Origin of the other 5110 images used to identify criminal behaviour at the riots

The request was partially successful.

Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

In the FoI response at http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/or... DCI Neville explained that the number of images used to identify criminal behaviour at the riots was 5110, as at 14th January 2012, for "images from other means" than received amateur images.

Please provide a) an explanation of what are all these other means and how they are classified, and b) a table detailing the number of such images for each other mean as per the classification used in this context.

Yours faithfully,

David Mery

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Mr Mery

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2012010002927
I write in connection with your request for information  which was
received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 21/01/2012.  I note
you seek access to the following information:

       "Dear Metropolitan Police Service ( MPS),

      In the FOI response at

 http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/or...
    DCI Neville explained that the number of images used to identify
 criminal behaviour at the riots was 5110, as at 14th January 2012,  for
"images from other means" than received amateur images.  

 Please provide a) an explanation of what are all these other means and
how they are classified, and  b) a table detailing the number of such
images for each other mean as per the classification used in this context.
"

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

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

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Your attention is drawn to the attached sheet, which details your right of
complaint.

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please write
or contact FOIA Team on telephone number 02071613640 quoting the reference
number above.

Yours sincerely

Peter Deja
Policy and Support Officer
COMPLAINT RIGHTS

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

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

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

Ask to have the decision looked at again –

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

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

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing, within forty (40) working days from
the date of the refusal notice, and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF
[email address]

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 20 working days.
The Information Commissioner

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

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

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone:  01625 545 700

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your
communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are
here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

 

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless
absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to
copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of
the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please
notify the sender and delete it from your system.  To avoid incurring
legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this
email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are
monitored to the extent permitted by law.  Consequently, any email and/or
attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are
authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by
email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements
reached with other employees or agents.  The security of this email and
any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned
but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur
during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in
this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Mr Mery

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2012010002927

I write in connection with your following request for information which
was received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 21/01/2012:

"http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/or...
DCI Neville explained that the number of images used to identify criminal
behaviour at the riots was 5110, as at 14th January 2012, for "images from
other means" than received amateur images.

Please provide a) an explanation of what are all these other means and how
they are classified, and b) a table detailing the number of such images
for each other mean as per the classification used in this context."

This letter is to inform you that it will not be possible to respond to
your request within the cost threshold.  

We estimate that the cost of complying with this request would exceed the
appropriate limit. The appropriate limit has been specified in regulations
and for agencies outside central Government; this is set at £450.00. This
represents the estimated cost of one person spending 18 hours [at a rate
of £25 per hour] in determining whether the MPS holds the information, and
locating, retrieving and extracting the information.

Please note that the Information Commissioner's guidance states that
'Section 12 makes it clear that a public authority does not have to make a
precise calculation of the costs of complying with a request. Only an
estimate is required ... what amounts to a reasonable estimate can only be
considered on a case by case basis.' The Information Commissioner also
advises 'where a reasonable estimate has been made that the appropriate
limit would be exceeded, there is no requirement for a public authority to
undertake work up to the limit.'

In accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000, this letter
therefore acts as a Refusal Notice. Please see the legal annex at the end
of the response for all the relevant extracts of the legislation which
apply.

In order to ascertain whether the information you have requested could be
located, retrieved and extracted within the 18 hours stipulated by the
Fees Regulations, searches were originally conducted within the
Territorial Policing Headquarters - Met Circulation Unit who are
responsible for the collection and circulation of images of offenders.

In order to obtain a breakdown of the source of the 5110 images obtained
by 'other means' apart from amateur images, a trained analyst would need
to find and locate what is known as a 7a submission form, which would then
need to be opened and the source of the image checked. If no source was
recorded, the Crime Reporting Information System (CRIS) report would then
need to be checked. However, if no CRIS number was located on the form
then a request would need to be sent to the Visual Identification
Investigations and Detections Office (VIIDO) who are responsible for the
reviewing and circulation of CCTV footage and images. If the source of the
image was not listed on the documents held by VIIDO then the footage would
subsequently need to be reviewed and the provider determined. If this
information only took 30 minutes per record to collate, an extremely
conservative estimate, coupled with the 5110 records that would need to be
searched, it would take well in excess of the 18 hours stipulated by the
FOI Act to locate, retrieve and extract even a fraction of all of the
requested information.

