Misconduct Hearing ACC Marcus Beale

dennis fallon made this Freedom of Information request to West Midlands Police

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

The request was partially successful.

Dear West Midlands Police,
Traditionally the police have operated under their own rules, allowing officers and staff accused of disgraceful behaviour to avoid investigation by taking early retirement and still collect their pensions, but according to the WM Police website,quote,"Since 1 May 2015 police misconduct and special case hearings have been held in public in accordance with new national legislation. The change was introduced to increase transparency, accountability and public confidence".

There is concern that there is an ongoing failure of transparency regarding the delayed sacking of Assistant Chief Constable Marcus Beale, which was recommended at an earlier misconduct hearing chaired by a legally qualified Corinna Ferguson, following his conviction for contravening the Official Secrets Act in December 2017.
According to the article,"The 54-year-old, who is due to retire in April, stands to lose a £215,000 pension lump sum if sacked". and there is concern is that there is some corrupt abuse of process ongoing,deliberately delaying the process, which would be contrary to the public interest.
The gross misconduct and Court Conviction has been explained in the media on 13th February 2018
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-430...
Apparently Mr Beale arranged for a hard copies of Top Secret documents to be printed, for some unexplained reason, and then removed them from a secure building and allowed them to pass into the hands of unknown people, which is classed as Gross Misconduct, and has resulted in Mr Beale receiving his conviction and a fine.
The Government have stipulated that in future an Independent Legally Qualified Chair(LQC) should be in charge of hearings,and the LQC should be chosen from a Home Office approved list.
The process is supposed to be open and transparent.

On Wednesday 28th March 2018, prior to 2.30pm, the WM Police website announced that the final hearing regarding Marcus Beale would be on the following morning at 9.30am in Lloyd House, but at around 10pm on the same Wednesday all details had been scrubbed and replaced by the message "No misconduct hearings are scheduled to take place at this time".

FOI Q1. No final hearing can occur until a Legally Qualified Chair (LQC) has been selected from the Home Office approved list, and the LQC is responsible for determining the time and venue for the hearing.Please confirm the name of the appointed LQC who advised that the hearing would be on Thursday 29th March 2018 at 9.30am, and please confirm when that notification was displayed on the website and when,and why,it was removed from the police website on the same day.Please confirm if the LQC was appointed by the Chief Constable or Mr Jamieson.
FOI Q2. The Home Office approved list of LQCs is supposed to be held within each police area.Please confirm if the list is held by the Chief Constable or Mr Jamieson the Police and Crime Commissioner(PCC), and please provide a copy of the list if it is under police control.
FOI Q3. The BBC state"The senior officer, who has a 30-year police career, has been suspended on full pay since November".Please confirm how much Mr Beale has been paid during his suspension after his conviction up till 29 March 2018, and if his perks, including his police car, were also suspended during this period.
FOI Q4. When the final hearing is finally heard, please confirm,apart from the LQC, who will be present to witness the proceedings, will it include the Chief Constable and the PCC, will there be an independent witness of any kind.

Thanking you in anticipation, the public are looking for a new age of accountability and transparency to demonstrate police integrity.

Yours faithfully,
Dennis Fallon BSc

Freedom of Information,

Please accept this as an acknowledgement of receipt of your e-mail by the
Freedom of Information Unit.
 
If your email is a valid request for information under the Freedom of
Information Act, your request will be dealt with within the legislative
deadline of 20 working days.  Should we be unable to meet this deadline
for any reason you will be notified as soon as possible.
 
Please note that if your email is a request is for your own personal data
you should make a subject access request to the Data Protection Unit.  You
can do this by completing a WA162 form, which is available on the West
Midlands Police website.  Search the West Midlands Police website for
'Subject Access' or go directly to this page:
 
[1]https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/get-...
 
If you require further information please contact 101 and ask for the
Freedom of Information Unit.
 
You might find what you are looking for on our website:
[2]http://foi.west-midlands.police.uk/
 
If you have information about any crime, you can contact us on the
non-emergency number: 101.
 
In an emergency, for example where life is in danger or a crime in
progress, call 999.

This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged
or confidential information. If received in error, please notify the
originator immediately. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or
alteration of this email is strictly forbidden. Views or opinions
expressed in this email do not necessarily represent those of West
Midlands Police. All West Midlands Police email activity is monitored for
virus, racist, obscene, or otherwise inappropriate activity. No
responsibility is accepted by West Midlands Police for any loss or damage
arising in any way from the receipt or use of this email.

