Human rights – diversity – neurodiversity – equality – inclusivity – discrimination – otherisation – speciesism – planet – consumerism – bioethics sensu lato

Police data

officially ᗩᑎGEᒪIᑎᗩ

Some points.

citizensWhen you are somehow in contact with police, as a victim, witness or offender, you can expect police to have data on you. Police have to be registered as data controllers, so that you are aware of this and can look up what they may do with the data they have on you (which they primarily obtain from you, in that case).

I carried out a search in the ICO database on “police Hampshire”. It turned up two records, of the Hampshire Police Federation (regarding its members) and the Police and Crime Commissioner for Hampshire (see here). The latter covers the data Hampshire Police has on citizens. It surprised me that the registration includes potential sharing of data with traders in personal data. This is one of the default entries, however, and I am assuming that they have left it in, just in case (a form of “CYA”).

So far so good. You would think that it becomes a different matter if you happen to be standing on the pavement eating a cheeseburger when some kind of demonstration takes place. Does that mean that your photo gets taken and you become included in the National Domestic Extremism Database?

I’ll spare you the details but as of January, I have been extremely aware of the enormous power police officers hold to screw someone royally, to put it bluntly. A chill ran down my spine when I found out something that I had been unaware of until then. The kind of coincidence that I had been a bit worried about as a result happened recently, when I discovered that I had been in Parliament Square just a few hours before Occupy planned to occupy Parliament Square. I was completely unaware of those plans, and saw nothing out of the ordinary (perhaps because I am not familiar with Parliament Square).

I am sure I stood there for a while looking pretty suspicious, however. Among other things, I was timing distances, for the sake of planning any future journeys to meetings. In the past, would that already have gotten me into the National Domestic Extremism Database because my behaviour was out of the ordinary? Non-touristy? Puzzling?

Believe it or not, there can be silly coincidences that have someone present at some kind of demonstration five times in a row. We all see such silly coincidences in other areas of our lives, after all. Does that justify the inclusion in the National Domestic Extremism Database? Of course not, but unless media shine a light on what goes on and one or two gutsy personalities take to the courts, a great deal of this kind of activity remains completely hidden from sight.

The National Domestic Extremism Database is not the only database you have to be concerned about. The police’s Crime Reporting Information System (CRIS)  can keep data up to twelve years. You would think that this CRIS system contains only crime data. It does not. CRIS contains data on serious offences, minor offences and about conduct that does not amount to an offence at all.

One wonders.

 

What Charlie Gard taught me

officially ᗩᑎGEᒪIᑎᗩ Leave a comment

No matter how you felt about the situation of Charlie Gard and his parents and about how it was handled, you will likely agree that little Charlie’s life and death have not been in vain. Many bioethics scholars and others – predominantly men, I noticed – have been writing up their feelings and opinions on the matter, analyzing what happened and drawing conclusions. This will benefit future babies like Charlie and future parents like Charlie’s.

Or at least, it should!

Like all those other people, I too want to do a write-up because it will be very enlightening for myself (maybe also for others, because I did a surprising U-turn).

In this post, I will not go into the differences between Britain and other countries. Neither will I discuss the British legal background of the case, but I do want to point out that it must be kept in mind as essentially separate from all other considerations. The law of England & Wales must be adhered to, whether we like it or not, and in many cases that should entice the legal profession to pick up the lead in their arena and endeavor to have laws changed where called for. (Legislature, that is your duty! Step up to the plate.)

I was like just about everybody else. When I first heard about Charlie Gard case, I saw it as a consumerist view of babies. Baby has a defect. Must be fixed. Period.

As a teenager, I saw my mother suffer for many years, wither away and die and it was an immense relief for me that her suffering had ended when she died.

So, no, I am not for the extension of life “at all cost” / “no matter what” because that often is very selfish on the side of everyone who is not the patient in question. Family members and friends have to ask themselves what it is that they want. Do they want to hold on to the person no matter what or do they want that person to be free of pain?

Letting go is part of life, part of growing up, part of… being.

When one door closes, another one opens, in so many ways.

So I felt angry and frustrated toward Charlie Gard’s parents, although I certainly understood their anguish.

Earlier this year, I came up with a definition of what constitutes “a life not worth living” and Charlie Gard’s vulnerable little life fit that definition. Please, stop his suffering and let him pass away, as nature itself considers him not viable and he would surely have passed away a long time ago if it hadn’t been for the care and services provided by Great Ormond Street Hospital. That’s what I thought.

