|
A1_58162
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12,
Visits: 37
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xyou are in fact correct , but of course the police will never admit to this if they can get away with it . If you are beyond the 5 year point with a SHPO active , you are entitled to apply to the courts ( with out permission from the police ) to potentially have it discharged in full . If a SHPO is discharged the conviction would be considered as spent , regardless if you remained on the SOR . In order for a discharge , you must provide evidence to state why you believe the SHPO must be discharged , the main thing the courts will consider first is . Changes in your circumstances ( obtaining work , making new friends , new relationships , steps taken to keep you from re - offending ), issues in which the SHPO prevents you from a change in circumstance ( if the SHPO is preventing you from working and you can prove it , this will go in you ' re favor ) If you are considering taking this step , contact various solicitors and see if they allow legal aid to represent you . Not all solicitors will do this , but some might if you ask . This would mean you get free legal advice to proceed with your application . Other wise you would have to represent your self in court . I applied to have my SHPO discharged 2 years ago , I finally managed it Feb last year after many hearings due to the police failing to show . I was successful because I proved because of my SHPO , it was hindering my ability to not only seek out work , but relevant training to help aid me in to work also . Therefor , the SHPO it ' s self was preventing me from changing my circumstances . It is highly suggested for the best outcome , that police get on board to allow the discharge to happen , but considering the officer told you what you said was not true , It is very unlikely you will get their support in this . However , you could always talk to his superior if you wish . As for DBS checks , You are correct and I believe a basic will not show your convictions that are considered spent , but higher checks will list both unspent and spent convictions . Thanks xDanx, you ' ve basically confirmed what I thought . Obviously I don ' t know if my appeal will be granted , but I think I have a reasonable case , the crime was long before my sentencing and I have an categorical example of a job I got last year where I had 3 interviews and a long application process without being asked about criminal records only to lose the job the first day when they informed me they were going to do a basic DBS check ( after I signed ) and so I proactively disclosed my record to save the paperwork and delay . ( my MOSOVO officer recommending me no disclose if I ' m not asked , but I ' m still questioning my choices there ) I record all interactions I have with the police because of issues with their accuracy and general stating falsehoods , it ' s extremely concerning for me and just adds to my anxiety . I have recorded examples of them stating restriction on my SHPO that it doesn ' t contain and them later admitting they were wrong ( and they failed to inform me , as they said they would ) and such . That kind of management makes me very unsure of what I can / can ' t do which pushes me into being stuck at home alone unemployed and unable to go into public spaces just to ensure I don ’ t go to a “ bad place ” ( actual quote of theirs ). It seems so bizarre to me because those are exactly the circumstances that precipitated my offending in the first place and I just can ' t seem to get myself onto a productive path because of the police . I would consider a complaint to the police department , but this is a consistent issue I ' ve had with every officer I ' d dealt with , so it seems institusional and I can see many ways it could backfire onto me . I assume I would still have a MOSOVO officer while I ' m on the register , even if my conviction was spent ? So far I have had 2 different officers , I am due to get a new one soon I believe . But yes even while on the register with out a SHPO you will still get the visits , however . if you are able to get the SHPO discharged it means you are no longer bound to letting them check your devices , unless you allow them too willingly . I wanted to record all my interactions with them also but I was always never prepared to have something set up to record , fearing that if they noticed my phone was recording for example it would back fire on me . But recording them is 100 % a good move , I have had the officers make up quite a lot of rules which were not on my SHPO . But one thing my first PPU told me has stuck with me , " if it is not written on your SHPO then there is no restriction " Even after successfully discharging my SHPO , I still continue to struggle to find work and training to aid me back in to work due to rejections based on my information still being known and searchable . So although having it removed has lifted a massive weight off my shoulders , there are still challenges to over come . OK , that ' s a shame about the visits once off of the SHPO , but it ' s understandable . The irony is I don ’ t mind showing them my devices ever , SHPO or not , I ’ ve kept myself clean and want to stay so I think it ’ s best for me to show that even if they don ’ t have a court order . For the first 3 years they didn ’ t even bother checking my devices at all , then they only checked my phone and laptop when I ’ ve got many other devices I ’ ve offered them . One thing that made me laugh was them saying the knew what devices I have because they can see what connects to the internet , except I ’ m a techie and know that ’ s not true ( due to the routers NAT ) and even if they did they couldn ’ t know if a phone connected to my network is mine or a friends . It just made them sound unknowledgeable and / or dishonest . When checking my recording phone they ’ ve never mentioned me recording them and from questions they ’ ve asked it sounds like they don ’ t really know how to use smart devices . I ’ m actually tempted to screen record them next time they check to see what they do . OK , so the statement " if it is not written on your SHPO then there is no restriction " is interesting to me , as that basically means I have no practical restrictions to my life , despite their extremely oppressive but vague restrictions . I ’ m sorry you ’ re struggling still , I don ’ t expect getting rid of the SHPO is a silver bullet but I ’ m hoping it ’ s just dropping the hurdles a bit . Have you looked into getting your name delisted from search engines ? It ’ s part of the GDPR “ Right To Be Forgotten ” that you can request results to be removed . Only works in the UK / EU and they might decline based on “ public interest ”, but it ’ s worth a try as long as your conviction is spent . That ’ s one of my reasons for wanting mine spent . I have attempted to delist various links , however Google are un willing to remove . Due to " public interest " as you say I will make further attempts at a later date though Being quite techie myself , I can confirm the majority of the Police simply do not have a clue how tech works . They just make it all up as they go . That ’ s very unfortunate , I really hope that ’ s not the situation for me , otherwise I guess a change of name would be my best bet . Did you only apply to Google , or any others ? Did you apply to have the articles themselves removed by the publisher ? I hear that ’ s less likely to be successful , but it ’ s worth a shot just in case . Yes , one of the things that worries me is that every police officer I ’ ve dealt with has started off saying something along the lines to “ I ’ m not very technical ”, I appreciate they are being honest there , but I think it ’ s like going to a bike shop and the staff saying “ I don ’ t really know much about bikes , I don ’ t ride ”, it ’ s a red flag on many levels . And given we ’ re talking about 10 officers now ( 0 being technical ) it doesn ’ t make me confident that they are competent to protect the public nor the people under their supervision . I only attempted Google I never contacted publishers to have them removed as in my mind , there would be nothing stopping them from potentially re - publishing them , but given that my conviction is now considered spent I am not entirely sure if the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act might prevent them from doing so ? Something I plan to look further into at a later date . But from what I understand of it so far is " I have a legal right to live my life as if the offence never happened " My last PPU officer would say the exact same thing ! He would always remind me that he isn ' t very techie and has bad memory , but I know the memory part is a complete lie . Just a tactic they use to try trip up people . This is just my opinion , but the only " people " they intend to protect are themselves and their own . xDanx I ’ m definitely more dubious about contacting publishers regarding