Section 16

Under Section 16 we are required to provide you with advice and assistance
to assist you with submitting a new request for recorded information which
can be located, retrieved and extracted within the 18 hours specified by
the Act.  

I can confirm that it may be possible to provide the source of those
images where this information has been recorded, however, this will not
include all images obtained during the riots and will therefore not
provide an all-encompassing picture of the source of images obtained via
other means apart from amateur images.

If you would be interested in redefining your request in this, or any
other way, please let me know. If you wish to submit a new, narrower
request, please let me know and this can be logged and considered under
the Act. If you have any difficulty in doing so, please do not hesitate to
contact me for further assistance.

Alternatively, should you wish to meet in person to discuss your area of
research in order to establish if further assistance can be given, this
can be arranged.

Please however note a public authority's right to aggregate requests of a
similar nature from an applicant. Section 12(4) of the Act explains that
requests from the same person asking for the same or substantially similar
information can be aggregated for cost purposes.

Therefore, if you were to submit a separate request asking for this
information, we would be within our rights to aggregate these requests.
This is set out in Section 5 of The Freedom of Information and Data
Protection (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004. You would need
to leave a 'reasonable' period between submitting such requests, which is
'60 consecutive working days'.

Legal Annex

Section 17(5) of the Act provides:

(5) A public authority which, in relation to any request for information,
is relying on a claim that section 12 or 14 applies must, within the time
for complying with section 1(1), give the applicant a notice stating that
fact.

Section 12(2) of the Act provides:

(2)Subsection (1) does not exempt the public authority from its obligation
to comply with paragraph (a) of section 1(1) unless the estimated cost of
complying with that paragraph alone would exceed the appropriate limit.

Section 12(4) of the Act provides:

(4) The Secretary of State may by regulations provide that, in such
circumstances as may be prescribed, where two or more requests for
information are made to a public authority-
(a) by one person, or
(b) by different persons who appear to the public authority to be acting
in concert or in pursuance of a campaign,
the estimated cost of complying with any of the requests is to be taken to
be the estimated total cost of complying with all of them.

Section 5 of The Freedom of Information and Data Protection (Appropriate
Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004

5.  - (1) In circumstances in which this regulation applies, where two or
more requests for information to which section 1(1) of the 2000 Act would,
apart from the appropriate limit, to any extent apply, are made to a
public authority -
(a) by one person, or
(b) by different persons who appear to the public authority to be acting
in concert or in pursuance of a campaign,
the estimated cost of complying with any of the requests is to be taken to
be the total costs which may be taken into account by the authority, under
regulation 4, of complying with all of them.

(2) This regulation applies in circumstances in which-
(a) the two or more requests referred to in paragraph (1) relate, to any
extent, to the same or similar information, and
(b) those requests are received by the public authority within any period
of sixty consecutive working days.

(3) In this regulation, "working day" means any day other than a Saturday,
a Sunday, Christmas Day, Good Friday or a day which is a bank holiday
under the Banking and Financial Dealings Act 1971[4] in any part of the
United Kingdom.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

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

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please write
or contact Deborah Solomon on telephone number 0207 161 4291 quoting the
reference number above.

