Officer arrests 2015-2019

Roedd y cais yn rhannol lwyddiannus.

Hello,

I'm a reporter with Newsquest's Data Investigations Unit and I'm hoping to obtain information relating to the number of police officers and staff arrested between 2015 and 2019 to date.

I'd prefer to receive the information in Excel spreadsheet - xlsx or xls - format and if you cannot provide the information in full, I would like to request that you provide as much as you are able to within the cost and time limits of the Act.

If you need clarification or can suggest ways in which the request can be refined in order for it to be successful, I'd be grateful if you could contact me as soon as possible.

I'd like to know the following, please:

1. The number of police officers arrested between 2015 and 2019, with figures broken down for each year.
2. The number of police staff arrested between 2015 and 2019, with figures broken down for each year.

For each arrest, please provide:

3. a. The rank/role of the arrested person
b. Years in service
c. Date of arrest
d. Details of the offence the individual was arrested on suspicion of
e. The outcome of the criminal investigation, including the outcome of any prosecution where applicable
f. The outcome of any other investigation into the matter - please specify who conducted the investigation (i.e. internal within the force, the IPCC, etc) and the end result of that investigation

Please structure the response for question 3 a-f within an Excel spreadsheet with the columns 'Date of Arrest - Officer or Staff - Rank/Role - Years in Service - Offence - Criminal outcome - Other outcome'.

Please don't hesitate to come back to me for further clarification if needed.

Yours faithfully,

Joanna Morris

Freedom of Information, Cleveland Police

This mailbox is for Freedom of Information requests only and all other
mail will be deleted unactioned.

 

For Legal please forward your e-mail to
[1][email address] and for Subject Access please
check the Subject Access section of the Cleveland Police website under the
heading of ‘Advice and Information’ or forward your e-mail to
[2][email address] for all other
enquiries please contact Cleveland Police via 101.

 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. mailto:[email address]

Freedom of Information, Cleveland Police

Dear Ms Morris,

Enquiry Ref: 10853/2019

I acknowledge receipt of your request received by this office on 23rd April 2019.

As set out by the Freedom of Information Act it will be our aim to respond to your request by 22nd May 2019. In some cases, however, we may be unable to achieve this deadline and would hope to contact you should this be the case.

If you have any questions regarding your request please contact this office on 01642 306825 or 01642 306832.

Yours sincerely,

Ms E McGuigan
Freedom of Information Decision Maker
Directorate of Standards and Ethics
Cleveland Community Safety Hub | 1 Cliffland Way | Hemlington | TS8 9GL
Tel: 01642 306832 or 01642 306825
E-mail: [Cleveland Police request email]

Website | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | LinkedIn

       
Public Service | Transparency | Impartiality | Integrity

Please do not use social media or email to report crime as we do not monitor these accounts 24/7. Dial 999 in an emergency or visit the contact us section of our website for all reporting options.

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Hello,

I have been made aware that my initial request may not have been as clear as I intended.

Just for further clarification, my request refers to officers and staff who were working for your force at the time of their arrest (whether they were arrested by your force or any other).

I hope that this helps refine my request if necessary.

Yours sincerely,

Joanna Morris

Freedom of Information, Cleveland Police

Dear Ms Morris,

Enquiry Ref: 10853/2019

I write in connection with your request for information dated 23rd April 2019 and received by this office on that date. Below are the questions raised in your request and our response?

I'd like to know the following, please:
1. The number of police officers arrested between 2015 and 2019, with figures broken down for each year.
2. The number of police staff arrested between 2015 and 2019, with figures broken down for each year.
For each arrest, please provide:
3. a. The rank/role of the arrested person b. Years in service c. Date of arrest d. Details of the offence the individual was arrested on suspicion of e. The outcome of the criminal investigation, including the outcome of any prosecution where applicable f. The outcome of any other investigation into the matter - please specify who conducted the investigation (i.e. internal within the force, the IPCC, etc) and the end result of that investigation

Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) places two duties on public authorities. Unless exemptions apply, the first duty at Section 1 (1) (a) is to confirm or deny whether the information specified in a request is held. The second duty at Sec 1(1) (b) is to disclose information that has been confirmed as being held. Where exemptions are relied upon s17 of FOIA requires that we provide the applicant with a notice which: a) states that fact b) specifies the exemption(s) in question and c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies.

