theForum is run by the charity Unlock. We do not actively moderate, monitor or edit contributions but we may intervene and take any action as we think necessary. Further details can be found in our terms of use. If you have any concerns over the contents on our site, please either register those concerns using the report-a-post button or email us at forum@unlock.org.uk.


ICO refusal to ask Google to remove links


ICO refusal to ask Google to remove links

Author
Message
david123
david123
Supreme Being
Supreme Being (1.8K reputation)Supreme Being (1.8K reputation)Supreme Being (1.8K reputation)Supreme Being (1.8K reputation)Supreme Being (1.8K reputation)Supreme Being (1.8K reputation)Supreme Being (1.8K reputation)Supreme Being (1.8K reputation)Supreme Being (1.8K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21, Visits: 1.8K
Six years ago I was convicted of downloading indecent images and given a 1 year suspended sentence and 10 years SHPO and 10 years on the SOR. This was reported in the local press and was picked up by a couple of vigilante sites who copied and pasted the story along with photos they took from my then Facebook account. Six years on I have managed to get the SHPO dismissed so my offence is now classed as spent. If you Google my name now the original newspaper story no longer appears as it has been archived (yesterdays news) but links to a vigilante site called Track Em Down (TED) do still appear so I put is a request to Google asking for these links to my name to be removed as my conviction was over six years ago and is now spent and my SHPO has been dismissed.
They replied with their standard template rejection letter saying it was still in the public interest for links to this vigilante website to be linked to my name. I then contacted the ICO explaining that my conviction is now sprint and that a crown court judge had dismissed my SHPO five years early having read reports on my rehabilitation from the police and the probation service and that the vigilante site in question encourages vigilante action against people identified on their site so I could be in danger of attack and that I was finding it hard to find employment as most employers these days google the names of applicants to see what kind of social media presence they have and  they can find out about my spent conviction which legally they have no right to know about. Three months later I received a reply saying that the ICO agree with Googles decision and are going to take no action. I can only conclude that if you raise a concern with the ICO and you are a SO they don't even bother to look into it  (you get everything you deserve)
GO

Threaded View

Threaded View
david123 - 2 Years Ago
AB2014 - 2 Years Ago
punter99 - 2 Years Ago
AB2014 - 2 Years Ago
Was - 2 Years Ago
                     + x [quote] [b] Was - 20 Jun 22 2:56 PM [/b] +...
AB2014 - 2 Years Ago
                         + x [quote] [b] AB2014 - 20 Jun 22 3:40 PM [/b] +...
david123 - 2 Years Ago
                             + x [quote] [b] david123 - 8 Jul 22 12:13 PM [/b]...
khafka - 2 Years Ago
                                 + x [quote] [b] khafka - 8 Jul 22 2:16 PM [/b] +...
david123 - Last Year
                                     + x [quote] [b] david123 - 7 Feb 23 11:02 AM [/b]...
AB2014 - Last Year
                                         + x [quote] [b] AB2014 - 7 Feb 23 11:28 AM [/b] +...
punter99 - Last Year
                                             + x [quote] [b] punter99 - 7 Feb 23 3:02 PM [/b] +...
AB2014 - Last Year
                                     + x [quote] [b] david123 - 7 Feb 23 11:02 AM [/b]...
Lineofduty - Last Year
                                         + x [quote] [b] Lineofduty - 9 Feb 23 3:09 PM [/b]...
AB2014 - Last Year
                                             + x [quote] [b] AB2014 - 9 Feb 23 3:42 PM [/b] +...
david123 - Last Year
                                                 + x [quote] [b] david123 - 12 Feb 23 9:50 AM [/b]...
AB2014 - Last Year
                                                     + x [quote] [b] AB2014 - 13 Feb 23 10:15 AM [/b] +...
david123 - Last Year
                                                         + x [quote] [b] david123 - 13 Feb 23 10:27 AM [/b]...
AB2014 - Last Year
                                                         + x [quote] [b] david123 - 13 Feb 23 10:27 AM [/b]...
punter99 - Last Year
                                                             + x [quote] [b] punter99 - 13 Feb 23 11:44 AM [/b]...
khafka - Last Year
                                                                 + x [quote] [b] khafka - 13 Feb 23 4:56 PM [/b]...
Lineofduty - Last Year
                                                                     + x [quote] [b] Lineofduty - 14 Feb 23 11:24 AM [/b]...
punter99 - Last Year
                                                                 + x [quote] [b] khafka - 13 Feb 23 4:56 PM [/b] +...
AB2014 - Last Year
                                     + x [quote] [b] david123 - 7 Feb 23 11:02 AM [/b]...
elpres - Last Year
                                         + x [quote] [b] elpres - 8 Mar 23 3:55 PM [/b] +...
Lineofduty - Last Year
                                         + x [quote] [b] elpres - 8 Mar 23 3:55 PM [/b] +...
AB2014 - Last Year
punter99 - Last Year
david123 - Last Year
punter99 - Last Year
david123 - Last Year
khafka - Last Year
david123 - Last Year
                 + x [quote] [b] david123 - 24 Mar 23 1:55 PM [/b]...
Lineofduty - Last Year


Similar Topics


As a small but national charity, we rely on charitable grants and individual donations to continue running theForum. We do not deliver government services. By being independent, we are able to respond to the needs of the people with convictions. Help us keep theForum going.

Donate Online

Login
Existing Account
Email Address:


Password:


Select a Forum....
























































































































































































theForum


Search