Please, please, please, let him go. Let him gooooooooooooooooooooo! That is what life is about!

But I had also come up with a definition of what harm is, within this context…

Both my definitions were very logical. I found them through play, playing with words, playing with ideas, concepts. They’d surely come across as “chilly” and “cruelly objective” to the “public”.

And then I saw that they clashed.

That’s when I saw that there was no conflict.

Both parties wanted what they thought would be the best for little Charlie.

But the only party with a real interest in this – one that didn’t clash with the wishes of the medical staff at GOSH – were Charlie’s parents.

Forgive me, please, for having accused you of a consumerist view of your child at first.

If Charlie had lived, he would be part of YOUR life now – not the hospital’s – and you were willing to accept anything that would have meant, it seems.

Who am I to judge a “vegetable” not worth of living?

Who am I to judge a being able of experiencing joy – and pain – as a life not worth of living?

Isn’t it true that ALL LIVES experience joy and pain?

Isn’t it true that this is LIFE?

I wrote the above after having consumed a considerable quantity of rum. Nothing bad about that! Below are my very (sober and) logical considerations.

Yelp trolls

officially ᗩᑎGEᒪIᑎᗩ Leave a comment

Last year, a New York steakhouse took legal steps to force Yelp to identify who wrote a certain post on Yelp. The writer claimed to be a waiter habitually spitting into the food served at the steak house. The writer used the name of a real person who said he had nothing to do with it and apparently filed a police report about the matter. The steak house took Yelp to court in an attempt to track  down the real poster. (Read more here, here and here.)

Earlier, another company had taken a similar matter to the courts in Virginia, claiming defamation. These cases force the US courts to carry out a delicate legal balancing act. The Virginia Appeals Court initially ruled that Yelp had to reveal the identities of seven posters, but Yelp appealed against that decision (read more here, here and here). The Virginia Supreme Court heard the matter in October 2014.

I haven’t been able to find recent information on the internet about these cases so it’s not clear to me how either of them ended. As there is a great deal of debate about the validity of Yelp reviews and the company’s ability to manipulate reviews, the point may be moot.

 

When theft is chased as a chattel tort

officially ᗩᑎGEᒪIᑎᗩ Leave a comment

When I say “chattel torts”, the mind of most people goes blank.

light bulbIf you’ve ever been caught shoplifting without having been arrested, however, you may have received letters from firms quoting the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977.

Ah, I saw your flash of recognition.

The practice is called civil recovery in England and Wales (and dunning in the US, so I understand).

You basically received a bill for costs incurred by the store, and you were told to pay or else you’ve be taken to court.

When they hear or read the word court, many people feel intimidated. Courts are places where people are sentenced, where children get taken away from families and places that evict people from their homes or point fingers at people and say they have to pay something.

It freaks them out! They can’t afford a lawyer, by definition, and lawyers scare them too. So they pay.

They pay the business that wrote them the letter. The business that does this to make money.

The bill they sent you did not represent actual costs of the store where you were shoplifting. It also has absolutely nothing to do with a criminal record.

Well, a few years, two such cases did go to court.

For a bill of £137.50.

The law has changed and business who send you similar exaggerated invoices are now committing a criminal offence when they do.

Are you aware of that?

Another mark against Uber

officially ᗩᑎGEᒪIᑎᗩ Leave a comment

There are many misgivings regarding the app-based taxi company Uber. One of those is a belief that Uber’s databases will get hacked.

Apparently, they already did. Get hacked.

Uber found out four months after the fact and kept quiet about it for months afterward. Last Friday, it finally came clean. In the New York Post, you can read more about Uber getting hacked.

Uber has meanwhile started a lawsuit against the hacker, identifying him or her as John Doe. This is also how you can sometimes take action against anonymous internet trolls as the FindLaw blog explains.

Revenge porn now a crime in the UK

officially ᗩᑎGEᒪIᑎᗩ

‘Revenge porn’ criminalised: What is it and what are the consequences? was one of yesterday’s headlines in the news.

Revenge porn is commonly used by internet trolls. California was among the first states that made it a crime. Many other forms of trolling are not a crime, or not a crime yet.

If you are a target of internet trolls and they are doing damage to your life, there are all sorts of things that you can do, in spite of how difficult it may seem. I will explain more about that in due course.

