Recent Theft at Spar Warrington

  • Reference Number: 1795
  • Date released: 20 April 2009

Request

I am currently researching the recent armed thefts at the Spar store located in cinnamon brow on Saturday the 7th of March 2009.

I would appreciate any information on the event in question and any more recent information regarding or relating to the incident.

Response

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

Firstly, for your reference some information regarding the crime above is already in the public domain, to assist you with your enquiries please search google for "Cinnamon Brow Robbery".

Your request for further information has now been considered and I am not obliged to supply the information you have requested.

Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires Cheshire Constabulary, when refusing to provide such information (because the information is exempt) to provide you with a notice which a) states that fact, b) specifies the exemption in question and c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies.

Reasons for Decision

This information is exempt by virtue of the following sections:

Section 40 (2) (a) Personal Data - Absolute Exemption

Any information to which a request for information relates is also exempt information if -
(a) it constitutes personal data which does not fall within subsection (1) (your own personal data), and
(b) either the first or the second condition below is satisfied

(3) The first condition is:-
(a) in a case where the information falls within any of paragraphs (a) to (d) of the definition of "data" in section 1(1) of the Data Protection Act 1998, that the disclosure of the information to a member of the public otherwise than under this Act would contravene:-
(i) any of the data protection principles, or
(ii) section 10 of that Act (right to prevent processing likely to cause damage or distress), and
(b) in any other case, that the disclosure of the information to a member of the public otherwise than under this Act would contravene any of the data protection principles if the exemptions in section 33A(1) of the Data Protection Act 1998 (which relates to manual data held by public authorities) were disregarded.

(4) The second condition is that by virtue of any provision of Part IV of the Data Protection Act 1998 the information is exempt from section 7(1)(c) of that Act (data subject's right of access to personal data).

Section 38 (1) (a) & (b) Health & Safety

Section 31 (1) (a) (b) (c) Law Enforcement

Qualified Exemption which requires Evidence of Harm and a Public Interest Test

The application of these exemptions we feel are necessary to ensure that we do not jeopardise the prevention and detection of crime, or the administration of justice (S31). Also we feel that the information you have requested is personal data of a third party and to release personal data would breach the principles of the Data Protection Act 1998 and would be unlawful (S40).

Harm

The Freedom of Information Act makes it a legal requirement that a public authority has to provide information, unless it is exempt. In this case there is one qualified exemption and one absolute exemption being applied to this request. If this information were to be disclosed it would undoubtedly contravene a basic human right of the "Right to a fair trial" which is covered by the Human Rights Act 1998. Also it could set precedence which could result in all previous and future internal investigations being disclosed if the same principals were to be applied.

The release of information would not provide a tangible community benefit. Releasing such information raises concerns that individuals with relevant evidence may be reluctant to cooperate with the police. To release this information before the investigation has been completed and the person has been processed through the Criminal Justice System could jeopardise the Health & Safety of any witnesses and any other participants. It could also just as importantly release into the public the details of the actual investigation before that information has been scrutinised by the CPS, therefore running the very real risk that undue pressure being brought to bear on the decision making process and before the evidence is properly subject to scrutiny by the courts.

Public Interest Test

Considerations Favouring Disclosure

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 quality of the police investigation, as regards thoroughness, vigilance and transparency. There is also a public interest in releasing information that demonstrates the use of police resources.

Public participation

Disclosure could benefit the police service by encouraging public participation and the input of the public at large.

Considerations Favouring Non-disclosure

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.

Public Safety

There may be occasions where the release of information relating to public safety may not be in the public interest. Public safety is of paramount importance to the policing purpose and must be considered in respect of every release. Any action that detracts from the efficient and effective conduct of the police service and its' investigations will have a 'knock on' and negative effect upon public safety. Individuals may remain at large if investigations are undermined or thwarted by inappropriate disclosures of investigation details.

Human Rights and fair treatment of an individual

The public interest will not be served if disclosure breaches the obligations placed on an authority under the European Convention on Human Rights, particularly the right to life, fair trial and privacy. This principle applies to a wide range of individuals, from the offender themselves, to their families, the victims, and those non offenders, who might suffer intimidation or assault because of the information disclosed.

Balancing Test

When balancing the public interest test we have to consider whether the information should be released into the public domain. Arguments need to be weighed against each other. The most persuasive reason for disclosure is Accountability which needs to be compared to the strongest negative reason which in this case is Investigations. The police service cannot and will not disclose information which may jeopardise an investigation. The Information released under FOI Act, where exemptions apply, will only be done where there is a tangible community benefit which is more powerful than the harm that could be done. This does not apply in this case.

On balance, and from the harm evidenced above, and Section 40 (Absolute Exemption) the information requested should be protected and the exemptions applied.

Back to Category List