removing me , they are more invested in their own content then Google ( or other search engines ), but I am considering it . My article actually contains a stolen facebook profile image , so I could try a DMCA takedown notice , but again I ’ m worried about them getting vindictive so I ’ m waiting until hopefully they just don ’ t care . Yes , I have always wondered how much of the police incompetence I perceive is real vs acted , but honestly being recorded falsely stating details about spent convictions on a phone they are checking at the time is a level of committing to the part of incompetent that I must commend . I ’ ve been reviewing the audio recordings now and making transcripts , in 20 minutes of it I ’ m literally shaking with anxiety and stress . What they are saying on this is factually false , and we ’ re talking about basic law , it ’ s their job to know this kind of information . I ’ m just unable to get over how callous they are about this , it ’ s got me so angry that I feel I have no viable recourse to complain . ED I ’ ve always wondered how easy it would be to track people , I mean I can buy a new device in minutes , get a SIM card similarly ( or try and hack someone else ’ s WiFi ) and then it ’ s basically untraceable , with the exception of the IP address being near my home . It ’ s sad that my suspicions of the police ’ s lack of technical knowledge is being confirmed at every turn . The frustration is that much as I don ’ t personally want or like being restricted I do appreciate the important role they play in protecting vulnerable people , except now it appears they are not capable of doing that job . It ’ s appalling . "in 20 minutes of it I’m literally shaking with anxiety and stress"
It was the same for me when I started to notice odd things in my SHPO , questions floating around in my head that needed answering , how police acted , the things they would ask me , the things they would prevent me from doing . I can honestly say if it was not for the lock - downs I very likely would have not looked into all this as much as I have . As stressful as it all was , I pursued other things to give myself time to focus on other things , new things to stress about . I took on a course online in programming which was something I had never really done much of before , so I figured I would give it a shot , try to learn a new skill . I am going to offer that same advice to you , Do a little here and there for your case , take a breather and do something else . Try something new with in boundaries of what you are allowed while keeping the officers happy ( for now ). Once you have a much deeper understanding of how they operate , how SHPO ' s are supposed to be drafted and understanding the facts , ( when you are allowed to discharge SHPO , discharging a SHPO makes conviction spent ) you can throw this at your officers stating this is what you know , this is something you intend to do and there is nothing they can do about it . I pretty much told my last officer , the same thing and he was basically saying " yep absolutely , you are correct , I do not like it and I think the SHPO should remain , but you have that option " I made him really mad when he tried to get me for breach of SHPO ( which I never breached ) in an attempt to prevent my SHPO from being discharged . Being angry is understandable , but never let it show . if you are unhappy with the officers in question then you have every right to complain , the main issue is whether they actually act on it or not . Probably something you could put at the back of your mind for the time being and focus on the steps you need to take to perhaps apply for a discharge of your own in stead . Yes , I ’ m trying to just do small parts of the transcription at a time . Making markers and short clips of the audio . Hopefully by the end of the week I ’ ll have short clips for each of my assertions for if I ever need to present my evidence . I have a lot of techie hobbies to fall back on , and I have bought a few new computer games in the sales to distract me . It ’ s just hard when I ’ m lacking a support network . I have family but their issues make them more of a drain and my friends tend to ghost at the worst times ( like Christmas ). Did have a mental health thing today and after I explained the situation they looked a bit horrified at my lack of support , though I ’ m not sure they understood / accepted how the police have acted as an antagonist exacerbating the problems as they have . I mean it ’ s like a perfect storm of issues , for example they say “ you could call the samaritans …” and I state , “ yeahhh , my ex , the one I caught cheating valentines and then ghosted ( all after I disclosed ), he was one of their call staff ”, it breaks their only solution into pieces . “ when he tried to get me for breach of SHPO ( which I never breached )” 10 years ago I ’ d have never believed the police would be like that , it is sad that nowadays I ’ d be totally unsurprised if that were true . Again , sorry you had to go through that . For better or worse I ’ m a people pleaser with retail experience , I tend to be polite and act positive as a matter of reflex . I don ’ t plan to confront the police in any way until my SHPO is discharged , just to build up my case so I ’ m ready to fire on all cylinders when I feel safe to do so .
|
|
|
|
|
xDanx
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 408,
Visits: 12K
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xyou are in fact correct , but of course the police will never admit to this if they can get away with it . If you are beyond the 5 year point with a SHPO active , you are entitled to apply to the courts ( with out permission from the police ) to potentially have it discharged in full . If a SHPO is discharged the conviction would be considered as spent , regardless if you remained on the SOR . In order for a discharge , you must provide evidence to state why you believe the SHPO must be discharged , the main thing the courts will consider first is . Changes in your circumstances ( obtaining work , making new friends , new relationships , steps taken to keep you from re - offending ), issues in which the SHPO prevents you from a change in circumstance ( if the SHPO is preventing you from working and you can prove it , this will go in you ' re favor ) If you are considering taking this step , contact various solicitors and see if they allow legal aid to represent you . Not all solicitors will do this , but some might if you ask . This would mean you get free legal advice to proceed with your application . Other wise you would have to represent your self in court . I applied to have my SHPO discharged 2 years ago , I finally managed it Feb last year after many hearings due to the police failing to show . I was successful because I proved because of my SHPO , it was hindering my ability to not only seek out work , but relevant training to help aid me in to work also . Therefor , the SHPO it ' s self was preventing me from changing my circumstances . It is highly suggested for the best outcome , that police get on board to allow the discharge to happen , but considering the officer told you what you said was not true , It is very unlikely you will get their support in this . However , you could always talk to his superior if you wish . As for DBS checks , You are correct and I believe a basic will not show your convictions that are considered spent , but higher checks will list both unspent and spent convictions . Thanks xDanx, you ' ve basically confirmed what I thought . Obviously I don ' t know if my appeal will be granted , but I think I have a reasonable case , the crime was long before my sentencing and I have an categorical example of a job I got last year where I had 3 interviews and a long application process without being asked about criminal records only to lose the job the first day when they informed me they were going to do a basic DBS check ( after I signed ) and so I proactively disclosed my record to save the paperwork and delay . ( my MOSOVO officer recommending me no disclose if I ' m not asked , but I ' m still questioning my choices there ) I record all interactions I have with the police because of issues with their accuracy and general stating falsehoods , it ' s extremely concerning for me and just adds to my anxiety . I have recorded examples of them stating restriction on my SHPO that it doesn ' t contain and them later admitting they were wrong ( and they failed to inform me , as they said they would ) and such . That kind of management makes me very unsure of what I can / can ' t do which pushes me into being stuck at home alone unemployed and unable to go into public spaces just to ensure I don ’ t go to a “ bad place ” ( actual quote of theirs ). It seems so bizarre to me because those are exactly the circumstances that precipitated my offending in the first place and I just can ' t seem to get myself onto a productive path because of the police . I would consider a complaint to the police