ASB and existence or non-existence of Hagley police records

Dear Mr Lambert

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST REFERENCE NO: RFI2182/1

I write in connection with your request for information dated 31st October
2009 which was received on 2nd November 2009.

Your request will now be considered in accordance with the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (the Act). You will receive a response within the
statutory timescale of 20 working days as defined by the Act, subject to
the information not being exempt or containing a reference to a third
party. In some circumstances West Mercia Police may be unable to achieve
this deadline. If this is likely you will be informed and given a revised
time-scale at the earliest opportunity.

There may be a fee payable for the retrieval, collation and provision of the
information you request. If this is the case you will be informed and the 20
working day timescale will be suspended until we receive payment from you. If
you chose not to make payment then your request will remain unanswered.

Some requests may also require either full or partial transference to
another public authority in order to answer your query in the fullest
possible way. Again, you will be informed if this is the case.

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please write
or telephone the Information Compliance Unit quoting the reference number
above.

Yours sincerely

Miss L MacKinnon

Information Compliance Assistant

Information Compliance Unit

Information Management and Technology Department

01905 331565

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Lambert

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST REFERENCE NO: RFIs 2182, 2183, 2184, 2195,
2196 and 2200

I write in connection with your 6 requests for information regarding crime
and policing in Hagley, which were received on 2^nd November (x3) 4^th
November (x2) and 9^th November (x1) 2009.  Please find below the
responses to your requests:

FOI 2182

1a. West Mercia police keep criminal records. How many cautions, final
warnings, reprimands, arrests, prosecutions of ANYONE of ANY age relating
to ASB have been carried out by Hagley Police actually in Hagley during
the past twelve months?

REPLY: Please also be advised that persons are not given cautions, final
warnings or reprimands etc for `Anti social behaviour`.  Persons can be
issued with an Anti Social Behaviour banning order. Persons are given
cautions, final warnings and reprimands etc for Home Office notifiable
offences. Please see the below links for information regarding ASBOs and
cautions that you may find useful

[1]http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/police/powe...

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/anti-social...

1b. Have any records at all been kept and if information is not available
regarding this question, why isn't it?

REPLY: Please see above

2a. Graffiti is an offence of criminal damage. How many reprimands,
cautions, final warnings, fixed penalty notices relating to graffiti alone
committed by ANYONE of ANY age have been issued by Hagley Police in the
last twelve months?

REPLY: Incidences of graffiti would be recorded under the offence of
Criminal Damage. No reprimands, cautions, final warnings or fixed penalty
notices relating to graffiti alone have been issued in Hagley in the last
12 months

2b. Have any records about the graffiti problem actually been kept by
Hagley Police and if not why not? If no information is available regarding
this question, why isn't it?

REPLY: Please see above

FOI 2183

1. The speed camera in Kidderminster Road Hagley was removed roughly two
years ago for "health and safety reasons." What

measures were taken by Hagley police since then and up to the present
date to deal with speeding motorists within the area that

would have been covered by that camera?

REPLY: Kidderminster Road, Hagley is continually monitored on a divisional
basis, as are other roads, for safety concerns and collisions. I have been
advised that there has only been one collision recorded on the
Kidderminster Road since January 2005 and this was not speed related.

2. Precisely how many speeding tickets have been issued by Hagley police
on the stretch of road that would have been covered by this

camera in the past two years. Have any records been kept at all
relating to this question?

REPLY: There is one recorded occasion of speed enforcement being carried
out on the section of road referred to, this was in October 2007 and no
FPN's were issued

3. The ANPR in Hagley seems not to be working given the number of
unlicensed (and therefore uninsured) drivers local residents have

reported to the DVLA because Hagley Police did not want to know when
unlicensed vehicles were reported to them.

Clearly uninsured vehicles are a grave concern to all residents in Hagley.
If the ANPR is indeed NOT working, what measures have

Hagley police taken to compensate for this? Has there been any
collaboration between Hagley Police and the DVLA within the past

twelve months or not?

REPLY: Please be advised that details regarding the positioning of ANPR
cameras are not disclosed to the public. To confirm or deny that we hold
information in relation to this part of the request under the Freedom of
Information legislation would in itself place such information into the
public domain. Therefore this part of the request has been considered and
I am not obliged to supply the information that you have requested.

Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires West Mercia
Police, when refusing to provide such information (because the information
is exempt), to provide you the applicant with a notice which: (a) states
that fact, (b) specifies the exemption in question and (c) states (if that
would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies. Other
exemptions covered by Section 17(4) will not be listed as to make a
statement regarding these would in itself involve the disclosure of exempt
information

The information you have requested is exempt from disclosure under the
Freedom of Information Act 2000. The exemption applicable in this case is
as follows:

Section 31 (1) (a)(b)(c) Law Enforcement.   

