Over 400'000 Police Records Compromised By Data Error

When making a post, please ensure it complies with this site's Main Rules at all times.
  • Serious Potential Security Breach

    This could be very bad. Very, very bad indeed. The information coming out about it is sketchy to say the least, but that's to be expected in this sort of situation. The police can't give too much away about what's been lost, but the implications for intelligence led policing strategies could be calamitous.

    ILP (Intelligence Led Policing) often requires historic data to help establish patterns which are very important in a lot of criminal investigations. Such strategies have been enormously effective in nipping potentially serious crimes in the bud.

    The loss of DNA data alone - if what is being reported is accurate - has major implications not only for investigations, but also possibly for getting convictions for cases being considered for charges, or even due to go to trial. It really is that serious.

    Other things that could be affected would include data held on sex offenders, terrorists and terrorist suspects, murders and rapes. Historic records and current investigations could be compromised.

    Hopefully the data can be recovered. Yes, there are backups but it isn't being revealed yet whether they were lost too.


    True to form, Home Secretary Priti Patel is already ducking for cover. She's left this for Kit Malthouse, her deputy, to deal with. What's the betting if anybody takes the rap for this, she'll make sure it isn't her.

    When leadership and taking responsibility are required, she's nowhere to be found.

    And finally.......... why is the Guardian the only newspaper covering this on their website ....? At the time of writing this, the "Usual Suspects" don't have this on their front page, or any other page come to that.

  • As HY says, backups will have been taken regularly, normally daily . Just restore the latest backup and all that would be lost is any data input from the previous day.

    If for some reason IT staff have been failing to carry out backups. They should be dismissed.

    The Voice of Reason

  • The loss of DNA data alone - if what is being reported is accurate - has major implications not only for investigations, but also possibly for getting convictions for cases being considered for charges, or even due to go to trial. It really is that serious.

    Another thought occurred to me and that is, what if this had been the all powerful database to power the ID cards that the deletion happened on?

    I was (still am) in favour of ID cards, but some commentators were warning then of storing information such as DNA on centralised databases.

  • Data bases have backups.

    I wouldn't be to sure of that when it comes to the government or Police in this case. That would be far to sensible. It's a big fuss over nothing as it's only those that have not been convicted and have had a caution as kid or whatever. Such a shame really. If the complete police database disappeared then it would give large numbers of people a chance of a half decent job instead of being punished for a mr meaner they done in their youth. Those records are supposed to destroyed when one is 18 years old anyway so why do they even still have them.

  • If the complete police database disappeared then it would give large numbers of people a chance of a half decent job .

    I strongly disagree, nobody wants to employ people who have a history of criminal behaviour. Also the Criminal Justice system needs that information to quickly help detect crime when it occurs.

    The Voice of Reason

  • So if you got caught smoking a spliff when 16 and got a caution you think when 40 years old that should possibly be held against them when they go for a job as a teacher of care worker. It's even worse now as all kinds of employers are abusing the check. This is another reason why we have so many foreign workers because their records can't be checked so easily if at all, so be careful what you wish for.

  • While it is true that Priti Patel is in charge of the Home Office, she did not personally lose these records, so I think people should pipe down about expecting ministerial resignations when something goes wrong.

    The sign of good leadership is to move in quickly to establish the cause of the problem, how it was allowed to happen, and move quickly to ensure there is no repeat of the problem in the future.

    My first thought was also why there was no back-up in place. I was previously employed in local government, and my local authority used to back up all of its computer systems every night. It beggars belief that this wasn’t the case here, and serious questions need to be asked of the IT staff who have failed. One more example of the chaotic management in the Home Office about which former Labour Home Secretaries complained and which Priti Patel is trying to put right, facing accusations of bullying for her trouble.

    I have drawn attention before to the clear out of dead wood that the PM wants in the Civil Service - well here is yet another reason why this is necessary.

  • So if you got caught smoking a spliff when 16 and got a caution you think when 40 years old that should possibly be held against them when they go for a job as a teacher of care worker. It's even worse now as all kinds of employers are abusing the check. This is another reason why we have so many foreign workers because their records can't be checked so easily if at all, so be careful what you wish for.