department , but this is a consistent issue I ' ve had with every officer I ' d dealt with , so it seems institusional and I can see many ways it could backfire onto me . I assume I would still have a MOSOVO officer while I ' m on the register , even if my conviction was spent ? So far I have had 2 different officers , I am due to get a new one soon I believe . But yes even while on the register with out a SHPO you will still get the visits , however . if you are able to get the SHPO discharged it means you are no longer bound to letting them check your devices , unless you allow them too willingly . I wanted to record all my interactions with them also but I was always never prepared to have something set up to record , fearing that if they noticed my phone was recording for example it would back fire on me . But recording them is 100 % a good move , I have had the officers make up quite a lot of rules which were not on my SHPO . But one thing my first PPU told me has stuck with me , " if it is not written on your SHPO then there is no restriction " Even after successfully discharging my SHPO , I still continue to struggle to find work and training to aid me back in to work due to rejections based on my information still being known and searchable . So although having it removed has lifted a massive weight off my shoulders , there are still challenges to over come . OK , that ' s a shame about the visits once off of the SHPO , but it ' s understandable . The irony is I don ’ t mind showing them my devices ever , SHPO or not , I ’ ve kept myself clean and want to stay so I think it ’ s best for me to show that even if they don ’ t have a court order . For the first 3 years they didn ’ t even bother checking my devices at all , then they only checked my phone and laptop when I ’ ve got many other devices I ’ ve offered them . One thing that made me laugh was them saying the knew what devices I have because they can see what connects to the internet , except I ’ m a techie and know that ’ s not true ( due to the routers NAT ) and even if they did they couldn ’ t know if a phone connected to my network is mine or a friends . It just made them sound unknowledgeable and / or dishonest . When checking my recording phone they ’ ve never mentioned me recording them and from questions they ’ ve asked it sounds like they don ’ t really know how to use smart devices . I ’ m actually tempted to screen record them next time they check to see what they do . OK , so the statement " if it is not written on your SHPO then there is no restriction " is interesting to me , as that basically means I have no practical restrictions to my life , despite their extremely oppressive but vague restrictions . I ’ m sorry you ’ re struggling still , I don ’ t expect getting rid of the SHPO is a silver bullet but I ’ m hoping it ’ s just dropping the hurdles a bit . Have you looked into getting your name delisted from search engines ? It ’ s part of the GDPR “ Right To Be Forgotten ” that you can request results to be removed . Only works in the UK / EU and they might decline based on “ public interest ”, but it ’ s worth a try as long as your conviction is spent . That ’ s one of my reasons for wanting mine spent . I have attempted to delist various links , however Google are un willing to remove . Due to " public interest " as you say I will make further attempts at a later date though Being quite techie myself , I can confirm the majority of the Police simply do not have a clue how tech works . They just make it all up as they go . That ’ s very unfortunate , I really hope that ’ s not the situation for me , otherwise I guess a change of name would be my best bet . Did you only apply to Google , or any others ? Did you apply to have the articles themselves removed by the publisher ? I hear that ’ s less likely to be successful , but it ’ s worth a shot just in case . Yes , one of the things that worries me is that every police officer I ’ ve dealt with has started off saying something along the lines to “ I ’ m not very technical ”, I appreciate they are being honest there , but I think it ’ s like going to a bike shop and the staff saying “ I don ’ t really know much about bikes , I don ’ t ride ”, it ’ s a red flag on many levels . And given we ’ re talking about 10 officers now ( 0 being technical ) it doesn ’ t make me confident that they are competent to protect the public nor the people under their supervision . I only attempted Google I never contacted publishers to have them removed as in my mind , there would be nothing stopping them from potentially re - publishing them , but given that my conviction is now considered spent I am not entirely sure if the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act might prevent them from doing so ? Something I plan to look further into at a later date . But from what I understand of it so far is " I have a legal right to live my life as if the offence never happened " My last PPU officer would say the exact same thing ! He would always remind me that he isn ' t very techie and has bad memory , but I know the memory part is a complete lie . Just a tactic they use to try trip up people . This is just my opinion , but the only " people " they intend to protect are themselves and their own . xDanx I ’ m definitely more dubious about contacting publishers regarding removing me , they are more invested in their own content then Google ( or other search engines ), but I am considering it . My article actually contains a stolen facebook profile image , so I could try a DMCA takedown notice , but again I ’ m worried about them getting vindictive so I ’ m waiting until hopefully they just don ’ t care . Yes , I have always wondered how much of the police incompetence I perceive is real vs acted , but honestly being recorded falsely stating details about spent convictions on a phone they are checking at the time is a level of committing to the part of incompetent that I must commend . I ’ ve been reviewing the audio recordings now and making transcripts , in 20 minutes of it I ’ m literally shaking with anxiety and stress . What they are saying on this is factually false , and we ’ re talking about basic law , it ’ s their job to know this kind of information . I ’ m just unable to get over how callous they are about this , it ’ s got me so angry that I feel I have no viable recourse to complain . ED I ’ ve always wondered how easy it would be to track people , I mean I can buy a new device in minutes , get a SIM card similarly ( or try and hack someone else ’ s WiFi ) and then it ’ s basically untraceable , with the exception of the IP address being near my home . It ’ s sad that my suspicions of the police ’ s lack of technical knowledge is being confirmed at every turn . The frustration is that much as I don ’ t personally want or like being restricted I do appreciate the important role they play in protecting vulnerable people , except now it appears they are not capable of doing that job . It ’ s appalling . "in 20 minutes of it I’m literally shaking with anxiety and stress"
It was the same for me when I started to notice odd things in my SHPO , questions floating around in my head that needed answering , how police acted , the things they would ask me , the things they would prevent me from doing . I can honestly say if it was not for the lock - downs I very likely would have not looked into all this as much as I have . As stressful as it all was , I pursued other things to give myself time to focus on other things , new things to stress about . I took on a course online in programming which was something I had never really done much of before , so I figured I would give it a shot , try to learn a new skill . I am going to offer that same advice to you , Do a little here and there for your case , take a breather and do something else . Try something new with in boundaries of what you are allowed while keeping the officers happy ( for now ). Once you have a much deeper understanding of how they operate , how SHPO ' s are supposed to be drafted and understanding the facts , ( when you are allowed to discharge SHPO , discharging a SHPO makes conviction spent ) you can throw this at your officers stating this is what you know , this is something you intend to do and there is nothing they can do about it . I pretty much told my last officer , the same thing and he was basically saying " yep absolutely , you are correct , I do not like it and I think the SHPO should remain , but you have that option " I made him really mad when he tried to get me for breach of SHPO ( which I never breached ) in an attempt to prevent my SHPO from being discharged . Being angry is understandable , but never let it show . if you are unhappy with the officers in question then you have every right to complain , the main issue is whether they actually act on it or not . Probably something you could put at the back of your mind for the time being and focus on the steps you need to take to perhaps apply for a discharge of your own in stead .
