WRITTEN ON December 9th, 2008 BY William Heath AND STORED IN Data nitwittery, Foundation of Trust, What do we want?
David writes in with a non-comment:
Quite right. I missed it. Cheers Dave.
Here the ethnographer can observe the “normal percentage of nitwits and crooks” theory playing out entirely as foreseen:
A corrupt police officer planned to make more than £2 million by using confidential details to blackmail registered sex offenders and sell information to wealthy criminals, a court heard yesterday.
Using intelligence from a police internal computer system Amerdeep Johal, 29, wrote letters to ten convicted sex offenders and one suspected offender, demanding that they pay him up to £31,000 or he would expose them to their families, neighbours and employers, the Old Bailey was told…Mr Johal was working as a constable at West End Central police station in July last year, using the Crimint system to get informaton for frontline officers, but he abused his positon to use the Metropolitan Police computer to compile a list of targets that he could extort money from, it was said.
Some Met Police apologist somewhere is muttering about “isolated incident”. Someone else is promising a thorough review of procedures, or praising our police, or saying our access controls are second to none in their thoroughness. Is anybody official questioning the wisdom (and in many cases legality) of granting wide access to personal data a range centrally held databases?
Well, not yet. But I start to sense a level of listening which was perhaps not there before. Let’s not get too shrill, let’s stay constructive. Let’s talk to the people who want to do the right thing, over the heads of those who merely want to do it right. Let’s take practical steps to offer constructive alternatives (eg the VRM model for non-coercive, elective applications). What Mr Johal is accused of is serious stuff. He’s pleading that he was a nitwit but the evidence suggests he is also a crook. But his is an essential role as this tragicomedy plays out.
2 Responses to “Policeman Amerdeep Johal accused of data nitwittery and crookery”
This is as William Heath states ‘serious stuff’. However should Police and other agencies be restricted in their access to information they hold and collect? I say no. After all the majority of law abiding citizens details are not even recorded by Police, other than of course vehicle details. Doing the right thing does not always improve things and quite often degrades a current process or system that, in fact, for the main works well.
Police and other agencies need information freely and in real time, to be able to conduct their jobs effectively and properly. Why should there be any ‘constructive alternatives’ other than from the relevant authority? Anyone else surely has not the experience to comment. All to often public opinion (normally the opinion of an outspoken minority) and political view overrule the knowledge and common sense of the people whom actually do the job. The issue here is simple. What Pc Johal did was wrong and for that he is being punished.
Hi,
A combination shameless plug and something that may be of interest to your readers: I compile lists of data abuses and data losses from the media and elsewhere.