Dishonest, Disintegrated, Opaque and Fairly Worrying

National Crime Squad, Information Booklet, 2002

"102 UK Kids Saved From Paedos" "More Than 100 Children in the UK Have Been Rescued from Child Abuse" "Paedophile Probe Saves 102 Children" "Paedo Op Saves 100 Kids" "Child Porn Crackdown Rescues 102 Children" "Net Paedophile Children 'Saved'" "Anti-Paedophile Operation ''Rescues 102 Children''" "100 KIDS RESCUED BY PORN PROBE" "Child Porn Investigation Saves 102 UK Children from Abuse" "PROBE SAVING CHILDREN" "Kids Saved in Porn Blitz" "Crackdown on Internet Paedophiles Saved 102 Children in UK from Abuse, Police Say" "SHOCK OF ORE" "102 Children Have Been Identified, Traced and Protected" Full articles The Background In April, 2004, Assistant Chief Constable Jim Gamble, of the National Crime squad, made a startling claim to his fellow officers, at a seminar, in Birmingham. His words (propogated by him) were interpreted, by the media, as shown above. Officer Gamble implied that these children had now been identified, removed from the grasp of child porn-owning, sexual offenders and were now in safe havens, thanks to him and his staff. This was to be applauded; the problem was, we know how officer Gamble operates. Here is the continuing search for the truth. Officer Gamble continues as normal.     Discussion and News - CEOP Centre It Took The Death of Many Men to Pay for This Discussion and News - Dishonest, Disintegrated, Opaque and Fairly Worrying

"I thought I knew" "I thought I knew who he was" "I couldn't get away" "He hurt me" "It was out of control" "I couldn't stop it" "It's better to tell someone" "Someone who can make it stop" "Then it won't happen at all" "Now I know - it's never too late" "Cus, you see ... I thought I knew"     Jim Gamble, Chief Executive of the UK's new Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre     "We can name 102 children clearly we won't - and can also name and link them to the actual abuser. Jim Gamble."     "These are individuals who have actually been  charged with abuse related offences."     In 102 cases there was evidence children in the UK  had been abused so that pornographic images could be  traded online. In those cases the perpetrators have been arrested or the children found a safe refuge. Jim Gamble,  assistant chief constable of the National Crime Squad, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.