|
|
|
|
|
A1_58162
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12,
Visits: 37
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xyou are in fact correct , but of course the police will never admit to this if they can get away with it . If you are beyond the 5 year point with a SHPO active , you are entitled to apply to the courts ( with out permission from the police ) to potentially have it discharged in full . If a SHPO is discharged the conviction would be considered as spent , regardless if you remained on the SOR . In order for a discharge , you must provide evidence to state why you believe the SHPO must be discharged , the main thing the courts will consider first is . Changes in your circumstances ( obtaining work , making new friends , new relationships , steps taken to keep you from re - offending ), issues in which the SHPO prevents you from a change in circumstance ( if the SHPO is preventing you from working and you can prove it , this will go in you ' re favor ) If you are considering taking this step , contact various solicitors and see if they allow legal aid to represent you . Not all solicitors will do this , but some might if you ask . This would mean you get free legal advice to proceed with your application . Other wise you would have to represent your self in court . I applied to have my SHPO discharged 2 years ago , I finally managed it Feb last year after many hearings due to the police failing to show . I was successful because I proved because of my SHPO , it was hindering my ability to not only seek out work , but relevant training to help aid me in to work also . Therefor , the SHPO it ' s self was preventing me from changing my circumstances . It is highly suggested for the best outcome , that police get on board to allow the discharge to happen , but considering the officer told you what you said was not true , It is very unlikely you will get their support in this . However , you could always talk to his superior if you wish . As for DBS checks , You are correct and I believe a basic will not show your convictions that are considered spent , but higher checks will list both unspent and spent convictions . Thanks xDanx, you ' ve basically confirmed what I thought . Obviously I don ' t know if my appeal will be granted , but I think I have a reasonable case , the crime was long before my sentencing and I have an categorical example of a job I got last year where I had 3 interviews and a long application process without being asked about criminal records only to lose the job the first day when they informed me they were going to do a basic DBS check ( after I signed ) and so I proactively disclosed my record to save the paperwork and delay . ( my MOSOVO officer recommending me no disclose if I ' m not asked , but I ' m still questioning my choices there ) I record all interactions I have with the police because of issues with their accuracy and general stating falsehoods , it ' s extremely concerning for me and just adds to my anxiety . I have recorded examples of them stating restriction on my SHPO that it doesn ' t contain and them later admitting they were wrong ( and they failed to inform me , as they said they would ) and such . That kind of management makes me very unsure of what I can / can ' t do which pushes me into being stuck at home alone unemployed and unable to go into public spaces just to ensure I don ’ t go to a “ bad place ” ( actual quote of theirs ). It seems so bizarre to me because those are exactly the circumstances that precipitated my offending in the first place and I just can ' t seem to get myself onto a productive path because of the police . I would consider a complaint to the police department , but this is a consistent issue I ' ve had with every officer I ' d dealt with , so it seems institusional and I can see many ways it could backfire onto me . I assume I would still have a MOSOVO officer while I ' m on the register , even if my conviction was spent ? So far I have had 2 different officers , I am due to get a new one soon I believe . But yes even while on the register with out a SHPO you will still get the visits , however . if you are able to get the SHPO discharged it means you are no longer bound to letting them check your devices , unless you allow them too willingly . I wanted to record all my interactions with them also but I was always never prepared to have something set up to record , fearing that if they noticed my phone was recording for example it would back fire on me . But recording them is 100 % a good move , I have had the officers make up quite a lot of rules which were not on my SHPO . But one thing my first PPU told me has stuck with me , " if it is not written on your SHPO then there is no restriction " Even after successfully discharging my SHPO , I still continue to struggle to find work and training to aid me back in to work due to rejections based on my information still being known and searchable . So although having it removed has lifted a massive weight off my shoulders , there are still challenges to over come . OK , that ' s a shame about the visits once off of the SHPO , but it ' s understandable . The irony is I don ’ t mind showing them my devices ever , SHPO or not , I ’ ve kept myself clean and want to stay so I think it ’ s best for me to show that even if they don ’ t have a court order . For the first 3 years they didn ’ t even bother checking my devices at all , then they only checked my phone and laptop when I ’ ve got many other devices I ’ ve offered them . One thing that made me laugh was them saying the knew what devices I have because they can see what connects to the internet , except I ’ m a techie and know that ’ s not true ( due to the routers NAT ) and even if they did they couldn ’ t know if a phone connected to my network is mine or a friends . It just made them sound unknowledgeable and / or dishonest . When checking my recording phone they ’ ve never mentioned me recording them and from questions they ’ ve asked it sounds like they don ’ t really know how to use smart devices . I ’ m actually tempted to screen record them next time they check to see what they do . OK , so the statement " if it is not written on your SHPO then there is no restriction " is interesting to me , as that basically means I have no practical restrictions to my life , despite their extremely oppressive but vague restrictions . I ’ m sorry you ’ re struggling still , I don ’ t expect getting rid of the SHPO is a silver bullet but I ’ m hoping it ’ s just dropping the hurdles a bit . Have you looked into getting your name delisted from search engines ? It ’ s part of the GDPR “ Right To Be Forgotten ” that you can request results to be removed . Only works in the UK / EU and they might decline based on “ public interest ”, but it ’ s worth a try as long as your conviction is spent . That ’ s one of my reasons for wanting mine spent . I have attempted to delist various links , however Google are un willing to remove . Due to " public interest " as you say I will make further attempts at a later date though Being quite techie myself , I can confirm the majority of the Police simply do not have a clue how tech works . They just make it all up as they go . That ’ s very unfortunate , I really hope that ’ s not the situation for me , otherwise I guess a change of name would be my best bet . Did you only apply to Google , or any others ? Did you apply to have the articles themselves removed by the publisher ? I hear that ’ s less likely to be successful , but it ’ s worth a shot just in case . Yes , one of the things that worries me is that every police officer I ’ ve dealt with has started off saying something along the lines to “ I ’ m not very technical ”, I appreciate they are being honest there , but I think it ’ s like going to a bike shop and the staff saying “ I don ’ t really know much about bikes , I don ’ t ride ”, it ’ s a red flag on many levels . And given we ’ re talking about 10 officers now ( 0 being technical ) it doesn ’ t make me confident that they are competent to protect the public nor the people under their supervision . I only attempted Google I never contacted publishers to have them removed as in my mind , there would be nothing stopping them from potentially re - publishing them , but given that my conviction is now considered spent I am not entirely sure if the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act might prevent them from doing so ? Something I plan to look further into at a later date . But from what I understand of it so far is " I have a legal right to live my life as if the offence never happened " My last PPU officer would say the exact same thing ! He would always remind me that he isn ' t very techie and has bad memory , but I know the memory part is a complete lie . Just a tactic they use to try trip up people . This is just my opinion , but the only " people " they intend to protect are themselves and their own . xDanx I ’ m definitely more dubious about contacting publishers regarding removing me , they are more invested in their own content then Google ( or other search engines ), but I am considering it . My article actually contains a stolen facebook profile image , so I could try a DMCA takedown notice , but again I ’ m worried about them getting vindictive so I ’ m waiting until hopefully they just don ’ t care . Yes , I have always wondered how much of the police incompetence I perceive is real vs acted , but honestly being recorded falsely stating details about spent convictions on a phone they are checking at the time is a level of committing to the part of incompetent that I must commend . I ’ ve been reviewing the audio recordings now and making transcripts , in 20 minutes of it I ’ m literally shaking with anxiety and stress . What they are saying on this is factually false , and we ’ re talking about basic law , it ’ s their job to know this kind of information . I ’ m just unable to get over how callous they are about this , it ’ s got me so angry that I feel I have no viable recourse to complain . ED I ’ ve always wondered how easy it would be to track people , I mean I can buy a new device in minutes , get a SIM card similarly ( or try and hack someone else ’ s WiFi ) and then it ’ s basically untraceable , with the exception of the IP address being near my home . It ’ s sad that my suspicions of the police ’ s lack of technical knowledge is being confirmed at every turn . The frustration is that much as I don ’ t personally want or like being restricted I do appreciate the important role they play in protecting vulnerable people , except now it appears they are not capable of doing that job . It ’ s appalling .
|
|
|
|
|
Evan Davis
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 80,
Visits: 2.8K
|
Sounds very much like your conviction would become spent if you had your SHPO discharged - you don ' t have to declare spent convictions for Basic DBS checks , which would be almost all techie - related jobs and no need to declare for insurance purposes etc . It ' s definitely a good idea to apply for a discharge if you think you can make a persuasive case . As for the rest of the discussion - the Police are absolutely clueless when it comes to technology . Visor / PPU officers are even more clueless than regular police officers , which is surprising given that they must deal with " offenders " who are a lot more tech - savvy than your average Joe , so you ' d have thought they might offer some sort of training for PPU staff to be a bit more aware - which they don ' t . Simple case in point is the Police ' s own admission they can ' t install monitoring software on Apple devices - monitoring software is& nbsp ; available for Apple products ( just Google " pegasus spyware "), the Police just cannot use it for whatever reason . Same way they can ' t break into Apple devices in the way they do with Android devices ( the reason they ask you to buy an Android if you have a SHPO ). They don ' t always like to volunteer this kind of information - for example , they told me previously when arrested and taken to court that they managed to access my iPhone ( after I refused to give them the pin ), and they even led the court to believe that they had broken into and checked the phone - I can guarantee they didn ' t , because the security settings of the phone simply didn ' t allow it , and if they did get in , I would ' ve been in a lot more trouble for unrelated matters . Police are technologically brainless and should not be relied on / trusted to give accurate information with anything to do with technology .& nbsp ;
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All views, opinions & contributions are my own and do not represent the views of Unlock unless specifically stated.