References

Visible links
1. https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/get-...
2. http://foi.west-midlands.police.uk/

dennis fallon left an annotation ()

This website is the ONLY way to establish truths, virtually every other website,especially comments sections of newspapers,are monitored and manipulated by unknown people.All praise to the memory of Chris Lightfoot who founded this website.I once posted a comment about police pay on a news site,and within 10 minutes received 30 negative arrows which is very revealing as to the degree of monitoring.This website,search Marcus Beale,shows someone else was aware Marcus was leading a charmed life, but at some point his protection seems to have failed, so lets see if he escapes with a big pension and retirement option, which is the usually way to ensure his silence.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/d...

dennis fallon left an annotation ()

I note that today,Thursday 5th April,the Chief Constable Dave Thompson has been interviewed on site at the Commonwealth Games in Australia,so he`s obviously not around for a few days whilst `working`there.Did he rush his colleagues hearing through in secret,with no mention or publicity,or did he do the honourable thing and postpone the hearing until his return?I wonder,will the police demonstrate honesty,transparency,and integrity?

dennis fallon left an annotation ()

Saturday 7th April, the Birmingham Mail has a full FRONT PAGE `story`that Marcus has apparently escaped being sacked and is lined up for a £200,000 pension windfall.No mention of anything on police website about it.The Chief Con Dave Thompson has been in Australia all week (allegedly looking at policing of Commonwealth Games,though he will probably be `retired`before they come here).Some explanation required as to why Dave FAILED to complete the hearing promptly when sacking was the recommended course, now the taxpayer must pick up the big costs cos the police are allegedly short of cash, and explanation as to how the story was leaked to the press, in the Chief Con`s absence , for Saturday publication when newspaper sales are minimal. The course of action might be considered scheming and dishonest by some people, but perhaps can be explained by reasons other than deliberate incompetence?

Dear West Midlands Police,
Regarding FOI Q4 it now appears,from the police website,that ,quote,"On 7 December 2017 ACC Beale appeared at Westminster Magistrates Court and was convicted of an offence contrary to the Official Secrets Act 1989.On 13 February 2018 ACC Beale appeared at a Special Case Hearing which was chaired by Corinna Ferguson. The panel found that ACC Beale’s conduct amounted to Gross Misconduct. Their recommendation as to the disciplinary action which should be imposed at the further special case hearing was dismissal without notice"and advises that the final misconduct hearing has been scheduled for 18th April 2018 at 9.30am in Police Headquarters Lloyd House.I require clarification about the circumstances of the final hearing so I would appreciate an additional FOI Q5.
FOI Q5.The Legally Qualified Chair(LQC),Corinna Ferguson,after considering all the evidence,recommended on 13th February 2018 that there should be dismissal without notice, but the Chief Constable Dave Thompson has FAILED in his duty to act promptly on this advice, which will now result in Mr Beale escaping from proper penalty by way of the usual excuse of retirement, which so irritates the taxpaying public.Please confirm if the LQC will chair this final meeting, did the LQC set the time and date,or will the Chief Constable chair the meeting.Additionally,I believe the Chief Constable was absent from his post whilst attending the Commonwealth Games in Australia, which may have led to the delay.Please confirm the dates during which Mr Thompson was allowed to attend these Games.

Thanking you in anticipation of allowing the additional question to explain events.

Yours faithfully,

dennis fallon

Michelle Richardson,

Good Afternoon Mr Fallon ,

Thank you for your email advising of additional questions to your original request for information .

These questions have been aggregated with your previous request for cost purposes. A new response date will be 15/05/2018 .

Yours sincerely

Michelle Richardson

FOI Unit

show quoted sections

Dear Michelle Richardson,
Thank you in anticipation.

Yours sincerely,

dennis fallon

Freedom of Information,

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Fallon

 

FOI Request Reference: 003513/18 and 45134_18 

 

Thank you for your request for information, received 29/03/2018 and
additional request on 16/04/2018, both requests have been aggregated for
cost purposes.

 

REQUEST

 

FOI Q1. No final hearing can occur until a Legally Qualified Chair (LQC)
has been selected from the Home Office approved list, and the LQC is
responsible for determining the time and venue for the hearing. Please
confirm the name of the appointed LQC who advised that the hearing would
be on Thursday 29th March 2018 at 9.30am, and please confirm when that
notification was displayed on the website and when, and why, it was
removed from the police website on the same day. Please confirm if the LQC
was appointed by the Chief Constable or Mr Jamieson.

FOI Q2. The Home Office approved list of LQCs is supposed to be held
within each police area. Please confirm if the list is held by the Chief
Constable or Mr Jamieson the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC), and
please provide a copy of the list if it is under police control.

FOI Q3. The BBC state" The senior officer, who has a 30-year police
career, has been suspended on full pay since November ".Please confirm how
much Mr Beale has been paid during his suspension after his conviction up
till 29 March 2018, and if his perks, including his police car, were also
suspended during this period.

FOI Q4. When the final hearing is finally heard, please confirm, apart
from the LQC, who will be present to witness the proceedings, will it
include the Chief Constable and the PCC, will there be an independent
witness of any kind.

 

Thanking you in anticipation, the public are looking for a new age of
accountability and transparency to demonstrate police integrity.

