Damian Green - alleged porn consumer

[Aber]

That is nonsense.

IIRC Nessie has intimate knowledge of the UK police forces.

 

[Nessie]

IIRC Nessie has intimate knowledge of the UK police forces.

I would not go that far, but by reputation, number of scandals, the behaviour of ex-Met officers who transferred to Scotland and then the CC Stephen House taking over with his cronies, the reputation of the Met was very low with other forces.

 

[cullennz]

Kind of a side topic, but I had a job once cleaning off old computers, when we got new batches, at a place before we sold them on second hand (before everyone started leasing)

People are into some freaky stuff man

 

[Information Analyst]

That is nonsense.

Corruption was certainly been rife within the Met in the past. Opinions differ on just how much it has cleaned up its act. Certainly reforms will have done little to change the character of some "old school" officers beyond prompting them to shut their mouths a bit more than they used to.

 

[Puppycow]

It was (or more specifically they were) a government computer and the browsing of legal pornographic images was carried out during "working" hours. In most workplaces that would at least earn you a written warning, in many it'd be gross negligence and get you fired.

Is there any clear law (not just a workplace policy) against this in the UK?

I would never do this myself, of course. OTOH, I do admittedly bend the rules a bit, by for example, coming to this website and others during work hours. I do steer clear of dodgy websites for the most part.

 

[Nessie]

Is there any clear law (not just a workplace policy) against this in the UK?

I would never do this myself, of course. OTOH, I do admittedly bend the rules a bit, by for example, coming to this website and others during work hours. I do steer clear of dodgy websites for the most part.

There is no law regarding workplace use of computres for non work purposes of any form.

 

[The Don]

Is there any clear law (not just a workplace policy) against this in the UK?

I would never do this myself, of course. OTOH, I do admittedly bend the rules a bit, by for example, coming to this website and others during work hours. I do steer clear of dodgy websites for the most part.

There's a difference between the law and what's stipulated in your employment contract. For example, it's not against the law to be chronically late for work but it's likely going to get you dismissed (after due process of course)

 

[Vixen]

Prosecuting the two ex-cops who leaked the news about Green's computer could be a double-edged sword as 'confidentiality clauses' can never cloak wrongdoing.

For example, say you are asked by someone to do something illegal. They cannot put you under a contract to keep it confidential, because the law of the land trumps any private agreement.

If, for the sake of argument, the two cops disclosed the information in good faith, that there was extreme porn on the computer and it was reasonable to conclude Green was the downloader of it, then they could have the legal defence that it was in the 'public interest' (the Whistleblowers charter).

Would we want a Cabinet Minister who behaves in such a manner (not that anyone is saying that Green has broken any laws)?

 

[ahhell]

Stuff I don't get: Idiots who use their work computer to access porn. I've no problem with the porn but doing it at work with company equipment is just stupid. Keep it at home.

This falls into the category of stupid hurts really.

There was a prof at my university fired for mysterious reasons. A brief student movement to get him back then the local paper rain a story about child porn being found on his work computer when he gave it to the IT department for maintenance. WTF was that guy thinking.

 

[Mikemcc]

Prosecuting the two ex-cops who leaked the news about Green's computer could be a double-edged sword as 'confidentiality clauses' can never cloak wrongdoing.

For example, say you are asked by someone to do something illegal. They cannot put you under a contract to keep it confidential, because the law of the land trumps any private agreement.

If, for the sake of argument, the two cops disclosed the information in good faith, that there was extreme porn on the computer and it was reasonable to conclude Green was the downloader of it, then they could have the legal defence that it was in the 'public interest' (the Whistleblowers charter).

Would we want a Cabinet Minister who behaves in such a manner (not that anyone is saying that Green has broken any laws)?

The trouble is that the porn found was not extreme or illegal. There is something that it would be illegal following a later law change (I'm assuming involving BDSM). Nor was the leak in good faith, the two officers involved were also involved in the debatably illegal search of Green's offices years ago to find leaked documents, a politically motivated witch-hunt that involved a distinct lack of a search warrant.

I find it amazing that a retired police officer still has his confidential notebooks 9 years on! I think both of these officers are acting in a manner that undermines the supposedly apolitical nature of policing. IMHO they should both have the book thrown at them to snuff out this silliness.

 

[Vixen]

The trouble is that the porn found was not extreme or illegal. There is something that it would be illegal following a later law change (I'm assuming involving BDSM). Nor was the leak in good faith, the two officers involved were also involved in the debatably illegal search of Green's offices years ago to find leaked documents, a politically motivated witch-hunt that involved a distinct lack of a search warrant.

I find it amazing that a retired police officer still has his confidential notebooks 9 years on! I think both of these officers are acting in a manner that undermines the supposedly apolitical nature of policing. IMHO they should both have the book thrown at them to snuff out this silliness.

Ah, but will Damian Green welcome having the details of the alleged 'extreme' porn spelt out in explicit minutaie under the legal privilege of the court room, what was found on his computer signed in on his password, and why they believed it to be his responsibility.