 

Revenge evictions coming to an end?

officially ᗩᑎGEᒪIᑎᗩ

This morning, I had an e-mail from Citizens Advice of which the first line said that the House of Lords voted to put a stop to retaliatory evictions yesterday.

homeI was very busy with something else yesterday and this morning’s media had nothing on the topic so I did a web search. On Letting Agent Today, I found that indeed, apparently, the House of Lords essentially wants to make it impossible for landlords to evict a tenant for no reason within six months after a tenant’s improvement or hazard awareness notice.

It concerns amendments to the Deregulation Bill.

Keeping a PC offline keeps it safe, right?

officially ᗩᑎGEᒪIᑎᗩ Leave a comment

Wrong.

Cyber crime is much sneakier than most people think. It is not limited to someone accessing your hotmail or Facebook account. it can take over your life. And gobble up your business.

There are various ways to access a computer that is offline. A term sometimes used for an offline computer is ‘air-gapped’, but for starters, a true air-gapped computer should never ever have been connected to the internet to minimise the chance that there is any software (code) on it that shouldn’t be on it. It should be brand-new, out of the box.

Unless you put it in a Faraday cage, some of the information on an offline computer can still be accessed although this is usually merely passive. It concerns information displayed on a screen or entered on a keyboard, for example. This can be accessed but not altered.

Here are a few technical articles for those who want some background:

Here is a really nice old video about it:

And this one, in German and much more recent, is quite clear too:

Here is another one:

In addition to the above, I see at least four more or less regular ways to access a computer and tamper with it:
– via cable or telephone line, directly;
– via cable or telephone line, using unused capacity on the line;
– wireless/wifi network;
– powerline networking.

In the case of powerline networking, there may be a need for that computer to have been hacked before it was taken offline. That also seems to be the case for at least one of the air-gap hopping methods.

It may also be possible to access printer memory via powerline networking and acquire information that way.

A computer does not have to be accessed through its operating system such as Windows, as is often thought. Computers can be accessed at a much more basic level as well, but it depends on the hardware and its settings.

Hackers can also purchase or build scanning equipment that can detect your mobile equipment. Phone hacking and spying software is available from regular retailers and its use has ‘reached epidemic proportions‘ (article in the Independent).

Here are four more articles, in The Independent and the Huffington Post:

If you are really intrigued now, read this article in NewScientist about new bugging devices.

Revenge evictions – part 2

officially ᗩᑎGEᒪIᑎᗩ

A little while ago, I posted about the upcoming vote on the Tenancies (Reform) Bill. Its intention is to put a stop to revenge evictions.

arrowpointingright

First, I received an update from Crisis (the national charity for single homeless people), informing me that “despite hundreds of Crisis campaigners like you emailing their MP, the Bill to tackle revenge evictions has failed.”

arrowpointingrightA few days later, I received a letter from the MP for Portsmouth South, Mike Hancock. He explained in detail that two Conservative MPs “intentionally used up the rest of the allotted time to prevent the Bill from being voted on“.

arrowpointingright

At around the same time, I also received Lime Legal’s newsletter (edited by housing champion Jan Luba QC), which included an item on the same topic:

“On 28 November 2014 a private members bill designed to address retaliatory evictions … was talked-out in Parliament and, despite having had UK Government support, is unlikely to make further progress.”

arrowpointingrightAlso interesting is what the Residential Landlord’s Association had to say about what actually happened. Among other things, it wrote:

“The Bill ran out of time, after only 60 MPs voted on a procedural motion to put the Bill to a vote.  100 MPs are required for such a motion to succeed.  It now drops to the bottom of the order for Private Members’ Bills and has no chance of proceeding.”

If you clicked on that last link, you’ll have seen that someone called the Bill “badly drafted“.

Together, these four views give a better picture than either one of them individually, particularly when combined with the official account of what went on that day.

More information:

home

The second reading debate is expected to continue on 23 January 2015. Initially, that appears to have been scheduled for 5 December 2014 (tomorrow), a day on which there would likely have been no time to discuss the Bill in Parliament as there would be 8 bills ahead of it, so I understood from Mr Hancock’s explanation. It is even less likely to be read on 23 January, as 11 bills will be ahead of it on that day, and everyone agrees that is it dead in the water.

If you want to follow what happens to the bill, click on this link to its page on the Parliament’s web site.

