According to a report by the BBC workers accused of theft or damage could soon find themselves blacklisted on a register to be shared among employers. It will be good for profits but campaigners say innocent people could find it impossible to get another job...
.... an online database of workers accused of theft and dishonesty, regardless of whether they have been convicted of any crime, which bosses can access when vetting potential employees. Later this month, the National Staff Dismissal Register (NSDR) is expected to go live.
Organisers say that major companies including Harrods, Selfridges and Reed Managed Services have already signed up to the scheme. By the end of May they will be able to check whether candidates for jobs have faced allegations of stealing, forgery, fraud, damaging company property or causing a loss to their employers and suppliers.
Workers sacked for these offences will be included on the register, regardless of whether police had enough evidence to convict them. Also on the list will be employees who resigned before they could face disciplinary proceedings at work.
The project has attracted little publicity. But the BBC News website can reveal that trade unions and civil liberties campaigners are warning that it leaves workers vulnerable to the threat of false accusations.
TUC policy officer Hannah Reed says that while criminal activity in the workplace can never be condoned, she fears such a system is open to abuse.
"The TUC is seriously concerned that this register can only lead to people being shut out from the job market by an employer who falsely accuses them of misconduct or sacks them because they bear them a grudge. Individuals would be treated as criminals, even though the police have never been contacted.
Source: BBC 8th May 2008
Park wardens have been ordered to stop and interrogate anyone who is not accompanied by children.
The visitors who are quizzed have to explain their presence and risk being thrown out or reported to police if their answers are not satisfactory.
The policy has been introduced at Telford Town Park in Shropshire. The council which manages the 420-acre area says it is a 'commonsense approach' aimed at safeguarding children.
But park users accused it of 'authoritarian madness' and said the ruling risked panicking parents about the dangers faced from potential paedophiles.
The policy came to light after two environmental campaigners dressed as penguins were thrown out of the park last month when caught handing out leaflets on climate change.
Telford and Wrekin Council said Rachel Whittaker and Neil Donaldson were ejected because they had not undergone Criminal Records Bureau checks or risk assessments before entering the park - a requirement under the Child Protection Act.
David Ottley, recreation manager at the Tory-run council, said in a letter to a member of the public over that issue: 'Our town park staff approach adults that are not associated with any children in the park and request the reason for them being there.
'In particular, this applies to those areas where children or more vulnerable groups gather.'
Miss Whittaker, 34, from Wellington, near Telford, said the policy carried a 'dangerous implication that if you have a child with you than everything is OK and you won't be questioned'.
Former childcare social worker John Evans said: 'It is authoritarian madness which can only be based on ignorance. It is absurd, it is insulting and it is dangerous as it panics people about the dangers their children face.'
A council spokesman insisted that only those 'acting suspiciously' would be stopped and questioned.
How Reliable is Memory
Posted by News Editor
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Our attention has been drawn to two recent articles on memory which may be of interest. The first is a recently published artice in The Guardian, by James Randerson, science correspondent on Wednesday September 10 2008
Study shows how false memories rerun 7/7 film that never existed
Four out of 10 people have false memories of the 7/7 London bombings, according to researchers who questioned students about what they remembered seeing on news reports of the events.
Some people claimed to have seen non-existent CCTV footage of the bus exploding in Tavistock Square in July 2005, while others gave detailed descriptions of footage which did not exist.
The study shows how prone people are to "false memories", which the researchers say police and social workers must take into account when evaluating witness testimony or "recovered" memories of childhood abuse.
"Taken as a whole, this is further evidence that our memories are not perfect," said Dr James Ost, a psychologist at the University of Portsmouth. "They are not like a videotape you can rewind and replay for perfect recall. Because of this, memory alone is not reliable enough to form the basis of legal decisions."
He gave questionnaires to 150 British students and 150 Swedish students on what they remembered of the Tavistock Square bomb three months after the attacks. None had seen the bomb first hand. He asked the students what they remembered about TV footage of the aftermath of the bomb and about CCTV images of the bus exploding and a computer reconstruction of the event.
Neither the CCTV or the computer reconstruction existed, but 40% and 28% of British respondents claimed to remember seeing them. The equivalent figures of the Swedish participants were 16% and 6%.
Some of the students embellished their accounts with details they could not have witnessed. One wrote: "The bus has stopped at a traffic light. There was a bright light and a loud bang and the top of the bus flew off."
The study backs up previous research by Ost in which people claimed to have seen non-existent footage of the crash in Paris that killed Princess Diana.
Ost presented the research at the British Association Festival of Science in Liverpool.
The second is a report by the British Psychological Society Research Board titled Guidelines on Memory and the Law Recommendations from the Scientific Study of Human Memory. Both are useful in helping us to understand that memory is not as reliable as some people think it is.
Terry Harrison lost his home, had his freedom curtailed and rarely saw his two daughters while under police investigation.
The 34-year-old missed family birthdays and a funeral and turned to alcohol and sleeping pills because of the ordeal.
He said: “It was hell. I felt lower than low and at times I honestly felt like killing myself.
“Now it is over I need people to hear my side and accept I am innocent.”
