Westcliff PCSO used photo of woman from police computer

9:30am Wednesday 26th September 2012 in News By Paul Hannah

A POLICE community support officer is facing the sack for using the force computer to find a photograph of a woman bus driver.

Bernard Iley downloaded the photo of the former friend to his mobile and used it, so when the woman called him, the photo would pop up.

But a court heard the officer did not have permission to use the photo and was suspended when his bosses found out.

Chelmsford Crown Court also heard the woman in the picture is no longer in a friendship with Iley.

The 56-year-old was told by a judge he had committed an “extremely bad error of judgment” when he took the photo from police files.

Judge David Turner QC told Iley: “When you did this, you entered the forbidden zone and it has had the gravest of consequences. You have brought shame on yourself and derailed your career.”

Iley worked as a PCSO for Rochford district. He has been suspended on pay of £1,500 a month since March, but the court heard he is now almost certain to lose his job.

He admitted a charge of obtaining personal information without permission when he appeared in court.

Judge Turner fined him £1,000 plus £1,000 costs.

The court heard Iley, of Cheddar Avenue, Westcliff , had been a PCSO since 2003 and got on friendly terms with the woman bus driver from the Southend area.

It was at this time, between January 2011 and February this year, Iley found the picture of the woman, Stephen Rose, prosecuting, said.

The matter came to light and father-of-five Iley was suspended in March. His barrister, Alexis Dite, told the court: “The real consequence of this is he will lose his job.

“He put the picture on his contacts list and accepts it was not used for a legitimate reasons.

“He had a friendship with this woman, but she did not want it to continue.”

The court heard Iley was a traffic warden in the Southend area for more than 20 years before becoming a community support officer.

An Essex Police spokesman said: “Professional standards will now look at commencing internal disciplinary proceedings.”

Comments (14)

10:00am Wed 26 Sep 12

ccd says...

Probably seems harsh but I work for a bank and I'd get fired if I accessed an account's details without a business reason and rightly so. The data protection act exists for good reasons (not that most firms actually know what to do about it and usually get it hopelessly wrong)
Probably seems harsh but I work for a bank and I'd get fired if I accessed an account's details without a business reason and rightly so. The data protection act exists for good reasons (not that most firms actually know what to do about it and usually get it hopelessly wrong) ccd

10:02am Wed 26 Sep 12

ccd says...

Although I would also say that his employers should also provide very clear training and guidelines to ensure transgressions do not occur. If they did, then he's banged to rights.
Although I would also say that his employers should also provide very clear training and guidelines to ensure transgressions do not occur. If they did, then he's banged to rights. ccd

10:13am Wed 26 Sep 12

E-Types... says...

Traffic warden to PCSO..
Traffic warden to PCSO.. E-Types...

10:26am Wed 26 Sep 12

Blind Haze says...

Bad error of judgement, but hardly crime of the century. A simple internal reprimand, made to delete the photo and increased IT security would have put this to bed. However, this man will lose his job after 9 years service and is fined £2,000 - seems exceptionally harsh when you see the 'punishment' handed out to the teenager who stole a moped and ran over a police officer.
Bad error of judgement, but hardly crime of the century. A simple internal reprimand, made to delete the photo and increased IT security would have put this to bed. However, this man will lose his job after 9 years service and is fined £2,000 - seems exceptionally harsh when you see the 'punishment' handed out to the teenager who stole a moped and ran over a police officer. Blind Haze

10:43am Wed 26 Sep 12

thesouthendone says...

Blind Haze wrote:
Bad error of judgement, but hardly crime of the century. A simple internal reprimand, made to delete the photo and increased IT security would have put this to bed. However, this man will lose his job after 9 years service and is fined £2,000 - seems exceptionally harsh when you see the 'punishment' handed out to the teenager who stole a moped and ran over a police officer.
As much as I think PCSOs are a complete waste of money (actual police would be better!) i couldn't agree more with this comment.

It seems you get punished more for being in a position of trust and making a mistake (regardless of previous contributions to society) then you do for being a little scrote who's whole life is a mistake and never contributes!
[quote][p][bold]Blind Haze[/bold] wrote: Bad error of judgement, but hardly crime of the century. A simple internal reprimand, made to delete the photo and increased IT security would have put this to bed. However, this man will lose his job after 9 years service and is fined £2,000 - seems exceptionally harsh when you see the 'punishment' handed out to the teenager who stole a moped and ran over a police officer.[/p][/quote]As much as I think PCSOs are a complete waste of money (actual police would be better!) i couldn't agree more with this comment. It seems you get punished more for being in a position of trust and making a mistake (regardless of previous contributions to society) then you do for being a little scrote who's whole life is a mistake and never contributes! thesouthendone

11:46am Wed 26 Sep 12

Son of stropmag says...

I never realised that a PCSO was a "career".
I never realised that a PCSO was a "career". Son of stropmag

11:50am Wed 26 Sep 12

andy:) says...

But lets face it, the guy sounds like a right donut !
But lets face it, the guy sounds like a right donut ! andy:)

11:57am Wed 26 Sep 12

ccd says...

