Storage Devices

  • Reference Number: 1714
  • Date released: 13 March 2009

Request

  1. How many hard drives or other storage devices has the force got waiting to be analysed and have data extracted as part of criminal investigations?
  2. How long is it expected to take to analyse the current backlog of storage devices and pull the information needed off of them?
  3. Can you break down, as a percentage of the total number of storage devices seized by the force, how many devices were/are being analysed by officers within the local force, national police specialists or private sector specialists over the past two years?
  4. How much did the force spend on paying private companies to analyse these devices over the past two years? How did that compare to the total budget available to force during those years?
  5. How many officers within the force are qualified to carry out forensic analysis of storage devices? How does this relate to the total number of police officers on the force?
  6. What training on online investigations and digital forensics is offered to officers?
  7. What is the breakdown of nature of the crimes that were being investigated when the devices were seized?
  8. What is the breakdown, by percentage, of the types of storage devices seized by the force?

Response

In accordance with section 1 (1) (b) of the Act our response is provided below;

Question 1

There are currently 93 devices awaiting examination. There are other hard disks and also quantities of CDs, DVDs etc held within the Force that are awaiting assessment, the number of which will not be known until they are formally submitted to the Hi Tech Crime Unit.

Question 2

There is no information held.

Question 3

In terms of Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 Cheshire Constabulary can neither confirm nor deny by virtue of Section 23(5) Information Relating to Certain Security Bodies that it holds any other information in relation to this request. To give an explanation of why neither confirming nor denying is appropriate in this case would itself involve the disclosure of exempt information and, therefore, under Section 17(4), no explanation can be given.

Question 4

Nil

The forces budget is exempt under Section 21 of the Freedom of Information Act, Information Accessible by other means please see website address below:

Force Budget

Question 5

There are 14 forensic analysts within the Hi Tech Crime Unit, and Cheshire Constabulary have approximately 2182 Police Officers. It must not be assumed that the total staff in the Hi Tech Crime Unit represents the total capability of Cheshire Constabulary to investigate such a crime. There are a large number of police officers within Cheshire Constabulary who will be engaged in the investigation of hi-tech crime as part of their normal duties.

Question 6

NCALT provides a module for all officers to complete, Cheshire Constabulary E-Forensics also provide first responder training to all probationers.

Further details can be found on the National Policing Improvement Agency website on the following address: NPIA

Question 7

This information is exempt under Section 30 1 (a) (b) & (c) (Investigations and proceedings conducted by public authorities) of the Freedom of Information Act which states that information held in relation to a criminal investigation is exempt from disclosure.

Question 8

We currently have 920 devices seized relates to hard drives or computers containing such, and 8473 other devices.

Exemptions

Exemptions Considered are Section 30 (1) (a) (b) (c) (3) Investigations and Section 31 (1) (a) (b) (c) & 3) Law Enforcement

Harm

Disclosure of specific work load and analysis details would provide an awareness of not only the capability of the Force in terms of volume of preparedness to undertake increasing workloads but also provide information regarding the complexity and fluctuations of workloads and use of more specialised support services. Disclosure would also provide intelligence to criminals about the application of particular police tactics.

Public Interest Test

Considerations favouring Disclosure

Public Awareness

Divulging Cheshire Constabulary's capabilities to carry out forensic analysis of digital storage devices would keep the public accurately informed about such matters and would prevent rumour and speculation. It would allow the public to be aware of the way in which the force is tackling growing problems of crime and the costs involved.

Accountability

When information disclosed relates directly to the efficiency and effectiveness of the force or its officers it is generally of benefit to the community. In this case, the release of information will enable the public to have exposure of the forces current investigation and devices which have been seized.

Considerations favouring Non Disclosure

Public Awareness

The Police Authority has made appropriate decisions on behalf of the public regarding the perceived risks and necessary development of appropriate resources in terms of the workload and capability. To disclose further detail would provide information to those with a criminal intent who may wish to take advantage of this or any other Force where they believed insufficient resources were unavailable to meet the growing demands.

Effective Conduct

It is a core role of the Force to ensure that any disclosure does not put the community in a position of increased risk. To disclose further detail relating to the specifics of investigations would, as identified above, provide a level of information which would benefit those of criminal intent.

Investigations

It is the Association of Chief Police Officers' approach that information relating to an investigation will rarely be disclosed under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. Whilst such information maybe released in order to serve a "core policing purpose" - to prevent or detect crime or to protect life or property - it will only be disclosed following a Freedom of Information request if there is a strong public interest consideration favouring disclosure.

Back to Category List