|
A1_58162
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12,
Visits: 35
|
+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: 377,
Visits: 11K
|
+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: 35
|
+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 .
|
|
|
|
|
E
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 31,
Visits: 689
|
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 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.
|
|
|
|
|
xDanx
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 377,
Visits: 11K
|
+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: 35
|
+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: 377,
Visits: 11K
|
+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: 35
|
+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: 377,
Visits: 11K
|
+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: 35
|
+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 ?
|
|
|
|