Children's Homes / Sex Abuse

Dear Sir,
 
I refer to your recent request for information under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000, as set out below:
 
yesterday as excuse to yet again refuse me information relating to your
Forces investigations of Cheshire Child Sexual Abuse you responded to my
request by volleying a hail of untruths and fabrications at me intended to
make the independent observer believe me only about dishonestly
discrediting your own dishonest and or poorly performing officers  - Mr
Gannon you are caught out unlawfully discrediting me !
 
For the record Mr Gannon I wish you to know how during the late sixties
numbers of children living at Newton Hall Frodsham attended my own school
- several of those children became my close friends. During that time I
visited the Home to play in its cricket and football teams. For the record
Mr Gannon several of my school chums not living at Newton Hall went on to
become Cheshire Police officers, one becoming a Detective Chief
Superintendent, and I am sure if need be they will support all I tell you.
For the record Mr Gannon I more than most people have every right to know
why it was my friends living at Newton Hall were not offered the emergency
telephone number / same safe harbour as those children living at the
Danesford home !
 
Putting aside your shameful, vexatious, oppressive, dishonest allegations
for now I again use my lawful right to press your Force to provide me
information which relates to its many different Cheshire child sexual
exploitation investigations including Newton Hall Frodsham !
 
Records prove at a time when Cheshire Police were investigating
allegations of child sexual exploitation at a number of Cheshire
children's homes including Danesford, Congleton - Greystone Heath
Warrington - St Aiden's, Widnes - St Joseph's, Nantwich - Newton Hall,
Frodsham, and Kilrie, Knutsford, the appropriate child protection agencies
agreed each child living at the Danesford home wpild be provided a
emergency telephone number, a safe harbor, to call in the event anyone
attempted to abuse them - I note the irrational decision was made not to
offer that same telephone number, that safe harbor, to any child living at
any other Cheshire Children's home - I note within three Months the
irrational decision was made to withdraw/disconnect  the telephone number
- I am interested to know which agency made that decision and I am
interested to know what steps if any your Force took to prevent that
telephone number / safe harbour from being disconnected.
 
I am recently reliably advised several members of the Cheshire Social
Services and Cheshire Constabulary teams who did believe some members of
staff, and their invited guests, were abusing the children at Danesford
did object to the decision taken to disconnect the children's emergency
helpline/safe harbour.I am reliably advised that their objections would
have been recorded in the minutes of various different joint meetings and
also in Police pocket books.
 
Please provide me copy of your officers written objections.
 
In accordance with  the Act, our response is as follows:
 
Since 2013 you have engaged Cheshire Constabulary in voluminous
correspondence in relation to a broad range of policing matters. It is our
view that this level of contact with the Constabulary is both
disproportionate and obsessive in nature.
 
Further to this, we consider that your approach to Cheshire Constabulary
and the requests you have made amount to an unreasonable level of
harassment. In many of your requests and correspondence you have made
allegations against both the Constabulary and individuals, which have
understandably cause distress to the parties involved.
 
Taking this into account, I have applied the findings in published
guidance along with the findings of the Upper Tribunal in the case of the
Information Commissioner v Devon County Council and Dransfield and upheld
by the Supreme Court Ruling dated 14/05/2015.
 
Therefore, In line with S17(5) of the FOI Act, the information is refused
on the basis of the application of S14 of the Act. The request is now
deemed to be vexatious.
 
In applying the findings of the Upper Tribunal case referred to above, it
should be noted that it was found that whilst an individual request might,
in itself, be benign, when taking into account other dealings between the
Constabulary and yourself, such requests for information can be and in
this case are vexatious, when taking into account three particular
considerations:
 
These are in relation to (i) the burden, (ii) the motive, value and
purpose and (iii) the causing of harassment or distress. From reviewing
the number and nature of requests from you under the FOI Act, particularly
in the past 12 months, along with other correspondence, I am satisfied
that all three of these elements are engaged.       
 
Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, you have further recourse for
appeal, if required, to the Information Commissioner. Information can be
obtained about the appeal procedure from:
 
The Information Commissioner
Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK8 5AF
 
Regards
 
John Gannon
Information Compliance
Professional Standards Department
Tel:  01606 364176

show quoted sections