Blind Haze wrote:
Bad error of judgement, but hardly crime of the century. A simple internal reprimand, made to delete the photo and increased IT security would have put this to bed. However, this man will lose his job after 9 years service and is fined £2,000 - seems exceptionally harsh when you see the 'punishment' handed out to the teenager who stole a moped and ran over a police officer.
The punishment certainly does seem to be too heavy for what was an error of judgement as you say. It could have been dealt with internally, as you say but it does depend on just how much training he got on the do's and don'ts of people's data.
[quote][p][bold]Blind Haze[/bold] wrote: Bad error of judgement, but hardly crime of the century. A simple internal reprimand, made to delete the photo and increased IT security would have put this to bed. However, this man will lose his job after 9 years service and is fined £2,000 - seems exceptionally harsh when you see the 'punishment' handed out to the teenager who stole a moped and ran over a police officer.[/p][/quote]The punishment certainly does seem to be too heavy for what was an error of judgement as you say. It could have been dealt with internally, as you say but it does depend on just how much training he got on the do's and don'ts of people's data. ccd

12:14pm Wed 26 Sep 12

Camp Incontinent says...

Why did the police have a photo of this lady on file in the first place ?
Why did the police have a photo of this lady on file in the first place ? Camp Incontinent

1:47pm Wed 26 Sep 12

E-Types... says...

He accessed a network of secret files that is restricted to only those with authority to access! That seems to be the crime not the photo of a woman's mugshot..
He accessed a network of secret files that is restricted to only those with authority to access! That seems to be the crime not the photo of a woman's mugshot.. E-Types...

2:35pm Wed 26 Sep 12

CALL ME CLINT says...

E-Types... wrote:
He accessed a network of secret files that is restricted to only those with authority to access! That seems to be the crime not the photo of a woman's mugshot..
I believe that is the nature of a "secret file".
[quote][p][bold]E-Types...[/bold] wrote: He accessed a network of secret files that is restricted to only those with authority to access! That seems to be the crime not the photo of a woman's mugshot..[/p][/quote]I believe that is the nature of a "secret file". CALL ME CLINT

2:46pm Wed 26 Sep 12

Blind Haze says...

ccd wrote:
Blind Haze wrote: Bad error of judgement, but hardly crime of the century. A simple internal reprimand, made to delete the photo and increased IT security would have put this to bed. However, this man will lose his job after 9 years service and is fined £2,000 - seems exceptionally harsh when you see the 'punishment' handed out to the teenager who stole a moped and ran over a police officer.
The punishment certainly does seem to be too heavy for what was an error of judgement as you say. It could have been dealt with internally, as you say but it does depend on just how much training he got on the do's and don'ts of people's data.
You're right, there may be more to this than the story says, perhaps he's been warned for similar offences previously. If not, it's a stark wake up call for the police as other maybe less trustworthy staff could download all sorts of very private information and give it to an 'interested party'. Either way, I think they should review their IT security policy and it seems that it's potentially open to a fair bit of abuse.

The above's obviously purely speculation and contemplation but there are a lot of unscrupulous people working in all industries.
[quote][p][bold]ccd[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Blind Haze[/bold] wrote: Bad error of judgement, but hardly crime of the century. A simple internal reprimand, made to delete the photo and increased IT security would have put this to bed. However, this man will lose his job after 9 years service and is fined £2,000 - seems exceptionally harsh when you see the 'punishment' handed out to the teenager who stole a moped and ran over a police officer.[/p][/quote]The punishment certainly does seem to be too heavy for what was an error of judgement as you say. It could have been dealt with internally, as you say but it does depend on just how much training he got on the do's and don'ts of people's data.[/p][/quote]You're right, there may be more to this than the story says, perhaps he's been warned for similar offences previously. If not, it's a stark wake up call for the police as other maybe less trustworthy staff could download all sorts of very private information and give it to an 'interested party'. Either way, I think they should review their IT security policy and it seems that it's potentially open to a fair bit of abuse. The above's obviously purely speculation and contemplation but there are a lot of unscrupulous people working in all industries. Blind Haze

3:16pm Wed 26 Sep 12

E-Types... says...

CALL ME CLINT wrote:
E-Types... wrote:
He accessed a network of secret files that is restricted to only those with authority to access! That seems to be the crime not the photo of a woman's mugshot..
I believe that is the nature of a "secret file".
He was then punished for accessing that confidential data without authority rather than or maybe as well as taking a woman's picture from it.

Breaking into bank is as much about breaking in as stealing whats in there.
[quote][p][bold]CALL ME CLINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]E-Types...[/bold] wrote: He accessed a network of secret files that is restricted to only those with authority to access! That seems to be the crime not the photo of a woman's mugshot..[/p][/quote]I believe that is the nature of a "secret file".[/p][/quote]He was then punished for accessing that confidential data without authority rather than or maybe as well as taking a woman's picture from it. Breaking into bank is as much about breaking in as stealing whats in there. E-Types...

5:43pm Wed 26 Sep 12

boom2012 says...

Gutted is all I can say on this matter. You work for scum you will be treated like scum. That is all.
Gutted is all I can say on this matter. You work for scum you will be treated like scum. That is all. boom2012

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree