• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear

    Telegraph: City lawyer fired after police kept record of her 'innocent' arrest

    A City lawyer, Lorraine Elliott, was fired from a £150,000-a-year job working on a Government contract after a vetting check showed that she had been wrongly accused of forging a signature on her daughter’s nursery application form.

    Mrs Elliott, 42, had her details logged on the police national computer after she was wrongly accused by her estranged husband of signing his name on the form.

    She was arrested but cleared within 24 hours, and checks at the school found no evidence of wrongdoing. However, officers kept details of her arrest – effectively giving her a record.

    Mrs Elliott disclosed yesterday how the “black mark” caused her to fail a security check and cost her a job working on the National Identity Card scheme.

    The mother of three, from Tenterden, Kent, said the arrest had potentially ruined her 25-year career. “It’s infuriating that details about me and my arrest are still retained on the police computer system for all to see despite the fact that I was never charged because there was no evidence,” she said.

    “The fact of the matter is that all the time those details are up there, I cannot get a job. It is impossible to find work in a profession that requires ultimate honesty, discretion and reliability when there is a black mark next to your name.

    “I am so angry that I am considering suing the Government for loss of earnings.”

    Mrs Elliot had been due to start work on a dispute resolution and arbitration project concerning the National Identity Card scheme. She was told she would be subject to mandatory “security check clearance”, which is carried out for posts involving access to secret assets and top secret material. But in the meantime she was arrested over the nursery school application.

    She was taken to her local police station where she was photographed and had her fingerprints and DNA taken.

    She strenuously denied fraud by misrepresentation and the next day, after challenging the police to provide evidence, was told there would be no charges. The fee-paying Montessori school corroborated Mrs Elliott’s account.

    She was sent a letter by police saying she had no case to answer and that “no further action” would be taken.

    But after she returned from holiday in September she was called to a meeting with bosses and told that her “record” had surfaced and her position was now “untenable”.

    “I was devastated,” she said. “There were no grounds for appeal — I was out.”
    How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror.

    Follow me on Twitter - LinkedIn Profile - The HAB blog - New Blog: Mad Cameron
    Xeno points: +5 - Asperger rating: 36 - Paranoid Schizophrenic rating: 44%

    "We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to high office" - Aesop

    #2
    We are all guilty under New Labour. It's just we might not have committed the crime yet or the laws have yet to be amended.

    Comment


      #3
      She might have been guilty, just because there was no evidence to convict her doesn`t mean.......

      DVA probably frown more on fraud and similar activity than others. And she hasn`t said if she received a warning or anything, if she had then it would probably (but not always) be on the PNC for a period of time. If not I think they can still record the issue in case she does something similar again in which case this record raises the probability of her being a fraudster. These usually expire after a year. I would place a small amount of money on her receiving a warning or caution, hence the record on the PNC.
      Last edited by SuperZ; 16 November 2009, 13:12.

      Comment


        #4
        In cases like these I think the estranged husband should share some of the blame.

        Comment


          #5
          She's not that good as a lawyer, if she hasn't got the record cleared.

          I'm surprised that they told her why she had failed the check - usually it's just a case of being turned down, from what little I know.
          Best Forum Advisor 2014
          Work in the public sector? You can read my FAQ here
          Click here to get 15% off your first year's IPSE membership

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by DimPrawn View Post
            We are all guilty under New Labour. It's just we might not have committed the crime yet or the laws have yet to be amended.
            1 in 5 of the working population already have a criminal record...
            ‎"See, you think I give a tulip. Wrong. In fact, while you talk, I'm thinking; How can I give less of a tulip? That's why I look interested."

            Comment


              #7
              Has this clueless bint no concept of the irony? Typical hard of thinking lawyer. She's moaning because she couln't get a job on a scheme designed to bring exactly this kind of misery to all of us? I have less than zero sympathy.
              Last edited by Peoplesoft bloke; 16 November 2009, 13:09.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Peoplesoft bloke View Post
                test
                please delete?
                ‎"See, you think I give a tulip. Wrong. In fact, while you talk, I'm thinking; How can I give less of a tulip? That's why I look interested."

                Comment


                  #9
                  Mrs Elliott disclosed yesterday how the “black mark” caused her to fail a security check and cost her a job working on the National Identity Card scheme.
                  Oh the irony!
                  Coffee's for closers

                  Comment


                    #10
                    It is a normal procedure for innocent people to be arrested. Charging and trial are what separates them from the guilty.

                    So judging anything from th fact that someone has been arrested is quite wrong: not just as a matter of justice but as a matter of fact and understanding.
                    Step outside posh boy

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X