Yours sincerely

DCI Neville
Met Circulation Unit
Territorial Policing Headquarters
COMPLAINT RIGHTS

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

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

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

Ask to have the decision looked at again –

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

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

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing, within forty (40) working days from
the date of the refusal notice, and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF
[email address]

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 20 working days.
The Information Commissioner

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

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

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone:  01625 545 700

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your
communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are
here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

 

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless
absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to
copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of
the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please
notify the sender and delete it from your system.  To avoid incurring
legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this
email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are
monitored to the extent permitted by law.  Consequently, any email and/or
attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are
authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by
email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements
reached with other employees or agents.  The security of this email and
any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned
but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur
during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in
this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

Dear Mr Neville,

You offered the following section 16 advice:

'I can confirm that it may be possible to provide the source of those images where this information has been recorded, however, this will not include all images obtained during the riots and will therefore not provide an all-encompassing picture of the source of images obtained via other means apart from amateur images.

If you would be interested in redefining your request in this, or any other way, please let me know.'

This is to let you know that I am interested in redefining my request in this exact way.

In addition, it would be helpful if you can also still respond to point a) in a general way, i.e. on such public order events by what most common means are images from. This would provide some of the information requested without requiring to go through any of the picture.

Yours faithfully,

David Mery

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Mr. Mery

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2012020002280
I write in connection with your following request for information which
was received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 11/02/2012:

* You offered the following section 16 advice: 'I can confirm that it
may be possible to provide the source of those images where this
information has been recorded, however, this will not include all
images obtained during the riots and will therefore not provide an
all-encompassing picture of the source of images obtained via other
means apart from amateur images. If you would be interested in
redefining your request in this, or any other way, please let me
know.'
* This is to let you know that I am interested in redefining my request
in this exact way.
* In addition, it would be helpful if you can also still respond to
point a) in a general way, i.e. on such public order events by what
most common means are images from. This would provide some of the
information requested without requiring to go through any of the
picture.

Your request will now be considered in accordance with the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (the Act).  You will receive a response within
the statutory timescale of 20 working days as defined by the Act,
subject to the information not being exempt or containing a reference
to a third party.  

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Your attention is drawn to the attached sheet, which details your
right of complaint.

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please
write quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

S. Stroud
FOIA Quality and Assurance Advisor
COMPLAINT RIGHTS

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

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

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

Ask to have the decision looked at again –

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is
to telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your
decision letter.

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

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision
of the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act)
regarding access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS
to have the decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing, within forty (40) working days
from the date of the refusal notice, and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF
[email address]

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 20 working days.
The Information Commissioner

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

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

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone:  01625 545 700

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your
communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are
here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

 

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless
absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to
copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of
the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please
notify the sender and delete it from your system.  To avoid incurring
legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this
email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are
monitored to the extent permitted by law.  Consequently, any email and/or
attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are
authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by
email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements
reached with other employees or agents.  The security of this email and
any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned
but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur
during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in
this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Mery

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2012020002280

I write in connection with your request for information which was received
by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 11/02/2012.  I note you seek
access to the following information:

"You offered the following section 16 advice: 'I can confirm that it may
be possible to provide the source of those images where this information
has been recorded, however, this will not include all images obtained
during the riots and will therefore not provide an all-encompassing
picture of the source of images obtained via other means apart from
amateur images. If you would be interested in redefining your request in
this, or any other way, please let me know. ' This is to let you know that
I am interested in redefining my request in this exact way. In addition,
it would be helpful if you can also still respond to point a) in a general
way, i.e. on such public order events by what most common means are images
from. This would provide some of the information requested without
requiring to go through any of the picture."

EXTENT OF SEARCHES TO LOCATE INFORMATION

To locate the information relevant to your request searches were conducted
at the Territorial Policing Headquarters - Met Circulation Unit and the
Visual Identification Investigations and Detections Office (VIIDO) who are
responsible for the reviewing and circulation of CCTV footage and images.

RESULT OF SEARCHES

The searches located records relevant to your request.

DECISION

I have today decided to disclose the located information to you in full.

Please find attached information pursuant to your request above.

