Proof of my acceptance of a Police Caution.
Dear West Midlands Police,
I Yvonne Patricia Pears, a Coventry resident, request "Proof" of the Police caution that is recorded in my Police criminal records, provided by ACPO. I require all Police evidence appertaining to the recorded caution, for 'Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm' in relation to my arrest and Bail, on 12th May 2008, at The Chace Avenue Police station in Coventry. I require, 1)A copy of my Police tape recorded interview, which has been consistently refused to me. 2) A copy of a said caution, supposedly signed by me. 3) Evidence from custody records including film and all other evidence, giving proof of any said agreement of a Police caution by me. 4) Transcripts provided by The West Midlands Police under commissioned defence evidence, in an unrelated hearing, in the Coventry County Court, over 2-years later are incorrect. Once again the Police refused me a copy of this tape, whilst sharing it with the other sides solicitor, to transcribe. All costs in the hearing went to the other side. 5) I also request a copy of my tape-recorded interview, taken on the 29th October 2010, at The Coventry Central Police Station. I was the litigant in person, no Solicitor attended. Again I was refused a copy of my tape. I was put on bail and the bail sheet has a hand written notice on it saying that I have to get a Copy of the tape from my Solicitor. The bail was dropped, yet there is an ACPO record, which states that 'No Further Action Was Taken' and 'Breach of a Non Molestation Order'. This appertains to the hearing where costs went to the other side. The Police interviewed me in the acceptance of my refusal of a Solicitor and no-one else except two Police officers attended the interview. No further action was taken, yet the Police on the 10th November 2010 contacted the Coventry Mental Health Services with concerns about my mental health. 6)If the Police had concerns about my mental health, WHY would the Police have decided not to have me assessed by a doctor, whilst I was in Police custody and why would I have not been supported in a Police interview. Furthermore, I had represented myself and a vulnerable person, 2 months prior, in the Coventry County Court for several hearings over a five month period, from 5th March 2010 to 20th August 2010 where Police had put it before the Court in writing that they believe that I have mental health issues. Two Judges, found No-Reason to ask for an assessment of me, of any kind. The costs of the hearings went to the Public Purse, against the other side. The mental health team who came with the Police to my home on 25th November 2010 and 9th December 2010, found no reason to section me or apply me to their services. A Consultant Psychiatrist has gave 'signed' hand written evidence, stating that the Police triggered their emergency attendances at my home. Giving rise to abuse of public money.
Yours faithfully,
Yvonne Pears.
Dear Ms Pears
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000
Thank you for your request for information, received
25/07/2011 concerning Your Request for Personal Data.
Your request is being considered and you will receive a response within
the statutory timescale of 20 working days, as defined by the Act, subject
to the application of any statutory exemptions. Where consideration is
being given to the application of any exemptions the 20 working day
timescale may be extended under the terms of the Act to a period
considered reasonable depending on the nature and circumstances of your
request. In such cases you will be notified and, where possible, a revised
time-scale will be indicated. In all cases we shall attempt to deal with
your request at the earliest opportunity.
There may be a fee payable for the retrieval, collation and provision of
the information requested, where the request exceeds the statutory limit.
In such cases you will be informed in writing and the 20 working day
timescale will be suspended until we receive payment from you or your
request is modified and /or reduced. If you chose not to make full payment
or modify your request then the request will remain unanswered.
Your request may require either full or partial transfer to another public
authority. You will be informed if your request is transferred.
Yours sincerely,
Freedom of Information Unit
Dear Ms Pears
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000
Your request for information received 23 July 2011, has now been
considered. This response is our response under the terms of the Freedom
of Information (FOI) Act only. The FOI Act places a number of legal
constraints upon us and therefore this letter answers only those
obligations.
Before I explain the decisions I have made in relation to your requests
and as per my previous response to 4428/11 I thought that it would be
helpful to reiterate how someone can apply for their own personal data.
Requests for information about the requester are classified as subject
access requests under the Data Protection Act 1998. Therefore should you
wish to know what information (if any) West Midlands Police holds about
you please complete a subject access form. Payment of a £10.00 fee and
proof of identification must accompany a completed subject access
application form, which can be downloaded here:
http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/pdf/F...
Please note that subject access requests can take up to 40 days to
complete after receiving your application. When completing this form
please be as precise as possible regarding the information that you
require. This will assist us in locating the required information.
If you have completed one of these forms and asked for a copy of your
Â*person record onlyÂ* from the Police National Computer (PNC) and not
for other information held it may be advisable to contact the Data
Protection Unit to request specific personal information.
DECISION UNDER THE TERMS OF THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT
West Midlands Police will neither confirm nor deny that we hold any of the
requested information. This letter serves as a Refusal Notice under
Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act).
REASONS FOR DECISION
Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act places two duties on public
authorities. Unless exemptions apply, the first duty at s1(1)(a) is to
confirm or deny whether the information specified in a request is held.
The second duty at s1(1)(b) is to disclose information that has been
confirmed as being held. Where exemptions are relied upon section 17 of
the Act requires that
we provide the applicant with a notice which: a) states that fact b)
specifies the exemption(s) in question and c) states (if that would not
otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies.
In accordance with the Act, this letter represents a Refusal Notice for
this particular request.
Your request is for your own information and, as such, if any information
exists it would be exempt by virtue of Section 40(5) of the Freedom of
Information Act. Section 40 (5) of the Act relieves us of the duty to
confirm or deny that we hold any relevant data.
A personÂ*s request for their own data should be dealt with as Data
Protection Act subject access requests. Therefore the information can be
supplied to the subject of the request by the means outlined above.
Further information about Data Protection and Subject Access is shown
here:
http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/foi/d...
Section 40 of The Freedom of Information Act is shown here:
[1]http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/foi/p...