Will Nadine Dorry(_sp?) the MP who rushed to his aid saying she gives everybody, including the interns, her password, want to explain herself in the witness box, bearing in mind the guidelines that passwords must not be shared?

Let's get the popcorn in.

 

[Beerina]

There are two issues,

1) A retired police officer reveals (embarrassing) information about an individual who was caught up in a criminal investigation an action that would have resulted in a disciplinary offence had he been still a serving officer. Police officers often escape discipline by 'retiring'. There is a question about whether there should be some on-going responsibility to keep confidential what you discover as a police officer.

In terms of the general good. Police may discover embarrassing but non criminal information about people who are not suspects during an investigation. E.g. having an affair. People will be reluctant to co-operate with police investigations if they feel that at some point in the future a retired police officer may exploit the knowledge for political or other gain.

That's not the real reason it's wrong. The real reason is related to the requirements to get warrants to search your stuff -- to prevent those in power from arbitrarily filching through your stuff in order to hurt their political competition. They're not supposed to reveal legal stuff they find unrelated to the crime they're looking for (more) evidence of, as government is not concerned with that because government isn't concerned with hurting political opposition, and, by extension, people in general.

 

[Puppycow]

That's not the real reason it's wrong. The real reason is related to the requirements to get warrants to search your stuff -- to prevent those in power from arbitrarily filching through your stuff in order to hurt their political competition. They're not supposed to reveal legal stuff they find unrelated to the crime they're looking for (more) evidence of, as government is not concerned with that because government isn't concerned with hurting political opposition, and, by extension, people in general.

Exactly. That to me is the bigger issue here.

 

[JJM 777]

surfing porn at work is bad and then lying about it isn't a good idea either.

Somehow, using Internet with your work computer becomes "bad" and a reason for a written warning or resignation, when the websites opened are porn rather than Facebook, private email, New York Times, Youtube, etc.

The whole story is one big piece of hypocrisy and moral double standard, from the beginning to the end.

 

[The Don]

Somehow, using Internet with your work computer becomes "bad" and a reason for a written warning or resignation, when the websites opened are porn rather than Facebook, private email, New York Times, Youtube, etc.

The whole story is one big piece of hypocrisy and moral double standard, from the beginning to the end.

It depends, some companies prohibit any access to external sites for non-work purposes.

I wouldn't surf for porn on the bus, I wouldn't surf for porn at work, I wouldn't surf for porn on a friend's PC. You may consider it hypocrisy and moral double standard, I think it's just being a reasonable member of society.

Likewise I may take some of my lunch hour to peruse Classic and Sportscar or Guitarist magazine or read those two magazines on the train into London. I wouldn't sit at my desk or in the quiet carriage thumbing through a sticky copy of Big Jugs Monthly....

 

[Vixen]

It depends, some companies prohibit any access to external sites for non-work purposes.

I wouldn't surf for porn on the bus, I wouldn't surf for porn at work, I wouldn't surf for porn on a friend's PC. You may consider it hypocrisy and moral double standard, I think it's just being a reasonable member of society.

Likewise I may take some of my lunch hour to peruse Classic and Sportscar or Guitarist magazine or read those two magazines on the train into London. I wouldn't sit at my desk or in the quiet carriage thumbing through a sticky copy of Big Jugs Monthly....

Too much information.

 

[Mycroft]

IMO if anyone who worked for me was using their work computer to access porn during office hours then at best they'd have a written warning - most likely that would constitute gross misconduct and result in their dismissal - I think that's fairly typical.

What if their work performance was great?

 

[The Don]

What if their work performance was great?

If it falls under the category of gross misconduct then job performance is irrelevant.

 

[Mycroft]

If it falls under the category of gross misconduct then job performance is irrelevant.

To me "gross misconduct" would be masturbating at work or showing the pornographic images to people who don't want to see them. Neither of which are demonstrated by the mere presence of images in the brower history.

While I personally wouldn't choose to look at porn at work, I have had the experience of accidenly accessing porn back in the days when the internet was a bit more wild. The elements of this story are that it happened a long time ago, it took a police search to expose it, and other than the existence of the images themselves there is no evidence that anything improper happened, I'd dismiss it all.

 

[The Don]

To me "gross misconduct" would be masturbating at work or showing the pornographic images to people who don't want to see them. Neither of which are demonstrated by the mere presence of images in the brower history.

While I personally wouldn't choose to look at porn at work, I have had the experience of accidenly accessing porn back in the days when the internet was a bit more wild. The elements of this story are that it happened a long time ago, it took a police search to expose it, and other than the existence of the images themselves there is no evidence that anything improper happened, I'd dismiss it all.

It depends on what is in your employment contract.

Regarding whether a single accidental visit to a porn site constitutes gross misconduct, there's a big difference between accidentally falling across a site once and a browser history which shows tens of hours actively searching for, and accessing, content.