|
|
|
|
|
xDanx
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 408,
Visits: 12K
|
+x+x+x+x+x+xyou are in fact correct , but of course the police will never admit to this if they can get away with it . If you are beyond the 5 year point with a SHPO active , you are entitled to apply to the courts ( with out permission from the police ) to potentially have it discharged in full . If a SHPO is discharged the conviction would be considered as spent , regardless if you remained on the SOR . In order for a discharge , you must provide evidence to state why you believe the SHPO must be discharged , the main thing the courts will consider first is . Changes in your circumstances ( obtaining work , making new friends , new relationships , steps taken to keep you from re - offending ), issues in which the SHPO prevents you from a change in circumstance ( if the SHPO is preventing you from working and you can prove it , this will go in you ' re favor ) If you are considering taking this step , contact various solicitors and see if they allow legal aid to represent you . Not all solicitors will do this , but some might if you ask . This would mean you get free legal advice to proceed with your application . Other wise you would have to represent your self in court . I applied to have my SHPO discharged 2 years ago , I finally managed it Feb last year after many hearings due to the police failing to show . I was successful because I proved because of my SHPO , it was hindering my ability to not only seek out work , but relevant training to help aid me in to work also . Therefor , the SHPO it ' s self was preventing me from changing my circumstances . It is highly suggested for the best outcome , that police get on board to allow the discharge to happen , but considering the officer told you what you said was not true , It is very unlikely you will get their support in this . However , you could always talk to his superior if you wish . As for DBS checks , You are correct and I believe a basic will not show your convictions that are considered spent , but higher checks will list both unspent and spent convictions . Thanks xDanx, you ' ve basically confirmed what I thought . Obviously I don ' t know if my appeal will be granted , but I think I have a reasonable case , the crime was long before my sentencing and I have an categorical example of a job I got last year where I had 3 interviews and a long application process without being asked about criminal records only to lose the job the first day when they informed me they were going to do a basic DBS check ( after I signed ) and so I proactively disclosed my record to save the paperwork and delay . ( my MOSOVO officer recommending me no disclose if I ' m not asked , but I ' m still questioning my choices there ) I record all interactions I have with the police because of issues with their accuracy and general stating falsehoods , it ' s extremely concerning for me and just adds to my anxiety . I have recorded examples of them stating restriction on my SHPO that it doesn ' t contain and them later admitting they were wrong ( and they failed to inform me , as they said they would ) and such . That kind of management makes me very unsure of what I can / can ' t do which pushes me into being stuck at home alone unemployed and unable to go into public spaces just to ensure I don ’ t go to a “ bad place ” ( actual quote of theirs ). It seems so bizarre to me because those are exactly the circumstances that precipitated my offending in the first place and I just can ' t seem to get myself onto a productive path because of the police . I would consider a complaint to the police department , but this is a consistent issue I ' ve had with every officer I ' d dealt with , so it seems institusional and I can see many ways it could backfire onto me . I assume I would still have a MOSOVO officer while I ' m on the register , even if my conviction was spent ? So far I have had 2 different officers , I am due to get a new one soon I believe . But yes even while on the register with out a SHPO you will still get the visits , however . if you are able to get the SHPO discharged it means you are no longer bound to letting them check your devices , unless you allow them too willingly . I wanted to record all my interactions with them also but I was always never prepared to have something set up to record , fearing that if they noticed my phone was recording for example it would back fire on me . But recording them is 100 % a good move , I have had the officers make up quite a lot of rules which were not on my SHPO . But one thing my first PPU told me has stuck with me , " if it is not written on your SHPO then there is no restriction " Even after successfully discharging my SHPO , I still continue to struggle to find work and training to aid me back in to work due to rejections based on my information still being known and searchable . So although having it removed has lifted a massive weight off my shoulders , there are still challenges to over come . OK , that ' s a shame about the visits once off of the SHPO , but it ' s understandable . The irony is I don ’ t mind showing them my devices ever , SHPO or not , I ’ ve kept myself clean and want to stay so I think it ’ s best for me to show that even if they don ’ t have a court order . For the first 3 years they didn ’ t even bother checking my devices at all , then they only checked my phone and laptop when I ’ ve got many other devices I ’ ve offered them . One thing that made me laugh was them saying the knew what devices I have because they can see what connects to the internet , except I ’ m a techie and know that ’ s not true ( due to the routers NAT ) and even if they did they couldn ’ t know if a phone connected to my network is mine or a friends . It just made them sound unknowledgeable and / or dishonest . When checking my recording phone they ’ ve never mentioned me recording them and from questions they ’ ve asked it sounds like they don ’ t really know how to use smart devices . I ’ m actually tempted to screen record them next time they check to see what they do . OK , so the statement " if it is not written on your SHPO then there is no restriction " is interesting to me , as that basically means I have no practical restrictions to my life , despite their extremely oppressive but vague restrictions . I ’ m sorry you ’ re struggling still , I don ’ t expect getting rid of the SHPO is a silver bullet but I ’ m hoping it ’ s just dropping the hurdles a bit . Have you looked into getting your name delisted from search engines ? It ’ s part of the GDPR “ Right To Be Forgotten ” that you can request results to be removed . Only works in the UK / EU and they might decline based on “ public interest ”, but it ’ s worth a try as long as your conviction is spent . That ’ s one of my reasons for wanting mine spent . I have attempted to delist various links , however Google are un willing to remove . Due to " public interest " as you say I will make further attempts at a later date though Being quite techie myself , I can confirm the majority of the Police simply do not have a clue how tech works . They just make it all up as they go . That ’ s very unfortunate , I really hope that ’ s not the situation for me , otherwise I guess a change of name would be my best bet . Did you only apply to Google , or any others ? Did you apply to have the articles themselves removed by the publisher ? I hear that ’ s less likely to be successful , but it ’ s worth a shot just in case . Yes , one of the things that worries me is that every police officer I ’ ve dealt with has started off saying something along the lines to “ I ’ m not very technical ”, I appreciate they are being honest there , but I think it ’ s like going to a bike shop and the staff saying “ I don ’ t really know much about bikes , I don ’ t ride ”, it ’ s a red flag on many levels . And given we ’ re talking about 10 officers now ( 0 being technical ) it doesn ’ t make me confident that they are competent to protect the public nor the people under their supervision . I only attempted Google I never contacted publishers to have them removed as in my mind , there would be nothing stopping them from potentially re - publishing them , but given that my conviction is now considered spent I am not entirely sure if the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act might prevent them from doing so ? Something I plan to look further into at a later date . But from what I understand of it so far is " I have a legal right to live my life as if the offence never happened " My last PPU officer would say the exact same thing ! He would always remind me that he isn ' t very techie and has bad memory , but I know the memory part is a complete lie . Just a tactic they use to try trip up people . This is just my opinion , but the only " people " they intend to protect are themselves and their own .