The Time Line

14th April 2004	From the beginning of 2004, I commented on Jim Gamble (knowing that the NCIS/NCS would be monitoring MBS?). I also sent an email, or two, which were ignored. Following his announcement, at the Birmingham seminar, I sent this email, asking: "I am disappointed that you failed to reply to my last email. You and your colleagues have squandered tens of millions of pounds, in the debacle, which is Operation Ore ... Mr Gamble - perhaps, on this occasion, you will have the integrity to respond to my email?"
15th April 2004	The following day, I emailed Catherine Feast, National Crime Squad Corporate Communications, with this email, enquiring about a copy of Jim Gamble's presentation: "Will a transcript of Mr Gamble's presentation (14/4/04) be available, in the near future? Thank you."
15th April 2004	I receive a response from Ms Feast. She states: "Mr Gamble has not made a presentation, so we have nothing to release on this."
26th May 2004	I email Ms Feast, expressing my confusion, stating: "Are you saying that the actual statement from Mr Gamble, at this seminar, will not be available? How is it that the press had ''copy'' so early? Were they invited to the seminar and on what criteria? I am sure Mr Gamble would not like to see, whatever he (actually) said, distorted by the press, as it has been?" There was no response to the email.
22nd-24th January 2005	Through the Association of Chief Police Officers I ensure that a Freedom of Information Act 2000 request is forwarded to the NCS. ACPO responds: "Your request has been forwarded to the NCS."
21st February 2005	I inform the MBS? Operation Ore forum that the FIA 2000 request, contains the following questions: (1) What, precisely, is meant by "the rescue of 102 children from abuse"? (2) What, precisely, is meant by "removed from areas of abuse and risk"? (3) What criteria were used for this? (4) How many of these ''102'' children were in the United Kingdom, at the time of removal? (5) How many of these children were removed from the same 'location/family'? (6) How many of these children have been returned to the same 'location/family'?
25th February 2005	Letter from NCS, stating that the request will be processed within 20 working days.
22nd March 2005	Letter from NCS, apologising that there will be a delay. The amended date is 8th April 2006.
15th April 2005	The response:
RECORD ONE What, precisely, is meant by "the rescue of 102 children from abuse"? The Freedom of Information Act 2000 is designed to provide members of the public with access to recorded material, not to give opinions or interpret legislation etc. Having therefore responded in terms of our recorded material I can help you no further. What, precisely, is meant by "removed from areas of abuse and risk"? The Freedom of Information Act 2000 is designed to provide members of the public with access to recorded material, not to give opinions or interpret legislation etc. Having therefore responded in terms of our recorded material I can help you no further. What criteria were used for this? The Freedom of Information Act 2000 is designed to provide members of the public with access to recorded material, not to give opinions or interpret legislation etc. Having therefore responded in terms of our recorded material I can help you no further. How many of these "102" children were in the United Kingdom, at the time of removal? All of the children were in the UK at the time of removal. How many of these children were removed from the same"location/family"? We do not hold this data. We would suggest you contact the individual regional forces who may hold this material. How many of these children have been returned to the same "location/family"? We do not hold this data. We would suggest you contact the individual regional forces who may hold this material. Secondly, I am also aware that ACPO forwarded an email from me to them to you, and you have failed to respond. Why is this? The Freedom of Information Act 2000 is designed to provide members of the public with access to recorded material, not to give opinions or interpret legislation etc. Having therefore responded in terms of our recorded material i can help you no further. Thirdly, I was informed by your press office, that SOCA will be exempt from the FOI. Please direct me to the legislation which enables this exemption. Please refer to the draft SOCA on the Parliament website on www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/1 d200405.1 dbills/024/2005024.htm Security Notice: Please ensure that there is no reference or indication to National Crime Squad, or 'police "generally (e.g. ranks, posts) on the outer cover of correspondence to National Crime Squad units or premises.   "The Freedom of Information Act 2000 is designed to provide members of the public with access to recorded material, not to give opinions or interpret legislation etc. Having therefore responded in terms of our recorded material I can help you no further." Really? The Home Office and its Agencies are committed, under the Freedom of Information Act to: • promote informed policy making and debate • provide timely and accessible information to explain the Department's policies, actions and decisions • and respond to reasonable requests for information. Any request to the Home Office for information will be handled in accordance with the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/inside/foi/index.html (Link dead - how strange) Not to worry ... http://web.archive.org/web/20050308201254/http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/inside/foi/index.html Mar 08, 2005

"We do not hold this data. We would suggest you contact the individual regional forces who may hold this material."

Alrighty then ... time for someone else to deal with that issue:

15th June 2005

I am recalled to prison on false allegations. It is claimed, in official documentation, that the NCS were involved in this process. The NCS deny knowledge of such participation.
 

28th October 2005

I am released from prison, following a successful oral hearing with the Parole Board.
 

17th November 2005

I contact the NCS, once more, by post:

Mr Jeff Winterbottom,
Records Manager,
PO Box 2500,
London,
SW1V 2WF

17th November, 2005.

Dear Mr Winterbottom,

Thank you for your recent confirmation that the NCS were not involved in the closure of MBS?

This is, almost certainly, my final FOA 2000 request to the NCS before its absorption into SOCA.

'Net paedophile children ''saved'''

Police say some Operation Ore paedophiles have re-offended

[snip]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3624131.stm

The request:

(1) "Senior detectives will be updated on an international investigation into child pornography on the internet at a briefing on Wednesday."

What was the location, date and title of this ‘briefing’?

(2) "We can name 102 children clearly we won't - and can also name and link them to the actual abuser. Jim Gamble, National Crime Squad."

"These are individuals who have actually been charged with abuse related offences. "So we can name 102 children - clearly we won't - and can also name and link them to the actual abuser."

Where did officer Gamble obtain this information?

Where is this evidence located?

What is the nature of this evidence?

(3) "In 102 cases there was evidence children in the UK had been abused so that pornographic images could be traded online."

Where is this evidence located?

What is the nature of this evidence?

End of request

You must bear in mind that Officer Gamble shared this in the public domain.

Thank you for your assistance.

Yours Sincerely,

Dr Nigel Leigh Oldfield
Director and WebManager
Mad, Bad or Sad?
________________________
TRUTH: HUMANITY: JUSTICE
 

12th December 2005

Fax a copy of the letter to NCS.
 

5th January 2006

Letter from NCS, stating that the request will be processed within 20 working days.
 

24th January 2006

Letter from NCS, apologising that there will be a delay. The amended date is 28th February 2006.
 

21st-27th March 2006

Two telephone calls made to NCS - left voicemail.
 

27th March 2006

The response:
 

Freedom of Information Act Request Reference Number: 00020 I write in connection with your request for information dated 17th November 2005 concerning Operation Ore details within a BBC news article. For the reasons set out below however, this Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires National Crime Squad, when refusing to provide such information (because the information is exempt), to provide you, the applicant, with a notice. This notice should (a) State that fact, (b) Specify the exemption in question and (c) State (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies. The exemption (s) applicable to the information are as follows:- Section 31 - disclosure would be prejudicial to the core role of policing Section 3 8 - health and safety. Each of these exemptions is a qualified exemption and requires the consideration of a balancing act of a Public Interest Test. Harm • The essence of the work undertaken by the police service is to protect both individuals and society as a whole. The flow of information to the police is essential to its work and any release of information provided in confidence during an investigation could adversely affect the future flow and could compromise the confidence of individuals supplying the police with information. As a consequence, reports resulting from investigations may contain elements of what is said or divulged to the police and therefore has an established law of confidentially attached to what is said or divulged to the police. This equally applies whether the individual giving the information was a suspect, victim, complainant or witness. In this instance not only might individual sources be compromised but also the basic co-operation with other agencies. Substantial harm to future investigations would ensue if this confidentiality were to be breached. Public Interest Test Considerations Favouring Disclosure Accountability The actions of the police service should be open to a check of accountability in relation to their provision of effective core functions and appropriate application of legislation. Disclosure of police strategies, reports, planning and procedure would go some way towards reassuring the public that the police service is effectively considering their obligations. Accountability for public funds The very nature of police service responsibilities and core functions lead to many major covert / overt investigations, operations and prosecutions being undertaken. Information relating to the effective use of public funds for these purposes will always be relevant to the public. Considerations Favouring Non-Disclosure Efficient and effective conduct of the service The current and future law enforcement role of the police service in general would be compromised if the basic methodology and structures were compromised. The work of the police service is about collaboration with many parties who could have their operational issues compromised. Flow of Information to the service The lack of confidentiality would deter the public from providing information to the service. An example of this would be the need to protect the flow of information from, and the identity of, any individuals involved. The public will only come forward and provide information when they are satisfied that the information they provide will be treated in confidence. This is particularly relevant to planning, investigation techniques, and strategy development. Criminal Investigation It is established law that confidentiality attaches to what is said or divulged to the police in the course of a criminal investigation. This applies equally to a suspect, the complainant, a witness or an informant. Where this confidentiality exists, the starting proposition should always be maintenance of the confidentiality save where disclosure is necessary for the furtherance of a criminal investigation, the apprehension of offenders at large, the detection of crime or the general administration of the criminal justice system. Operational reports In the course of investigations reports are produced which may be circulated to others associated in investigating similar types of criminal activity. The information contained in these reports may include details of methods and tactics used. The disclosure of these methods and tactics could render them invalid for further operations. Health and safety of operational staff The confirmation of venues where operational staff meet to disseminate specific reports and discuss tactics could render any future meetings worthless. This is due to individuals being able to obtain attendee lists which they may use to target staff or future meetings. Balancing Test I believe that on balance it is not in the public interest to release information which discloses the information requested. The disclosure of the information within these documents, whilst providing the individual requestor with detail, would substantially undermine the accepted level of confidentiality which underpins the flow of information and assistance from all contacts during a criminal investigation. Information within these documents was obtained during a criminal investigation and as such the Constabulary are under a duty as data controllers to process the information only for the purpose collected. This cannot include disclosure to a third person otherwise than for the purpose collected without the agreement of the individual concerned, an order of the Court/Information Commission. In this instance disclosure would not be for the purpose the information was collected. In accordance with the Act, this letter represents a formal Refusal Notice for this particular part of your request. This action cannot be taken as confirmation or denial that the National Crime Squad holds the information you have asked for. Your attention is drawn to the attached sheet which details your right of complaint. Should you have any further inquiries concerning this matter, please write or contact Mr J Winterbottom on telephone number 0870 267 2001 quoting the request reference number above. I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your interest in the National Crime Squad. Yours sincerely MR J WINTERBOTTOM RECORDS MANAGER Security, Notice: Please ensure that there is no reference or indication to National Crime Squad, or ' jvolice"generally (e.g. ranks, posts) on the outer cover of correspondence to National Crime Squad units or premises.