In response to point a), I can confirm that the vast majority of images
are from CCTV systems. These images are gathered from local authority CCTV
Control Rooms, offices, businesses, shops, transport (trains / buses) and
any other premises with CCTV cameras, if the footage is found to be
relevant to the enquiry. I hope that this is the information that you
require.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

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

Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please write
or contact Deborah Solomon on telephone number 0207 161 4291 quoting the
reference number above.

Yours sincerely

DCI Neville
Met Circulation Unit
Territorial Policing Headquarters

In complying with their statutory duty under sections 1 and 11 of the
Freedom of Information Act 2000 to release the enclosed information, the
Metropolitan Police Service will not breach the Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act 1988. However, the rights of the copyright owner of the
enclosed information will continue to be protected by law.  Applications
for the copyright owner's written permission to reproduce any part of the
attached information should be addressed to MPS Directorate of Legal
Services, 1st Floor (Victoria Block), New Scotland Yard, Victoria, London,
SW1H 0BG.
COMPLAINT RIGHTS

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

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

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

Ask to have the decision looked at again –

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

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

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing, within forty (40) working days from
the date of the refusal notice, and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF
[email address]

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 20 working days.
The Information Commissioner

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

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

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone:  01625 545 700

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your
communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are
here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

 

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless
absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to
copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of
the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please
notify the sender and delete it from your system.  To avoid incurring
legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this
email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are
monitored to the extent permitted by law.  Consequently, any email and/or
attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are
authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by
email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements
reached with other employees or agents.  The security of this email and
any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned
but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur
during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in
this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

Dear Metropolitan Police Service (MPS),

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

I am writing to request an internal review of Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)'s handling of my FOI request 'Origin of the other 5110 images used to identify criminal behaviour at the riots'.

1) The attachment provided by DCI Neville in his latest response dated 2012-02-23, includes mentions of 'Private Photographer 17', 'Camera 3', 'Photo 2', 'Personal 1', 'Twitter 1', 'Internet 1'.

These mentions describe amateur images, however in DCI Neville's response dated 2012-01-18 to the earlier related request, he wrote 'The number of amateur images received (ie from camera phones) received from the public to help identify criminal behaviour at the recent riots is 1.'

This list, as per the S16 advice quoted in the 2012-02-23 response, is supposed to be for the 'source of those images where this information has been recorded, [...] obtained via other means apart from amateur images.'

Please explain these inconsistencies.

2) The attachment provided by DCI Neville in his latest response dated 2012-02-23, includes the mention of 'Mobile Phone 1'.

DCI Neville explained 'The number of amateur images received (ie from camera phones) received from the public to help identify criminal behaviour at the recent riots is 1. The number of images from other means used to identify criminal behaviour at the riots is 5110.'

As per point 1) this list is about the 5110 other images, is that another mobile phone photograph? The same one counted again? Please explain these inconsistencies.

3) Some of the sources mentioned in the attachment provided by DCI Neville in his latest response dated 2012-02-23 do not appear to be sources. For instance 'Burglary 1', 'Violent Disorder 1' and 'Photo 2'

Please explain what these mean.

4) The only police-sourced image where the information is said to have been recorded is 'Police Vehicle 1'. Considering that one documented aim for Project Javelin was 'a database for images' it is surprising that the source of most of the images used to identify criminal behaviour at the riots has not been recorded (only 1972 or 1973 out 5111). Either only one police-sourced photograph was used or police-sourced photographs are not recorded in any database that could have been searched as part of responding to this request. In particular it is surprising not to find any photographs sourced to FIT or EGT.

Please explain this possible mistake.

Please provide any correction, resulting from the internal review, to the numbers of images per type of origin used to identify criminal behaviour at the riots already provided (including the numbers of images taken by FIT and by EGT if these are recorded).

A full history of my related FOI requests and all correspondence is available on the Internet at these addresses:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/or...
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/or...

Yours faithfully,

David Mery

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear  Mr Mery,

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2012030001512

I write in connection with your letter dated 11 March 2012 requesting that
the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) review its response to your request
for information relating to:

* Original FOI case numbers 2012010002927 and 2012020002280.