Regarding FOI Q4 it now appears, from the police website, that, quote, “On
7 December 2017 ACC Beale appeared at Westminster Magistrates Court and
was convicted of an offence contrary to the Official Secrets Act 1989.On
13 February 2018 ACC Beale appeared at a Special Case Hearing which was
chaired by Corinna Ferguson. The panel found that ACC Beale’s conduct
amounted to Gross Misconduct.  Their recommendation as to the disciplinary
action which should be imposed at the further special case hearing was
dismissal without notice" and advises that the final misconduct hearing
has been scheduled for 18th April 2018 at 9.30am in Police Headquarters
Lloyd House. I require clarification about the circumstances of the final
hearing so I would appreciate an additional FOI Q5.

FOI Q5.The Legally Qualified Chair (LQC), Corinna Ferguson, after
considering all the evidence, recommended on 13th February 2018 that there
should be dismissal without notice, but the Chief Constable Dave Thompson
has FAILED in his duty to act promptly on this advice, which will now
result in Mr Beale escaping from proper penalty by way of the usual excuse
of retirement, which so irritates the taxpaying public. Please confirm if
the LQC will chair this final meeting, did the LQC set the time and date,
or will the Chief Constable chair the meeting. Additionally, I believe the
Chief Constable was absent from his post whilst attending the Commonwealth
Games in Australia, which may have led to the delay. Please confirm the
dates during which Mr Thompson was allowed to attend these Games.

 

Thanking you in anticipation of allowing the additional question to
explain events.

 

RESPONSE

 

Please find attached our response. You may also wish to view the following
website .

 

[1]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-438...

 

As recommended as good practice by the Information Commissioner’s Office a
version of this response may be published on the West Midlands Police
website.

 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

 

For further information and data on West Midlands Police see our
publication scheme and disclosure log

 

[2]http://foi.west-midlands.police.uk/

 

RIGHT OF APPEAL

 

Your attention is drawn to your right to request a re-examination of your
case under West Midlands Police review procedure, which can be found at:

 

[3]http://foi.west-midlands.police.uk/revie...

 

Please note that such an appeal must be received within 20 working days of
the date of this correspondence. Any such request received after this time
will only be considered at the discretion of the FOI Unit.

 

If you require any further information, then please do not hesitate to
contact me.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

 

Michelle Richardson

Freedom Of Information Unit

Corporate Communications

To report crime and anti-social behaviour which does not require an
emergency response, please call 101. In an emergency, dial 999

 

Ext: 801 2068

 

 

Website:    [4]http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/ 

WMNow:      [5]www.wmnow.co.uk/

Twitter:       [6]www.twitter.com/wmpolice 

Facebook:  [7]www.facebook.com/westmidlandspolice

YouTube:    [8]www.youtube.com/westmidlandspolice

Flickr:         [9]www.flickr.com/westmidlandspolice 

 

- [10]View all our social network links

 

 Our vision: Preventing crime, protecting the public and helping those in
need.

 

 

This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged
or confidential information. If received in error, please notify the
originator immediately. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or
alteration of this email is strictly forbidden. Views or opinions
expressed in this email do not necessarily represent those of West
Midlands Police. All West Midlands Police email activity is monitored for
virus, racist, obscene, or otherwise inappropriate activity. No
responsibility is accepted by West Midlands Police for any loss or damage
arising in any way from the receipt or use of this email.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-438...
2. http://foi.west-midlands.police.uk/
3. http://foi.west-midlands.police.uk/revie...
4. http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/
5. https://www.wmnow.co.uk/
6. http://www.twitter.com/wmpolice
7. http://www.facebook.com/westmidlandspolice
8. http://www.youtube.com/westmidlandspolice
9. http://www.flickr.com/westmidlandspolice
10. http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/conta...

Dear West Midlands Police,

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

I am writing to request an internal review of West Midlands Police's handling of my FOI request 'Misconduct Hearing ACC Marcus Beale'.
I wish for an independent person to assess if the standard Police FOI response is acceptable as,IMHO it demonstrates an attitude contrary to the stated policies of transparency and, as I was employed as a hardworking genuine professional person(pharmacist) I am well used to supplying top quality,detailed responses to any questions and can instintively recognise responses which are deceptive and unacceptable.
Questions are generally posed in good faith by people who do not know the circumstances prevailing, and the enquiring public expect the corresponding replies,from the well paid dedicated staff, to be helpful and not resort to fake restrictive dumbness to avoid providing help.I have great interest in learning how the fake justice system operates since the CPS chased me like a dog on heat when they chose(in the public interest) to pursue my Court conviction for speeding at 35mph on an empty main road, and yet evidence shows `the system`allows errant police staff to escape quietly without ever reaching court or,as in the case of the convicted ACC Marcus Beale, have his dismissal suspiciously delayed so that he can achieve maximum pension with no consideration of the taxpayers who fund the charade.This is not just a gripe, it is an evidence based discovery.
APPEAL REFERENCE MY FOI Q1(summarised).
FOI Q1.".Please confirm the name of the appointed LQC who advised that the hearing would be on Thursday 29th March 2018 at 9.30am, and please confirm when that notification was displayed on the website and when,and why,it was removed from the police website on the same day.Please confirm if the LQC was appointed by the Chief Constable or Mr Jamieson",FOI RESPONSE,the LQC had no role.
I wish to appeal that the response is substandard, as it has been completely blanked on the basis that the LQC did not arrange the hearing, and did not helpfully identify that CC Thompson was actually responsible for the hearing date and proceed with the response on that basis.It was mentioned in the media on March 20th that Mr Beale was employing Judicial Review of his conviction(JR) yet CC Thompson still announced the final hearing on 28th March,which did not go ahead on the 29th due to the allegedly incomplete JR.
Please clarify the confusion,CC Thompson knew the JR was in place yet still arranged for the final hearing for the 29th and advertised it on the police website for a few hours on the day before.I wish to know how long the alleged final meeting for the 29th was advertised on the police website, and when and why the announcement was taken down, presumably after a very late realisation that the JR was still incomplete.Please confirm when,and how, WM Police became aware that the JR was completed, so that CC Thompson could arrange a proper date for the hearing, and which Judge(s) completed the JR.