Let us make it crystal clear. I asked when and where an event occurred. I asked where a senior police officer had obtained information. which he, personally, ensured the media would distribute. During the week of receiving this letter, I left a telephone message on the NCS (always unmanned) voicemail, stating that Mr Winterbottom should initiate the internal complaints procedure. There has been no reply, at this time (1/5/06). I also informed him that I would now contact the Information Commissioner. I appreciate that time limits exist. This is not a problem.

27th March 2006

The Times reports that the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) is now operational.

"It amalgmates the National Crime Squad, the National Criminal Intelligence Service (NCIS), and investigators from Customs and the Home Office's Immigration Service."
 

24th April 2006

Sky News reports that the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (CEOP) centre is now operational.

"Jim Gamble, the head of the new body, said: "The CEOP centre is the most significant development in child protection in recent years.""

"CEOP is affiliated to the Serious Organised Crime Agency, the UK's new FBI-style organisation."
 

So - Where Now, On This Issue?

Of course, it would be easy to make judgments, at this time, and I have been prompted to do to so. However, I will allow the reader to make their own judgements, for now.

For me, there is another stage, and that is, communication will now be made with the following:

Hazel Blears - Minister of State for Crime, Security and Communities. Paul Goggins is the Under-secretary of State who supports her.

Charles Clarke - The Home Secretary.

The Information Commisioner's Office.

The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO).

The Guardian Newspaper.

Specific agenda will be fashioned for each body.

Dr Nigel Leigh Oldfield, 1/5/06

Emails

To: info@ncs.police.uk

14/4/04

FAO Jim Gamble - You Have Squandered Our Money.
Dear Mr Gamble,

I am disappointed that you failed to reply to my last email.

You and your colleagues have squandered tens of millions of pounds, in the debacle, which is Operation Ore.

In regards to your comments, today:

*****

Let us accept that Gamble''s figures are not spin, and, I have to say, in his case, I am unable to this.

102 ''saved'' children.
1230 ''convicted''.
8% ''saved''.

Estimate of ''abused'' child females in UK = 25%
Estimate of ''abused'' child males in UK = 14% (minimum)
Mean of ''abused'' children in the UK = 20%

The police would have been twice as effective, knocking on doors at random.

WM

http://madbadorsad.org/sadbbs/viewtopic.php?p=5178#5178

*****

Mr Gamble - perhaps, on this occasion, you will have the integrity to respond to my email?

Thank you.

Yours,

WebManager.
www.madbadorsad.org
www.madbadorsad.org/sadbbs
webmanager@madbadorsad.org
*
Knowing Who We Are
Not What You Think We Are
*

Catherine Feast, National Crime Squad Corporate Communications

15/4/04

020 7238 2510
press.office@ncs.police.uk.

Dear Ms Feast,

Will a transcript of Mr Gamble''s presentation (14/4/04) be available, in the near future?

Thank you.

WebManager

www.madbadorsad.org
webmanager@madbadorsad.org
*
Knowing Who We Are
Not What You Think We Are
*
WM

Subj: Re: FAO Ms Catherine Feast
Date: 15/04/2004 09:11:22 GMT Daylight Time
From: press.office@ncs.police.uk
To: webmanager@madbadorsad.org
Sent from the Internet (Details)

Mr Gamble has not made a presentation, so we have nothing to release on this.

regards

Catherine

Catherine Feast, National Crime Squad Corporate Communications
020 7238 2510
press.office@ncs.police.uk.

