Freedom of information Act.

[stephen25000]

As regards anyone holding the 'personal details' of other people without their consent.

Including those who think it might be a 'good idea' to pass on details to Carter Ruck, or illegally hold other personal details of posters...................

' People could write to the police and to Carter Ruck and demand to see the information which according to Debunker they now hold on file - we all have that right under the DPA. (Data Protection Act ).

You would then have a right to demand that the information was removed as it cannot be held without your consent.

You could then serve an FOI request on the police to ask how often Internet warrior busybodies have submitted information to them, claiming that it identifies people who have harassed the McCanns online and what action has been taken on the basis of it '

[debunker]

As regards anyone holding the 'personal details' of other people without their consent.

Including those who think it might be a 'good idea' to pass on details to Carter Ruck, or illegally hold other personal details of posters...................

' People could write to the police and to Carter Ruck and demand to see the information which according to Debunker they now hold on file - we all have that right under the DPA. (Data Protection Act ).

You would then have a right to demand that the information was removed as it cannot be held without your consent.

You could then serve an FOI request on the police to ask how often Internet warrior busybodies have submitted information to them, claiming that it identifies people who have harassed the McCanns online and what action has been taken on the basis of it '

You need to advise yourself better on the Law.

If what you said was true, no-one would be allowed to maintain an address book!!!!!

Think before you emote.

You only need to register as a Data Handler if the list contains private information.

[stephen25000]

As regards anyone holding the 'personal details' of other people without their consent.

Including those who think it might be a 'good idea' to pass on details to Carter Ruck, or illegally hold other personal details of posters...................

' People could write to the police and to Carter Ruck and demand to see the information which according to Debunker they now hold on file - we all have that right under the DPA. (Data Protection Act ).

You would then have a right to demand that the information was removed as it cannot be held without your consent.

You could then serve an FOI request on the police to ask how often Internet warrior busybodies have submitted information to them, claiming that it identifies people who have harassed the McCanns online and what action has been taken on the basis of it '

You need to advise yourself better on the Law.

If what you said was true, no-one would be allowed to maintain an address book!!!!!

Think before you emote.

You only need to register as a Data Handler if the list contains private information.

No not quite.

Holding people's personal data and passing to others  without their permission breaches the DPA.

In the case of Mccann supporter's or others utilizing this type of information, it is being used  for nefarious purposes.

[Eleanor]

As regards anyone holding the 'personal details' of other people without their consent.

Including those who think it might be a 'good idea' to pass on details to Carter Ruck, or illegally hold other personal details of posters...................

' People could write to the police and to Carter Ruck and demand to see the information which according to Debunker they now hold on file - we all have that right under the DPA. (Data Protection Act ).

You would then have a right to demand that the information was removed as it cannot be held without your consent.

You could then serve an FOI request on the police to ask how often Internet warrior busybodies have submitted information to them, claiming that it identifies people who have harassed the McCanns online and what action has been taken on the basis of it '

You need to advise yourself better on the Law.

If what you said was true, no-one would be allowed to maintain an address book!!!!!

Think before you emote.

You only need to register as a Data Handler if the list contains private information.

No not quite.

Holding people's personal data and passing to others  without their permission breaches the DPA.

In the case of Mccann supporter's or others utilizing this type of information, it is being used  for nefarious purposes.

Could you have a word with Mr. Bennett about this?  Not that I cared when he leaked my Email Address, so this is of no importance to me.

[stephen25000]

As regards anyone holding the 'personal details' of other people without their consent.

Including those who think it might be a 'good idea' to pass on details to Carter Ruck, or illegally hold other personal details of posters...................

' People could write to the police and to Carter Ruck and demand to see the information which according to Debunker they now hold on file - we all have that right under the DPA. (Data Protection Act ).

You would then have a right to demand that the information was removed as it cannot be held without your consent.

You could then serve an FOI request on the police to ask how often Internet warrior busybodies have submitted information to them, claiming that it identifies people who have harassed the McCanns online and what action has been taken on the basis of it '

You need to advise yourself better on the Law.

If what you said was true, no-one would be allowed to maintain an address book!!!!!

Think before you emote.

You only need to register as a Data Handler if the list contains private information.

No not quite.

Holding people's personal data and passing to others  without their permission breaches the DPA.

In the case of Mccann supporter's or others utilizing this type of information, it is being used  for nefarious purposes.

Could you have a word with Mr. Bennett about this?  Not that I cared when he leaked my Email Address, so this is of no importance to me.

I have no regard for Bennett at all.

ANYONE who reveals personal data falls into the same category.

[Luz]

As regards anyone holding the 'personal details' of other people without their consent.

Including those who think it might be a 'good idea' to pass on details to Carter Ruck, or illegally hold other personal details of posters...................

' People could write to the police and to Carter Ruck and demand to see the information which according to Debunker they now hold on file - we all have that right under the DPA. (Data Protection Act ).

You would then have a right to demand that the information was removed as it cannot be held without your consent.

You could then serve an FOI request on the police to ask how often Internet warrior busybodies have submitted information to them, claiming that it identifies people who have harassed the McCanns online and what action has been taken on the basis of it '

You need to advise yourself better on the Law.

If what you said was true, no-one would be allowed to maintain an address book!!!!!

Think before you emote.

You only need to register as a Data Handler if the list contains private information.

Taking data on the users from 3As is not maintaining an address book, don't play the fool.

[Luz]

I had forgotton- 17 pages of [ censored word ]s placed before the court.

If you do the same do you think that is legal or illegal?!

[Angelo222]

Let's have more debate and less ridicule peeps.

On a point, what constitutes private information these days?

[Luz]

You are free to use my info from the 3As, but if you dare invade my private life, earth will be too short for you to hide.

Just being a friend 

[Eleanor]

Let's have more debate and less ridicule peeps.

On a point, what constitutes private information these days?

My Email Address if I use it to join a Site.  It's the only one I have ever had, and it contains my name.

[Angelo222]

There was the exact same trouble here for a while when a woman called Colleen who runs an employment agency started using her resources to seek out private information on people she wanted to intimidate.  She was named and shamed and now hides over on the Bamber forum under another false name.  Two other women started digging up background information on some of our members businesses and started posting about them again on the Bamber forum. They even went to Companies house to get information which they hoped to use.

[Redblossom]

There must be a name for a certain action, when one disagrees with another in a discussion about something, that takes that disagreement to threats or illegal acts

 >@@(*&)

[stephen25000]

Another nutter called .............. started trawling facebook pages for private stuff and posted pictures of one of our long term members son together with the names of his ex girlfriend and friends everywhere.  Another created fake websites and posted abuse about other members. Both currently have several police reports about them in several police areas from Sheffield to London.

Why anyone has to resort to this nonsense is beyond me.

I completely agree.

Unfortunately it has occurred in this case and I'm sure others as well.

There is no excuse for this behaviour, regardless of the source.

[Eleanor]

Personally, I don't care, but it is such a breech of trust that actually shocked me rigid.  But my name has only ever been bandied about by McCann [ censored word ]s.
Have a ball y'all.  I am not ashamed of who I am.

[Eleanor]

PS.  La Morbihan is a big place.  That's in France, you know.  But then of course you know.