Dear Norfolk Constabulary,
I made an FOI on 6.1.21 and then asked for internal review and then received an SAR that was still hugely redacted and data is still missing, like the arrest number.
I have posted today on the now hidden request on What do they know about this FIO.
I request all my information this is on the old What do they know and emailed to you.
See below the last correspondence on the hidden What do they know.
Please have my FOI and in the next 20 days.
Thank you so much Kerry

Dear Freedom Of Information (Norfolk),

I am completely confused by this and the information I have received so far. I requested an FOI and internal review but received a redacted SAR. I request

1. All correspondence, e.g. letters, minutes of meetings, reports, including OPT forms and referrals in fact all documents between BDC and Norfolk POlice in respect to any discussions of Kerry Radley or 82b Lower Street.

I request a public FOI and if LLP does apply to this request online then please email me the information with no redauctions as the ICO have confirmed that LLP does not apply if the case has been dropped.
Please note this is not a vexatious request or repeated request and simply a continuation of the FIO that has not been excepted. I repeat this is a request for public information and not private information. Please do not treat this as an SAR.
Yours sincerely,

Kerry Radley

Dear Norfolk Constabulary,

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c...
Original FOI

Yours faithfully,

Kerry Radley

Norfolk Constabulary
Just so you are aware this as stated above this is part of the original FOI I made. I still have not received my FOI or internal review or charge number? The CD’s you sent me of my interview do not work so I need a working version, so please send on a audio file instead. I am confused as to why this is going to take another 20 days? Please can you explain? Please make sure this FOI is up to date minimum 25th May.

Yours sincerely,

Kerry Radley

Dear Ms Gibson

Thank you for your response. I feel that the Norfolk Police are simply playing semantics with my information requests.

1. You are not providing information under SAR
2. When asked for public information on my case via FOI in January 2021 this was completely ignored.
3. I subsequently sent another FOI via WDTK - the police employ Section 40 and send me back to the loop of SAR.
For the record, the Norfolk Police have not provided me with full disclosure of all my information that was requested under SAR in 19 January 2020. It has been the case there has been a drip feeding of information for 16 months. Despite this drip feeding of information there has not been full disclosure.

There are many important documents that exist regarding the Community Protection Notice served on me in August 2017 which was subsequently dropped in January 2018 due to lack of evidence.

There is also the important exclusion of the charge number for an alleged arrest by the Norfolk Police. This alleged arrest was used as evidence in Norwich Magistrates Court where PC Clare prejudiced my case that I had been arrested for harassment. The arrest never happened and the police cannot provide me with a definitive evidence that I was arrested. Throughout my data requests I have consistently asked for the charge number and proof of arrest and this has not been forthcoming. I do not the Norfolk Constabulary realise how distressing this is for me.

I am requesting an internal review. In particular I request specific proof of my alleged arrest and any information relating to my CPN.
This is my final request for proof from the Norfolk Constabulary that I was arrested for a crime of harassment in 2018. If it cannot provide evidence of this - please say so. If the police have committed perjury - then it is incumbent on them to admit this - after all they are the upholders of the law.

Unless this information is forthcoming I will be making a full complaint to the IOPC regarding this and other misconduct.

Yours sincerely
Kerry Radley

Dear Freedom Of Information (Norfolk),

ICO are now investigating the NP again as my data still has not been received. This is breaking PACE.
I have requested repeatedly for the full interview tape and the 999 call and custody suite video from April 2021 and I am still waiting for everything. I am also missing lots of data and redactions need to be removed.
Please have all data to this date with me by the end of this month.

Yours sincerely,

Kerry Radley

Dear Freedom Of Information (Norfolk),

You have privately emailed me today but I completely disagree with your email. So I now request an internal review. I will post your reply and prof this is a data breach.

Yours sincerely,

Kerry Radley

Dear Freedom Of Information (Norfolk), John McGuire
Email you sent me on Wednesday 30.3.22
I have attached just 1 email thread I have and will email you the document I have made of all the other requests for my data, including the multiple custody suite requests. Which I will happily post on this public forum. Please now explain why Norfolk Police have deleted this video / data and why you have clearly lied in you email below.
O have never received the custody suite video and 999 call or the unedited voluntary Interview all of which I should have received last year in May under my PACE rights.
Lets not forget I was the victim and Mr Bob Carter was charged and sentenced with ABH and a public order offence against my 14 year old son. Mr Carter is now wearing a TAG for 12 months and there is a restraining order against him for 9 months of which he has already broken.
Please also on this public forum tell us all what your data policy is.