Dear Ms Feast,

Many thanks for your prompt reply.

"Mr Gamble has not made a presentation, so we have nothing to release on this.

regards

Catherine"

I am a little confused, with Mr Gamble speaking on various TV and radio news programmes, yesterday and:

"Detectives in a global crackdown on suspected paedophiles rescued more than 100 British children from abusers, officers at a seminar in Birmingham said yesterday."

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/story.jsp?story=511566&lt

Are you saying that the actual statement from Mr Gamble, at this seminar, will not be available?

How is it that the press had ''copy'' so early? Were they invited to the seminar and on what criteria?

I am sure Mr Gamble would not like to see, whatever he (actually) said, distorted by the press, as it has been?

Thank you again for your assistance.

WebManager
www.madbadorsad.org
webmanager@madbadorsad.org
*Knowing Who We Are
Not What You Think We Are*

WM

Association of Chief Police Officers of England Wales and Northern Ireland - (ACPO).
info@acpo.police.uk
ACC J. Gamble: The Freedom of Information Act 2000.
To whom it may concern,

Within one week, I will be challenging Assistant Chief Constable Jim Gamble, on a number of issues, under The Freedom of Information Act 2000.

As you may be aware, the NCS has no direct email contact (which it should, for FOI purposes), thus, I am obliged to work through your body. I trust that this is acceptable.

I will extract a recent thread, from our website, to illustrate the main thrust of our request, at this time:

Op Ore - Leicester police report

"POLICE SEIZE IMAGES IN CHILD-PORN CRACKDOWN

BY CIARAN FAGAN

10:30 - 22 January 2005

Police have seized at least 75,000 pornographic images of children and rounded up more than 60 suspects in a two-year hunt for internet paedophiles in Leicestershire.

Senior officers today said the Leicestershire force has almost completed its part in Operation Ore - the international hunt for paedophiles who use the internet to trade in obscene images.

The operation was launched in May 2002 after the FBI passed details to British police of UK credit cards used to buy indecent images of children from American websites.

Some sites were selling chilling, pornographic images of children as young as five.

Local forces and the National Crime Squad then began tracing suspects through their credit card details. The first wave of arrests, including Leicestershire, began in May 2002.

Police today confirmed they had seized almost 300 computers, some of which proved to be storing at least 75,000 indecent images of children.

The number of people convicted is still being kept under wraps, however the force has confirmed it has made 66 arrests since the operation began.

Many have passed through the courts and received sentences of up to 15 years.

Those convicted as a result of Leicestershire police''s role in the crackdown included a university academic, a police officer and a youth worker.

Nationally, at least 100 children have been rescued from "abusive conditions" during the course of visits to suspects'' homes, the National Crime Squad confirmed. It could not say whether any of these children, who have been removed to "places of safety" were found in Leicestershire.

Six people have been cautioned for what are believed to have been more minor offences and a small number of cases are still going through the courts.

However, senior officers stressed they are still actively hunting paedophiles who surf the internet for indecent images of children.

Chief Superintendent Alistair Helm, head of the Leicestershire force''s specialist crime investigation department, said: "We have and will continue to support any initiative locally and nationally to detect the perpetrators of this vile crime."

The number of paedophiles convicted across the country since the operation began is unknown, however, at least 7,000 credit card details were passed to the National Crime Squad two years ago.

A spokeswoman for the National Crime Squad said: "There were critics who said it would take 10 years to carry out Operation Ore, but it is virtually all over after just two years.

Neatly ignoring the fact that with a population of 1 million Leics. police will have had almost 150 suspects on the Landslide list. so they have completed less than half after almost 3 years, and now say they are finished.

"People who say we are only seizing pictures of children which are somehow not real should consider that in the course of visiting suspects'' homes we have found 109 children in real situations of abuse."

Hmm I wonder what a "real situation of abuse" means, actually being sexually abused, being abused in some other way, other children being abused or just ''deemed'' to be at-risk. A little clarification might be interesting. Still less than 10% of the number that was being anticipated by the "33% are abusers" claim.