|
|
|
|
|
A1_58162
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12,
Visits: 37
|
+x+x+x+x+xyou are in fact correct , but of course the police will never admit to this if they can get away with it . If you are beyond the 5 year point with a SHPO active , you are entitled to apply to the courts ( with out permission from the police ) to potentially have it discharged in full . If a SHPO is discharged the conviction would be considered as spent , regardless if you remained on the SOR . In order for a discharge , you must provide evidence to state why you believe the SHPO must be discharged , the main thing the courts will consider first is . Changes in your circumstances ( obtaining work , making new friends , new relationships , steps taken to keep you from re - offending ), issues in which the SHPO prevents you from a change in circumstance ( if the SHPO is preventing you from working and you can prove it , this will go in you ' re favor ) If you are considering taking this step , contact various solicitors and see if they allow legal aid to represent you . Not all solicitors will do this , but some might if you ask . This would mean you get free legal advice to proceed with your application . Other wise you would have to represent your self in court . I applied to have my SHPO discharged 2 years ago , I finally managed it Feb last year after many hearings due to the police failing to show . I was successful because I proved because of my SHPO , it was hindering my ability to not only seek out work , but relevant training to help aid me in to work also . Therefor , the SHPO it ' s self was preventing me from changing my circumstances . It is highly suggested for the best outcome , that police get on board to allow the discharge to happen , but considering the officer told you what you said was not true , It is very unlikely you will get their support in this . However , you could always talk to his superior if you wish . As for DBS checks , You are correct and I believe a basic will not show your convictions that are considered spent , but higher checks will list both unspent and spent convictions . Thanks xDanx, you ' ve basically confirmed what I thought . Obviously I don ' t know if my appeal will be granted , but I think I have a reasonable case , the crime was long before my sentencing and I have an categorical example of a job I got last year where I had 3 interviews and a long application process without being asked about criminal records only to lose the job the first day when they informed me they were going to do a basic DBS check ( after I signed ) and so I proactively disclosed my record to save the paperwork and delay . ( my MOSOVO officer recommending me no disclose if I ' m not asked , but I ' m still questioning my choices there ) I record all interactions I have with the police because of issues with their accuracy and general stating falsehoods , it ' s extremely concerning for me and just adds to my anxiety . I have recorded examples of them stating restriction on my SHPO that it doesn ' t contain and them later admitting they were wrong ( and they failed to inform me , as they said they would ) and such . That kind of management makes me very unsure of what I can / can ' t do which pushes me into being stuck at home alone unemployed and unable to go into public spaces just to ensure I don ’ t go to a “ bad place ” ( actual quote of theirs ). It seems so bizarre to me because those are exactly the circumstances that precipitated my offending in the first place and I just can ' t seem to get myself onto a productive path because of the police . I would consider a complaint to the police department , but this is a consistent issue I ' ve had with every officer I ' d dealt with , so it seems institusional and I can see many ways it could backfire onto me . I assume I would still have a MOSOVO officer while I ' m on the register , even if my conviction was spent ? So far I have had 2 different officers , I am due to get a new one soon I believe . But yes even while on the register with out a SHPO you will still get the visits , however . if you are able to get the SHPO discharged it means you are no longer bound to letting them check your devices , unless you allow them too willingly . I wanted to record all my interactions with them also but I was always never prepared to have something set up to record , fearing that if they noticed my phone was recording for example it would back fire on me . But recording them is 100 % a good move , I have had the officers make up quite a lot of rules which were not on my SHPO . But one thing my first PPU told me has stuck with me , " if it is not written on your SHPO then there is no restriction " Even after successfully discharging my SHPO , I still continue to struggle to find work and training to aid me back in to work due to rejections based on my information still being known and searchable . So although having it removed has lifted a massive weight off my shoulders , there are still challenges to over come . OK , that ' s a shame about the visits once off of the SHPO , but it ' s understandable . The irony is I don ’ t mind showing them my devices ever , SHPO or not , I ’ ve kept myself clean and want to stay so I think it ’ s best for me to show that even if they don ’ t have a court order . For the first 3 years they didn ’ t even bother checking my devices at all , then they only checked my phone and laptop when I ’ ve got many other devices I ’ ve offered them . One thing that made me laugh was them saying the knew what devices I have because they can see what connects to the internet , except I ’ m a techie and know that ’ s not true ( due to the routers NAT ) and even if they did they couldn ’ t know if a phone connected to my network is mine or a friends . It just made them sound unknowledgeable and / or dishonest . When checking my recording phone they ’ ve never mentioned me recording them and from questions they ’ ve asked it sounds like they don ’ t really know how to use smart devices . I ’ m actually tempted to screen record them next time they check to see what they do . OK , so the statement " if it is not written on your SHPO then there is no restriction " is interesting to me , as that basically means I have no practical restrictions to my life , despite their extremely oppressive but vague restrictions . I ’ m sorry you ’ re struggling still , I don ’ t expect getting rid of the SHPO is a silver bullet but I ’ m hoping it ’ s just dropping the hurdles a bit . Have you looked into getting your name delisted from search engines ? It ’ s part of the GDPR “ Right To Be Forgotten ” that you can request results to be removed . Only works in the UK / EU and they might decline based on “ public interest ”, but it ’ s worth a try as long as your conviction is spent . That ’ s one of my reasons for wanting mine spent . I have attempted to delist various links , however Google are un willing to remove . Due to " public interest " as you say I will make further attempts at a later date though Being quite techie myself , I can confirm the majority of the Police simply do not have a clue how tech works . They just make it all up as they go . That ’ s very unfortunate , I really hope that ’ s not the situation for me , otherwise I guess a change of name would be my best bet . Did you only apply to Google , or any others ? Did you apply to have the articles themselves removed by the publisher ? I hear that ’ s less likely to be successful , but it ’ s worth a shot just in case . Yes , one of the things that worries me is that every police officer I ’ ve dealt with has started off saying something along the lines to “ I ’ m not very technical ”, I appreciate they are being honest there , but I think it ’ s like going to a bike shop and the staff saying “ I don ’ t really know much about bikes , I don ’ t ride ”, it ’ s a red flag on many levels . And given we ’ re talking about 10 officers now ( 0 being technical ) it doesn ’ t make me confident that they are competent to protect the public nor the people under their supervision .