The review will be conducted in accordance with the MPS complaints
procedure. The MPS endeavour to respond to your complaint by 11 April
2012.

Should you have any further inquiries concerning this matter, please
contactme quoting the reference number above.

Thank you for your interest in the MPS.

Yours sincerely

Ms S. Strong
FOIA  Complaints Officer

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

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

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

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

Ask to have the decision looked at again –

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

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

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing, within forty (40) working days from
the date of the refusal notice, and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF
[email address]

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 20 working days.
The Information Commissioner

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

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

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone:  01625 545 700

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your
communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are
here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

 

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless
absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to
copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of
the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please
notify the sender and delete it from your system.  To avoid incurring
legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this
email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are
monitored to the extent permitted by law.  Consequently, any email and/or
attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are
authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by
email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements
reached with other employees or agents.  The security of this email and
any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned
but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur
during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in
this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

 

Find us at:

Facebook: Facebook.com/metpoliceuk

Twitter: @metpoliceuk

Dear Ms Strong,

Re Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2012030001512

You wrote that the MPS would endeavour to respond to my complaint by 11 April 2012, i.e. yesterday. Can you please inform me as to the status of your response and when you expect to complete it?

Yours faithfully,

David Mery

Dear Ms Strong,

Re Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2012030001512

You wrote that the MPS would endeavour to respond to my complaint by 2012-04-11. I sent you a reminder on 2012-04-12 that also remains unanswered to this day.

May I also remind you that although there is no statutory time set out in the Act within which public authorities must complete a review, the Commissioner has issued guidance on this matter (Good Practice Guidance 5). The Commissioner considers that a reasonable time for completing an internal review is 20 working days from the date of the request for review, and in no case should the total time taken exceed 40 working days.

Can you please send me your internal review or inform me as to the status of your response and when you expect to complete it?

Yours faithfully,

David Mery

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Dear Mr Mery

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2012030001512

I write in connection with your request for a review of the original MPS
decision relating to FoI case numbers 2012010002927 and 2012020002280.

I have unfortunately been unable to complete a full internal review within
our target response time of 20 working days.  The MPS endeavour to respond
to your complaint ASAP and in any case no later than 09/05/2012.

Should there be any unforeseen delay, I will contact you and update you as
soon as possible.

Please accept my apologies for the delay and thank you for your patience

Should you have any further queries concerning this matter, please contact
me via the address at the top of the letter quoting the reference number
above.

Thank you for your interest in the MPS.

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Your attention is drawn to the attached sheet, which details your right of
complaint.

Yours sincerely

Brian Wilson
FOIA Complaints Officer
COMPLAINT RIGHTS

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

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

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

Ask to have the decision looked at again –

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

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

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing, within forty (40) working days from
the date of the refusal notice, and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF
[email address]

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 20 working days.
The Information Commissioner

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

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

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone:  01625 545 700

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your
communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are
here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

 

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless
absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to
copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of
the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please
notify the sender and delete it from your system.  To avoid incurring
legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this
email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are
monitored to the extent permitted by law.  Consequently, any email and/or
attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are
authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by
email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements
reached with other employees or agents.  The security of this email and
any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned
but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur
during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in
this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

 

Find us at:

Facebook: Facebook.com/metpoliceuk
Twitter: @metpoliceuk

Dear Mr Wilson,

Re: Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2012030001512

I note that you've unfortunately missed your own latest deadline (and consequently are not respecting the ICO's Good Practice Guidance 5). With all the time you are dedicating to this review I look forward to receiving shortly a very exhaustive, substantive and detailed response.

Yours faithfully,

David Mery

David Mery left an annotation ()

I complained to the ICO on 2012-06-06 about the time it is taking for the MPS to carry out their internal review (requested on 2012-03-11). The ICO has replied yesterday that it recommended the MPS, on 2012-06-07, that they eventually respond within 20 working days.