    Actually, that is a good point, Norra. If the government wants to reduce crime and reduce unemployment, they need to ensure only that sensible measures are in place to protect employers and wider society.

    If someone convicted of, say, careless driving resulting in death is sent to prison, that person has a criminal record on being released, which he must declare to any employer. Why? Clearly, there could be an obligation to reveal such a conviction if the duties of the job being applied for involves driving, but not if, for example, the job was purely administrative in nature or if it was a non-driving job in construction.

    I think that certain jobs should indeed be subject to criminal records checks, but the results given by the police should relate to the requirements of the job. If they are not relevant, they should not be disclosed.

    If something is not done about the rules as they are now, prisoners who have served their sentences will not be able to get another job, and so of course they will return to crime because they have to make a living somehow.

  • If something is not done about the rules as they are now, prisoners who have served their sentences will not be able to get another job, and so of course they will return to crime because they have to make a living somehow.

    We are at that point now and have been for years but in recent years it has got worse as it extends to numerous more jobs requiring a check. Certain jobs yes it is something that is necessary but it should only be serious offences related to the job that get reported back to perspective employers. Also why should a high st shop or McDonald's be able to request a DBS check on someone. Those records should not be available to them under data protection and anti discrimination laws. I just used them two as an example but it's almost at the point now of becoming a blanket check for any job and as common as requiring a CV. More and more employers are requesting a check. There are also times when the expense of the check is on the person looking for work and not the employer doing the check and paying for it or they put in the advertisement that you are required to have a current DBS check, not that one will be made. In other words don't bother applying unless you have one. I've seen this with some of the COVID test centre jobs. Good luck for anyone claiming benefits being able to afford a test.

    Prisons are now basically an overflow system for the state of society and lack of services elsewhere. I would take a guess that 70% of prisoners should not be in there and it's mostly drug crimes or drug related crimes and mental health issues. Other maybe in there because they where abused as a child and didn't get get the appropriate support and then grew up to be an abuser themselves or where just out on the streets left to fend for themselves. Others maybe on benefits and have committed benefit fraud to survive because the benefits system is inadequate or maybe they have ended up homeless and decided rather than live on the streets to get oneself put in prison so it's a roof over your head and some food. Probably safer than many homeless shelters too and with a chance of some re-education, open university courses and such. What happens when these people get released and have a criminal record. It's a vicious circle and the chances are they will end up back inside.

  • We are at that point now and have been for years but in recent years it has got worse as it extends to numerous more jobs requiring a check. Certain jobs yes it is something that is necessary but it should only be serious offences related to the job that get reported back to perspective employers. Also why should a high st shop or McDonald's be able to request a DBS check on someone. Those records should not be available to them under data protection and anti discrimination laws. I just used them two as an example but it's almost at the point now of becoming a blanket check for any job and as common as requiring a CV. More and more employers are requesting a check. There are also times when the expense of the check is on the person looking for work and not the employer doing the check and paying for it or they put in the advertisement that you are required to have a current DBS check, not that one will be made. In other words don't bother applying unless you have one. I've seen this with some of the COVID test centre jobs. Good luck for anyone claiming benefits being able to afford a test.

    Prisons are now basically an overflow system for the state of society and lack of services elsewhere. I would take a guess that 70% of prisoners should not be in there and it's mostly drug crimes or drug related crimes and mental health issues. Other maybe in there because they where abused as a child and didn't get get the appropriate support and then grew up to be an abuser themselves or where just out on the streets left to fend for themselves. Others maybe on benefits and have committed benefit fraud to survive because the benefits system is inadequate or maybe they have ended up homeless and decided rather than live on the streets to get oneself put in prison so it's a roof over your head and some food. Probably safer than many homeless shelters too and with a chance of some re-education, open university courses and such. What happens when these people get released and have a criminal record. It's a vicious circle and the chances are they will end up back inside.

    I think the system needs changing. Employers should be required to make any checks necessary, and the police should only reveal relevant convictions given the nature of the job.

    People applying for jobs in the shops still need to be checked if they have access to money (eg on the tills). The police would then only reveal details such as convictions for theft.

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!