If you are unhappy with the way that the police have handled a particular
case, the correct process to make a complaint is to contact our
Professional Standards Department or to make a complaint directly to the
Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), the latter can be
contacted via the following website:
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:
http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/pdf/F...
Please note that such an appeal must be received within six months of the
date of this correspondence.
If you require any further information, then please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Yours sincerely,
Susan Brown
Freedom of Information Unit
West Midlands Police in complying with their statutory duty under sections
1 and 11 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to release the enclosed
information 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
ownerÂ*s written permission to reproduce any part of the attached
information should be addressed to The Force Solicitor, West Midlands
Police Headquarters, Lloyd House, Colmore Circus Queensway, Birmingham, B4
Dear b_foi,
By law the West Midlands Police should normally have responded promptly and by 22 August 2011.
I require you to comply with this request in accordance to Law.
Furthermore due to past threats made against myself by the West midlands Police, I require your responses to be made public on this site, due to my safety and that of my family having already been compromised.
I am reiterating again to yourselves, I require your responses to only be given on this site. I do not wish to be telephoned or contacted in person by you, in regard to this request, I do not give consent for you to do so.
Yours sincerely,
Yvonne Pears.
Dear Ms Pears
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 REQUEST REFERENCE No:4887 11
I acknowledge receipt of your letter, received 24th August 2011,
requesting West Midlands Police to review its response to your request for
information
The review will be conducted in accordance with the West Midlands Police
review procedure and every effort will be made to have a response to you
by 22nd September 2011. However, if it becomes clear that the review will
not be completed by this date you will be advised.
If you wish to discuss this matter prior to West Midlands PoliceÂ*s
response, please contact me,
Yours sincerely,
Carl Bird
FOI Unit Assistant Manager
Dear Ms Pears
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 REQUEST REFERENCE No:4887_11
Thank you for your email received 24 August 2011 where you stated that
West Midlands Police had not responded to your request for information
regarding Proof of your acceptance of a Police Caution. I have considered
your email as a request for West Midlands Police to review its response to
your request.
A review has been conducted and I have found the following:
A response was provided to you on 27 July 2011 which is within the 20
working day timeframe. This response is displayed on the ‘what do they
knowÂ’ website and is actually included in your request for an internal
review.
I have gone on to examine the response that was provided. I agree with the
decision to neither confirm nor deny that any information is held by
virtue of Section 40 (5) of the Freedom of Information Act. Furthermore
that response provided the correct information on how you can make a
subject access.
Therefore the decision is upheld.
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
CommissionerÂ’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire,
SK9 5AF
Yours sincerely,
Carl Bird
FOI Unit
Peter Danby left an annotation ()
In order for the public to have confidence in the police" the public must trust them to act lawfully, but in the case of Yvonne Pears this does not appear to be the case".
From reading Yvonne Pears FOI request i have formed the opinion that <West Midlands Police> have something to hide as do many other <police forces> throughout the uk".
Neuro Linguistic Programming (BRAIN WASHING) which <police forces> use on <police officers> confuses officers into making false/unproven allegations, this interferes with there public liability insurance as police officers are making numerous mistakes WHICH AS WE KNOW THE <POLICE> ARE NOT PREPARED TO ANSWER IN FOI REQUESTS".
Yvonne Pears. left an annotation ()
The <<West midlands Police>> are also using NLP( Neuro Linguistic programming) on teenage girls immediately after kidnapping them and taking them to the Police station. They drag them off from a public place, by hand-cuffing them and throwing them into the police cars. They then lie to them and tell them that there is a complaint against them, when there definitely is NOT. The Police then use TRAUMA based hypnosis on them, which is NLP, to remove the teenage girls away from family and home. The police then do NOT place them in a place of safety, they DELIBERATELY place them into direct danger. The parents and family are then threatened by the captives for money. The <<West Midlands Police>> will do anything to cover this up, including attempted kidnapping and murder of the parent. The police also falsely arrest the parent and attempt to get them sectioned under the Mental Health, even though the parent has NO-HISTORY of any mental health whatsoever. The teenage children are also placed under mental health drugging and hypnosis, behind the parents back. The past memories of family life are removed from the teenagers memory and they are left with NO-CHOICE, but to rely on their abusers and follow their instructions. ANY attempts by the parent to protect their teenager whom has been kidnapped by the <<West Midlands police>> will be met with hostility, threats and massive organised crime.
We work to defend the right to FOI for everyone
Help us protect your right to hold public authorities to account. Donate and support our work.
Donate Now
Yvonne Pears. left an annotation ()
West Midlands Police.
You had already refused me a copy of my tape recorded interview taken on 12th May 2008.
You FURTHER REFUSED me a copy of the above mentioned tape within county court proceedings in 2010.
You gave a copy of my tape, to the other side,s Solicitors (Blakemores) to transcribe, whilst with holding it again from me.
The transcripts of MY Tape-Recorded interview, put before the Court, are FALSE. This leads me to believe that the supposed copy of MY Tape was not the original.
Furthermore I will offer payment for a copy of the above Tape, whilst not accepting that I was EVER given a copy of it.
I will consider that you will be obtaining money by deception.
Copies of the Transcripts are at several different locations, for my personal protection.
The copy provided by you, if it is not a true copy, will be tested by a forensic examiner.
I can prove what I said to the Police during the Taped interview.
The Transcripts from Tapes put before the Court, PROVE, that the West Midlands Police falsely arrested and bailed both parties.
Furthermore the Police chucked a Vulnerable person out of her family home and into danger.
If The West Midlands Police had nothing to hide, why are they refusing me a lawful right to a copy of my tape recorded interview, whilst sharing it with others.
This breaches my rights to defence within a Family Court hearing.