In order to be able to claim section 31 the public interest in maintaining
the exemption must outweigh the public interest in disclosure. A summary
of the harm test and the public interest test follows.

Harm

I am unable to confirm or deny that an ANPR camera is located in Hagley
and also, therefore, whether there has been collaboration with the DVLA
regarding any such camera. The reason for this is that to provide
information regarding the specific locations and purpose of all ANPR
cameras would provide information that would be useful to individuals or
groups of criminal intent. It would indicate areas and locations to be
avoided in furtherance of their unlawful activity. This would give those
individuals who do offend a tactical advantage and would be likely to
prejudice the prevention or detection of crime and the apprehension or
prosecution of offenders and potentially impact on the safety of the
public.

Public Interest Test

Considerations Favouring Disclosure

Accountability

When information disclosed relates directly to the efficiency and
effectiveness of the force or its officers. The purpose of the Act is to
make public authorities more accountable and this factor, therefore, may
be applied to a wide range of scenarios from how an individual or the
force fulfils their role or function, to policy decisions that have been
taken in relation to investigations or general policy issues. In this
instance, disclosure allows public scrutiny of information relating to the
performance and use of ANPR.

Public awareness and debate
Where disclosure can assist individuals by raising awareness of issues
which may be of relevance to them. The public may have little
understanding of the use of ANPR and disclosure of this information would
contribute to more accurate public debate, allowing the opportunity to
correct speculation and improve understanding.

Favouring Non-Disclosure

Investigations

It is rare that details of an investigation or investigatory processes
will be disclosed as to do so will invariably release law enforcement
techniques. This is particularly pertinent in the case of ANPR as its use
prevention and detection, intelligence gathering and intercept operations
would be compromised.

Efficient and Effective Conduct of the Force

The current or future law enforcement role of the force may be compromised
by the release of location information, i.e. where the
prevention/detection of crime, the apprehension/prosecution of offenders
or the administration of justice may be hindered as a result of the
release of information. Disclosure of the requested information would
provide details of benefit to offenders and criminal organisations but to
the detriment of law enforcement agencies.

Public Safety

There may be occasions where the release of information relating to public
safety may not be in the public interest. Public safety is of paramount
importance to the policing purpose and must be considered in respect of
every release. In this instance it is likely that release of this
information would adversely affect wider public safety if the criminal
fraternity/less law abiding individuals are provided with a tactical
advantage over the force.

Balancing Test

When balancing the public interest test we have to consider whether the
information should be released into the public domain.  Arguments need to
be weighed against each other.  The most persuasive reason for disclosure
is accountability which needs to be compared to the strongest negative
reason which in this case is Efficient and Effective Conduct of the
Force.  The police service cannot and will not disclose information which
may benefit an offender and/or place the public at risk.  Information
released under FOIA, where exemptions apply, will only be done where there
is a tangible community benefit, which is more powerful than the harm that
could be done.  This does not apply in this case.

On balance, and from the harm evidenced above, the information should be
protected and the exemption applied.

In accordance with the Act, this letter represents a Refusal Notice for
this part of your request

FOI 2184

1. How many burglaries in Hagley remain unsolved as of 1/11/09.

REPLY: There are 420 undetected Burglary dwelling offences recorded

2. Off all the unsolved burglaries which has remained unsolved the longest

REPLY: One Burglary dwelling remains undetected since 29^th January 1994

3. How long has this remained unsolved

REPLY: As above, this equates to approximately 15 years

4. From the earliest unsolved burglary, please list in order how long has
transpired from the earliest investigation of each burglary to the present
time

REPLY: Please see the below table which shows the length in years that the
offence has remained undetected and the number of offences undetected

FOI 2195

5. Please list in figures the number of offences of criminal damage in
Hagley April to September 2009

6. Please list in figures the number of offences of criminal damage in
Hagley April to September 2008

7. Please list the exact types of criminal damage carried out during both
the above periods.

REPLY: Please see the below tables

Criminal Damage Offences 01 Apr - 30 Sep 2009 April May June July Aug Sept
Criminal Damage - Vehicle £5000 & under 1 4 2 0 1 3
Criminal Damage - Building not dwelling
£5000 & under 0 1 0 1 1 0
Criminal Damage - Other property £5000 &
under 1 0 0 1 1 0
Racially or Religiously aggravated criminal
damage building not dwelling 0 0 1 0 0 0
Total 2 5 3 2 3 3

Criminal Damage Offences 01 Apr - 30 Sep 2008 April May June July Aug Sept
Criminal Damage - Vehicle £5000 & under 2 0 2 1 1 3
Criminal Damage - Building not dwelling
£5000 & under 0 0 0 1 1 1
Criminal Damage - Other property £5000 &
under 1 1 0 3 1 2
Total 3 1 2 5 3 6

8. Please list for both the above periods the precise number of
convictions/prosecutions/cautions/ final warnings etc. for criminal

damage in Hagley

REPLY:

2008 - 2 detentions (1 No Further Action, 1 Police Bail)

2009 - 1 detention (1 No Further Action)

9. How many reports of criminal damage were received from Hagley residents
during both these periods and how many were acted upon by the police in
Hagley?

