La_Dolce_Vita Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?Q...p;in_page_id=34 Oh dear, this is really bad. "Lord Justice Waller said: 'If the police say rationally and reasonably that convictions, however old or minor, have a value in the work they do, that should, in effect, be the end of the matter.'" Is it really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebees Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 I would hope that any employer would take a person on their merits 'at this time' rather than damning a person for having a criminal record. I would not want to work for someone who was of that ilk anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 It's the politics of fear again. Once we are all frightened of each other, and won't talk or help each other - we'll all look to the state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneak Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?Q...p;in_page_id=34 Oh dear, this is really bad. "Lord Justice Waller said: 'If the police say rationally and reasonably that convictions, however old or minor, have a value in the work they do, that should, in effect, be the end of the matter.'" Is it really? Don't criminal records stay on file indefinitely over here, anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pragmatopian Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Everything you need to know about spent convictions and disclosure of criminal records can be found here: http://www.yourrights.org.uk/yourrights/pr...ers/index.shtml To me it seems completely disproportionate for records of long spent convictions for minor, isolated offences by juveniles to be retained by police, and especially for them to be disclosed on a criminal record check. The fact that someone stole a packet of crisps as a schoolchild 25 years ago should not be a matter for consideration of a prospective employer for any position today. Unless 'Life on Mars' was a documentary, I fail to see the relevance of such historical records to the police in their ongoing efforts to combat crime either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 The fact that someone stole a packet of crisps as a schoolchild 25 years ago should not be a matter for consideration of a prospective employer for any position today. But it might have saved us from years of Gary Fookin Lineker on Match of The Day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Can't believe some old git passed this. I used to say if you've nothing to hide, then you've got nothing to worry about, but the system seems to have gone bonkers. In the UK for instance, what level of checks are carried out on immigrants and how about those that have burned their ID? Over the top and unnecessary IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Don't criminal records stay on file indefinitely over here, anyway? No, Rehabilitation of Offenders Act came into force in 2000 or 2001. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.