Skip to main content

Part 34: FOI Risk of Criminal Offence


[originally posted 12 August 2015]


In Part 33 I wrote about Paul Delamore’s victory in having the Scottish Information Commissioner decide that Police Scotland should release the information he had requested.

My analysis was incomplete.  I had ignored a key part of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 – FOISA.  I hadn’t even read the relevant section.  I must also say that I didn’t recognise my omission: a friend had to point this out to me.

The crucial part is Section 65
FOISA S65








Basically this says that if an applicant is not given all the information to which he/she is entitled then, if the act is deliberate, the person responsible is guilty of a criminal offence.  The highlighted paragraph lists ways in which a person may prevent full release: 

alters, defaces, blocks, erases, destroys or conceals

The penalty for conviction?  A fine not exceeding £5000!

Now how MIGHT this apply to Delamore’s case?  I am being very careful here.  I allege no wrong-doing. All I do is to highlight what hypothetically might have happened.

In Part 33, I said that I did not believe that Police Scotland would tell a lie to Delamore but I said that I could imagine the whole truth not being revealed.  If my reading of Section 65 is correct then a person who did not reveal the entirety of the relevant part(s) of the police records would be guilty of a criminal offence.

Now let’s look again at the two questions I considered in Part 33.

Delamore’s Question 5
P33 I1



In the response there is no mention of what, if anything, happened on 7 April. 
Section 65 makes a huge potential difference here.

Imagine that the car was removed on 7 April as well as on 6 April and this fact was in the police records.  Under these circumstances, the person responsible for not revealing the details of the 7th would be guilty of a criminal offence.

Delamore’s Question 4
P33 I1



Delamore’s interest was to find out if the photographs were taken on the 7th.  If they were, then the car must have been returned to the scene.  All that is said in response is that the photographs were NOT taken before 1.50pm on 6 April.  There is no end time or date.  There is nothing about whether they were taken on the Saturday or Sunday or even, ridiculously, if they were taken in 2000.

Now imagine that, within the police files, there was information which indicated an end date or time.  Under these circumstances, the person responsible for not revealing the details of the 7th would be guilty of a criminal offence.

Has a criminal offence been committed?

I have no evidence of any crime and I hope none has been committed because the reputation of our justice system would be in tatters.  If lies could be told about a 30-year-old case what might be happening elsewhere?

I do hope, though, that Delamore will challenge the release of information to him if he hasn’t already done so.

Delamore’s victory has created a new situation in which Police Scotland and the Crown Office can no longer rely (automatically) on their claimed exemptions being upheld.  The door has been opened and I and others are trying to pour through. 

That same door brings Section 65 into play. 

I hope that none fall foul of it and all that should be revealed is.

Time will tell.

Interesting times!
_______________________________________________________________

If you have thoughts, or more, feel free to:

email me at calumsblogATgmailDOTcom or

tweet me at @calumcarr

© CalumCarr 2015

__________________________________________________________________

COPYRIGHT

Copyright over this article is retained by me, CalumCarr.

Please feel free to reproduce extracts and images provided you attribute the words and images to me taking into account any provisos below.

If you wish to use more than one quarter of the article then contact me for permission at calumsblogATgmailDOTcom.

Labels

Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

Part 1: Introduction

Willie McRae: born 18 May 1923; died 7 April 1985 This we know for certain but much else in his life and death is open to conjecture. What is fact or fiction? Truth or lies? Openness or obfuscation? Will we ever know? Probably not but in this series – may be 1 post or 20 posts depending on my enthusiasm – I want to look back and review his story.  The best way to ensure I keep going with my review is to write and post as I go on.   You, my readers, are key to my continuing! I must have read about Willie in the 80s but I only became aware of him on Sunday past when the Sunday Express published a story more than 24 years after his death. [ Original source ; archived source ] Of course, we note the very important, … it was claimed last night. There’s nothing definite here but you can start to see that McRae’s life might not be straightforward. Within the rest of the article there is more. So here we have claims that he was killed: - by drug smugglers - by security services...
Read more

Part 25: Special Branch – Official View

Introduction In Part 24 I said that I believed any active involvement of the Special Branch* with Willie McRae was sufficient for an FAI to be held. (* see end of post)   In Part 26 we’ll look at evidence from a retired policeman, Donald Morrison, who claims Special Branch were involved up to, at least, the day McRae left Glasgow, 5 April 1985. Here you get to see what the police and Crown Office have said about Special Branch and McRae. Before we go there, I invite you to read Part 23, if you haven’t yet done so.  Last Sunday, 29 March, the Sunday Herald published an article highlighting the new campaign for a Fatal Accident Inquiry to be held into McRae’s death.  The article was light on information until the last sentence in which the Crown Office appears to have set its face against holding an FAI …. ever.  The Crown Office is quoted as saying, Crown Counsel are satisfied with the extensive investigations into the death of William Macra...
Read more

Part 5: Which Site?

Strange as it may seem there is even doubt about where Willie McRae’s car came off the road. In this 5th post, but first post of any real depth, we shall - look in great detail at all possible roadside features which could be close to the crash site, - see the sites themselves in aerial and streetview mode, - see old video of the two sites, - see what physical evidence there is to tie each site to the actual crash site, - seen how the official and Coutts site came to be - pose two major questions - and a wee bit more and I will be only scratching the surface of this mystery. Before we start we should probably take a little detour to see how the official and Coutts site came to be. Alex Main in the Scotsman wrote about this [highlighted area] on 7 April 1987. and thus the official and Coutts’ sites were born ….. …. and still we talk of them! Again I must stress that I come to this with no agenda.  I don’t know what happened to Willie McRae: this and subsequent posts are my journey o...
Read more