Disclosure and Rumours
Notifications OFF
Post sentence question: If you disclose to someone that you are on the sex offenders register for any reason, can they then tell anyone else they like? Or is there any sort of law to protect privacy? I know the police do risk assessments to decide whether or not to disclose (or tell you to disclose) and it says on the Sarah's Law info that the person they tell can't tell anyone else. But how can they stop them? What if the person the police have informed decides to tell all your friends because they'd want to know in that situation? I can't find anything online about this. My person has a community order and no contact restrictions from the court. But he is on the 'sex offenders register' obviously - once someone knows that, are they free to spread that info? I'm thinking about the effect on our family of people being told by my person's ex (who hates him) and is threatening to tell people.
Often it will depend on who does the disclosure. If the police do it, they are supposed to warn the person not to tell anyone else. If you do the disclosure, then the police may phone the person, in order to check that you have told them the right thing and again they probably will explain that the info is to be kept confidential.
But once someone's conviction is out there on the internet or in the media, it becomes public knowledge and the police cannot prevent people from passing on something they have seen online, for example.
But once someone's conviction is out there on the internet or in the media, it becomes public knowledge and the police cannot prevent people from passing on something they have seen online, for example.
This is something which worries me too- my son was forced to either disclose or resign from his previous employment by the Visor and was given less than an hour to decide ( he chose to resign)and the visor still insisted on going into the workplace and making a disclosure to the duty manager not even the main manager so where is the guarantee of confidentiality there?
Son has also now been told by his visor and PO that he needs to disclose for any job he applies for despite the law stating that you only have to if asked - wtf if he makes a disclosure then A. He won't even be considered and B. What's to prevent someone spreading this information??
When he queried this during a probation meeting and said that it could potentially compromise both his and our family safety he was told that he was overreacting and attempting to deflect attention away from his crime.
Son has also now been told by his visor and PO that he needs to disclose for any job he applies for despite the law stating that you only have to if asked - wtf if he makes a disclosure then A. He won't even be considered and B. What's to prevent someone spreading this information??
When he queried this during a probation meeting and said that it could potentially compromise both his and our family safety he was told that he was overreacting and attempting to deflect attention away from his crime.
Seaside, I am so sorry that you and your son are having such a distressing, upsupportive experience with your PO and VISOR. The experiences you share seem to show how prejudiced and antagonistic these 'professionals' are being, when they should be offering their rock-solid support. I know it's hard on you, but thank goodness your son has you as his supporter and advocate. Without you, his PO and VISOR could very easily send him spiralling downwards.
Were you able to make any progress in arranging for a chaperone to join his PO/VISOR meetings? Seems some objectivity and sensecheck is definitely needed...
Also, surely, surely they can understand that he's not trying to 'deflect attention' from his crime, but he is perfectly reasonably trying to 'move on' from it. The offence was in his past. It's history, and every day should be considered a day forward towards the rest of his life as an 'ex-offender'.
As for disclosing - it's obvious that the more people who know, the greater the risk to both the perpetrator and their family. Can they seriously not see that?! Wishing you all good things!
Were you able to make any progress in arranging for a chaperone to join his PO/VISOR meetings? Seems some objectivity and sensecheck is definitely needed...
Also, surely, surely they can understand that he's not trying to 'deflect attention' from his crime, but he is perfectly reasonably trying to 'move on' from it. The offence was in his past. It's history, and every day should be considered a day forward towards the rest of his life as an 'ex-offender'.
As for disclosing - it's obvious that the more people who know, the greater the risk to both the perpetrator and their family. Can they seriously not see that?! Wishing you all good things!
@InTatters both the PO and the Visor have absolutely refused to allow him to have a chaperone for the meetings and seem determined to push him to the point where he either snaps or goes into a downward spiral by continually referring to him as an offender and telling him that he was born that way which I think is absolutely appalling.
We have put in a formal complaint but haven't even received an acknowledgment of receipt.
We have put in a formal complaint but haven't even received an acknowledgment of receipt.
Edel2020 it was not in the media or online and he has no SHPO at all because he is so low risk. His ex knows because of the kids, and she doesn't care about any of that, she just sees anyone on the sex offenders register as dangerous and hates him so is not interested in understanding any different. So even if the police officer who told her said the information is confidential, is there any actual law or right to privacy or anything like that which would stop her from telling parents of their kids' friends, for example? Or is it just "you shouldn't tell anyone" from the police, but there's nothing they can actually do if you do?
