UK investigators told to stop mass collection of personal data in rape cases

The problem you will have is when the defendant raises electronic communications as part of their defence. If the investigation is to remain open and impartial, it may have to be examined.

There have been previous agreements to put an end to digital strip-searching but they haven't been implemented.
This seems to be a repeating pattern with this govt.

There have been instances of lawyers accidentally allowing their clients to access the data. There have been women who have had their phones confiscated for months, and who have had to continue paying for the contract on that phone. For women who's phones are linked to their benefit accounts or jobs, it's not feasible.

Thank you for posting this op it's important.

As far as I can see, the data commissioner types are saying hold on wtf. Records from school 20 years ago? That's OTT.

But that's just the data bods. Who think that trawling through everything possibly available ever... To look into, as they put it l,.. an assault last Saturday... Is not ok...

Well it's just the data people. And as someone upthread pointed out, there needs to be serious scrutiny in these situations. Forging a signature to get out of swimming at 14 does of course point to a certain lack of credibility...

This is all beside the point isn't it?

Yes the data people are right. The approach to women and girls reporting serious sex offences is less than helpful. Quite obviously so.

By accident or design? Hmmmm....

I've lived in met area most of my life. I know what my answer would be.

Oh meant to add. Men and boys as well, if attacked by men and esp if victims were gay.

Missing a serial killer... Again!

Still the phone records, medical history, school record, everything of anyone who reports a sex offence are vvv important.

CheeseMmmm · 02/06/2022 03:52
Still the phone records, medical history, school record, everything of anyone who reports a sex offence are vvv important.

Do you happen to know if they look into the alleged perpetrator’s full records in the same way?

Isn’t it the case that is such a person had a previous record that can’t be brought up?

We can only look into people's records if its relevant to the specific case.

For example - medical records can only be about the specific injury that has occurred in that incident. So if we need a statement from the doctor/surgeon, we can't get a complete download of the medical history.

Same with phone records, school records etc etc.

Its also the same with the person who is the alleged offender. Their records can be looked at, but only if its relevant to the case.

Bad character (previous convictions and MO's) can be considered in all cases, but this must be disclosed.

This form that states.....‘Please authorise us to access any information we want’ doesn't exist - unless you can show otherwise.

All information gathered and disclosed has to be justified and proportionate.

For example - medical records won't just be handed over to the police. We have to state exactly what we want and why before any statements are produced.

Its the same with CCTV, phone records etc etc. RIPA submissions for phone downloads have to take into account proportionality, collateral intrusion and each line has to be justified. The process takes ages to do and can be rejected at every stage - and usually is.

For example - missing from homes who are at risk - we can suggest trying to track their phone to see where they are. But these requests often get rejected as its not proportionate line of inquiry.

Yes, the point they have highlighted I reject.

Do you reject all their recommendations or just specific ones out of interest?

Not all of them - but we can start with the one quoted in the original post which I do reject.

This form that states.....‘Please authorise us to access any information we want’ doesn't exist - so I reject the claim that it does.

A “Stafford statement” is not a CPS requirement, but is used by some police forces to seek the consent of the complainant to access material held by third parties when this is relevant to the investigation.

It is of vital importance that the personal information of complainants who report sexual offences is treated in a way that is consistent with both their right to privacy and with the interests of justice. CPS guidance is clear that requests for access to information held by third parties or on digital devices must be a reasonable line of inquiry, justified by the circumstances of the individual case. It should not be undertaken routinely in every case.

Hence, a form that states ‘Please authorise us to access any information we want’ doesn't exist

CPS are working closely with the police to ensure that complainants are given the opportunity to make an informed decision about allowing police access to their personal information. This will ensure that complainants are aware of both how their digital devices or records will be examined and the use that may be made of any data obtained through that examination, including informing the complainant if it is to be disclosed to the defendant.

7 or so years so when my DD went through this (as a high school age teen)they took her phone for months and absolutely trawled through everything. The police actually commented to her about how long it was taking because she had so many messages / photos etc. I'm sure they were checking it for relevant things but it was incredibly invasive and working out what was "relevant" seemed to involve picking apart lots of unrelated conversations. Her attacker was convicted (pleaded to a reduced charge) but the process absolutely would make me think twice about reporting in future. I'm glad they are looking at it.

The problem you will have is when the defendant raises electronic communications as part of their defence. If the investigation is to remain open and impartial, it may have to be examined.

That is true. And they can impound the defendent's phone, in that case, can't they. If i reported a sex crime and the police wanted to confiscate my phone? I would withdraw the complaint.

But then i have zero trust in the police in respect of their treatment of women and sex crimes in particular. And this is a police problem, not a me problem.

All information gathered and disclosed has to be justified and proportionate.

yes, indeed.

that's what this is about.

what's currently happening is not 'justified and proportionate'

So, if a defendant raises a defence that there is evidence on the victim's phone which will prove their innocence - what do you want the police to do?

Ignore the defence claim?

If the victim states "in that case you're not looking at my phone and I will withdraw my compliant" - any defence lawyer will use that as evidence to get their client off.

What would you like the police to do then if a defence is raised?

Not take their phones but make an appointment to see/collect the info. Are the avvused's phones removed for forensic scrutiny? How do you do your banking, work, UC claims in that time?

You're police? Are you all so ignorant to why women feel this is an issue?
As I said, it's not a me problem it's a police problem. At a time when their credibility and people's (particularly women's) trust in them is rock bottom I expect better.

But I don't think we are disagreeing about the same thing.

What people have been complaining about is police removing the phones from victims of rape and sexual assault to go through the data as a matter of course.

Where as what, I think, you are describing is if the defendant says 'there is a video on the victims phone that shows her consenting' you would then access the victims phone to check whether that is correct or not.

The second scenario makes more sense. The first is what the ICO are talking about.

You can't just 'see' the data

If its going to a court case or CPS decision, the data will have to be forensically recovered - in the same way that the accused's phone is. There are pathways to speed the process up for the victim's phone, but it will still be subject to RIPA.

If the accused gives a defence relating to information stored on the victim's phone - you have to consider that the victim is not going to openly disclose this information to you.

Or should we not scrutinise the victim's account at any point during the investigation?

Which is my point. We don't just seize and go through victim's phones as a matter of course - we can only look into people's records if its relevant to the specific case.

This form that states.....‘Please authorise us to access any information we want’ really doesn't exist.

This is a genuine question as I didn’t know, does this mean that if I were raped by a stranger and reported it, the police would trawl through my phone as part of the investigation?

Yet people that Ive known who have reported sexual assaults and rape, have been asked for their phones by police, pre charge too. Some refused to continue with the complaint due to that