Dear Mr Wilson,

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

May I remind you that my request for an internal review of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)'s handling of my FOI request 'Origin of the other 5110 images used to identify criminal behaviour at the riots' is still outstanding.

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

Yours faithfully,

David Mery

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)

Sent on behalf of Brian Wilson

Dear Mr. Mery,

Freedom of Information Internal Review Reference No: 2012030001512

I write in connection with your correspondence dated 11/03/2012 requesting
that the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) review its response dated
23/02/2012 in relation to Freedom of Information Request reference number
2012020002280.  Firstly, before I progress to the response I wish to offer
sincere apologies for the delay in getting this reply to you. The MPS
recognises that we have been far in excess of the guidance published by
the Information Commissioner in regard to managing Freedom of Information
Internal Reviews, and for that I apologise.

Your initial request was for the following information:  

You offered the following section 16 advice:

'I can confirm that it may be possible to provide the source of those
images where this information has been recorded, however, this will not
include all images obtained during the riots and will therefore not
provide an all-encompassing picture of the source of images obtained via
other means apart from amateur images.

If you would be interested in redefining your request in this, or any
other way, please let me know.'

This is to let you know that I am interested in redefining my request in
this exact way.

In addition, it would be helpful if you can also still respond to point a)
in a general way, i.e. on such public order events by what most common
means are images from. This would provide some of the information
requested without requiring to go through any of the picture.

DECISION

The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) has completed its review and has
decided to:

"        Uphold the original decision

REASON FOR DECISION        

Please see the legal annex for the sections of the Freedom of Information
Act 2000 and related documents that are referred to in this letter.

The Freedom of Information Act 2000 creates a statutory right of access to
information held by public authorities. A public authority in receipt of a
request must confirm whether they hold the requested information and if
so, communicate it to the applicant. Furthermore, the Freedom of
Information Act is designed to place information into the public domain.
Therefore, once access to information is granted to one person under the
Act, it is then considered to be public information and must be
communicated to any individual upon request.

The right of access to information is subject to a number of exemptions
that are designed to enable public authorities to withhold information
that is not suitable for release.

Your request dated 11/02/2012 was made with reference to advice and
assistance provided to you in relation to an earlier request which advised
that it may be possible to provide the source of images where this
information has been recorded and that this would not provide an all
encompassing picture of the sources of images.

This information has been provided to you in full and therefore I have
decided to uphold the original decision.

However, your correspondence dated 13/03/2012 contained a number of
queries in relation to the information provided.

The information provided within the MPS response dated 23/02/2012, MPS
ref: 2012020002280, includes the information provided to you in response
to your earlier request ref: 2011120003100).

Whereas your initial request (ref: 2011120003100) asked for 'The
approximate number of amateur images' and suggested 'camera phones' as an
example, it appears that your request was interpreted as relating to
'camera phones'.  Therefore, the reference to 'Mobile phone' in the list
provided relates to the same image referred to within the earlier MPS
response.

It is not possible to determine whether the images relate to amateur
images from the information recorded in the spreadsheet.  The list
provided relates to the source of all images where this information has
been recorded.

Therefore, there were 5,110 images in total, including the 1 referred to
in response to your original request (ref: 2011120003100).  

Of these, the source of 1,972 images is recorded.  

When a crime has been recorded that contains multiple images, the actual
source is only recorded against the first image.  This is the reason for
the difference between the total number of images held and the number of
images against which a source was recorded.

In relation to the sources, 'burglary 1', 'violent disorder 1' and 'photo
2' these relate to instances where the information has been entered onto a
spreadsheet incorrectly, that is input error.  (For example where the
offence relating to the image has been entered instead of the source)

Regarding information held in relation to police sourced images, the
information recorded on the spreadsheet were inputted at the time
documents containing such images were received by the MPS. At the time of
such recording a spreadsheet was set up, but not all the origins of the
5110 images were entered, as previously explained. As a database was not
set up at the time this has unfortunately lead to inaccuracies in the way
such information has been recorded. Therefore, in order to determine all
police-sourced images in all cases, other than those provided, would need
to be looked into in order to determine the exact source.

