Clearance & Not Guilty On A Serious Charge & Pnc Record Deletion...

[mhtu111]

Hi,

In my previous post, I mentioned that I was arrested and charged with a serious allegation which was actually nonsense.

Post:
https://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/Law/Question1633982.html

I was found NOT guilty, however, I was informed by people on here that this usually does not mean anything, because apparently 'not guilty' does not mean innocent, it just means that there was not sufficient proof beyond a reasonable doubt for a conviction.

This is a case where if someone was to look into the details, and had a bit of common sense, they would be able to tell that this is actually complete nonsense from the police and not even a crime, nor was it on its way to being any form of crime. However, users on this forum also said that it is likely that someone will not even bother to look into the details of this charge when it comes to making a decision for security clearance, and instead reject the application immediately.

About a month ago I applied for a record deletion through ACRO, so that this nonsense would be removed from the PNC.

A Chief Police Officer has made a decision on whether to remove this charge from the PNC or retain it.

Now on top of being found not guilty, a chief police officer looked into the details, evidence and grounds for deletion, and agreed that this should be removed off of the PNC.

It has been confirmed by ACRO that this charge and the details of arrest has been removed from the PNC.

However, I am aware that local police records will still hold details of my arrest. I called 101 and asked if there was a way to apply for arrest records to be removed (from local police records) and I was told that there was not, is this true?

I plan to include the letter from ACRO that states that a chief police officer made a decision to delete this charge from my PNC records in my Security Clearance application. Will this help my clearance application or should I expect the same outcome? @Buenchico & @Peter Pedant, it would be great if I could get a second opinion on this

Is there any way to completely clear my name of this charge mentioned on my previous post, or should I consider my life ruined for utter nonsense from the police?

This is just about the worst thing anyone can be accused of. I am also aware that even on an enhanced DBS check police are still able to release this nonsense 'intelligence' because it is information that is stored locally, not on the PNC.

Have I benefitted at all from having a chief police officer delete this charge from the PNC or was it simply wasted effort?

Thanks in advance!

[Peter Pedant]

yes well done
you have achieved much more than I would have thought possible
( from common law principles - after all you were arrested and so that fact might well be recorded and not erased ( as it occurred ) ]
All this may well come from GDPR ( a buggaboo or monster amongest cherished ABers)

You've been acquitted
The records record this acquittal
Usually I have to say that the judge says something like "you may go: open the dock/door you leave this court without a blemish to your name"

It has been confirmed by ACRO that this charge and the details of arrest has been removed from the PNC. - is incredible

yes you should include this in your security application ( of which I have no experience whatsoever) - and perhaps if there is "anything you wish to add section" details (one side of A4 only) of how hard it is to have frivolous allegations erased or recorded as frivolous
I wouild use more measured English - "charges without any foundation whatsoever" rather than "a frivolous pack of lies easily swallowed by gullible police constables who really should know better" - even if no2 is closer to the truth. perhaps stressing only one learning point...

local police records I have no knowledge about
they would be subject to GDPR but also the exceptions in the GDPR - er police records

Did I say there is a recent high court decision about who does what with PNC entries - the recording officer has to ask herself a series of questions before recording - and the reviewing officer has to go thro another series if they have to review ....

I think you have achieved far more than I judged possible

My main experience is from medicine and child protection
It is very difficult to change the original doctors observations and usually not possible to erase his opinions, but only to record separately that the opinion is now different. stupid and frivolous are words never used

well done

[New Judge]

“This is a case where if someone was to look into the details, and had a bit of common sense, they would be able to tell that this is actually complete nonsense from the police and not even a crime, nor was it on its way to being any form of crime.”

But somebody did. A reviewing lawyer employed by the CPS (somebody who probably does have “a bit of common sense”) looked at the details and decided a prosecution was appropriate.

“I called 101 and asked if there was a way to apply for arrest records to be removed (from local police records) and I was told that there was not, is this true?”

I would be very worried if it were not true. It is a matter of record that you were arrested. Why should that record be deleted? Supposing you had a subsequent problem arising from that arrest (let’s say you were injured and it causes you problems later on). You ask for the record of your arrest to be disclosed. “Sorry Guv. Got no record that you ever were arrested by us.” Deleting records of matters of fact is not usually desirable.

