* *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
16-09-19, 09:02AM

Login with username, password and session length

Recent

Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 60687
  • Total Topics: 1068
  • Online Today: 150
  • Online Ever: 826
  • (23-02-15, 06:44PM)
Users Online

Author Topic: Access To Evidence  (Read 2851 times)

Iron Giant

  • VLH Supporter
  • Regular Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 165
Access To Evidence
« on: 30-08-19, 09:18AM »
If invited to an investigation should you have access to any evidence prior to the meeting or will the meeting itself be the first opportunity to see it?
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.

NightAndDay

  • Smart Arse
  • *****
  • Posts: 500
Re: Access To Evidence
« Reply #1 on: 30-08-19, 10:05AM »
Meeting itself will be the first opprtunity to see it, if however they say they have evidence, but don't present it during the investigation and then proceed to discipline you, you can request to see the evidence (in most cases) under the freedom of information act and also raise a grievance for out of process investigation.

Investigations also have a note taker, in my experience, the notes they write contradict everything you say, after the meeting you' should be given an opportunity to review the notes, if not add that to your grievance as out of process.

Cleaner1

  • Regular Pain
  • ***
  • Posts: 100
Re: Access To Evidence
« Reply #2 on: 30-08-19, 01:23PM »
Do managers have to delete names from statements if they are given to a person under investigation?

SameOld

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Access To Evidence
« Reply #3 on: 30-08-19, 02:45PM »
Yes, there is a redaction process.  Unfortunately its followed poorly though

Cleaner1

  • Regular Pain
  • ***
  • Posts: 100
Re: Access To Evidence
« Reply #4 on: 30-08-19, 03:49PM »
SameOld

Beautiful!  :-*

Loki

  • VLH Supporter
  • Sad Muppet
  • ******
  • Posts: 3542
  • Justice is the sanction of established injustice
Re: Access To Evidence
« Reply #5 on: 12-09-19, 06:33AM »
Do managers have to delete names from statements if they are given to a person under investigation?

No they cannot delete the names if those names are witnesses and/or relevant to the case. Any personal information relating to the names that are not relevant to the case are redacted.
Life is a monstrous demented gag. Madness is the emergency exit.
I will not reply to unsolicited PM's.

Rad

  • Know All
  • ****
  • Posts: 440
Re: Access To Evidence
« Reply #6 on: 12-09-19, 08:30AM »
I don't think this is quite right.  If there are fear of reprisals any details including their name can be redacted.
However the person being investigated might not be able to defend themselves against a mystery witness.

Unless I've misunderstood the latest redaction policy.
 

Expressdude2016

  • Sad Muppet
  • ******
  • Posts: 1283
Re: Access To Evidence
« Reply #7 on: 12-09-19, 02:53PM »
Meeting itself will be the first opprtunity to see it, if however they say they have evidence, but don't present it during the investigation and then proceed to discipline you, you can request to see the evidence (in most cases) under the freedom of information act and also raise a grievance for out of process investigation.

Investigations also have a note taker, in my experience, the notes they write contradict everything you say, after the meeting you' should be given an opportunity to review the notes, if not add that to your grievance as out of process.

Freedom of information act is for public sector not businesses.

NightAndDay

  • Smart Arse
  • *****
  • Posts: 500
Re: Access To Evidence
« Reply #8 on: 12-09-19, 03:14PM »
Sorry, my mistake, I meant the data protection act.

Loki

  • VLH Supporter
  • Sad Muppet
  • ******
  • Posts: 3542
  • Justice is the sanction of established injustice
Re: Access To Evidence
« Reply #9 on: 13-09-19, 02:21PM »
I don't think this is quite right.  If there are fear of reprisals any details including their name can be redacted.
However the person being investigated might not be able to defend themselves against a mystery witness.

Unless I've misunderstood the latest redaction policy.

I’m aware of such scenarios... but these, in my experience, are very rare. And even if the name were redacted where there were legitimate concerns of reprisals, a Tribunal would disclose the names.

Excluding such rare cases, what I have stated is correct.
Life is a monstrous demented gag. Madness is the emergency exit.
I will not reply to unsolicited PM's.

Rad

  • Know All
  • ****
  • Posts: 440
Re: Access To Evidence
« Reply #10 on: 13-09-19, 03:21PM »
Whether the case is rare or not, if a colleague wants their name redacted for fear of reprisals, they can.
 

Loki

  • VLH Supporter
  • Sad Muppet
  • ******
  • Posts: 3542
  • Justice is the sanction of established injustice
Re: Access To Evidence
« Reply #11 on: 13-09-19, 05:35PM »
If genuine yes. They have to provide clear rationale for that my friend. Not as simple and straightforward as you imply it to be. I can tell you that from experience from both sides of that argument.
« Last Edit: 13-09-19, 05:40PM by Loki »
Life is a monstrous demented gag. Madness is the emergency exit.
I will not reply to unsolicited PM's.