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=132683&command=displayContent&sourceNode=132377&contentP
K=11696032*****

Quote:

Police have seized at least 75,000 pornographic images of children and rounded up more than 60 suspects in a two-year hunt for internet paedophiles in Leicestershire.

Hunt ?

Here''s a list of names and credit card details guys... go get ''em!

Hardly the cutting edge of police investigatary technique. Will the silly sods never stop patting themselves on the back for being able to read?

Quote:

Operation Ore - the international hunt for paedophiles who use the internet to trade in obscene images.

That kind of reporting makes me angry beyond belief. How many other damning labels are the going to attach to this twisted operation?

_________________

The truth is out there - if you can accept it

*****

Quote:

Nationally, at least 100 children have been rescued from "abusive conditions" during the course of visits to suspects'' homes, the National Crime Squad confirmed. It could not say whether any of these children, who have been removed to "places of safety" were found in Leicestershire.

''Abusive conditions'' - dirty house, drug/drink/violent adult in house, adult who argues with the SS/police on the day and on and on.

I have no doubt some have records for sex offences (too many folk out there, not to be on the list) - how many offences on the children in their care or on children in general, please?

Of course you can say how long they were ''removed'' (and then returned) &ldots; and you can say how many in your force area were involved - there is nothing in law to stop you.

You will not, because you, and we, know you that you are lying. As soon as I have completed my FOI email to Jim, we will confirm your lies.

Quote:

"People who say we are only seizing pictures of children which are somehow not real should consider that in the course of visiting suspects'' homes we have found 109 children in real situations of abuse."

Well, ''you'' have not (see ''nationally'' above) - and, now, this is first and last chance ... put up or shut up, before you, too, are shown to be a child-saving zealot (at best).

WM

http://madbadorsad.org/sadbbs/viewtopic.php?p=23495#23495

Please confirm that you are able to accept my FOI request, towards Jim Gamble, if not, please direct me to an appropriate contact.

Many thanks for reading this email and I expect, and look forward to, a reply, under the FOI Act, within 20 working days.

Yours faithfully,

Full Name Provided.

WebManager
www.madbadorsad.org/sadbbs
www.madbadorsad.org
webmanager@madbadorsad.org
*Knowing Who We Are
Not What You Think We Are*

WM

Subject: RE: ACC J. Gamble: The Freedom of Information Act 2000.
Date: 24/01/2005 14:27:15 GMT Standard Time

From: hannah.gardiner@acpo.pnn.police.uk
Reply To:
To: webmanager@madbadorsad.org
CC:
BCC:
Sent on:

Sent from the Internet (Details)

Your request has been forwarded to the NCS.

-----Original Message-----

From: webmanager [SMTP:webmanager@madbadorsad.org]
Sent: 22 January 2005 14:23
To: info acpo
Subject: ACC J. Gamble: The Freedom of Information Act 2000.
[Snip]

DISCLAIMER: ACPO is not subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The content of this e-mail should not be disclosed without consulting its author.

Thank you Hannah, but you can bite me on the consultation.

WM
 

Dear All,

I had to move swiftly, for reasons indicated in the communication:

[quote]press.office@ncs.police.uk
FAO: Ms Sarah Adcock

Dear Ms Adcock,

Thank you for dealing with my request.

I am requesting answers, to the following questions, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. They relate to the comments made by ACC Jim Gamble, relating to Operation Ore:

http://madbadorsad.org/sadbbs/viewtopic.php?t=1713&;start=0

(1) What, precisely, is meant by "the rescue of 102 children from abuse"?

(2) What, precisely, is meant by "removed from areas of abuse and risk"?

(3) What criteria were used for this?

(4) How many of these ''''102'''' children were in the United Kingdom, at the time of removal?

(5) How many of these children were removed from the same ''''location/family''''?

(6) How many of these children have been returned to the same ''''location/family''''?

You will appreciate that ACC Jim Gamble has made these claims, publicly, and we are requiring this information, under the criteria, quoted clearly, below:

***************************************

Values

These values have been developed with our staff to set the standards for the organisation and ensure we continue to provide the highest quality service.