REPLY:

2008 - 9 callers were recorded as residing in Hagley

2009 - 6 callers were recorded as residing in Hagley

Please be advised that an individual resident may have made more than one
call, and conversely, more than one call may have been made about an
individual incident.

Please also be advised, that every crime reported receives a level of
investigation appropriate to the circumstances. an assessment is made of
the crime recorded by the force and the likelihood of achieving the
identification of a suspect/offender for that offence. A judgement is then
made on the local priority of the offence and the likelihood of
identifying an offender. A decision is then made whether further enquiries
are necessary, would require the use of disproportionate resource, or if
the matter can be closed without further investigation. An investigation
can be resurrected at any time after initial filing.

FOI 2196

10. How many night time patrols have been carried out in Hagley Village
centre in the past 12 months

11. How many night time patrols have been carried out in Hagley Village
centre in the 12 months previous to this

REPLY: No specific recorded information held

Please be advised that the location is patrolled by local and district
response officers, however the number of times that the village centre is
patrolled is not recorded.

FOI 2200

1.How many prosecutions for selling alcohol to someone underage have been
carried out in the West Mercia region in the past twelve months?

REPLY: None

2.Please provide the same figures for the previous twelve months.

REPLY: One

Every effort has been made to ensure that the information provided above
by our North Worcestershire Division and our Safety & Justice Department
is as accurate and comprehensive as possible

Please note that though we have answered the six requests that you have
submitted this month, and the one that you submitted in October, about
crime and anti-social behaviour in Hagley, it is only fair for this
Authority to point out that when persons make a number of requests for
information that are similar, about the same subject or repeated,
consideration will be given to ascertain if there is evidence of a pattern
of behaviour which could be seen to be obsessive or unreasonable.

If this is found to be the case, the Authority would consider applying the
below exemptions to future similar requests for information:

S12 of the Act `exceeds the fees limit' - by aggregating the costs to the
authority of all the requests made to date

S 14 (1) of the Act - by making future requests on the same topic
vexatious

Please be advised that an authority is not obliged to deal with requests
that are considered to be unreasonable or obsessive.

Your attention is drawn to the below which details your right of
complaint.

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please write
or telephone the Information Compliance Unit quoting the reference number
above.

Yours sincerely

Miss R Forrest

Information Compliance Unit

Information Management and Technology Department

West Mercia Police

PO Box 55

Hindlip

Worcester

WR3 8SP

01905 331545 / 331565

West Mercia Police in complying with their statutory duty under sections 1
and 11 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to release the enclosed
information will not breach the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
However, the rights of the copyright owner of the enclosed information
will continue to be protected by law.  Applications for the copyright
owner's written permission to reproduce any part of the attached
information should be addressed to The Force Solicitor, West Mercia Police
Headquarters, PO Box 55, Hindlip, Worcester, WR3 8SP.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Are you unhappy with how your request has been handled or do you think the
decision is incorrect?

You have the right to require West Mercia Police (WMP) to review their
decision.

Prior to lodging a formal complaint you are welcome and encouraged to
discuss the decision with the person that dealt with your request.

Ask to have the decision looked at again -

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the person named at the end of your decision letter.

That person will be able to discuss the decision, explain any issues and
assist with any problems.

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
WMP made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information, you can lodge a complaint with WMP to have the
decision reviewed.  WMP must be notified of your intention to complain
within 2 months of the date of its response to your Freedom of Information
request.  Complaints should be made in writing and addressed to:

West Mercia Police Headquarters

Information Management and Technology Department

Hindlip Hall

Hindlip

PO Box 55

Worcester

WR3 8SP

In all possible circumstances, WMP will aim to respond to your complaint
within 2 months.

The Information Commissioner

After lodging a complaint with WMP if you are still dissatisfied with the
decision you may make application to the Information Commissioner for a
decision on whether the request for information has been dealt with in
accordance with the requirements of the Act.

For information on how to make application to the Information Commissioner
please visit their website at www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk 
Alternatively, phone or write to:

Information Commissioner's Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

Phone:            01625 545700

show quoted sections