Dear Ms Radley,

As Manager of the Freedom of Information Team and Data Protection Team your email below has been passed to me to provide a response. However, I am replying to the email address we have for you and not the What Do They Know email as that would place this response in the public domain. My email contains personal data relating to you and I am not comfortable in replying in such detail for it to be in the public domain. If you want to place my response on the What Do They Know website then that is your choice and your decision.

Unfortunately it appears you are confusing the Freedom of Information Act with the Data Protection Act. Requests to access personal data relating to yourself are dealt with under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and Data Protection Act. Under the legislation an individual has the Right of Access, this is called Subject Access. The GDPR and Data Protection Act do not have the provisions for an Internal Review as the Freedom of Information Act does.

I have reviewed the three Subject Access Requests you have made since May 2021. When you initially requested access to the Interview Record upon your voluntary attendance there was a live criminal investigation and as such the interview was considered exempt from disclosure and you were written to on 11th June 2021 advising you of this. The interview record was subsequently disclosed to you on 29th September 2021 under your Subject Access Request Reference 3003/21.

You have not submitted any Subject Access Requests that requested access to the Custody Suite CCTV Footage or the 999 call from April 2021. However, CCTV Footage from within the Custody suite will no longer be retained as it is automatically deleted after 90 days. In respect of the 999 call you made in April 2021 I will create a new Subject Access Request for you. Could I ask you please to provide a phone number or location from which you made the call as this will assist my team in locating the record of the call.

The three Subject Access Requests you have made since May 2021 were for the following information:

1857/21 received on 24th May: I was interviewed on Friday at Alysham around noon and would like a digital copy of this please. Interview was taken by PC Clarke 0388 [email address] Please note this was a voluntary interview, where I was asked questions but not offered to reread or add or sign any statement. The custody number is 36A1/50071/21.

2465/21 received on 12th July: On the 21.5.21 at 10am I attended a voluntary interview at Aylsham Police Station. The duty solicitor assigned to my case was Ms Helen Cleall. Please could you provide me with all emails between Norfolk Constabulary and the duty solicitor bank that relate to the appointment of a solicitor for my interview. That is any and all emails to and from the duty bank of solicitors that requests attendance of duty solicitor and the confirmation email that Ms Cleall had been appointed to attend Aylsham on 21.5.21.

3003/21 received on 2nd September: Please can I request a SAR from the date the last one finished to now please

In reference to the missing data you refer to in your email below, can you please be specific in what data you believe to be missing, until that information is provided by yourself, the Constabulary considers your requests to have been serviced in line with your requests, your rights and the obligations placed on the Constabulary, including the redactions, and will take no further action. Subject Access only entitles an individual to access personal data relating to themselves. Information held in records that do not fall under that definition are removed, as such, you have no rights to access it or receive a copy of it.

Yours sincerely,

John McGuire
Information Compliance Manager
DBS and CLPD Chief Officer Delegate
Norfolk and Suffolk Constabularies
Falconers Chase, Wymondham, NR18 0WW
Tel: 01953 423927
Mobile: 07795507476
www.norfolk.police.uk www.suffolk.police.uk

-----Original Message-----
From: Kerry Radley <[email address]>
Sent: 29 March 2022 13:59
To: Freedom Of Information (Norfolk) <[email address]>
Subject: Re: Response to Internal Review

Dear Freedom Of Information (Norfolk),

ICO are now investigating the NP again as my data still has not been received. This is breaking PACE.

I have requested repeatedly for the full interview tape and the 999 call and custody suite video from April 2021 and I am still waiting for everything. I am also missing lots of data and redactions need to be removed.

Please have all data to this date with me by the end of this month.

Yours sincerely,

Kerry Radley

-----Original Message-----

Dear Ms Radley

Our ref: IR 001830/21

Please see attached response letter. The review was undertaken by Mr John

McGuire, the Information Compliance Manager, who was independent of the

original response.

Yours sincerely

+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

|Amanda Gibson |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Freedom of Information Decision Maker |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Norfolk Constabulary |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|OCC, Jubilee House, Falconer's Chase, |

|------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|Wymondham, Norfolk, NR18 0WW. |

| |

|Tel: 01953 425699 x 2803 |

| |

|[mobile number] |

| |

|[1]https://gbr01.safelinks.protection.outlo... |

+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

This e-mail carries a disclaimer

Go here to view [2]Norfolk Constabulary Disclaimer

References

Visible links

1. https://gbr01.safelinks.protection.outlo...

2. https://gbr01.safelinks.protection.outlo...

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Please use this email address for all replies to this request:

[email address]

Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:

https://gbr01.safelinks.protection.outlo...

For more detailed guidance on safely disclosing information, read the latest advice from the ICO:

https://gbr01.safelinks.protection.outlo...

Please note that in some cases publication of requests and responses will be delayed.

If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Wakefield, Matthew" <[email address]>
Date: 23 June 2021 at 09:02:29 BST
To: Kerry Radley <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Request for Interview Tape - Kerry Radley


Morning Kerry

I did reply to your longer email to me on Monday, I have requested both the interview and CCTV footage as you requested to be put on disc and sent to me. The minute I have them I will contact you to arrange handing them to you.

Thanks

Matt

Sgt 1560 Matt WAKEFIELD
Local Policing Neighbourhood Sergeant
Broadland – Sprowston, Thorpe St Andrew, Acle
Sprowston Police Station
01603 276727

From: Kerry Radley <[email address]>
Sent: 22 June 2021 19:58
To: Wakefield, Matthew <[email address]>
Subject: Fwd: Request for Interview Tape - Kerry Radley

Hi Matt
31 days ago I call Alysham Police station and asked for the video of my voluntary interview. Under PACE I should have received a copy before I left that day. It’s is now 31 days and despite numerous requests it has not been fourth coming. I am staggered that the police have attempted to circumvent PACE and send my request down the SAR routine. See email below. This is unacceptable.
Please send a digital copy by return.
Jude is still very concerned that he still does not know whats happening, he is a victim with enhanced rights.
On the 30th of April at 2.30pm I was head butted by Mr Carter who has harassed me for years and there was apparently a police investigation for this at the time but I still know nothing and I am still beginning harassed by him.
Please Please tell me whats happening. I am opening a new business which they are already attacking and I am stressed enough. This is ground hog day.

Regards Kerry

From: "Ling, Kevin" <[email address]>
Date: 21 June 2021 at 13:21:51 BST
To: Kerry Radley <[email address]>
Subject: RE: Request for Interview Tape - Kerry Radley


Dear Ms Radley,

Thank you for your e-mail.

Firstly I would like to clarify that disclosure under (Police & Criminal Evidence Act 1984)PACE, differs from that of Subject Access (Section 45 of the Data Protection Act 2018).

The original request for your interview was sent to the Tape Librarians and did not mention that the request was being made under PACE. They therefore forwarded it to us for consideration of disclosure under Subject Access. Under that part of the legislation I was correct to exempt disclosure.
Now that it has been established that you are requesting this under PACE, Sgt Wakefield will now facilitate disclosure for you.

Kindest Regards

Kevin Ling
Data Protection Decision Maker
Room 1.3.3
Norfolk Constabulary
Falconers Chase
Wymondham
NR18 0WW

From: Kerry Radley <[email address]>
Sent: 18 June 2021 23:42
To: Ling, Kevin <[email address]>
Cc: Wakefield, Matthew <[email address]>; Ray <[email address]>
Subject: Fwd: Request for Interview Tape - Kerry Radley

Dear Mr Ling

Thank you for your email.Please be advised on or around 3pm on the day of the interview I called the Alysham station for a copy of the tape. I was informed by the police to contact my solicitor. I contacted my solicitor who informed me that it is the duty of the police to supply the copy.

I do not understand why my request for the interview tape was forwarded to you as it was not addressed to you. Furthermore, the request for a copy of my interview is not a Subject Access Request. To be very clear I am requesting a copy of the May 21st interview under my rights governed by the Police & Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and the police must provide me with a copy of this interview 'as soon as practicable'.

For your information, I was not provided with any information by Alysham about my rights in respect to the recordings. My custody record also reflects that I refused to sign 'rights declaration' and 'offence disposal'. It is my recollection that the custody sergeant did not asked to sign anything and I did not refuse to sign anything, Therefore, I have also requested from Sgt Wakefield a copy of the custody suite video where it will document exactly when and how I refuse to sign the documents that were allegedly presented to me by the custody sergeant. This request for cctv evidence that proves my non cooperation to sign ' has been ignored thus far.

I must also emphatically state that my risk assessment for the voluntary interview undertaken by the same custody sergeant is completely inappropriate. I clearly stated to the custody sergeant that had a learning disability. I also stated that I had a mental health condition of depression. However, the custody sergeant has only recorded the dyslexia and excluded any reference to mental health on the risk assessment This omission shows that any consideration of my mental health as a risk factor was disregarded and as such my needs and cumulative risks were not properly assessed.

To be very clear, I am a vulnerable person with a learning disability and to that end I requested that my boyfriend be in the room as an appropriate adult for the voluntary interview. I made this request for an appropriate adult of PC Clarke at 13.5.21 meeting. This request was refused by PC Clarke, who had during prior police interviews allowed my boyfriend to be present for this reason.

During the interview with PC Clarke & PC Chambers of 21.5.21 I was so confused by what was happening and emotionally distraught, I requested to see my boyfriend. This request was refused. I also asked to leave the voluntary interview and was advised by PC Clarke that I would be arrested if I did so.

I was kept at the voluntary interview against my will. This is not only an abuse of power as I had been advised on the 13.5.21 by PC Clarke that I could leave at any time 'simple as that'. I wish to emphatically state that being interviewed against my will under the threat of arrest is not the best evidence gathering practice for a voluntary interview for a vulnerable person with a learning disability. I was clearly not in a fit state to answer any questions, did not know what was going on and was extremely frightened. Indeed, I advised my boyfriend on exiting Aylsham police station that I did not know what was going on, I was scared and confused and I would have agreed to anything to get out the interview.

Therefore, I am not only requesting a copy of my interview tape as part of my rights to do so via PACE, but am requesting a copy as a vulnerable person with a learning disability. This is to understand and process of what happened during that voluntary interview. This request would allow me to listen to the the events to fully comprehend what was occurring on that day. This is no more or no less that would have occurred if an appropriate adult had been present. They would have been able to explain what was happening and assist me in understanding what exactly was going on in the interview including discussions between the duty solicitor and police officers.

It is clear that no adjustments were made for dyslexia and/or my mental health issues were not risk assessed. The subsequently refusal to provide a copy of the interview tape under the guise of the Data Protection Act is not only a frustration of transparency and abuse of my rights under PACE - but disregards my disability and as such that the police are not providing any adjustment to support my needs.

Please provide a copy of this interview without any further delay.

Yours sincerely
Kerry Radley

This e-mail carries a disclaimer

Go here to view Suffolk Constabulary Disclaimer

This e-mail carries a disclaimer

Go here to view Norfolk Constabulary Disclaimer

Yours sincerely,

Kerry Radley

Dear Freedom Of Information (Norfolk),
In May .2021 I attended a voluntary interview at Aylsham Police station.

Since this interview some 11 months ago I have requested multiple times via email, phone calls and requests to officers of the Norfolk Constabulary the video’s of the interview, custody suite and booking in. These requests have been ignored, delayed and my data not supplied in line with PACE.

My many requests for this data are now with the freedom of information and data protection team who have also, ignored, delayed and not dealt with my request in the correct manner.

I requested my initial 999 call
when I was assaulted.

The custody suite and booking in videos.

The in full and UNEDITED voluntary police interview.

The FOI and data protection manager Mr McGuire has been completely untruthful about the chain of events and delayed retrieving my data until after 90 days have passed and has informed me that this has now been deleted?

If this is truly the case then this action and the denial of this data in line with PACE is a disgraceful act and has been done purely to hide the actions of the Police during this wrongful interview.

I will once again supply Mr McGuire with my multiple email requests and conversations sent since last years interview in the hope he will understand and see my ignored requests and rectify this cover up.

This will prove without any doubt the custody video should not have been deleted and if this is the case and it has in fact it has been deleted then this is purely a criminal act and an attempt by the Norfolk constabulary to stop the truth from being revealed.

The fact is I have made official complaints and have on going Police complaints about these actions and the officers involved.

I do hope Mr McGuire that the Police have not conveniently delayed the release of this information to purposely try and stop the truth from being revealed and the officers concerned are being ‘protected’ to deny me justice.

Furthermore I am more than happy for the information concerning my wrongful interview to be placed on the WDTK site, I have done no wrong and I was ‘tricked’ and lied to in order to do the Voluntary interview.

Mr McGuire, one thing is for sure; I know now I cannot trust the Police and I am now very concerned about your actions and attempt’s to deny me my data.

For the record I have my own transcripts of all meetings and interviews from before, leading up to my assault and since, like I said I no longer trust the Police and the lengths they have gone to, to cover up there wrongdoings, the lies I was told and the keystone cop Norfolk Policing.

I await the release of all my data between April 2021 to today. Also send the data policy that is relevant to my case. Peoples data that have been questioned and been made to go into the police station to be questioned. Your policy under PACE, data retention etc

Yours sincerely,

Kerry Radley