The National Crime Squad will deliver its mission with:

+ Honesty
+ Integrity
+ Transparency
+ Fairness

www.nationalcrimesquad.police.uk/downloads/AnnualReport2003_04.pdf

Who can I ask for information?

A full list of the public authorities covered by the act is available here. You should note that some public authorities are described generically (e.g ''Any government department''), whilst others are listed by name (e.g the Financial Services Authority). Broadly, Freedom of Information applies to all public authorities within the following categories:

Central and Local Government
The health sector
The police and armed forces
The education sector
Other Public Bodies in England, Wales and Northern Ireland (Scotland is covered by its own Act)

The Freedom of Information Act gives anybody the right to access information held by public authorities including Central Government. This means that members of the public have a right to access information held by the Home Office.

An overview of the Act can be found below. Full details of the FOI Act are detailed on the Department of Constitutional Affairs (DCA) website at http://www.foi.gov.uk/.

http://www.foi.gov.uk/faqs.htm#part3

Quote:

The Home Office and its Agencies are committed, under the Freedom of Information Act to:

promote informed policy making and debate
provide timely and accessible information to explain the Department''s policies, actions and decisions
and respond to reasonable requests for information.

Any request to the Home Office for information will be handled in accordance with the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act.

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/inside/foi/index.html

***************************************

Secondly, I am also aware that ACPO forwarded an email from me to them to you, and you have failed to respond. Why is this?

Thirdly, I was informed by your press office, that SOCA will be exempt from the FOI. Please direct me to the legislation which enables this exemption.

Thank you for your help and I look forward to your reply, within 20 working days. Please respond to this email, ASAP, so that I know that you have received it.

Yours sincerely,

Name and address supplied.

WebManager
www.madbadorsad.org/sadbbs
www.madbadorsad.org

webmanager@madbadorsad.org
*Knowing Who We Are
Not What You Think We Are*

WM
 

Articles
 
OVER 100 CHILDREN RESCUED

More than 100 children in the UK have been rescued from child abuse thanks to an international operation co-ordinated in England and Wales by the National Crime Squad.

Operation Ore was launched in the UK in 2002 following an investigation by the U.S. Postal Inspection Service into Landslide Inc. in Ft. Worth, Texas - a multimillion-dollar Internet site selling adult pornography and images of child abuse.

Customers came from around the world, with more than 7000 individuals based in the United Kingdom.

Operation Ore was launched to deal with those identified and the National Crime Squad became the central co-ordinating agency in the operation, working with forces across the country.

At a one-day conference in the Midlands today senior officers and practitioners from every force in the England and Wales were updated with the national picture of the Operation and heard how their combined efforts have resulted in the rescue of 102 children from abuse.

National Crime Squad Assistant Chief Constable Jim Gamble said: "Operation Ore is a prime example of law enforcement agencies working together with the protection of children at the forefront.

"The National Crime Squad is committed to ensuring children and young people are protected from this kind of abuse and continues to work tirelessly with UK forces and other agencies to achieve this aim.

"Innocent, vulnerable children and young people have been systematically abused so that their persecutors can trade these images on the Internet and by other means.

"Their protection is paramount to our work and we will continue to seek out those who commit these vile acts and bring them to justice.

"The fact that more than 100 children in the UK alone have been identified and removed from areas of abuse and risk is good news, but it is a statistic we cannot celebrate.

"Thousands of people have been arrested, charged and convicted of viewing and trading in these images. Many offenders had thousands and thousands of images on their computer systems. We must all continue to work together to create an environment where children are not put at risk in this way at all.

"Today''s conference was about thanking all the forces who have helped to protect these children; sharing best practice and learning from each other so that we all become more sophisticated at tackling this type of crime."

Assistant Chief Constable Stuart Hyde, ACPO Lead on Combating Child Abuse on the Internet, said: "On behalf of the UK Police forces who have investigated these cases, rescued children and brought people to justice, I am pleased with the progress we have made. We still have much to do, particularly to manage the forensic examination of many computers, as well as seeking out other offenders.

&q