I have never once said that I was an expert in IT or software- that's why we have to get an expert in to fix them.

But I am rest assured that you have managed to make the bank 100% foolproof against any software issues that will lead to data loss - so this is absolutely impossible to happen to the bank ever again.

AnSolas
Well - we will just agree to differ then.

But, its OK - you seem to suggest data breaches at banks are OK and you can shrug it off, so long as its not data loss.

No I said that cyber security breaches aren't the same thing as data storage issues, the subject we are discussing.

Cyber security is not my area of expertise so unlike you I'm not going to discuss those in great detail.

You do seem to confuse the two a lot.

But I am rest assured that you have managed to make the bank 100% foolproof against any software issues that will lead to data loss - so this is absolutely impossible to happen to the bank ever again.

Can you give me some examples of when it has happened due to software issues please?

And no I didn't, I'm not a software engineer. And I said I worked in banks which didnt lose customer data due to data corruption. You are the only one responsible for saying I did this.

I have talked about data because I am a data expert. Not a software expert. Data storage and software are not the same thing. But you do seem to confuse the two a lot.

Nevertheless I look forward to your examples as you are always the one demanding proof.

You are agreeing to differ with someone who is clearly an expert in the data protection field. That's bold

I think you have clearly proven your lack of understanding of even the basics.

Thanks @Catchasingmewithspiders But I am far from an expert
I just have had enough training to spot the obvious flaw in an organisation which works in a high risk area deciding that overwriting data when it is obvious that the happy data subjects dont to make data requests

It is not as if the police are attempting to claim that a camera malfunctioned (they cant for an obvious reason) they admitted to wiping the footage.

AnSolas

Not at all - you're not bringing anything new to the table here.

Under Data protection rules, we can only store the data for so long. So it depends on when the report of the incident occurred as to when the footage was marked as evidential.

So when did she phone the report in that she had been sexually assaulted/raped? 30 days, 60 days, 90 days? - you said you don't know

If its after the 31 days, then its possibly gone. If it was a data request only, then she was given a copy of the footage but the original may have been overwritten if its gone beyond the 31 days. If she has reported a crime during this time, then it should have been marked as evidential - but it depends on when that report was received.

If it was a data request only, then she was given a copy of the footage but the original may have been overwritten if its gone beyond the 31 days

So she is given a copy that is corrupted, but they cannot give her a new copy of the original because the data has now been overwritten because its gone past 31 days? Because data protection rules?

*You can delete your data unless a request has been made for it via a SAR. Once a SAR has been made to an institution covered by FoI legislation, it becomes a criminal offence to alter, deface, block, erase, destroy or conceal any part of the data subject's personal data.

Most of the sanctions under this legislation will apply to your institution, but if you delete requested information or order deletion, you could be personally liable. Don’t do it, and make sure it is not deleted accidentally after the request.*

Can you give me some examples of when it has happened due to software issues please?

First thing that comes up on google:
Maybe not data loss - but its a software issue never the less. And not a cyber attack.

https://www.validata-software.com/blog/item/447-banks-busted-by-a-software-glitch-during-2021

But as you said "...I've worked in banks making millions of transactions a month and funnily enough they have excellent systems for preventing data corruption..."

Obviously not Halifax, Lloyds, Bank of Scotland, Reserve Bank of Australia, Hong Kong Stock Exchange, Mizuho Bank, Chase Bank, JP Morgan Chase, European Central Bank then!

So I look forward to there never ever being an issue with software at any bank ever again as it appears to be 100% completely avoidable. Great!

Catchasingmewithspiders
So she is given a copy that is corrupted....

So when was the request made then?

And is it case that the original data has become corrupted after the request?
Is it part of the data, that has been corrupted?
Is it recoverable?

Who knows?

And if it is part of some big cover up by the senior management team or whoever - then they need sacking and jailing!

Those are some interesting software issues, thank you, that was informative reading

Many certainly caused inconvenience and some caused data breaches so certainly very disruptive and worrying for their customers

None however caused data corruption which is the main focus here, but I appreciate you finding them, as its ways good to be informed in adjacent fields and it was software issues I asked about as you brought them up previously, perhaps I should have been more specific about software issues causing data corruption.

However, I'm not sure how you are linking this about data corruption:

.I've worked in banks making millions of transactions a month and funnily enough they have excellent systems for preventing data corruption..."

With this about software malfunctions:

Obviously not Halifax, Lloyds, Bank of Scotland, Reserve Bank of Australia, Hong Kong Stock Exchange, Mizuho Bank, Chase Bank, JP Morgan Chase, European Central Bank then!

And no I haven't worked for these, I am starting to feel like you are trying to dox me however.

So I look forward to there never ever being an issue with software at any bank ever again as it appears to be 100% completely avoidable. Great!

Again I am talking about data corruption ,which I said most banks have excellent data polices to prevent, you are the only one who added the 100% avoidable in, not software issues. You do seem to get all these technical areas easily confused don't you.

Software malfunctions and data corruptions may be linked but are not the same issue.

You bring nothing

You do keep whining on about 31 one days and evidence

i do know that the police had the data
they could not attempt to supply a copy if they did not have it. And there is no way that they could have decided to overwrite it if they did not have it.

The police had the footage and would apparently have to be as thick as a police officer not to recognise that a SAR is a "letter before action" notification. (Managers in shops and pubs manage to understand that little detail)

And yes it it reasonable to store data to prove a crime did not happen or to mitigate liability in a civil case or even to ensure that a investigation of the police action had actual footage.

Basic stuff which is in the public interest to ensure that the general public dont end up suspecting a police force had covered up a unlawful act (eg rape) by an active member of their force

So let's assume that she made the request within the 31 days for arguments sake

My logic here is that as per your statements about DP all the data would have been erased after 31 days. And if it wasn't then the Police are breaching DP according to you.