APPEAL REFERENCE MY FOI Q3(summarised).
FOI Q3. The BBC state"The senior officer, who has a 30-year police career, has been suspended on full pay since November".Please confirm how much Mr Beale has been paid during his suspension after his conviction up till 29 March 2018, and if his perks, including his police car, were also suspended during this period. FOI RESPONSE.http://foi.west-midlands.police.uk/acc-b...
Mr Beale had use of his police vehicle during suspension.
Clarification required, the pay link provided indicates that the pay for an ACC should be £111,249(maximum)
but the BBC link provided quotes"He was suspended from the force in November on full pay, on an annual salary of £119,000" http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-438...
Please explain which figure is correct, and please explain the discrepancy.

APPEAL REFERENCE MY FOI Q4(summarised).
FOI Q4. When the final hearing is finally heard, please confirm,apart from the LQC, who will be present to witness the proceedings, will it include the Chief Constable and the PCC, will there be an independent witness of any kind.FOI RESPONSE No LQC required in accordance with Police
(Conduct) Regulations 2015.
Please note,I did not ask for the theoretical arrangements for the hearing, I requested the reality.Please confirm the names of the 2 people who sat on the panel with the Chief Constable,please confirm the names of the legal people who represented Mr Beale and the CC respectively, and please confirm the number of places assigned to the public and the media.Also please identify if anyone from the PCC`s Office was present, as specified in the request.Anyone holding the high responsibility of sitting on a panel should be held accountable for their performance.

APPEAL REFERENCE MY FOI Q5(summarised).
Additionally, I believe the Chief Constable was absent from his post whilst attending the Commonwealth Games in Australia, which may have led to the delay. Please confirm the dates during which Mr Thompson was allowed to attend these Games. FOI RESPONSE The Chief Constable went from 1 April to 9 April. Had the hearing being scheduled during this time, the Chief would have cancelled his visit to the Commonwealth Games .
I wish to appeal the deceptive nature of the response, contrary to transparency ethics,namely stating the CC would have cancelled his visit if the meeting had been scheduled at the same time without indicating the same person(CC Thompson) was in charge of both events.The public do not expect people in charge of information release to strive to provide a false impression by the deceptive use of words, we just expect unbiased honesty.
The BBC link provided quotes CC Thompson saying of Mr Beale"I am sure the public would recognise the great service and would wish no harm to him and his family and to this extent I have no regrets this case has finalised after he can retire securely".
The public are seriously concerned about the judgement of CC Thompson, failing to act promptly, thinking Mr Beale provided `great service`when,in fact,he was appointed from Staffordshire Police whilst under IPCC investigation for allegedly mishandling a witness and thereby causing innocent people to be jailed( with subsequent compensation due) and requested Confidential documents to be printed,took them away from a secure location without permission, then allowed them to disappear without trace and no evidence of any theft reality.None of this is even vaguely `great service`.
The CC Thompson disappearing from the U.K to spend thousands of taxpayer`s money on inappropriately visiting a totally non-comparable country to learn lessons about security, and arranging with the PCC Jamieson to increase the local Council Tax by the maximum amount.The public are getting tired of the quality of clowns within the Colmore Circus, we just want to see people who actually behave like professionals and treat us with respect rather than just sources of revenue and targets to intimidate..

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/m...

Yours faithfully,

dennis fallon

Freedom of Information,

Dear Mr Fallon

 

FOI Request Reference: 006667/18

 

I acknowledge receipt of your correspondence, received 13/05/2018,
requesting West Midlands Police to review its response to your request for
information concerning 004513/18

 

The review will be conducted by a person independent of the original
decision in accordance with the West Midlands Police review procedure.
Every effort will be made to have a response to you within 20 working
days. However, if it becomes clear that the review will not be completed
by this date you will be advised.