|
|
|
|
|
xDanx
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 408,
Visits: 12K
|
+x+x+x+xyou are in fact correct , but of course the police will never admit to this if they can get away with it . If you are beyond the 5 year point with a SHPO active , you are entitled to apply to the courts ( with out permission from the police ) to potentially have it discharged in full . If a SHPO is discharged the conviction would be considered as spent , regardless if you remained on the SOR . In order for a discharge , you must provide evidence to state why you believe the SHPO must be discharged , the main thing the courts will consider first is . Changes in your circumstances ( obtaining work , making new friends , new relationships , steps taken to keep you from re - offending ), issues in which the SHPO prevents you from a change in circumstance ( if the SHPO is preventing you from working and you can prove it , this will go in you ' re favor ) If you are considering taking this step , contact various solicitors and see if they allow legal aid to represent you . Not all solicitors will do this , but some might if you ask . This would mean you get free legal advice to proceed with your application . Other wise you would have to represent your self in court . I applied to have my SHPO discharged 2 years ago , I finally managed it Feb last year after many hearings due to the police failing to show . I was successful because I proved because of my SHPO , it was hindering my ability to not only seek out work , but relevant training to help aid me in to work also . Therefor , the SHPO it ' s self was preventing me from changing my circumstances . It is highly suggested for the best outcome , that police get on board to allow the discharge to happen , but considering the officer told you what you said was not true , It is very unlikely you will get their support in this . However , you could always talk to his superior if you wish . As for DBS checks , You are correct and I believe a basic will not show your convictions that are considered spent , but higher checks will list both unspent and spent convictions . Thanks xDanx, you ' ve basically confirmed what I thought . Obviously I don ' t know if my appeal will be granted , but I think I have a reasonable case , the crime was long before my sentencing and I have an categorical example of a job I got last year where I had 3 interviews and a long application process without being asked about criminal records only to lose the job the first day when they informed me they were going to do a basic DBS check ( after I signed ) and so I proactively disclosed my record to save the paperwork and delay . ( my MOSOVO officer recommending me no disclose if I ' m not asked , but I ' m still questioning my choices there ) I record all interactions I have with the police because of issues with their accuracy and general stating falsehoods , it ' s extremely concerning for me and just adds to my anxiety . I have recorded examples of them stating restriction on my SHPO that it doesn ' t contain and them later admitting they were wrong ( and they failed to inform me , as they said they would ) and such . That kind of management makes me very unsure of what I can / can ' t do which pushes me into being stuck at home alone unemployed and unable to go into public spaces just to ensure I don ’ t go to a “ bad place ” ( actual quote of theirs ). It seems so bizarre to me because those are exactly the circumstances that precipitated my offending in the first place and I just can ' t seem to get myself onto a productive path because of the police . I would consider a complaint to the police department , but this is a consistent issue I ' ve had with every officer I ' d dealt with , so it seems institusional and I can see many ways it could backfire onto me . I assume I would still have a MOSOVO officer while I ' m on the register , even if my conviction was spent ? So far I have had 2 different officers , I am due to get a new one soon I believe . But yes even while on the register with out a SHPO you will still get the visits , however . if you are able to get the SHPO discharged it means you are no longer bound to letting them check your devices , unless you allow them too willingly . I wanted to record all my interactions with them also but I was always never prepared to have something set up to record , fearing that if they noticed my phone was recording for example it would back fire on me . But recording them is 100 % a good move , I have had the officers make up quite a lot of rules which were not on my SHPO . But one thing my first PPU told me has stuck with me , " if it is not written on your SHPO then there is no restriction " Even after successfully discharging my SHPO , I still continue to struggle to find work and training to aid me back in to work due to rejections based on my information still being known and searchable . So although having it removed has lifted a massive weight off my shoulders , there are still challenges to over come . OK , that ' s a shame about the visits once off of the SHPO , but it ' s understandable . The irony is I don ’ t mind showing them my devices ever , SHPO or not , I ’ ve kept myself clean and want to stay so I think it ’ s best for me to show that even if they don ’ t have a court order . For the first 3 years they didn ’ t even bother checking my devices at all , then they only checked my phone and laptop when I ’ ve got many other devices I ’ ve offered them . One thing that made me laugh was them saying the knew what devices I have because they can see what connects to the internet , except I ’ m a techie and know that ’ s not true ( due to the routers NAT ) and even if they did they couldn ’ t know if a phone connected to my network is mine or a friends . It just made them sound unknowledgeable and / or dishonest . When checking my recording phone they ’ ve never mentioned me recording them and from questions they ’ ve asked it sounds like they don ’ t really know how to use smart devices . I ’ m actually tempted to screen record them next time they check to see what they do . OK , so the statement " if it is not written on your SHPO then there is no restriction " is interesting to me , as that basically means I have no practical restrictions to my life , despite their extremely oppressive but vague restrictions . I ’ m sorry you ’ re struggling still , I don ’ t expect getting rid of the SHPO is a silver bullet but I ’ m hoping it ’ s just dropping the hurdles a bit . Have you looked into getting your name delisted from search engines ? It ’ s part of the GDPR “ Right To Be Forgotten ” that you can request results to be removed . Only works in the UK / EU and they might decline based on “ public interest ”, but it ’ s worth a try as long as your conviction is spent . That ’ s one of my reasons for wanting mine spent . I have attempted to delist various links , however Google are un willing to remove . Due to " public interest " as you say I will make further attempts at a later date though Being quite techie myself , I can confirm the majority of the Police simply do not have a clue how tech works . They just make it all up as they go .
|
|
|
|
|
A1_58162
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12,
Visits: 37
|
+x+x+xyou are in fact correct , but of course the police will never admit to this if they can get away with it . If you are beyond the 5 year point with a SHPO active , you are entitled to apply to the courts ( with out permission from the police ) to potentially have it discharged in full . If a SHPO is discharged the conviction would be considered as spent , regardless if you remained on the SOR . In order for a discharge , you must provide evidence to state why you believe the SHPO must be discharged , the main thing the courts will consider first is . Changes in your circumstances ( obtaining work , making new friends , new relationships , steps taken to keep you from re - offending ), issues in which the SHPO prevents you from a change in circumstance ( if the SHPO is preventing you from working and you can prove it , this will go in you ' re favor ) If you are considering taking this step , contact various solicitors and see if they allow legal aid to represent you . Not all solicitors will do this , but some might if you ask . This would mean you get free legal advice to proceed with your application . Other wise you would have to represent your self in court . I applied to have my SHPO discharged 2 years ago , I finally managed it Feb last year after many hearings due to the police failing to show . I was successful because I proved because of my SHPO , it was hindering my ability to not only seek out work , but relevant training to help aid me in to work also . Therefor , the SHPO it ' s self was preventing me from changing my circumstances . It is highly suggested for the best outcome , that police get on board to allow the discharge to happen , but considering the officer told you what you said was not true , It is very unlikely you will get their support in this . However , you could always talk to his superior if you wish . As for DBS checks , You are correct and I believe a basic will not show your convictions that are considered spent , but higher checks will list both unspent and spent convictions . Thanks xDanx, you ' ve basically confirmed what I thought . Obviously I don ' t know if my appeal will be granted , but I think I have a reasonable case , the crime was long before my sentencing and I have an categorical example of a job I got last year where I had 3 interviews and a long application process without being asked about criminal records only to lose the job the first day when they informed me they were going to do a basic DBS check ( after I signed ) and so I proactively disclosed my record to save the paperwork and delay . ( my MOSOVO officer recommending me no disclose if I ' m not asked , but I ' m still questioning my choices there ) I record all interactions I have with the police because of issues with their accuracy and general stating falsehoods , it ' s extremely concerning for me and just adds to my anxiety . I have recorded examples of them stating restriction on my SHPO that it doesn ' t contain and them later admitting they were wrong ( and they failed to inform me , as they said they would ) and such . That kind of management makes me very unsure of what I can / can ' t do which pushes me into being stuck at home alone unemployed and unable to go into public spaces just to ensure I don ’ t go to a “ bad place ” ( actual quote of theirs ). It seems so bizarre to me because those are exactly the circumstances that precipitated my offending in the first place and I just can ' t seem to get myself onto a productive path because of the police . I would consider a complaint to the police department , but this is a consistent issue I ' ve had with every officer I ' d dealt with , so it seems institusional and I can see many ways it could backfire onto me . I assume I would still have a MOSOVO officer while I ' m on the register , even if my conviction was spent ? So far I have had 2 different officers , I am due to get a new one soon I believe . But yes even while on the register with out a SHPO you will still get the visits , however . if you are able to get the SHPO discharged it means you are no longer bound to letting them check your devices , unless you allow them too willingly . I wanted to record all my interactions with them also but I was always never prepared to have something set up to record , fearing that if they noticed my phone was recording for example it would back fire on me . But recording them is 100 % a good move , I have had the officers make up quite a lot of rules which were not on my SHPO . But one thing my first PPU told me has stuck with me , " if it is not written on your SHPO then there is no restriction " Even after successfully discharging my SHPO , I still continue to struggle to find work and training to aid me back in to work due to rejections based on my information still being known and searchable . So although having it removed has lifted a massive weight off my shoulders , there are still challenges to over come . OK , that ' s a shame about the visits once off of the SHPO , but it ' s understandable . The irony is I don ’ t mind showing them my devices ever , SHPO or not , I ’ ve kept myself clean and want to stay so I think it ’ s best for me to show that even if they don ’ t have a court order . For the first 3 years they didn ’ t even bother checking my devices at all , then they only checked my phone and laptop when I ’ ve got many other devices I ’ ve offered them . One thing that made me laugh was them saying the knew what devices I have because they can see what connects to the internet , except I ’ m a techie and know that ’ s not true ( due to the routers NAT ) and even if they did they couldn ’ t know if a phone connected to my network is mine or a friends . It just made them sound unknowledgeable and / or dishonest . When checking my recording phone they ’ ve never mentioned me recording them and from questions they ’ ve asked it sounds like they don ’ t really know how to use smart devices . I ’ m actually tempted to screen record them next time they check to see what they do . OK , so the statement " if it is not written on your SHPO then there is no restriction " is interesting to me , as that basically means I have no practical restrictions to my life , despite their extremely oppressive but vague restrictions . I ’ m sorry you ’ re struggling still , I don ’ t expect getting rid of the SHPO is a silver bullet but I ’ m hoping it ’ s just dropping the hurdles a bit . Have you looked into getting your name delisted from search engines ? It ’ s part of the GDPR “ Right To Be Forgotten ” that you can request results to be removed . Only works in the UK / EU and they might decline based on “ public interest ”, but it ’ s worth a try as long as your conviction is spent . That ’ s one of my reasons for wanting mine spent .
