Official Secrets Act

[Rhyd6]

I don't want to get into a "lost" type discussion about Damien Green and the two police officers just to ascertain whether or not the police broke the law re disclosure of information obtained whilst they were employed. When I retired from the Civil Service my boss reminded me that even though I was retiring I was still subject to the official secrets act and that disclosure of sensitive matters relating to a specific person could result in criminal proceedings. Is this no longer the case?

R6

[staffordian]

The Official Secrets Act binds one for life.

The issue here is that the matters in question, and possibly the role of police officers more generally perhaps fall outwith the Act.

An ex Met bod was asked about this on the radio today, and his answer was that it certainly contravened tne police code of conduct, but a retired officer is not bound by this after leaving the force.

He also appeared to hint that even though matters discovered in the course of a different investigation should remain confidential, there might be cases where the public interest is best served by making some things public.

[didds]

Appreciating this may become LOST... AIUI the report was about porn found on the PC but in itself nothing "illegal". So I can't work out why its been made public. If they'd found evidence of a pirated version of a Disney film - would it have been reported? Or evidence of the PC being used for a personal rather than business usee - share trading maybe? Or private email accounts? And if not - why not?

didds

[Slarti]

Appreciating this may become LOST... AIUI the report was about porn found on the PC but in itself nothing "illegal". So I can't work out why its been made public. If they'd found evidence of a pirated version of a Disney film - would it have been reported? Or evidence of the PC being used for a personal rather than business usee - share trading maybe? Or private email accounts? And if not - why not?

didds

That is evidence of the PC being used for personal rather than business use.

Plus, the places porn comes from are some of the less secure places on the web, often infected with malware, so using them from within Parliament is a security risk.

It also goes to the standard of judgement of the MP in question.

Slarti

[swill453]

That is evidence of the PC being used for personal rather than business use.

Plus, the places porn comes from are some of the less secure places on the web, often infected with malware, so using them from within Parliament is a security risk.

It also goes to the standard of judgement of the MP in question.

But the most important aspect of it now, is that he has denied, multiple times, downloading or viewing porn on that computer.

If it transpires that he has lied, then for an MP that's a far more serious offence than any of the others.

Scott.

[redsturgeon]

If it transpires that he has lied, then for an MP that's a far more serious offence than any of the others.

Scott.

Is that because no MP has ever been known to lie?

I think the HoC would look very different if we got rid of every MP/minister shown to have lied.

John

[swill453]

Is that because no MP has ever been known to lie?

I think the HoC would look very different if we got rid of every MP/minister shown to have lied.

There are lies and lies.

Scott.

[dionaeamuscipula]

Appreciating this may become LOST... AIUI the report was about porn found on the PC but in itself nothing "illegal". So I can't work out why its been made public. If they'd found evidence of a pirated version of a Disney film - would it have been reported? Or evidence of the PC being used for a personal rather than business usee - share trading maybe? Or private email accounts? And if not - why not?

didds

Someone complained about inappropriate behaviour of what seems to me to be a relatively minor kind, which are denied. The Cabinet Office launched a behind-closed-doors inquiry as to whether the ministerial code had been broken. A senior policeman decided that the inquiry should be informed of the pornography find allegation. The Sunday Times found out about this allegation and splashed it. Green denied this as well and said it was a political smear. The story today seems to have been driven by this denial. The former officer is backing up the claims made by his former boss. Green has again denied it. The story has included a statement that he had been using the PC for private e-mails, although this is as background not an allegation of impropriety. The question is not whether anything illegal has been found but whether he has broken the ministerial code, and the outcome if he is found guilty may be that he would be forced to resign. This would be highly embarrassing for the PM and the government. Now apparently David Davies has weighed in and is threatening to resign himself if Green (his former deputy) is forced to resign. A resignation by Davies would derail the Brexit process at a crucial stage.

DM

[swill453]

A resignation by Davies would derail the Brexit process at a crucial stage.

Fingers crossed then

Scott.

[richlist]

Yes, fingers crossed indeed......perhaps something good will come out of this, like Boris Johnson or Jacob Rees Mogg replacing David Davis.