 

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

 

Susan Brown

Freedom of Information Unit

Tel: 101

ext: 801 2068

[mobile number]

 

 

email. [1][email address]

Working hours 7:30am to 3:30pm Monday to Thursday

 

To report crime and anti-social behaviour which does not require an
emergency response please call 101. In an emergency call 999.

 

Website: [2]www.west-midlands.police.uk

WMNow: [3]www.wmnow.co.uk/
Twitter: [4]www.twitter.com/wmpolice
Facebook: [5]www.facebook.com/westmidlandspolice
YouTube: [6]www.youtube.com/westmidlandspolice

Flickr: [7]www.flickr.com/westmidlandspolice

 

[8]View all our social network links

 

Our vision: : Preventing crime, protecting the public and helping those in
need.

 

 

This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged
or confidential information. If received in error, please notify the
originator immediately. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or
alteration of this email is strictly forbidden. Views or opinions
expressed in this email do not necessarily represent those of West
Midlands Police. All West Midlands Police email activity is monitored for
virus, racist, obscene, or otherwise inappropriate activity. No
responsibility is accepted by West Midlands Police for any loss or damage
arising in any way from the receipt or use of this email.

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. https://exchange.wmpad.local/owa/redir.a...
3. https://www.wmnow.co.uk/
4. https://exchange.wmpad.local/owa/redir.a...
5. https://exchange.wmpad.local/owa/redir.a...
6. https://exchange.wmpad.local/owa/redir.a...
7. https://exchange.wmpad.local/owa/redir.a...
8. https://exchange.wmpad.local/owa/redir.a...

Freedom of Information,

Dear Mr Fallon

FOI Internal Review Reference: 006667/18

Thank you for your correspondence, received 13/05/2018 where you requested West Midlands Police to review its response to your request for information

ORIGINAL AGGREGATED REQUEST

FOI Q1. No final hearing can occur until a Legally Qualified Chair (LQC) has been selected from the Home Office approved list, and the LQC is responsible for determining the time and venue for the hearing. Please confirm the name of the appointed LQC who advised that the hearing would be on Thursday 29th March 2018 at 9.30am, and please confirm when that notification was displayed on the website and when, and why, it was removed from the police website on the same day. Please confirm if the LQC was appointed by the Chief Constable or Mr Jamieson.

FOI Q2. The Home Office approved list of LQCs is supposed to be held within each police area. Please confirm if the list is held by the Chief Constable or Mr Jamieson the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC), and please provide a copy of the list if it is under police control.

FOI Q3. The BBC state "The senior officer, who has a 30-year police career, has been suspended on full pay since November". Please confirm how much Mr Beale has been paid during his suspension after his conviction up till 29 March 2018, and if his perks, including his police car, were also suspended during this period.

FOI Q4. When the final hearing is finally heard, please confirm, apart from the LQC, who will be present to witness the proceedings, will it include the Chief Constable and the PCC, will there be an independent witness of any kind.

FOI Q5.The Legally Qualified Chair (LQC),Corinna Ferguson, after considering all the evidence, recommended on 13th February 2018 that there should be dismissal without notice, but the Chief Constable Dave Thompson has FAILED in his duty to act promptly on this advice, which will now result in Mr Beale escaping from proper penalty by way of the usual excuse of retirement, which so irritates the taxpaying public. Please confirm if the LQC will chair this final meeting, did the LQC set the time and date, or will the Chief Constable chair the meeting. Additionally, I believe the Chief Constable was absent from his post whilst attending the Commonwealth Games in Australia, which may have led to the delay. Please confirm the dates during which Mr Thompson was allowed to attend these Games.

INTERNAL REVIEW

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

I am writing to request an internal review of West Midlands Police's handling of my FOI request 'Misconduct Hearing ACC Marcus Beale'.

I wish for an independent person to assess if the standard Police FOI response is acceptable as, IMHO it demonstrates an attitude contrary to the stated policies of transparency.

Questions are generally posed in good faith by people who do not know the circumstances prevailing, and the enquiring public expect the corresponding replies, from the well paid dedicated staff, to be helpful and not resort to fake restrictive dumbness to avoid providing help. I have great interest in learning how the fake justice system operates and yet evidence shows `the system` allows errant police staff to escape quietly without ever reaching court or, as in the case of the convicted ACC Marcus Beale, have his dismissal suspiciously delayed so that he can achieve maximum pension with no consideration of the taxpayers who fund the charade. This is not just a gripe, it is an evidence based discovery.

APPEAL REFERENCE MY FOI Q1 (summarised).
FOI Q1.".Please confirm the name of the appointed LQC who advised that the hearing would be on Thursday 29th March 2018 at 9.30am, and please confirm when that notification was displayed on the website and when, and why ,it was removed from the police website on the same day. Please confirm if the LQC was appointed by the Chief Constable or Mr Jamieson ",FOI RESPONSE, the LQC had no role.