|
|
|
|
|
xDanx
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 408,
Visits: 12K
|
+x+xyou are in fact correct , but of course the police will never admit to this if they can get away with it . If you are beyond the 5 year point with a SHPO active , you are entitled to apply to the courts ( with out permission from the police ) to potentially have it discharged in full . If a SHPO is discharged the conviction would be considered as spent , regardless if you remained on the SOR . In order for a discharge , you must provide evidence to state why you believe the SHPO must be discharged , the main thing the courts will consider first is . Changes in your circumstances ( obtaining work , making new friends , new relationships , steps taken to keep you from re - offending ), issues in which the SHPO prevents you from a change in circumstance ( if the SHPO is preventing you from working and you can prove it , this will go in you ' re favor ) If you are considering taking this step , contact various solicitors and see if they allow legal aid to represent you . Not all solicitors will do this , but some might if you ask . This would mean you get free legal advice to proceed with your application . Other wise you would have to represent your self in court . I applied to have my SHPO discharged 2 years ago , I finally managed it Feb last year after many hearings due to the police failing to show . I was successful because I proved because of my SHPO , it was hindering my ability to not only seek out work , but relevant training to help aid me in to work also . Therefor , the SHPO it ' s self was preventing me from changing my circumstances . It is highly suggested for the best outcome , that police get on board to allow the discharge to happen , but considering the officer told you what you said was not true , It is very unlikely you will get their support in this . However , you could always talk to his superior if you wish . As for DBS checks , You are correct and I believe a basic will not show your convictions that are considered spent , but higher checks will list both unspent and spent convictions . Thanks xDanx, you ' ve basically confirmed what I thought . Obviously I don ' t know if my appeal will be granted , but I think I have a reasonable case , the crime was long before my sentencing and I have an categorical example of a job I got last year where I had 3 interviews and a long application process without being asked about criminal records only to lose the job the first day when they informed me they were going to do a basic DBS check ( after I signed ) and so I proactively disclosed my record to save the paperwork and delay . ( my MOSOVO officer recommending me no disclose if I ' m not asked , but I ' m still questioning my choices there ) I record all interactions I have with the police because of issues with their accuracy and general stating falsehoods , it ' s extremely concerning for me and just adds to my anxiety . I have recorded examples of them stating restriction on my SHPO that it doesn ' t contain and them later admitting they were wrong ( and they failed to inform me , as they said they would ) and such . That kind of management makes me very unsure of what I can / can ' t do which pushes me into being stuck at home alone unemployed and unable to go into public spaces just to ensure I don ’ t go to a “ bad place ” ( actual quote of theirs ). It seems so bizarre to me because those are exactly the circumstances that precipitated my offending in the first place and I just can ' t seem to get myself onto a productive path because of the police . I would consider a complaint to the police department , but this is a consistent issue I ' ve had with every officer I ' d dealt with , so it seems institusional and I can see many ways it could backfire onto me . I assume I would still have a MOSOVO officer while I ' m on the register , even if my conviction was spent ? So far I have had 2 different officers , I am due to get a new one soon I believe . But yes even while on the register with out a SHPO you will still get the visits , however . if you are able to get the SHPO discharged it means you are no longer bound to letting them check your devices , unless you allow them too willingly . I wanted to record all my interactions with them also but I was always never prepared to have something set up to record , fearing that if they noticed my phone was recording for example it would back fire on me . But recording them is 100 % a good move , I have had the officers make up quite a lot of rules which were not on my SHPO . But one thing my first PPU told me has stuck with me , " if it is not written on your SHPO then there is no restriction " Even after successfully discharging my SHPO , I still continue to struggle to find work and training to aid me back in to work due to rejections based on my information still being known and searchable . So although having it removed has lifted a massive weight off my shoulders , there are still challenges to over come .
|
|
|
|
|
A1_58162
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12,
Visits: 37
|
+xyou are in fact correct , but of course the police will never admit to this if they can get away with it . If you are beyond the 5 year point with a SHPO active , you are entitled to apply to the courts ( with out permission from the police ) to potentially have it discharged in full . If a SHPO is discharged the conviction would be considered as spent , regardless if you remained on the SOR . In order for a discharge , you must provide evidence to state why you believe the SHPO must be discharged , the main thing the courts will consider first is . Changes in your circumstances ( obtaining work , making new friends , new relationships , steps taken to keep you from re - offending ), issues in which the SHPO prevents you from a change in circumstance ( if the SHPO is preventing you from working and you can prove it , this will go in you ' re favor ) If you are considering taking this step , contact various solicitors and see if they allow legal aid to represent you . Not all solicitors will do this , but some might if you ask . This would mean you get free legal advice to proceed with your application . Other wise you would have to represent your self in court . I applied to have my SHPO discharged 2 years ago , I finally managed it Feb last year after many hearings due to the police failing to show . I was successful because I proved because of my SHPO , it was hindering my ability to not only seek out work , but relevant training to help aid me in to work also . Therefor , the SHPO it ' s self was preventing me from changing my circumstances . It is highly suggested for the best outcome , that police get on board to allow the discharge to happen , but considering the officer told you what you said was not true , It is very unlikely you will get their support in this . However , you could always talk to his superior if you wish . As for DBS checks , You are correct and I believe a basic will not show your convictions that are considered spent , but higher checks will list both unspent and spent convictions . Thanks xDanx, you ' ve basically confirmed what I thought . Obviously I don ' t know if my appeal will be granted , but I think I have a reasonable case , the crime was long before my sentencing and I have an categorical example of a job I got last year where I had 3 interviews and a long application process without being asked about criminal records only to lose the job the first day when they informed me they were going to do a basic DBS check ( after I signed ) and so I proactively disclosed my record to save the paperwork and delay . ( my MOSOVO officer recommending me no disclose if I ' m not asked , but I ' m still questioning my choices there ) I record all interactions I have with the police because of issues with their accuracy and general stating falsehoods , it ' s extremely concerning for me and just adds to my anxiety . I have recorded examples of them stating restriction on my SHPO that it doesn ' t contain and them later admitting they were wrong ( and they failed to inform me , as they said they would ) and such . That kind of management makes me very unsure of what I can / can ' t do which pushes me into being stuck at home alone unemployed and unable to go into public spaces just to ensure I don ’ t go to a “ bad place ” ( actual quote of theirs ). It seems so bizarre to me because those are exactly the circumstances that precipitated my offending in the first place and I just can ' t seem to get myself onto a productive path because of the police . I would consider a complaint to the police department , but this is a consistent issue I ' ve had with every officer I ' d dealt with , so it seems institusional and I can see many ways it could backfire onto me . I assume I would still have a MOSOVO officer while I ' m on the register , even if my conviction was spent ?
|
|
|
|