Therefore given she was given a large part of the data it is reasonable to assume that it was within the 31 days.

So I'm not sure why you keep debating when the request was made. Because either GMP broke the rules by still having the majority of the data after 31 days or the request was made inside 31 days.

AnSolas
i do know that the police had the data
they could not attempt to supply a copy if they did not have it
Do you know they had all the data from every camera?
Its not possible that one of the cameras was not working - so that's why part of the footage given to Zayna was not there/corrupted? If its corrupted right at the start of the recording (malfunctioning camera perhaps) its always going to be corrupted. Doesn't matter how many checks you have in place.

Catchasingmewithspiders
Software malfunctions and data corruptions may be linked but are not the same issue.
I never said they were - but we still don't know what the issue is. Software, hardware, a knackered camera - who knows at this stage.

So I'm not sure why you keep debating when the request was made. Because either GMP broke the rules by still having the majority of the data after 31 days.
Maybe - it depends on their policy of how long the data is retained for. 31 days isn't a hard a fast rule - but is generally accepted by most companies/agenices.

Has she asked for this way after the '31 days' and the footage is present only because it was marked as evidential for another case/incident?

Who knows - we are all assuming again.

lets wait for the update.

Well luckily the GMPs data procedures are available online as are many other police forces

And 31 days is how long they keep the camera footage for

So either:

The request was made during the 31 days so all the data should have been available and none of it should have been overwritten so either the GMP did something wrong by over writing it or this theory is incorrect

The request was made outside the 31 days but you are saying that all of the data was marked as evidential except the 2 missing time periods. And the people responsible for marking it as evidential would be the officers dealing with her? So basically the people she is accusing of raping her?

Yeah that's not sounding at all suspicious

Or its a software/hardware malfunction. the camera kept breaking, being spotted and fixed remarkably quickly by the tame CCTV engineer kept on site. Or they could do with reviewing their procedures.

Either way the police are not perfect, despite you coming up with every reason why it cant possible be their fault

Every time our neighbourhood Bobby posts, it gets worse. Honestly mate, give up.

when I found myself underemployed, I volunteered at a charity. I didn’t lay out massive and terrifying gaps in my knowledge on the internet, therefore undermining the public confidence in my profession even more. Have a look in the mirror. Or maybe consider PSD response to the insta account “copingwithcoppering”.

It may be a bit of a long shot.
But I am trusting the senior management statement is not a calculated attempt to mislead the public.

That trust may be a misplaced and the data officer and senior officers may have obtained the same level of DP as your employer appears to have provided.

But the trust is based on the expectation that a data officer has a professional ability to do the job of data officer by running some basic checks.

Oddly enough i would also expect that senior officers involved in the crisis management process be professional enough to have obtained and reviewed status reports eg level 1 tec support (power outage, systems failure, alien invasion, stray dogs eating the floppy disks). That they carry out normal step by step inquiries before making a public statement admitting to overwriting the data.

Catchasingmewithspiders
No - anyone can have access and mark the footage as evidential - not just the one officer.

It could be just one camera that is broken. 2 or 3 segments are missing in the overall footage, but it maybe the footage from this one camera only that is at fault.

And i never said the police are perfect. In fact i have said that if it is a cover up - they all need sacking and jailing.

AnSolas
Perhaps so. But perhaps its all a big cover up by the senior management team from the Police & Capita. If it is they should all be sacked and jailed.

Audit fail

It started out as a check for training gaps and ended in a trust check.

With a professional training gap one can to establish a base level of pre-existing knowlege.

So ask a question that the trainee knows or should know the answer to

The reply will either be
1.1 a correct answer/appropiate response giving proof of pior training
1.2 an incorrect answer proves a training gap.

Option 1.2 comes with attitude test

Reason for that is the problem is either the training or the trainee
A trainee may be unable to be trained for a specific role or be able but unwilling to be trained to carry out the role
So one needs to assess if the trainee can be trusted within the role

On the trainee side a false answers indicate training can provide a solution
However false misleading answers indicate a possible choice, blatant false misleading answers indicate active choice

Re-asking the same questions in a slightly different way gives the trainee an opening to reconsider their choices
An escalation indicates that one has a serious problem as one can not trust the trainee in the role

By the escalation stage the trainee knows it is known that the trainee is lying but the next choice is to expand the lie
Parents and others dealing with children teach them not to lie as a personal ethos value so a trainee should know that a personal choice to lie shows a low or no ethical value

In a professional role the authority is delegated and the trainee has to be trustworthy to act within the constraints of a role but the trainer now has proof that this is not the case
The trainer should recomend that as the trainee is not trustworthy they should never be given any delegated authority and removed from the organisation

Have you actually read the articles or are you just pulling theories out of the air at this point? Because your ideas don't fit with what anyone involved is actually saying.

There are gaps in the footage when she is in the cell. Either there are multiple cameras in the cell, so why wouldn't they give her footage from another one, or the one camera in the cell has footage which isn't available for whatever reason

Is there a reason why you don't trust the statement the GMP put out and feel the need to come up with alternate theories which indicate they are lying? Do you not trust the police?

Catchasingmewithspiders
I am saying 'who knows until the conclusions have been made available'
I am suggesting alternative theories - that's why i often use the word 'perhaps'

But if you are adamant that software and data storage issues are impossible to occur in this day and age - then it must be a cover up.

Therefore, is it the case that the senior management from the police & 'Capita' know that they have a sexual offending cop and are covering for him?

Have we ruled out the possibility that she could have been attacked at her home address prior to the police attending?

AnSolas
What incorrect answer?