I wish to appeal that the response is substandard, as it has been completely blanked on the basis that the LQC did not arrange the hearing, and did not helpfully identify that CC Thompson was actually responsible for the hearing date and proceed with the response on that basis. It was mentioned in the media on March 20th that Mr Beale was employing Judicial Review of his conviction (JR) yet CC Thompson still announced the final hearing on 28th March, which did not go ahead on the 29th due to the allegedly incomplete JR.

Please clarify the confusion, CC Thompson knew the JR was in place yet still arranged for the final hearing for the 29th and advertised it on the police website for a few hours on the day before. I wish to know how long the alleged final meeting for the 29th was advertised on the police website, and when and why the announcement was taken down, presumably after a very late realisation that the JR was still incomplete. Confirm when, and how, WM Police became aware that the JR was completed, so that CC Thompson could arrange a proper date for the hearing, and which Judge(s) completed the JR.

APPEAL REFERENCE MY FOI Q3(summarised).
FOI Q3. The BBC state "The senior officer, who has a 30-year police career, has been suspended on full pay since November". Please confirm how much Mr Beale has been paid during his suspension after his conviction up till 29 March 2018, and if his perks, including his police car, were also suspended during this period. FOI RESPONSE .http://foi.west-midlands.police.uk/acc-b...
Mr Beale had use of his police vehicle during suspension.
Clarification required, the pay link provided indicates that the pay for an ACC should be £111,249(maximum) but the BBC link provided quotes "He was suspended from the force in November on full pay, on an annual salary of £119,000" http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-438...
Please explain which figure is correct, and please explain the discrepancy.

APPEAL REFERENCE MY FOI Q4 (summarised).
FOI Q4. When the final hearing is finally heard, please confirm, apart from the LQC, who will be present to witness the proceedings, will it include the Chief Constable and the PCC, will there be an independent witness of any kind. FOI RESPONSE No LQC required in accordance with Police
(Conduct) Regulations 2015.
Please note, I did not ask for the theoretical arrangements for the hearing, I requested the reality. Please confirm the names of the 2 people who sat on the panel with the Chief Constable, please confirm the names of the legal people who represented Mr Beale and the CC respectively, and please confirm the number of places assigned to the public and the media. Also please identify if anyone from the PCC`s Office was present, as specified in the request. Anyone holding the high responsibility of sitting on a panel should be held accountable for their performance.

APPEAL REFERENCE MY FOI Q5 (summarised).
Additionally, I believe the Chief Constable was absent from his post whilst attending the Commonwealth Games in Australia, which may have led to the delay. Please confirm the dates during which Mr Thompson was allowed to attend these Games. FOI RESPONSE The Chief Constable went from 1 April to 9 April. Had the hearing being scheduled during this time, the Chief would have cancelled his visit to the Commonwealth Games.
I wish to appeal the deceptive nature of the response, contrary to transparency ethics, namely stating the CC would have cancelled his visit if the meeting had been scheduled at the same time without indicating the same person (CC Thompson) was in charge of both events. The public do not expect people in charge of information release to strive to provide a false impression by the deceptive use of words, we just expect unbiased honesty.
The BBC link provided quotes CC Thompson saying of Mr Beale "I am sure the public would recognise the great service and would wish no harm to him and his family and to this extent I have no regrets this case has finalised after he can retire securely".
The public are seriously concerned about the judgement of CC Thompson, failing to act promptly, thinking Mr Beale provided `great service `when, in fact, he was appointed from Staffordshire Police whilst under IPCC investigation for allegedly mishandling a witness and thereby causing innocent people to be jailed( with subsequent compensation due) and requested Confidential documents to be printed, took them away from a secure location without permission, then allowed them to disappear without trace and no evidence of any theft reality. None of this is even vaguely `great service`.
The CC Thompson disappearing from the U.K to spend thousands of taxpayer`s money on inappropriately visiting a totally non-comparable country to learn lessons about security, and arranging with the PCC Jamieson to increase the local Council Tax by the maximum amount. The public are getting tired of the quality of clowns within the Colmore Circus, we just want to see people who actually behave like professionals and treat us with respect rather than just sources of revenue and targets to intimidate.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/m...

RESPONSE

I have reviewed the original decision and can confirm that the response previously provided is appropriate and relevant. Please also see our response to your additional questions below.

I note your comments. We provided the relevant response to the question as you asked it, and provided you with the relevant information that enabled you to understand the process better, and to subsequently ask further questions. There is a duty to assist within the Freedom of Information Act, but it does not extend to second-guessing what information you would have required had you had a better understanding of the process.

An Internal Review is the opportunity for the requester to ask the public authority to review its original response. It does not provide the opportunity for the requester to ask further questions.

However, like the ICO, we recognise that there are some circumstances where a response will cause the requester to have more questions that they wish to ask. I recognise that this is one of those circumstances. I have therefore considered the new questions within the terms of the Internal Review.

However you should note that this confused method of asking requests places an unnecessary burden on West Midlands Police. I note your eagerness to ask for an Internal Review, rather than to ask new questions. I also note the derogatory nature of your correspondence.