Having made enquiries regarding your request we have been advised that to extract this information would require that we check every arrest, for the timescale specified, to ascertain if the arrested person either declared that they were a Police Officer or a member of Police Staff or against the personal record of ever officer and staff member. It is estimated that this would take in excess of the appropriate time stipulated by the Secretary for Constitutional Affairs, Lord Falconer on the 18th Of October 2004, that is, eighteen hours. This falls under the exemption of 'Compliance exceeding the appropriate limit' covered by Section 12 (1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and as such this work could not be undertaken.
Therefore, please treat this as a refusal notice under S17 of the Freedom of Information Act.

The Cleveland Police response to your request is unique and it should be noted that Police Forces do not use generic systems or identical procedures to capture and record data therefore responses from Cleveland Police should not be used as a comparison with any other force response you receive.

If you are not satisfied with this response or any actions taken in dealing with your request you have the right to request an independent internal review of your case under our review procedure. The APP College of Policing guidance states that a request for internal review should be made within 20 working days of the date on this response or 40 working days if extenuating circumstances to account for the delay can be evidenced.

If we can be of any further assistance please do not hesitate to contact this office on 01642 306825 or 01642 306832.

Yours sincerely,

Ms E McGuigan
Freedom of Information Decision Maker
Directorate of Standards and Ethics
Cleveland Community Safety Hub | 1 Cliffland Way | Hemlington | TS8 9GL
Tel: 01642 306832 or 01642 306825
E-mail: [Cleveland Police request email]

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Freedom of Information, Cleveland Police

Dear Ms Morris

 

Enquiry Ref: 10853-19

 

I write in connection with your request for further information received
in this office via telephone.   I note you seek the following:

 

I'd like to know the following, please:

 

1. The number of police officers arrested between 2015 and 2019, with
figures broken down for each year.

2015 – 3

2016 – 3

2017 – 3

2018 – 6

2019 – 1

 

2. The number of police staff arrested between 2015 and 2019, with figures
broken down for each year.

2015 – 1

2016 – 1

2017 – 1

2018 – 2

2019 – 1

 

For each arrest, please provide:

 

3. a. The rank/role of the arrested person b. Years in service c. Date of
arrest d. Details of the offence the individual was arrested on suspicion
of e. The outcome of the criminal investigation, including the outcome of
any prosecution where applicable f. The outcome of any other investigation
into the matter - please specify who conducted the investigation (i.e.
internal within the force, the IPCC, etc) and the end result of that
investigation

a)

 

+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Outcome |Insp &|PC & Sgt|Support|
| |above | |staff |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Drink Driving |  |  |  |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Resigned/Retired whilst suspended before conduct|0 |0 |1 |
|charges preferred. | | | |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Drugs |  |  |  |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Dismissal without notice |0 |0 |1 |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Misc/Malf in public office & other |  |  |  |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Dismissal without notice |0 |1 |0 |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Other |  |  |  |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Dismissal without notice |0 |1 |0 |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|First Written Warning |0 |0 |1 |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Management action |0 |1 |0 |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Sexual offence |  |  |  |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|No case to answer |0 |1 |0 |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Resigned prior to hearing - hearing held would |1 |0 |0 |
|have been dismissed | | | |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Sexual offence, Misc/Malf in public office & |  |  |  |
|other | | | |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Dismissal without notice |0 |1 |0 |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Theft |  |  |  |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Dismissal without notice |0 |1 |0 |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|No Action |0 |1 |0 |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Traffic |  |  |  |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Dismissal without notice |0 |1 |0 |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Final written warning |0 |1 |2 |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Management action |0 |1 |0 |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|No Action |0 |0 |1 |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Resigned prior to hearing |1 |0 |0 |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Violence against person |  |  |  |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Management action |0 |1 |0 |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|No Action |0 |2 |0 |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Sexual offence/Misc in a public office |  |  |  |
|------------------------------------------------+------+--------+-------|
|Final written warning |0 |1 |0 |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

 

You will note that we have not supplied all the information requested, to
break down the figures/information further, could, if put with other
information you may hold or obtain could lead the identification of an
individual which is against the principles of the Data Protection Act 
1998.  For anything else we would rely on the following:

 

Cleveland Police can neither confirm nor deny that it holds any further
information pertinent to this request as the duty in Section 1(1) (a) of
the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not apply, by virtue of the
following exemptions:

 

Section 30(3) Investigations;

Section 30 is a class based qualified exemption and consideration must be
given as to whether there is a public interest in neither confirming nor
denying the information exists is the appropriate response.

 

Factors favouring confirming or denying whether any other information is
held for Section 30

Confirming or denying whether any further information is held would allow
the public to see where public funds have been spent and this would allow
the Police service to appear more open and transparent.

 

Factors against confirming or denying whether any other information is
held for Section 30

To confirm or deny that law enforcement holds this information could
compromise law enforcement tactics which would lead to a hindrance on the
Police Force’s ability to prevent and detect crimes.