UPDATE 10 December from Lime Legal:

“After the talking-out of the Tenancies Reform Bill, there is to be an attempt to introduce the same provisions controlling retaliatory eviction as part of the Deregulation Bill which is currently going through the House of Lords”

Policing matters at the Supreme Court

officially ᗩᑎGEᒪIᑎᗩ

You can follow the current proceedings online: here.lady justice

There has been a “massive bonfire” (words of counsel) in the National Domestic Extremism Database recently, partly or perhaps mainly because of the HMIC’s assessment that there was massive overinclusion of data.

The existence of this database was revealed by the media (The Guardian, I believe) in 2009. It may have been in existence since 1999 and have widened its scope later.

Disabled woman stole food from Asda after benefits stopped

officially ᗩᑎGEᒪIᑎᗩ

Police and CPS like soft targets. (I call it sandwich justice, but sometimes, it goes a lot further than mere sandwich justice.) Thankfully, she was not jailed for 12 months.

samedifference1's avatarSame Difference

Readers, howmany more similar stories am I going to have to cover?

A woman whose benefits had been stopped stole food from a supermarket.

Wendy Rogers, 51, of Garstang Road East, Poulton, pleaded guilty to two offences of theft.

Chrissie Hunt, prosecuting, said Rogers took a shoulder of pork from Asda on September 28, and the following day returned to the store and took a packet of cream cheese.

Trevor Colebourne, defending, said his client, who had no previous convictions, was severely disabled and had had numerous operations.

At the time of the theft she had problems over her benefits and was penniless.

Rogers was given a 12-month conditional discharge and ordered to pay £15 victims’ surcharge by Blackpool magistrates.

View original post

Revenge evictions

officially ᗩᑎGEᒪIᑎᗩ

On 28 November, MPs can vote to outlaw revenge evictions, evictions that happen just because a tenant asks to have the heating fixed or a mould and moisture problem dealt with. The law currently still allows that. Find out if your MP is standing up for renters. Mine is (but I don’t know yet if he will also attend the debate in Parliament that day).

Here are examples of other MPs who are voting to end revenge evictions:

Andrew Smith
Oxford East

Bob Blackman
Harrow East

Nicola Blackwood
Oxford West and Abingdon

Peter Bottomley
Worthing West

homePhilip Hollobone
Kettering

Sarah Teather
Brent Central

Stephen Williams
Bristol West

Tessa Munt
Wells

Andrew Slaughter
Hammersmith

Annette Brooke
Mid Dorset and North Poole

Caroline Lucas
Brighton Pavilion

David Lammy
Tottenham

Diane Abbott
Hackney North and Stoke Newington

Don Foster
Bath

Heidi Alexander
Lewisham East

Jeremy Corbyn
Islington North

Jim Fitzpatrick
Poplar and Limehouse

Julian Huppert
Cambridge

Karen Buck
Westminster North

Kate Hoey
Vauxhall

Keith Vaz
Leicester East

Lynne Featherstone
Hornsey and Wood Green

Simon Danczuk
Rochdale

Stephen Pound
Ealing North

Teresa Pearce
Erith and Thamesmead

Brian Donohoe
Central Ayrshire

How to turn ‘no’ into ‘yes’

officially ᗩᑎGEᒪIᑎᗩ

Once upon a time, there was a woman who got really ticked off because her disabled brother was unable to get a job. Employers told him ‘no’. So she started a business herself and offered him a job.

The year was 1999. The startup location was in Amsterdam, right around the corner from where I was living back then. Today that business has 17 branches all over the country. Two years ago, in 2012, it was acquired by a larger enterprise, but the business philosophy remains the same.

Valid Express only employs couriers who are physically disabled or chronically ill.
Continue reading →

Case Law: Hegglin v Persons Unknown and Google, Data Protection Battle Costs set to hit £2.36 million – Media Lawyer

officially ᗩᑎGEᒪIᑎᗩ

Privacy is a cultural concept. Privacy does not mean the same in the US as it does in the UK and it does not mean the same in the UK as it does in the Netherlands and it does not mean the same in the Netherlands as it does in Hong Kong.

That’s a challenging idea.

INFORRM's avatarInforrm's Blog

Google--007A battle between a Hong Kong-based businessman and internet search giant Google is set to cost some £2.36 million by the time it reaches the end of a five-day trial set for later this month, according to figures given to a High Court judge.

