Disclosing photographs of offenders

There are a number of reasons why disclosing a photograph of an offender may assist legitimate crime reduction activities, for example to a neighbourhood or shop watch scheme. Photographs are generally held by the police although the growth of CCTV camera’s means that increasingly they may be held by other crime reduction partners, such as a local authority, business or any other agency.

In the case of Hellewell v. Chief Constable of Derbyshire, it was held that in certain circumstances a photograph taken in certain circumstances, could be actionable as a breach of confidence. Where the police take a photograph of a suspect and do so at the police station in circumstances, where the suspects consent is not required, they are not by law free to make whatever use of it they choose.

The police are permitted to make reasonable use of a photograph for the purposes of preventing and detecting crime, the investigation of alleged offences and the apprehension of suspects unlawfully at large. The principal consideration must always be that they must have these and only these purposes in mind, when disclosing the photograph to anyone else and must make no more than reasonable use of the picture in seeking to accomplish these purposes.

This would normally individuals suspected, charged or convicted of an offence. The police would need to be mindful in cases involving those suspected of or charged with an offence that there is no possibility of prejudice to any future trial, especially where identification of the individual may be an issue in any forthcoming or future proceedings.

The police would therefore need to weigh the public interest on each occasion. For example, in terms of shop watch schemes and preventing shoplifting a photograph of a prolific shoplifter may reasonably be disclosed to shops in an area, where there is a reasonable likelihood that the offender will target them.

The likelihood should be judged on the basis of the offender’s previous pattern of convictions and method of operation. It would be unreasonable to distribute a shoplifter’s photograph nationally if there was no evidence or a reasonable suspicion that they would operate outside of a certain shopping centre or town. Similarly, if their previous offences only involved the theft of clothes then it may not be appropriate to distribute their photograph to shops, which did not sell clothes, without a reasonable suspicion to the contrary. the legal restrictions imposed by the Data Protection Act, Human Rights Act etc, will also need to be complied with.

Partners and agencies who receive photographs from the police would need to seek the permission of the police before disclosing a photograph and related information to a third party, except where the information has clearly been put in the public domain.

Partners and agencies who seek to disclose photographs they fairly and lawfully hold would also need to establish whether a duty of confidence exists and ensure that they comply with same legal restrictions outlined in CCTV data (in the context of the Data Protection Act, Human Rights Act and relevant legislation, where these apply).

Back to Vires and Intravires