 

Overall balancing test 

Whilst there is a public interest in the transparency of policing
investigations/operations there is a very strong public interest in
safeguarding the integrity of police investigations and operations in
these sensitive areas.   It is our opinion that for these issues the
balancing test for disclosure is not made out.

 

Please note that all statistical data supplied in relation to Freedom of
Information requests is a snapshot of data held at the time the request
was received by the Freedom of Information office and is subject to
constant change/updates.

 

The Cleveland Police response to your request is unique and it should be
noted that Police Forces do not use generic systems or identical
procedures to capture and record data therefore responses from Cleveland
Police should not be used as a comparison with any other force response
you receive.

 

If you are not satisfied with this response or any actions taken in
dealing with your request you have the right to request an independent
internal review of your case under our review procedure. The APP College
of Policing guidance states that a request for internal review should be
made within 20 working days of the date on this response or 40 working
days if extenuating circumstances to account for the delay can be
evidenced.

 

If I can be of any further assistance please do not hesitate to contact
this office on any of the below numbers.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Mrs M Johnson

Freedom of Information Decision Maker

Department of Standard & Ethics | 1 Cliffland Way | Hemlington | TS8 9GL

 

 

Telephone: 01642 306825 & 01642 306832

 

Website | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | LinkedIn

 

 

Public Service | Transparency | Impartiality | Integrity

 

 

Please do not use social media or email to report crime as we do not
monitor these accounts 24/7. Dial 999 in an emergency or visit the contact
us section of our website for all reporting options.

 

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Hello,

Thank you very much for sending over the response to my FOI request.

I acknowledge why you have provided the information in a way that doesn't link an officer to a particular crime, but would like to request the disclosed data be re-sent in a spreadsheet format, if possible.

It could be a formatting problem but the way the data has come through to me makes it difficult to decipher and the figures aren't quite adding up.

From the figures you've provided, this is the information I've extracted:

OFFICERS
16
STAFF
6

OFFENCES
Drink driving
Drugs
Misconduct in public office
Sex offence
Sex offence, misconduct in public office, other
Theft
Traffic
Violence against the person
Sex offence, misconduct in public office

OUTCOMES
Resigned/retired while suspended before conduct 1
Dismissed without notice 7
First written warning 1
Management action 3
No case 1
Resigned prior to hearing which would have resulted in dismissal 1
No action 4
Final written warning 4

As you can see, the offences listed aren't as numerous as the officers/staff members who have been arrested - please could you indicate which offences may have more than one arrest associated with them, or otherwise provide the remainder of the offences?

The data also does not include reference to the outcomes of any criminal cases, as requested. Please could you provide that information or your justification for its refusal?

With respect especially to this point - but also regarding the rest of the FOI and the way the information has been presented - as I'm sure you're aware, it is not illegal to identify suspects who are arrested and, should any cases progress to court, the names, addresses and dates of birth of individuals become a matter of public record. With that in mind, I'd be grateful if you could provide as full a response as you are able to both this point, and if possible to provide more clarity in linking up offences to the rank and outcome for officers involved.

Yours sincerely,

Joanna Morris

Freedom of Information, Cleveland Police

1 Atodiad

Dear Ms Morris

Please find attached spreadsheet as requested. I cannot explain why the formatting changed as when the response was sent it was legible.

Yours sincerely

Mrs M Johnson
Freedom of Information Decision Maker
Department of Standard & Ethics | 1 Cliffland Way | Hemlington | TS8 9GL

Telephone: 01642 306825 & 01642 306832

Website | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | LinkedIn

Public Service | Transparency | Impartiality | Integrity

Please do not use social media or email to report crime as we do not monitor these accounts 24/7. Dial 999 in an emergency or visit the contact us section of our website for all reporting options.

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Hello,

Many thanks for sending over the spreadsheet, it does add more context.

Could you also address the other matters raised in my email sent earlier today, please? I believe outcomes of criminal investigations concerning the officers arrested will be held by the force and would appreciate disclosure of those.

As you're aware, I'm interested in as full a disclosure as possible concerning the arrests of police officers working for Cleveland Police at the time of their arrests. However, having checked our archives this morning, I'm also a little bit concerned that there appear to be some omissions from the data - it does not seem to reflect the arrests of Tina Notman, Adrian Roberts or Paul Youll, for example. Is there a reason for this? Anything you can do to add to the data already disclosed would be appreciated.