If you have a particular concern or question relating to the use of CCTV,
DCI Neville has replied to this unit personally and offered his assistance
should you have any further questions in this area. DCI Neville can be
contacted on telephone number 020 7230 6402

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

If you are dissatisfied with this response please read the attached paper
entitled Complaint Rights which explains how to contact the Information
Commissioner with your complaint.

Should you have any further inquiries concerning this matter, please
contact me on 0207 161 3705 or at the address at the top of this letter,
quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

Brian Wilson
FOIA Complaints Officer

 
LEGAL ANNEX

Section 1 (General right of access to information held by public
authorities) of the
Act states:

(1) Any person making a request for information to a public authority is
entitled-
(a) to be informed in writing by the public authority whether it holds
information of the
description specified in the request, and
(b) if that is the case, to have that information communicated to him.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000...

Section 12(1) and 12(2) (Exemption where cost of compliance exceeds
appropriate limit) of the Act states:

(1) Section 1(1) does not oblige a public authority to comply with a
request for information if the authority estimates that the cost of
complying with the request would exceed the appropriate limit.

(2) Subsection (1) does not exempt the public authority from its
obligation to comply with paragraph (a) of section 1(1) unless the
estimated cost of complying with that paragraph alone would exceed the
appropriate limit.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000...

Section 17(5) (Refusal of a request) of the Act states:

(5) A public authority which, in relation to any request for information,
is relying on a claim that section 12 or 14 applies must, within the time
for complying with section 1(1), give the applicant a notice stating that
fact.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000...

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

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

You have the right to require the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to
review their decision.

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

Ask to have the decision looked at again –

The quickest and easiest way to have the decision looked at again is to
telephone the case officer that is nominated at the end of your decision
letter.

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

Complaint

If you are dissatisfied with the handling procedures or the decision of
the MPS made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) regarding
access to information you can lodge a complaint with the MPS to have the
decision reviewed.

Complaints should be made in writing, within forty (40) working days from
the date of the refusal notice, and addressed to:

FOI Complaint
Public Access Office
PO Box 57192
London
SW6 1SF
[email address]

In all possible circumstances the MPS will aim to respond to your
complaint within 20 working days.
The Information Commissioner

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

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

Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Phone:  01625 545 700

Total Policing is the Met's commitment to be on the streets and in your
communities to catch offenders, prevent crime and support victims. We are
here for London, working with you to make our capital safer.

 

Consider our environment - please do not print this email unless
absolutely necessary.

NOTICE - This email and any attachments may be confidential, subject to
copyright and/or legal privilege and are intended solely for the use of
the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please
notify the sender and delete it from your system.  To avoid incurring
legal liabilities, you must not distribute or copy the information in this
email without the permission of the sender. MPS communication systems are
monitored to the extent permitted by law.  Consequently, any email and/or
attachments may be read by monitoring staff. Only specified personnel are
authorised to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of the MPS by
email. The MPS accepts no responsibility for unauthorised agreements
reached with other employees or agents.  The security of this email and
any attachments cannot be guaranteed. Email messages are routinely scanned
but malicious software infection and corruption of content can still occur
during transmission over the Internet. Any views or opinions expressed in
this communication are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

 

Find us at:

Facebook: Facebook.com/metpoliceuk

Twitter: @metpoliceuk

Dear Mr Wilson,

Thank you for this belated ICO-prompted internal review.

I note that even though the outcome of your internal review is to uphold the original decision, you admit in your reason for this decision that the previous response by DCI Neville was misleading, that the referenced database is in such a poor state (incomplete, with data 'input error's and 'inaccuracies') that no useful information can be obtained from it, and that the MPS do not have a record of photographs taken by police officers during the riots.

I wish you useful databases and records of police officers' actions for this new year.

Yours faithfully,

David Mery