THIS IS THE REPLY FROM THE CROWN OFFICE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE WITH REGARDS TO FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUESTS MADE ON 15/5/12 AND MY RESPONSE TO THEM!!!
Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service
Crown Office, 25 Chambers Street, Edinburgh, EH1 1LA
Mrs Michelle MacLeod, Head of Policy
Tel: 0131 226 2626
Mr G Cluckie
RNID Typetalk prefix: 18001
15 May 2012
Dear Mr Cluckie
Thank you for your email of 15 April 2012 requesting information under the Freedom of
Information (Scotland) Act 2002 about the investigation into the case involving Hollie
Greig, and in particular:-
Details of whom Grampian Police interviewed in regards to those persons
accused by Hollie Greig and the conclusions thereof; Details of any decision made by said authority not to interview or investigate any
person named as one of Hollie Greig’s abusers; and Full details of any decision made by Dame Elish Angiolini in her past positions as
the local Procurator Fiscal and as Lord Advocate with regards to the case and a
full conclusion and official statement of her own satisfaction with regards to all
allegations placed before her being thoroughly investigated.
I regret I am unable to provide the information requested in relation to the
investigation into the c
ase involving Hollie Greig. Any information held at any time for
the purposes of an investigation which the authority has a duty to conduct to ascertain
whether a person should be prosecuted for an offence is exempt under section
34(1)(a)(i) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA). This
exemption applies regardless of whether criminal proceedings are live or have been
This exemption is not absolute and I have to consider whether the public interest in
disclosure of the information requested is “outweighed” by the public interest in relying
on this exemption under FOISA. The courts in Scotland have traditionally placed great
weight on any assertion of the Lord Advocate that it is not in the public interest for
certain documents to be disclosed except when, in the particular circumstances, the
interests of justice require it. In particular a high degree of confidentiality has
traditionally attached to police reports. Having considered the circumstances of this
particular case, I have come to the conclusion that the public interest falls in
maintaining the exemption in this instance.
In addition, section 38(1)(b) of FOISA provides an absolute exemption for all personal
data. The information requested contains personal data of a third party/third parties
and thus disclosing it would contravene the data protection principles in Schedule 1 to
the Data Protection Act 1998.
If you are dissatisfied with the way in which your request has been handled, you do
have the right to ask us to review it. Your request should be made within 40 working
days of receipt of this letter and we will reply within 20 working days of receipt. If you
require a review of our decision to be carried out, please write to The Disclosure
Section, Policy Division, 25 Chambers Street, Edinburgh EH1 1LA or if you wish to
email you request please e-mail [email protected]
The review will be undertaken by staff not involved in the original decision making
If our decision is unchanged following a review and you remain dissatisfied with this,
please note that although generally under section 47(1) of FOISA there is a right of
appeal to the Scottish Information Commissioner, where the information requested is
held by the Lord Advocate as head of the systems of criminal prosecution and
investigation of deaths in Scotland, under section 48(c) no application can be made as
respects a request for review made to the Lord Advocate. The information you have
requested appears to fall into that category, although ultimately it would be for the
Commissioner to decide whether that was the case should you refer the matter to him.
In circumstances where section 48(c) does not apply and the Commissioner accepts an
appeal, should you subsequently wish to appeal against that decision, there is a right
of appeal to the Court of Session on a point of law only.
Dear Mrs Michelle MacLeod,
THE REPLY TO MY REQUEST FOR A REVIEW HAS COME BACK WITH THE SAME RESPONSE ALMOST WORD FOR WORD.IT SEEMS THE COPFS IS ADAMANT THAT THE PUBLIC SHOULD HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE REFUSAL OF SCOTLAND’S AUTHORITIES TO INVESTIGATE CHILD ABUSE WHEN IT INVOLVES SOME OF THEIR OWN…….!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!