[Peter Pedant]

// But somebody did. A reviewing lawyer employed by the CPS (somebody who probably does have “a bit of common sense”)//

thanks to NJ for a CPS view - rehearsing the two stage test for a prosecution
sort of can we get a conviction
and is it in the public interest

if only this paradise occurred on Earth. It doesnt

AND - or BUT - the tenure of the gel at the top, one Allison Saunders has been thankfully cut short. You only chuck a civil servant out if they have been truly truly awful - she was.

unsupported allegations were sent to court on her diktat despite warnings that er it may not work
and chaos ensued

I asked her to look at the decision to prosecute someone who had been acquitted in eight minutes and her underling reported ( mediaeval history grad) that the system was meant to work like that. like yeah. my arriss.

that was in the era of unsupported allegations being believed and now it is toned down to - unsupported allegations are taken seriously

and that was the point I thought you might usefully make in a 'any other comments' document. to wit that you were prosecuted under criteria now known to be unworkable and have been changed....[ she isnt going to spring out of a cupboard and scream - "quite wrong you know - what happened was ...."]

If you are really really truly cruddy - you lose your job ( allison did - she has been head hunted you know) - but the marker is that your flagship reforms are reversed whilst you are working your notice. This happened to her. She is unmourned.

IN case you are still in the grip of - "it all happens for the best, and some frighteningly bright people decide this you know"
Think of Alan Salmond who said "Mr X cant have anything to do with this - he was in on the last one."
One year later and half a million pounds spent, a QC for the scots govt said - "salmond my lord was right and we were wrong" - and that case had been declared a nullity.
I sat there with my mouth agape

[Peter Pedant]

same system two widely differing views

[mhtu111]

(The context behind this case is within my previous post that I have linked in my original question)

@Peter Pedant

Thank you for taking the time to reply, I really do appreciate it! The CPS lawyer at my first hearing at a crown court for this 'offence' had even said to my barrister and to the judge "we don't really know what to do with this charge"

This resulted in the hearing being adjourned, and before the second hearing, I got a call from my lawyer saying that the CPS wanted to drop the charge.

Multiple different lawyers told me that the police blamed me for a nuisance that they themselves caused.

I have given a lot of thought to what type of language I used in my security application so that I did not come across as someone who's rude, arrogant and unprofessional. However, I expect them to instantly reject it, despite my best efforts of explaining everything openly.

Also, I have read over your response to New Judge, I don't believe that the CPS thought about this for even a minute before deciding to charge me. In fact... straight after my interview at the station, I was charged, I mean literally straight after.

I walked out of my interview and was walked over to the main desk and then charged. I did not admit guilt to nonsense offences that I had not committed.

No one even alleged this 'offence', as previously mentioned, police attended for a completely separate reason which would not have led to an arrest.

I applied for record deletion without seeking legal advice, I simply wrote out the facts. The application resulted in a chief officer agreeing to delete this off of the PNC. However, if local records of my arrest are stored, as an event that took place... then I don't know what I have gained from this deletion process? I will forever have to justify why I was arrested for such an offence, that is if i am given a chance to explain it... right?

@New Judge, I also appreciate the time you have taken to read up on this and then reply.

Do the CPS not have to wait for an interview (of the 'suspect') before making a decision to charge? How was it that I was charged less than 5 minutes after my interview, the journey was a 15 minute (ish) interview -> front desk -> charges read out... my interview was never even considered.

The example you gave me for local arrest records not being eligible for deletion: "let’s say you were injured and it causes you problems later on...." is the exact same example I was given when I called 101 and asked for the local record deletion procedure (Not PNC, as that had already been deleted at this point).

With the options available to me and my financial situation, I have done everything I can to clear my name. However, it does seem like there is absolutely no way to clear my name entirely...

[Peter Pedant]

I am very glad Justice triumphed

Your story is the reason why a large proportion of the popn will not talk to the police. This includes a tenant being threatened with sawn off shot-gun by a convict. 'Hi wayne are you pleased to see me or is that a ...' Wayne was not pleased, it was. He also said 'wayne you dont frighten me!' which he later admitted was absolutely untrue. It was dealt with locally - wayne is back inside

Now if you have lots and lots of moolah
a situation whereby you can erase the PNC data bank but not local data banks (which I cant imagine re-seed the mainframe but cd do so) - then I wd have thought that was unlawful ( unequal treatment ) and you could argue successfully that the local databanks should have the same checks and balances. You seem incredibly to have won on 'proportionality' - whether the information that you have been acquitted of frivolous charges had any crime prevention value .... and of course that rule would apply to local databanks as well

You would need Cliff Richards amounts of money for that ....

welld one