Prison Record Angus Sinclair

The request was refused by Scottish Prison Service.

Dear Scottish Prison Service,

Could you please furnish me with a copy of Angus Sinclair's (dob 7 June 1945 died 11 March 2019) Prison Record for the period of 1961 to 1982 please.

Yours faithfully,

Chris Clark

Gaolinfo,

Thank you for your email.

 

If your email is regarding the location of an individual in our care
please redirect you enquiry to [1][email address]

 

Please note that this mailbox is monitored between 8am and 3.30pm Monday
to Friday.

 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

Duffin Paul,

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Clark

 

Please find attached out response to your request for information.

 

Regards

 

Paul A Duffin

SPS HQ

Dear Scottish Prison Service,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.
Colin McConnell, Chief Executive, Scottish Prison Service, Calton House, Redheughs Rigg, Edinburgh EH12 9HW.
I am writing to request an internal review of Scottish Prison Service's handling of my FOI request 'Prison Record Angus Sinclair'.

Chris Clark
[email address]
Our Ref: HQ 18335
17 April 2019

Dear Mr Clark

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST

Thank you for your recent freedom of information request, which was received on 20 March 2019. This gives a statutory deadline for responding of 17 April 2019 under the terms of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002.

You asked the following, and for ease of reference I have copied your original request for information (RFI) as follows.

RFI – Furnish a copy of Angus Sinclair’s (DOB 7 June 1945 died 11 March 2019) Prison Record for the period 1961 to 1982 please.
We do endeavour to provide information whenever possible. However, in this instance an exemption under section s.38 (1) (b) of FOISA applies to all of the information requested. Section 38(1) (b) Personal data relating to a third party.
As the exemption is conditional we have applied the ‘public interest test’. This means we have, in all the circumstances of this case, considered if the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. It should be noted that the test considers what is in the public interest not what is of interest to the public. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption. While we recognise that there is some public interest in release because of general interest in prisons and those in our care, this is outweighed by the public interest in protecting an individual’s personal data. It should also be noted that under DPA matters relating to his death have not been concluded.
If you are dissatisfied with this response, you have the right to request a review. Your request should be made within 40 working days of the date of receipt of this letter and we will reply within 20 working days of receiving your request. Under section 20(3) (c) (ii) of the Act your request should outline your reason for seeking a review. If our decision is unchanged following a review and you remain unsatisfied with this, you then have the right to make a formal complaint to the Scottish Information Commissioner.
If you require a review of our decision to be carried out, please write to Colin McConnell, Chief Executive, Scottish Prison Service, Calton House, Redheughs Rigg, Edinburgh EH12 9HW. The review will be undertaken by staff not involved in the original decision making process.

I trust this information is helpful.

Yours sincerely

Paul Duffin
SPS HQ

Dear Colin McConnell
ICO Section 38
5. Section 38 states:
38.—(1) Information is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely to— (a) endanger the physical or mental health of any individual, or (b) endanger the safety of any individual.
(2) The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent that, compliance with section 1(1) (a) would, or would be likely to, have either of the effects mentioned in subsection (1).
With regards to someone who has died (and is therefore not covered by the personal information exemption) where disclosure might endanger the mental health of surviving relatives, particularly if they had been unaware of it.
11. In order to engage this exemption the public authority must demonstrate that there is a causal link between the endangerment and disclosure of the information.
12. The public authority must also show that disclosure would or would be likely to have a detrimental effect on the physical or mental health of any individual, or the safety of any individual. The effect must be more than trivial or insignificant.
13. The term “would…endanger” means that it is more likely than not to occur (i.e. a more than 50% chance). “Would be likely to endanger” is a lower threshold; this means that even if there is below a 50% chance, there must be a real and significant likelihood of the endangerment occurring. The authority must decide the likelihood of endangerment arising on the facts of the case. For more details on this, please see our guidance on the prejudice test.
14. The assessment of endangerment is relevant to the public interest test. Note that the choice between “would” and “would be likely” is important because it affects the balance of factors in the public interest test. The greater the likely endangerment to the physical or mental health of any individual, or the safety of any individual, the stronger the public interest in not disclosing the information requested.
Section 38(1) (b) - Endanger the safety of any individual
18. Endangering safety is usually connected to the risk of accident and the protection of individuals.
20. Information that could endanger an individual’s safety could also endanger their mental or physical health. If so, both parts of the exemption may be relied upon.
21. The public authority must be satisfied that the endangerment would result from disclosure of the information. They must be able to show a connection between the disclosure and the endangerment.
22. Another issue for public authorities is whether the same or similar information is already available in the public domain. They need to consider whether the consequences of disclosure are therefore more or less serious, in each particular case.

Data Protection Act 1998 The Data Protection Act 1998 is a United Kingdom Act of Parliament designed to protect personal data stored on computers or in an organised paper filing system.

Section 1 defines "personal data" as any data that can be used to identify a living individual
It is quite clear that no relative came forward to claim Mr Sinclair's body, which has since been cremated and I challenge that the information requested, a copy of Mr Sinclair's Prison Record from 1961 to 1982 would be likely to endanger the mental or physical health of any person.

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

Yours faithfully,

Chris Clark

Gaolinfo,

Thank you for your email.

 

If your email is regarding the location of an individual in our care
please redirect you enquiry to [1][email address]

 

Please note that this mailbox is monitored between 8am and 3.30pm Monday
to Friday.

 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

Dickie Maurice,

1 Attachment

Dear Sir / Madam,

 

Please find attached our response to your FOI review request.  This email
address should not be used for any responses. All enquiries should be
directed to the address [1][email address]

 

Yours sincerely

 

Maurice Dickie

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]