[swill453]

Yes, fingers crossed indeed......perhaps something good will come out of this, like Boris Johnson or Jacob Rees Mogg replacing David Davis.

Not exactly what I was thinking. A no confidence vote, a general election with the liberals on a 2nd referendum platform was more what I had in mind.

Off topic? Me?

Scott.

[didds]

The question is not whether anything illegal has been found but whether he has broken the ministerial code, and the outcome if he is found guilty may be that he would be forced to resign.

Yup, indeed.

So if the policeman had found evidence instead of

* share dealing
* private emails
* a pirated version of "Frozen"

would he have mentioned it?

And if not - why not?

didds

[dionaeamuscipula]

Yup, indeed.

So if the policeman had found evidence instead of

* share dealing
* private emails
* a pirated version of "Frozen"

would he have mentioned it?

And if not - why not?

didds

Use for private emails *was* mentioned, but only in the context of the porn (AFAIK). With the rest, I guess it would depend on the scale.

I don't know the circumstances of why and how the first police officer came to bring this to the attention of the inquiry and the press. The second officer came forward because Green was denying everything and who knows? perhaps a chunk of cash. They seem to be acting against the code of conduct but they are ex police so it apparently doesn't apply.

It does seem like Green has upset someone and they are out to get him, and it would seem to me to be some one inside government or the Tory party. I have no idea what the motive might be. Or maybe he has just been unlucky.

DM

[Rhyd6]

We do seem to be getting into "lost" territory. Maybe I should just have asked if members of the police force are required to sign the official secrets act and if so will the officers who divulged sensitive information be prosecuted.

R6

[chas49]

We do seem to be getting into "lost" territory. Maybe I should just have asked if members of the police force are required to sign the official secrets act and if so will the officers who divulged sensitive information be prosecuted.

R6

Moderator Message:
As this is the Legal Issues Board, could further posts please stick to answering the question highlighted above, please? (chas49)

[gryffron]

Personal private information is covered by privacy law. Not by the official secrets act. I don't think there is any suggestion that the police officers have breached official secrets. Which is designed to protect the government and the country, not individuals. The information they have released is more a breach of privacy.

Serving police officers would certainly be disciplined for such a breach. I have no idea what they can do to retired ones.
The evidence presumably no longer exists, so the allegation cannot be proven, so Green could sue for slander/libel??

Gryff

[didds]

Serving police officers would certainly be disciplined for such a breach. I have no idea what they can do to retired ones.

remove their service pensions?

I suspect not however...

didds

[melonfool]

I deal with the Official Secrets Act a bit and I don't think it covers the Police (in this sort of situation).

I'm not sure what 'privacy laws' the pp is talking about, maybe they could let us know? I think it's more internal police rules and procedures that would affect this. All employment contracts I have ever seen say that the confidentiality that applies in employment continues post employment. So, a contract breach, for which the police could sue their former employee - but to what end? Damaging their reputation? I can't see them doing it, they hardly have much of a reputation worth damaging, frankly.

Green can sue for slander, of course, as no 'evidence' exists......as far as he knows*.....he would be ill advised to sue if he is not 100% sure he is right.

*who knows if the police officer downloaded the files to his own PC/USB stick, took a photo of the screen, sent the logs somewhere....who knows.....if they exist, of course, I'm not saying they do!

For me, the issue is also about the fact that the police officer said this streaming had gone on for several *hours*. What is wrong with the man, why wasn't he doing his job?
Oh, and for me, there is a bit of a difference to 'watching porn' and 'downloading porn'. Neither is great but once you start downloading you're into addicted territory, in my view, because it shows you want it to be available to you.

Mel

[swill453]

In the interview with the police officer, it was said that the browser history (or cache) had thousands of thumbnails of porn images in it.

All that shows is that some kind of index page was looked at. Maybe the result of a Google image search or something similar. A clued-up techy would have been able to determine exactly the circumstances, maybe none was available

No specific evidence of anything beyond that has been presented, as far as I've seen.

Scott.