Seaside, I am so sorry that your sons PO and Visor are treating your son like this. My son has had a completely different experience and after disclosing his conviction at interview on several occasions and not being successful in getting the job, his PO and Visor advised him that he didn't need to disclose unless he was specifically asked about convictions.
Hedgehog, I'm sorry I can't help you with your question. My sons case was in the local paper and on line twice so family and friends all know the details of his offence and of the fact he is on the SOR.
Hedgehog, I'm sorry I can't help you with your question. My sons case was in the local paper and on line twice so family and friends all know the details of his offence and of the fact he is on the SOR.
Hedegehog I am so sorry you are going through this. I am sorry I cannot help, I googled your question and it looks like there is not much protection, only sue for damages. But the article did not go into much detail.
Seaside, could you not obtain legal advice about how your son is being treated. It is not right that they are treating him like that, surely the visor and PO cannot ignore a solicitor?
Seaside, could you not obtain legal advice about how your son is being treated. It is not right that they are treating him like that, surely the visor and PO cannot ignore a solicitor?
Seaside - my son is treated exactly the same as yours. How the hell do these people have a job. I thought they were supposed to help them move on not cause more conflict at every turn. I would so like to report this but my son won't let me for fear of more reprisals x
Seaside and Mandymoo, I know I have suggested this in the past, but if you haven't already contacted them, I wonder if it would be worth contacting 'Circles' and 'Safer Lives' (especially the latter) for their advice on your experience with PO and VISOR.
Both of these are very experienced in this area, and the staff include lots of highly experienced ex-probation people. They are incredibly supportive, non-judgemental and really do want the best for us and for the perpetrators in our lives.
Both of these are very experienced in this area, and the staff include lots of highly experienced ex-probation people. They are incredibly supportive, non-judgemental and really do want the best for us and for the perpetrators in our lives.
Although it's not exactly the same situation, under the Disclosure scheme known as Sarah's law, it says this.
b. The person to whom the disclosure is to be made will be asked to sign an undertaking that they agree that the information is confidential and they will not disclose the information further.
c. Legal proceedings could result if this confidentiality is breached, which should be explained to the person before they sign the undertaking.
d. If the person receiving the disclosure believes that further children are at risk and further disclosure is required to safeguard them, they should talk to the police who will then make a decision about whether the information needs to be disclosed to others.
It should be explained that the recipient should neither make that decision nor make any further disclosure themselves.
e. If appropriate, the recipient may be given information to empower them to safeguard the child in future.
94) If a person is not willing to sign the undertaking (Annex C), the police will need to consider if the disclosure should still take place. The outcome should be recorded and considered in the risk assessment and decision-making process.
A similar process exists for other police disclosures. If the person receiving the information signs a piece of paper, then leaks the info, then it's probably a breach of Human rights law and data protection. But it may just be a civil remedy, in other words not a criminal offence. That means you could get financial compensation from the leaker, if you can prove their actions caused harm. But, once the info is out there, no matter what punishment there is for the person who leaked it, the damage is already done.
b. The person to whom the disclosure is to be made will be asked to sign an undertaking that they agree that the information is confidential and they will not disclose the information further.
c. Legal proceedings could result if this confidentiality is breached, which should be explained to the person before they sign the undertaking.
d. If the person receiving the disclosure believes that further children are at risk and further disclosure is required to safeguard them, they should talk to the police who will then make a decision about whether the information needs to be disclosed to others.
It should be explained that the recipient should neither make that decision nor make any further disclosure themselves.
e. If appropriate, the recipient may be given information to empower them to safeguard the child in future.
94) If a person is not willing to sign the undertaking (Annex C), the police will need to consider if the disclosure should still take place. The outcome should be recorded and considered in the risk assessment and decision-making process.
A similar process exists for other police disclosures. If the person receiving the information signs a piece of paper, then leaks the info, then it's probably a breach of Human rights law and data protection. But it may just be a civil remedy, in other words not a criminal offence. That means you could get financial compensation from the leaker, if you can prove their actions caused harm. But, once the info is out there, no matter what punishment there is for the person who leaked it, the damage is already done.
This is so helpful. Thank you.