After seeing his accuser jailed for perverting the course of justice last week, Mr Harrison said he is finally starting to rebuild his life.
Shirley Prince, a 42-yearold single mother from Newton Aycliffe, County Durham, said she was raped by Mr Harrison during a house party in May last year.
She later admitted perverting the course of justice and was jailed for three months when she appeared at Durham Crown Court on Tuesday.
More: Northern Echo
A High Court judge has acknowledged that workers' careers can be ruined by unproven allegations kept on police files but refused to allow a challenge to the rules.
Mr Justice Blake said he recognised the "difficult circumstances" a care worker had been left in after a claim of abuse was made against her six years ago but never tested in court.
He agreed that Farida Manji was unable to get a job - even at a supermarket - simply because the allegation had been kept on file and could be seen by potential employers when they ran a background check on her.
But the judge added that he was powerless to stop details of unproved accusations being passed to managers because the Government and police had clearly intended that they should be, in order to protect vulnerable groups.
It comes just days after The Daily Telegraph disclosed that all adults who work or volunteer with children must have abuse allegations made against them kept on file until they retire, even if they are totally groundless.
From next year, an estimated 11.3 million adults who work with under-16s must register with a new vetting body, the Independent Safeguarding Authority, which could lead to many more people driven from their jobs because of unproven claims made against them in the past.
The High Court heard yesterday (mon) that Miss Manji, from Bracebridge Heath, Lincoln, had been accused by a co-worker of abusing an elderly woman at Sancroft Hall care home in Harrow in 2002.
The Crown Prosecution Service investigated but decided there was insufficient evidence to prosecute her.
However, details of the allegation have been kept on the 46-year-old's file and made available to prospective employers who apply for an enhanced Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) certificate for her.
This has meant no care home will take her on, and the court heard she cannot even get a job at Tesco because she is deemed unsuitable to work with elderly customers.
Mr Justice Blake said: "I recognise at once the dilemma she is in.
"Because of this allegation that has never gone to trial, she is unable to pursue her career in her chosen field as a care assistant because no employer is willing to employ her once they have received the police information.
"She submits the presumption of innocence means that where there is no adverse finding by a competent court she should not be subjected to this disadvantage."
However, he said that the 1997 Police Act had placed officers under a duty to disclose allegations to employers, even when they had not been proved, provided they were relevant and not too historic.
The judge added: "In my judgment, it is plain that Parliament has decided in particular fields of sensitive employment that employers are entitled to enhanced certificates, and the content is very much a matter for the police service."
He refused to allow her challenge to the current rules, saying: "Despite the difficult circumstances Miss Manji finds herself in, there are no grounds for granting judicial review.''
Miss Manji told the court the unsubstantiated allegation had been made maliciously and said she was the victim of "a monstrous injustice''.
She pleaded in person with the judge, saying: "Please put me on trial so that I can remove the blight on my name and go back to the profession I love.''
Miss Manji now plans to take her claim to the European Court of Justice.
Terry Gore, a friend of Miss Manji who had assisted her in court, said afterwards: "This judgment means that anybody in the care field can make a malicious allegation against a fellow worker and effectively destroy their career.
"You are treated as guilty, and the legal system in this country gives you no opportunity to clear your name."
Source: Telegraph
By Martin Beckford, Social Affairs Correspondent
Last Updated: 9:09PM BST 15 Sep 2008
Parents will from today be able to ask police whether anyone who has access to their child is a convicted paedophile or is even suspected of abusing children.
Police will pass on details of any relevant criminal convictions and may include ‘soft intelligence’ detailing unproven complaints of abuse, even where there was no finding of guilt.
But parents will face civil court action or even criminal charges for inciting violence if they gossip about the findings or pass on the restricted material to other parents whose children could be at risk.
The measures are aimed at parents who are worried about those who spend time with their children, such as neighbours or sports coaches, or single mothers anxious to know more about a new boyfriend’s background.
The initiative, which starts today in four pilot areas across England, was drawn up by the Home Office in response to demands for ‘Sarah’s Law’ to make available
more information on known paedophiles, following the murder of Sarah Payne by convicted sex offender Roy Whiting.
Twelve-month trials are being held in Peterborough, Southampton, Stockton in Cleveland and across Warwickshire, and the measures will be extended across England and Wales if judged a success.
The Home Office said police would also deal with inquiries about under-18s – to cover babysitters for example. They said ‘special considerations’ would apply in such cases, but could give no details.
If the checks uncover paedophile convictions, the scheme sets out an ‘assumption’ that parents should be informed.
But police and child protection agencies will have more discretion about past complaints which did not lead to a successful prosecution, or of past convictions for non-sexual crimes such as child neglect or domestic violence.
Home Secretary Jacqui Smith claimed the scheme was a ‘huge step forward’ which would ‘empower’ worried parents to protect-their children better.
But campaigner Donald Findlater, of child protection charity the Lucy Faithfull Foundation, said: ‘The biggest risk to children is not from the registered sex offender who the police know and are managing.
‘It is from the sex offender who is not registered and who no one knows about.
‘There are probably ten of these unknown individuals to every one registered offender.’
