FOI Devices (0721-2024/25)

Request
Q1. In the past two years, has your police force returned a device to somebody convicted of revenge porn (as per section 33(1) of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015), which still had the relevant non-consensual intimate images on the device? 

Q2. If so, how many times has your police force done this?

Q3.  If so, what are the specific case details that your police force can share about these cases?

Q4. In the past two years under the jurisdiction of your police force, have there been any cases of people who have been convicted of revenge porn charges then re-offending with the same NCIIs or against the same victims?

Extent of Searches to Locate Information
Following receipt of your request searches were conducted within North Yorkshire Police to locate relevant information. 

Decision
I am not obliged to provide you with a response to your request pursuant to Section 12(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act). Please note that when one part of your request falls under Section 12, we are not obliged to review the rest of the questions and the whole request is therefore exempt.

Section 12(1) applies to your request as the cost of complying with your request is above the amount to which we are legally required to respond i.e. the cost of identifying and retrieving any relevant information exceeds the ‘appropriate level’ as stated in the Freedom of Information (Appropriate Limit and Fees) Regulations 2004.

Due to the nature of our recording systems the information requested, if held, is not in an easily retrievable format. Our information retrieval process generally relies on a computer ran report which captures any information recorded upon the surface of a record or within specified fields. Where relevant information is held deeper in the record, or outside of a specified field, a manual assessment is required to retrieve that information.

In order to retrieve the requested information, it would be necessary to manually review every record over a timeframe of two years, which would exceed the time limit allowed under the Act.

I can confirm, however, that any device seized during the course of an investigation relating to non-consensual images should be subject to destruction orders via the Courts and should never be returned, or orders made for said images to be deleted before the return of the device.

Pursuant to Section 17(5) of the Freedom of Information Act this letter acts as a Refusal Notice.

Pursuant to Section 16 of the Act I am required to offer you advice and assistance with regarding to refining your request to within the ‘appropriate limit’ (time/cost limit). However, due to the information provided above I am unable to suggest how you may refine your request and still receive the information within the cost threshold. If you wish to discuss this please do not hesitate to contact me.

Please note that systems used for recording information are not generic, nor are the procedures used locally in capturing the data.  It should be noted therefore that this force’s response to your questions should not be used for comparison purposes with any other responses you may receive.