Yours sincerely,

Joanna Morris

Freedom of Information, Cleveland Police

1 Atodiad

Dear Ms Morris

In response to your email firstly having made enquiries into the subject of your request I find the previous response was erroneous and we have attached a document with all the information we have been able to retrieve, and to answer your comments in relation to the Officers that you have named the first officer was included in previous responses and for anything else we would rely on the following:

Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) places two duties on public authorities. Unless exemptions apply, the first duty at Sec1 (1) (a) is to confirm or deny whether the information specified in a request is held. The second duty at Sec1 (1) (b) is to disclose information that has been confirmed as being held. Where exemptions are relied upon s17 of FOIA requires that we provide the applicant with a notice which: a) states that fact b) specifies the exemption(s) in question and c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies.

Section 40(2) Personal Information

Section 40 is an absolute exemption, which means that the legislators have identified that harm would be caused by any release. In addition there is no requirement to consider the public interest test.

By way of explanation to you I would point out the following: Under subsection 2 of Section 40 of The Freedom of Information Act, information is exempt information if it constitutes personal information of which the applicant is not the data subject. In order to be considered exempt personal information, the information must satisfy one of two conditions. It must either be information which would be exempt from disclosure to the data subject under the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998, or disclosure of the information would contravene any of the Data Protection Principles or cause damage or distress to the data subject.

On this occasion the information requested is clearly personal information and would contravene the first principle of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) - lawfulness, fairness and transparency, what are the likely expectations of the data subjects, in that would they expect the Cleveland Police to release personal details to the world, since release of information under The Freedom of Information Act 2000, is release to the world at large and not just to the individual applicant and as such I believe to do so would amount to unfair processing and hence therefore is exempt under Section 40(2)(a).

Section 40 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 is a class based and absolute exemption. This indicates that the legislators when writing this piece of legislation considered that the release of this type of information would cause harm to either the authority or the individuals involved.

Disclosure, at this moment in time, it is our opinion that for these issues the balance test for confirmation or denial is not made out.
No inference can be taken from this refusal that any other information requested does or does not exist.

And additionally

I consider that an exemption to disclosure afforded under the Freedom of information act exists, in that Section 31 (1) (g) & 2(b) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (The Act) – Law Enforcement - needs to be considered. That the exercise by any public authority of its functions for the purpose of ascertaining whether any person has failed to comply with the law, or of ascertaining whether any person is responsible for any conduct which is improper.

Section 31 (1)(g) (2)(b) Law Enforcement

Section 31 is a prejudice based and qualified exemption, which requires the Harm in disclosure to be identified and additionally requires a public interest test to be conducted.

Factors favouring disclosure for Section 31
The Police Service is charged with enforcing the law, preventing and detecting crime and protecting the communities we serve and there is a public interest in the transparency of policing operations and use of Public Funds especially where an investigation is high profile and concerning the organisation that is charged with upholding these principles. The release of such information would provide further and accurate information in relation to recent public debate.

Factors favouring non-disclosure for Section 31
The Cleveland Police Service is committed to demonstrating proportionality and accountability to the appropriate authorities. However, if the Cleveland Police Service were to either confirm or deny that information is held; other law enforcement may either be compromised or significantly weaken any on-going investigations and any future investigations.
No inference can be taken from this refusal that any other information requested does or does not exist.
The Cleveland Police response to your request is unique and it should be noted that Police Forces do not use generic systems or identical procedures to capture and record data therefore responses from Cleveland Police should not be used as a comparison with any other force response you receive.

If you are not satisfied with this response or any actions taken in dealing with your request you have the right to request an independent internal review of your case under our review procedure. The APP College of Policing guidance states that a request for internal review should be made within 20 working days of the date on this response or 40 working days if extenuating circumstances to account for the delay can be evidenced.

If I can be of any further assistance please do not hesitate to contact this office on any of the below numbers.

Yours sincerely

Mrs M Johnson
Freedom of Information Decision Maker
Department of Standard & Ethics | 1 Cliffland Way | Hemlington | TS8 9GL

Telephone: 01642 306825 & 01642 306832

Website | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | LinkedIn

Public Service | Transparency | Impartiality | Integrity

Please do not use social media or email to report crime as we do not monitor these accounts 24/7. Dial 999 in an emergency or visit the contact us section of our website for all reporting options.

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Hello,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Cleveland Police's handling of my FOI request 'Officer arrests 2015-2019'.

I am grateful for the disclosures thus far but believe that a fuller response should be possible within the scope of the FOI Act.

I note that some details have been held back on the basis that they could identify individual officers and the nature of their arrests.

However, in a number of those cases, the arrests resulted in court hearings and as such, information relating to their identity and the nature of the offence they were accused/convicted of committing will now be considered a matter of public record.