View original post 1,099 more words

When bedroom tax victims are evicted

officially ᗩᑎGEᒪIᑎᗩ

Last September, the Independent reported that about 50,000 people – mostly disabled – were being threatened with eviction on account of the so-called bedroom tax (a cut in the benefits of those people who need support most, generally). Someone just alerted me to this post about the eviction of Michael Hilton in East Lancashire.

homeIf this account of events is accurate and fairly complete, a violation of the Interference with Good Act 1977 occurred in this case, and under  circumstances that I find repugnant.

The Lancashire Telegraph also reported on this eviction but did not mention the destruction of Mr Hilton’s belongings. I hope that the ‘rifling’ through the skip was done by caring neighbours who tried to salvage some of Mr Hilton’s possessions, if they were indeed disposed of instantly.

To me, the ‘bedroom tax’ sounds like an instrument fitting for a feudal aristocracy as those who are affected by it are often unable to change their circumstances in such a way that they can avoid it. There is an almost feudal relationship between those who impose this astonishingly ridiculous and cruel ‘bedroom tax’ (the government) and the affected persons, but that is not what this post is about.

It is not necessarily true that tenants who appear to ignore eviction notices are burying their heads in the sand. The real reason can be that there is simply very little such tenants can do. There is a general misconception among the public – including police – that tenants who receive an eviction notice can make this ‘go away’ if only they will act.

There is no magical solution called ‘help’ out there. Many councils are unable to do anything for tenants threatened with eviction. The councils can rehouse some of the most vulnerable people, but that appears to be relatively rare. I think it is a fair assumption that anyone who is unable to escape the bedroom tax is equally unable to do something about a subsequent eviction.

The idea of eviction makes most people feel so extremely vulnerable that they distance themselves from other people’s evictions by telling themselves that eviction could never happen to them. They, after all, would act if it ever happened to them. That assumption is wrong. Eviction can happen to anyone. If it were to happen to you, you might find yourself just as powerless and just as distraught as Mr Hilton, certainly if you’d been living in your home as long as Mr Hilton had. 30 years.

In all fairness, Hyndburn Homes appears to be trying to do what it can, but it is a bit hard to tell from a distance. I am finding them very communicative, though, and that is usually a good sign. I have asked for concrete examples of solutions Hyndburn Homes finds together with tenants. Seeing what is possible might help diminish the number of tenants who seemingly refuse offers of support and ‘choose not to work with’ housing associations.

When you’re very stressed, which is almost always the case when you’re about to be kicked out of your home, it becomes very hard to see solutions. All you likely still see is a giant wall of problems closing in on you. I too would like to know what solutions housing associations are able to offer. Because many people – tenants and housing associations alike – need that inspiration.

White shoes and magic circles

officially ᗩᑎGEᒪIᑎᗩ

England often seems to have a big problem with them. White shoes. Sneakers. Trainers.

trainersI’ve been wearing them for decades. No, not the same pair, ha ha.

I love to walk and I love to run and I love being able to make that bus, train or tram on account of a last-minute sprint instead of being hampered by my high-heeled footwear. Wearing those white shoes also helps if you have to traverse long corridors and many staircases in university buildings a lot, like I used to do.

My Dutch GP used to compliment me on my sensible shoes, but many English people seem puzzled and amused or even alarmed by it when I wear white shoes. Trainers. Sneakers.

I don’t know the exact background for the strange looks I sometimes get because of my white shoes – something to do with ‘chavs’ ? – but I can’t be the only one who gets them. Those looks. Next time you catch one or dole one out, remember the following, and smile.

A white shoe firm is a top firm in law, management consulting or investment banking. Clifford Chance, as one example, is usually seen as part of the magic circle, but would be called a white shoe law firm much more often if it weren’t English and the description weren’t of American origin.

And next time someone comments on my white shoes? Maybe I will smile, and counter that I work at a white shoe firm.

If the British pay more attention to substance and less to color-coordinating their acccessories, and hire more people on the basis of their capabilities instead of on size of tits and perceived fuckability or the fact that someone is the son or nephew of the Duke of Dipshitz, Britain may soon be in much better shape than it is today and be a better place for everyone.

I usually wore my white sneakers while at work at Clifford Chance. Because Clifford Chance cared more about what I was able to do than about what I was wearing. (Might that be because HR was Dutch?) Yes, I was on a contract. Yes, I quit, but I was overqualified, only there to make some extra money, and they were aware of that. They looked after their legal secretaries pretty well and most of their lawyers were pretty damn good. Some were even better than pretty damn good.