Therefore, if you wish to make any future requests, please restrict your correspondence to a description of the information required. Please also be clearer with respect to the description of this information.

I recommend that you read the ICO Guidance on making FOI requests:

https://ico.org.uk/for-the-public/offici...

While we would prefer to provide responses to requests for recorded information, we will seriously consider the application of Section 14 of the Act where the Act is being used inappropriately to create a burden or to target West Midlands Police staff.

ADDITONAL QUESTIONS

Please clarify the confusion, CC Thompson knew the JR was in place yet still arranged for the final hearing for the 29th and advertised it on the police website for a few hours on the day before.

Q1 I wish to know how long the alleged final meeting for the 29th was advertised on the police website, and when and why the announcement was taken down, presumably after a very late realisation that the JR was still incomplete.

The Freedom of Information Act applies to recorded information held by West Midlands Police. We have searched our systems and there is no recorded information held. From memory we can say that the Head of Corporate Communications was contacted by Professional Standards Department as per normal routine and asked to put the date of the hearing on the website five days before, which is the legal requirement. This was done.

To clarify the position in relation to the Judicial Review (JR) applications, Mr Beale’s legal team made their first application for a JR on the 15th March 2018 and this was heard by the Honourable Mrs Justice Lambert. The decision of Mrs Justice Lambert was that the Special Case Hearing could not go ahead until the application for the JR had been determined. A further hearing took place on 26 March at which the presiding Judge discharged the Order of Mrs Justice Lambert, allowing the Special Case Hearing to proceed. On the 27 March, the Force notified Mr Beale’s legal team that the Special Case Hearing would be taking place on 29 March 2018. A public notice was also put on the Force Website. Shortly after updating Mr Beale’s legal team (within 35 minutes) the Force received notification that Mr Beale’s legal team had made a further application for an oral hearing (an oral renewal application). At this time, the Court indicated that they could not list the matter until the application had been filed at the Court office. The Force was notified that the JR (oral renewal application) was to be heard on 28 March 2018 but the email confirming this start time was not received until 16:38 on the 27 March 2018.
The oral renewal application (for a JR) was heard the day before the original Special Case hearing date. As the JR hearing didn’t finish until 5pm on the 28th and there was not the necessary time for the papers to be shared and read and thus the Special Case hearing was postponed.

Q2 Please confirm when, and how, WM Police became aware that the JR was completed, so that CC Thompson could arrange a proper date for the hearing, and which Judge(s) completed the JR.

There was more than one JR application. The final hearing was not concluded until 5pm on the 28 March 2018 (before Mr Justice Jay). WMP were informed at 1810hrs that day.

Q3 Clarification required, the pay link provided indicates that the pay for an ACC should be £111,249(maximum) but the BBC link provided quotes "He was suspended from the force in November on full pay, on an annual salary of £119,000" http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-438...
Please explain which figure is correct, and please explain the discrepancy.

We are unable to comment on the BBC figure as there is no recorded information held. The top of the ACC Rank is £111,249.00 per annum basic pay

Q4.Please confirm the names of the 2 people who sat on the panel with the Chief Constable, please confirm the names of the legal people who represented Mr Beale and the CC respectively, and please confirm the number of places assigned to the public and the media. Also please identify if anyone from the PCC`s Office was present, as specified in the request. Anyone holding the high responsibility of sitting on a panel should be held accountable for their performance.

The CC did not sit on a panel he sat alone in the second Special Case Hearing. In terms of places 12 spaces were available for press and public in each hearing. 6 for each press and public. No member of the public attended either hearing. Therefore press was increased to 7 because of their demand on the day, the remaining chairs for the public remained empty. No one from the PCCs office was present at either hearing. John Beggs QC represented Mr Beale, Fiona Barton QC represented the Appropriate Authority.

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF

If you require any further information, then please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours sincerely,

Carl Bird
Freedom of Information Unit
Corporate Communications
To report crime and anti-social behaviour which does not require an emergency response, please call 101. In an emergency, dial 999.

Ext: 801 2068
[email address]

Website: www.west-midlands.police.uk
WMNow: www.wmnow.co.uk/
Twitter: www.twitter.com/wmpolice
Facebook: www.facebook.com/westmidlandspolice
YouTube: www.youtube.com/westmidlandspolice
Flickr: www.flickr.com/westmidlandspolice

View all our social network links

Our vision: Preventing crime, protecting the public and helping those in need

show quoted sections

Dear Freedom of Information,
Please consider this particular request as closed,as I have marked it as `partially successful`.
For the record,however i am unhappy with the attitude of the public facing persona called Carl Bird , QUOTE "However you should note that this confused method of asking requests places an unnecessary burden on West Midlands Police. I note your eagerness to ask for an Internal Review, rather than to ask new questions. I also note the derogatory nature of your correspondence".
I would like to clarify the CONFUSION that Mr Bird seems to be experiencing, I assumed he would have completed training for dealing with the public, who pay his wages,rather than showing a lack of empathy with the varying nature of enquirees, from basic simply enquiries to intelligent indepth questions to clarify unclear issues that may require detailed responses and some research.I do not like threats and I do not like Mr Bird apparently contacting the whatdotheyknow webteam requesting that they reprimand me which, like the honourable people that they are, they have done, and I respect them.

