My idea is important, beacuse of the following stated below, as I feel when someones record gets cleaned totally off the PCN and it takes 5 to 10 years, than they will be so glad and they will never ever hopefully re-offent!!
Just look at it, you get bad credit due to late payments, and you get yourself a credit report, you than try to clear your name, ok you may not be able, but than you wait for 6 years for that status on your credit file to get erased, and than you have a clean record.
Look at Europe, they most of them delete the records.
I strongly believe that the Criminal Record processes needs to change for ONLY I say only for a certain group of people who made mistakes in the past for maybe committing a crime when they may have had other issues in their life’s, and people do automatically do something which they shouldn’t have i.e. shoplifting from a supermarket, and than get caught and truthfully, honestly never do something like that ever again as it was a complete shake up for them or shall I say a wake up call. Even someone attending or being arrested and sitting in a police cell can really make someone re-think on how they ended up in this state. This is all coming from experience, and experience from other friends who ended up with Cautions, minor convictions. I want to also state that it is important to distinguish between a criminal and someone who has a police caution or minor conviction (single conviction no cautions) & someone who is a criminal and does that for his lively hood.
There are people, who got a conviction or caution for something petty, and they never ever have re-offended since, and these people have high statuses in society like holding university degree, and are highly educated. These people now have a record, and some jobs they will struggle with. There is a different on someone having a conviction for always committing crime, and have a list of convictions and cautions, and someone who was a professional by status university educated and than being committed for something which could have been an accident. The processes used to be were Police used to delete minor single convictions lets say after 5 years, but im not sure whether they still are doing this.
The step down process was appalling, in that after 10 to 12 years the record was cleared, but it still showed on the PCN for policing purposes, surely doesn’t that fail against the Data protection act of holding irrelevant details (you delete something off the PCN, but still keep the details hanging around). It wasn’t that long that the ICO won the case for the Police to delete irrelevant minor old aged convictions, and than the Police appealed against the supreme court to not to delete these records. It was a victory for the ICO, only to be ruled against them for some reason which I can only imagine was due to the fact that they the Police had to change there entire process in holding conviction data. Hence the Sunita Mason inquiry, which was absolutely perfect what Sunita has offered other than still, holding the record for 100 years, what for? I ask the question. In Europe all data is deleted in majority of the countries. I am not saying this happens for every one, just for minor offences and single offences, this surely must be deleted as if that person spends 5 or even 10 years without falling or committing any further convictions, than surely that’s a complete erasing of a record, this used to be the case. I hope the government can look at this and really say that anyone who doesn’t have any cautions, and has a single conviction like my friend had when the crime is worth a caution only than they should be erased completely. The ROA is technically saying after 5 years it’s spent, erased, but erase the conviction totally, not have it still on the PCN. I know the ROA is subject to change too within Sunits Masons wonderful strategy. He only down side to Sunitas strategy is she still wants the records to stay for 100 years. I agree you should keep the records for serious criminals, but please distinguish between or filter between serious criminals and petty shoplifters, as there is a massive difference, and I feel, I feel 10 years for a minor single offence is more than suitable.
Lets hope our government our newly elected government who has offered us to ask what changes are needed, can really help us to erase petty single offences.I also think that depending on the severity of the crime, Police should decide whether a caution is enough, and not ask the person arrested to owe up to the crime with that in mind it doesn’t lead to a court trial, unless obviously the crime is severe that he/she needs to go to court for.Our great country is following old laws, laws that are required to change, and if they don’t change, than the Human rights aspects will always come into play. Holding a conviction data for 100 years, well, I find that absolutely astonishing.
Finally, the ROA needs changing, when it’s a spent conviction than it should mean spent i.e erase it and never required to declare it on even enhanced check. Spent conviction should only occur on petty minor convictions.
NOTE: all the above is for petty minor convictions which occurred once and is 5 to 10 years without re-offending.
I want to end by saying the Sunita Mason has proposed a solution, BUT she still requires the records to be on the PCN for 100 years, I ask why?!? you will not show minor records ever to employer no matter what check gets done, and yet your still holding this data on the PCN. Ok for serious offence you do but for shoplifting?