Paul Cavadino, director of crime reduction charity Nacro, welcomed the rules in principle but said: ‘The real test of these pilots will be whether this information can be kept confidential to the parents or whether it spreads to other people, causing a risk of vigilante attacks.
‘If this happened it could drive offenders underground, making it difficult for the police and probation service to keep track of them and increasing risk to other children.’
Sara Payne, Sarah’s mother, welcomed the moves, but said there was far more still to do, adding: ‘This is a giant step towards truth and honesty when dealing with sex offenders and all we need now is for local communities up and down the UK to help make this work.’
Source: Daily Mail
There has been an 86% increase in the number of teachers suspended on full pay in the UK over claims of pupil mistreatment, the BBC has learned.
The Donal McIntyre programme on BBC Radio 5 Live obtained details from Freedom of Information requests to all 204 local authorities in the UK.
Among the 40% of councils responding, the numbers suspensions rose from 168 in 2003-04 to 314 in 2007-08.
Teachers' unions say there has been a rise in false allegations.
The councils responding said almost £14.5 million was paid out in salaries for those suspended during the same period of time.
But the total cost to taxpayers will be higher when other local authorities are taken into consideration.
'Neutral act'
The most common reason for suspending a teacher was because of child protection issues, which includes allegations of verbal abuse, unreasonable force against a pupil, indecent assault, downloading child pornography.
Other reasons were misuse of drugs or alcohol, and gross misconduct. The length of suspensions ranged from about a week to, in one case in Leicester, more than four years.
Teaching unions have been expressing concern for some time about growing numbers of false allegations made against teachers by pupils or their parents.
Some allegations have been coupled with compensation claims made against local authorities. "There's a worrying trend of parents not going to the head teacher, but instead heading straight to the police," says Sharon Liburd, a solicitor for the Association of Teachers and Lecturers.
"Parents automatically believe the child and often the facts are embellished. They go to the police to create the maximum amount of hurt to the school."
Employers say suspending a teacher is a "neutral" act and does not imply any guilt.
But Mick Brookes, general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers, said he believed suspending a teacher was more extreme than that.
"It is not a neutral act and doesn't feel like a neutral act," he said.
"Especially when a teacher is suspended as a result of false or malicious allegations. Something like that can badly affect a teacher's career and their whole life."
The numbers of teachers suspended appeared to vary considerably from one local authority to another.
In Essex, 80 teachers have been suspended during the last five years, whereas other areas, like Camden, according to their records, no teachers have been suspended.
The Freedom of Information research did not reveal how many allegations against teachers were upheld.
In total there are 537,000 teachers in the UK, so only a tiny minority - fewer than 0.1% get suspended.
More on this story on
The Donal MacIntyre show, Sunday at 19:00 (BST) on BBC Radio 5 Live or download the programme podcast from the Radio 5 Live website.
Source: BBC
F.A.C.T. Comment
Employers frequently state that suspension is a neutral act and does not imply guilt. This is what the High Court had to say about the issue.
"The employer also argued that a suspension was qualitively different from a dismissal, but the Court of Appeal disagreed. Suspension is not a neutral act. It changes the status quo from work to no work and inevitably casts a shadow over the employee's competence. Therefore, suspension and dismissal are capable of being a breach of contract, depending on the facts."
Mezey v South West London & St George's Mental Health NHS Trust [2007], EWHC 62
Verbal abuse and threats of litigation are becoming more common.
Read Times article here
A Cardiff man who served 11 years in prison for a crime he did not commit has passed a lie detector test.
Michael O’Brien, who was wrongfully convicted with Darren Hall and Ellis Sherwood for the 1987 murder of Cardiff newsagent Phillip Saunders, said he had taken the test because of the refusal of South Wales Police to give him an apology.
The Court of Appeal quashed the three men’s convictions after judges found serious flaws in the prosecution case.
Two years ago South Wales Police agreed to pay Mr O’Brien £300,000 in an out-of-court settlement of a civil case he was bringing against it for malicious prosecution.
More: Wales on Line South Wales Echo
A 16-year-old girl has been handed a 12 month referral order including counselling sessions after falsely accusing a man of raping her, Yourmaidstone reports.
Maidstone magistrates heard the teenager had claimed a 19-year-old youth had dragged her into his home and raped her.
But she concocted the story after having consensual sex with the man she accused, as she had a boyfriend.
The girl, who cannot be named due to her age, pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice by making false allegations of rape at the hearing in Maidstone today (Monday).
The chair of the bench told her she was only escaping jail because of her age.
Police said this is one of a number of recent similar cases in Maidstone – and they want to make sure such incidents stop.
Following the hearing this morning Detective Inspector Susie Harper said: "Rape is a very serious offence which can have a huge impact on the life of the victim.
"It often takes considerable bravery for a rape victim to come forward to report the crime and we always sensitively and thoroughly investigate all reported rape allegations.
"On rare occasions where false rape allegations are made, it wastes not only the police's time, but causes untold grief for the accused, having the potential to ruin their reputation forever.
"In these instances we will seek to prosecute those who make false claims, as these people undermine the courage of real victims who seek justice.”
Source: Kent News