Indirectly Mr Bird is a public servant but he is displaying an attitude that is not public orientated,providing the very minimal of information,sometimes without substantiation,and when a question seeks information, only ignorance in good faith, choosing to deliberately not incorporate closely relevant information which demonstrates a degree of unhelpfulness, which he defends by saying that the `Act`doesn`t `require`him to be exceptionally helpful.
I advise you that my attitude of `disrespect`is founded on discoveries such as these,because when I was a GENUINE professional, as opposed to a wannabe unqualified`professional, I used to go out of my way to provide the maximum amount of information in the shortest time possible,which is totally the opposite of the minimalistic impatient behaviour of the FOI department.
To me,and perhaps the public in general,it is self evident but I accept there is a possibility you are unaware of the antisocial aspects of your operations .
Reference Mr Bird`s quote phrase`unnecessary burden`,I would like to point out, in this situation, the GENUINE `unnecessary burden`is the thousands of pounds being given to Mr Beale which should NOT have been given to him if the Chief Constable had acted promptly after being told he had been prosecuted,found guilty of gross incompetence and,after detailed investigation by a Legally Qualified person, recommended for dismissal.The Chief Constable should NOT have been allowed to be in charge of the dismissal because he was NOT an unbiased person, with Mr Beale being a close colleague on the same `executive team`,and was preoccupied with the nonessential attending of the Commonwealth Games in Australia.The Chief Constable Dave Thompson is not really interested in protecting the West Midlands taxpayer because his roots are in Manchester and because,within two years,he will probably be replaced.
Reference Mr Bird`s quote`I note your eagerness to ask for an Internal Review, rather than to ask new questions.`
I should point out that that is my style, to keep closely related information within a single compact request, without independent viewers having to wander off elsewhere to follow the thread.
I appreciate Mr Bird likes a simple straightforward life and,in this regards,I shall post a separate followup FOI to fill in a few discrepancies.

Personally,I do not consider my communications to be derogatory, this is simply a subjective term,I consider them to be disrespectful because respect is something that is earned and is not a right.PRIOR to my Courtroom Conviction,and heavy fine and points,for simply trying to drive home from work in the safest and most considerate way possible,I had plenty of hearsay respect for the police BUT now I know that PARTS of the police behave ,errrm,dubiously regarding integrity then the assumed respect has,quite rightly,been reassessed.The Court Conviction has given me a permanent questioning of `authority`and the financial motives behind the `justice`system.Prior to my conviction I instinctively believed people of integrity ran the system.
The Police have NO RIGHT to assume automatic respect.I know the MAJORITY of police are just doing their best and following orders so,to a great degree,I respect that they think they are always doing a good job in the public interest though sometimes forced to protect the `police family`as part of their training. approach`should not be confused with a `disrespectful approach`and should NOT be confusing `vexatious questions` with `justified persistance`.
Carl Bird,unlike myself, is PAID regarding his job of FREEDOM of Information, and he should show respect to those providing him with work and paying his wages.

I have taken criticisms on board,there will be simpler FOI`s in future,I have paid all my fines and Court Costs so I have paid into the system,pay the local Council Tax always and accordingly expect something useful in return for my disimbursements.

This particular FOI is now considered closed.

Yours sincerely,

dennis fallon

Freedom of Information,

Please accept this as an acknowledgement of receipt of your e-mail by the
Freedom of Information Unit.
 
If your email is a valid request for information under the Freedom of
Information Act, your request will be dealt with within the legislative
deadline of 20 working days.  Should we be unable to meet this deadline
for any reason you will be notified as soon as possible.
 
Please note that if your email is a request is for your own personal data
you should make a subject access request to the Data Protection Unit.  You
can do this by completing a WA162 form, which is available on the West
Midlands Police website.  Search the West Midlands Police website for
'Subject Access' or go directly to this page:
 
[1]https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/abou...
 
If you require further information please contact 101 and ask for the
Freedom of Information Unit.
 
You might find what you are looking for on our website:
[2]http://foi.west-midlands.police.uk/
 
If you have information about any crime, you can contact us on the
non-emergency number: 101.
 
In an emergency, for example where life is in danger or a crime in
progress, call 999.

This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged
or confidential information. If received in error, please notify the
originator immediately. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or
alteration of this email is strictly forbidden. Views or opinions
expressed in this email do not necessarily represent those of West
Midlands Police. All West Midlands Police email activity is monitored for
virus, racist, obscene, or otherwise inappropriate activity. No
responsibility is accepted by West Midlands Police for any loss or damage
arising in any way from the receipt or use of this email.

References

Visible links
1. https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/abou...
2. http://foi.west-midlands.police.uk/