Skip to main content

Covert Tape Recording

One of the issues raised in the Sunday Telegraph today is that of covert tape recording. The recording of Video pictures with CCTV is covered by the Data Protection Act because it records someone's face.

As far as I can tell a Public Authority is prevented from doing a covert tape recording unless it is done in accordance with the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.

However, as it is entirely reasonable to take notes of a conversation that someone has with another party then I cannot see that the privacy aspects of ECHR constrain recording the same conversation. The situation may be difficult for a situation where someone is "bugged".

I know that Childrens Social Services don't like meetings being recorded. I think, however, that this is wrong and they should be willing to have recordings made. It is much like the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 where tape recordings are used for interviews to ensure there is accuracy of evidence.

I would think that having accuracy of evidence in respect of Child Protection Proceedings would be a step forwards.


moira said…
Secretly taping ss has saved some families.They were able to prove lies in statements and meetings.

I wish I had secretly taped them,then I could prove in the complaint malicious,childish and bullying behaviour.

Due to social services having power to instigate care proceedings,I would think it was absolutely necessary to record them. Similar as you say to the offender who is taped as he is going to end up in court.

Why do criminals have more rights than someone who has asked for help from SS and suddenly find themselves in a nightmare situation.

due to secrecy, social services have been allowed to become a corrupt organisation where lying is now considered perfectly normal if it gets social workers the results they want.A situation that must be righted.
Benedict White said…
John, I thought PACE was 1984?

Actually for a one off recording the Data protection act will not help them.

As it is not yet in court they can't rely on the secrecy of that either.


I have also linked back here from my blog.

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Statement re Police investigation into Harassment and Perverting the Course of Justice.

It was recently reported that the police were not investigating the allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice that I had made. This came as a surprise to me as I had been told for some time that my allegations were to be considered once the VRR had been rejected. I have now had a very constructive meeting with Staffordshire police on Friday 29th June 2018 and the misunderstandings have been resolved. At that meeting the evidence relating to the perversion of the course of justice and the harassment campaign against my family were discussed. The police have decided to investigate both the perversion of the course of justice and also the harassment campaign. I would like to thank them for changing their decision and I accept their apology for the way in which they did that. I am also in possession of written confirmation a police force would be investigating allegations that a vulnerable witness has been harassed for trying to expose the campaign against me. I hope that the aut…

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).


R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…