For each case that reached court, the information available for public disclosure included, but will not have been limited to, the individual's identity, home address, date of birth, the charges they were facing and the dates and circumstances of the offences.

Given that is the case for several of the arrests highlighted via your correspondence thus far, I'd appreciate further disclosure that will give a fuller response to my original questions, to specifically include the offences listed under 'other' and the description of the offences, rather than the offence groups.

As mentioned previously, I'm also concerned that there have been some omissions from the disclosure. You say that the case of Tina Notman is included within the data set you have provided, but I don't believe that Adrian Roberts or Paul Youll are included. Anything you can do to add to the data already disclosed would be appreciated.

Thank you for your help thus far.

Yours faithfully,

Joanna Morris

Hello,

Please could you advise as to when the internal review I requested in June will be responded to?

Yours sincerely,

Joanna Morris

RUMINS, Samantha (C8894), Cleveland Police

2 Atodiad

Dear Ms Morris

 

Enquiry Ref: 10853/2019

 

I have been requested to carry out an internal review of Cleveland
Police’s response to your FOI request.

 

By request dated 23^rd April 2019 you raised the following questions:

1.       The number of police officers arrested between 2015 and 2019,
with figures broken down for each year;

2.       The number of police staff arrested between 2015 and 2019, with
figures broken down for each year.

For each arrest, please provide:

3.       a. The rank/role of the arrested person;

b. Years in service;

c. Date of arrest;

d. Details of the offence the individual was arrested on suspicion if;

e. The outcome of any criminal investigation, including the outcome of any
prosecution where applicable;

f. The outcome of any other investigation into the matter – please be
specify who conducted the investigation (i.e. internal within the force,
the IPCC, etc) and the end result of that investigation.

Although you have already received part disclosure in relation to your
questions, the Freedom of Information Decision Maker found that she could
not supply all of the information requested as the information was exempt
by virtue of Section 30(3) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. She
carried out a balancing test when coming to this decision which took into
account the public interest test and the considerations favouring
disclosure and non-disclosure.

 

I have reviewed your request and it is my determination that the
information is exempt by virtue of Section 30(3) of the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 in that the duty to confirm or deny does not arise in
relation to information which is (or if it were held by the public
authority would be) exempt information by virtue of subsection (1) or (2).
If any of the matters are still under investigation, this information is
exempt by virtue of Section 30(1)(a), (b) & (c) of the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 in that information held by a public authority is
exempt information if it has at any time been held by the authority for
the purposes of (a) any investigation which the public authority has a
duty to conduct with a view to it being ascertained (i) whether a person
should be charged with an offence, or (ii) whether a person charged with
an offence is guilty of it, (b) any investigation which is conducted by
the authority and in the circumstances may lead to a decision by the
authority to institute criminal proceedings which the authority had the
power to conduct, or (c) any criminal proceedings, which the authority has
the power to conduct.

 

Furthermore, I find that the additional information requested is exempt by
virtue of Section 21 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 in that (1)
information which is reasonably accessible to the applicant otherwise than
under s1 is exempt information. Some of the requested information is
already in the public domain, as noted by the requester.

 

Please treat this as a refusal notice under Section 17 of the Freedom of
Information Act 2000.

 

If you are not satisfied with the outcome of this internal review you can
appeal to the Information Commissioner at the following address:

 

The Information Commissioner’s Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

 

Or alternatively email [1][email address]

 

Kind regards

 

Sam Rumins

 

 

C8894 Samantha Rumins

Senior Paralegal/Practice Manager

Evolve Collaborative Legal Services

 

Community Safety Hub | 1 Cliffland Way | Hemlington | TS8 9GL

 

[2]cid:image002.jpg@01D55DAC.4E572630[3]cid:image003.png@01D4A2BA.16CFF050

 

[4]Website | [5]Facebook | [6]Twitter | [7]Instagram | [8]LinkedIn

 

Public Service | Transparency | Impartiality | Integrity

 

Please do not use social media or email to report crime as we do not
monitor these accounts 24/7. Dial 999 in an emergency or visit the
[9]contact us section of our website for all reporting options.

 

Please be advised that this communication and associated communications
may be protected by legal professional privilege or litigation privilege
and as such should not be disclosed to any other person without reference
to legal services and the recipient.

 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
4. https://www.cleveland.police.uk/
5. https://www.facebook.com/clevelandpolice/
6. https://twitter.com/ClevelandPolice
7. https://www.instagram.com/clevelandpolic...
8. https://www.linkedin.com/company/clevela...
9. https://www.cleveland.police.uk/contact-...