Ethical dilemma

StewartR

StewartR

Suspended / Banned
Messages
11,513
Name
Stewart
Edit My Images
Yes
I've got an interesting dilemma at work. I know what I'm going to do, but I'm curious as to how other people would handle it.

The situation is that one of my former customers has been imprisoned. I don't think I can say anything about the circumstances because, if I did, it wouldn't be very hard for people to be able to identify her. Judging from the newspaper reporting of her trial, there seems to be no doubt whatsoever that this person is particularly loathsome, and a menace to society. There was no doubt about her guilt in this case, and she has literally dozens of previous convictions for similar offences. (I feel I should point out that I knew none of this until yesterday!) The length of her sentence indicates that the court judged it to be a very serious offence for which she bore a very high degree of culpability, which is perfectly consistent with the newspaper reporting.

But anyway I've been contacted by her legal team. They would like copies of all her invoices relating to hiring equipment from us, because they believe they are in some way relevant to an appeal which they are trying to put together for her.

So the question is, to what extent do I co-operate?
 
Assuming that you have confirmed that the legal team is acting on your customers instruction and the customer is happy for you to hand over this information (thinking data protection and all that), then I would hand it over.

My guess is that if you withhold the information they could just issue a witness summons (UK equivalent of a subpoena) if they deem it relevant to the case
 
I would imagine this is purely on a voluntary basis so a quick call to the company solicitor just to find out what your obligations are.
Also I assume you can charge this time to her defence team as well?
 
As an individual ethics are paramount............but your dealings were with this person as a business.

Obviously your moral compass will affect all of your decisions but surmise, subject to confirming with your legal advisor (?), that if they have made an authorized & legitimate data request you are as a business obligated to provide the information. Why they think it will help & what they do with the information is up to them?

PS AFAIK with GDPR having greater influence than Data Protection Act it is probably better to consult with your legal advisor to be sure all is done "correctly".
 
Last edited:
I would ask myself the question "what would be my reaction to this request if I did not know the outcome of the legal case, or previous convictions" and then act on that, but also, as others have said, a discussion with your own legal adviser and the requesting solicitor would also be high on my 'to do' list.
 
Unless you own the company then simply pass the request "upstairs". It is for the company to decide if they want to comply and for the company to answer for that decision.
What you know of the case, or the person, or your personal feelings is totally irrelevant. It is for the company to decide what to do and take whatever consequences may arise from that decision.
 
Do you have your customer's written consent to release their details? If yes, then there's no reason why you can't.
If you don't, then either ask for written consent, or wait for summons.
 
arclight said:
Unless you own the company then simply pass the request "upstairs". It is for the company to decide if they want to comply and for the company to answer for that decision.
Click to expand...
I do own the company.
 
ecoleman said:
Assuming that you have confirmed that the legal team is acting on your customers instruction and the customer is happy for you to hand over this information....
Click to expand...
Box Brownie said:
... if they have made an authorized & legitimate data request ....
Click to expand...
omens said:
Do you have your customer's written consent to release their details?
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's the nub of it. My customer cannot provide this consent directly because she is incommunicado.

I'm in no doubt that, should I receive explicit authorisation from my customer, then I am obliged under GDPR to release the information to her solicitor. (Subject of course to it being reasonably practicable, which in this case it is.) But in the absence of explicit authorisation ... it's a bit of a grey area.
 
StewartR said:
Yeah, that's the nub of it. My customer cannot provide this consent directly because she is incommunicado.

I'm in no doubt that, should I receive explicit authorisation from my customer, then I am obliged under GDPR to release the information to her solicitor. (Subject of course to it being reasonably practicable, which in this case it is.) But in the absence of explicit authorisation ... it's a bit of a grey area.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that her legal team have access to and are able to communicate with her so getting written consent really shouldn't be a problem.
 
StewartR said:
Yeah, that's the nub of it. My customer cannot provide this consent directly because she is incommunicado.

I'm in no doubt that, should I receive explicit authorisation from my customer, then I am obliged under GDPR to release the information to her solicitor. (Subject of course to it being reasonably practicable, which in this case it is.) But in the absence of explicit authorisation ... it's a bit of a grey area.
Click to expand...

Even from a position of incommunicado she could likely give them a proxy authorisation..................but do check that such "instruction" actually gives her solicitor the 'right' (under GDPR) to request & receive the data. As you say it reads as a bit grey where GDPR is by comparison "black & white" so IMO you just need to get your position ready?

PS Elliott posted whilst I was still typing.....
 
Oh I am sure if it is her legal team she will already have give some form of written consent which they will send to you.
I would then cooperate full but place an admin charge for the work and simply forward your invoice with the requested docs.
job done
walk away
 
ecoleman said:
I'm sure that her legal team have access to and are able to communicate with her so getting written consent really shouldn't be a problem.
Click to expand...
Yeah, good point, I didn't think of that. Duh.

My legal advisor (who I've spoken to this morning, since starting this thread) says I absolutely should require explicit authorisation. I guess if my client's legal team think it's sufficiently important, they'll make the effort, and then I'll comply with their requests within 30 days; and if they don't, well that's fine by me.
 
StewartR said:
I do own the company.
Click to expand...

Ah .......... then "the buck stops here" .......... Harry Truman.

Looks like your legal adviser has given you the appropriate advice.
 
StewartR said:
Yeah, good point, I didn't think of that. Duh.

My legal advisor (who I've spoken to this morning, since starting this thread) says I absolutely should require explicit authorisation. I guess if my client's legal team think it's sufficiently important, they'll make the effort, and then I'll comply with their requests within 30 days; and if they don't, well that's fine by me.
Click to expand...
You can always wait for the court to require you to furnish such information and then it won’t be your decision to make.
 
IMHO its none of your business what she has or hasn't done.. your not being asked to marry her...

Business wise... I would supply the required documents as requested and maybe evn charge an admin fee :)
 
Brazo said:
You can always wait for the court to require you to furnish such information and then it won’t be your decision to make.
Click to expand...
It's not my decision to make anyway, as I understand it. If I have a properly authorised, explicit request from my customer then I am obliged by GDPR to respond within 30 days.
 
KIPAX said:
IMHO its none of your business what she has or hasn't done.. your not being asked to marry her...
Click to expand...
But that's where the ethical dilemma comes in. This person is very obviously a career criminal, and she has ruined people's lives. So to what extent do I want to co-operate with - or obstruct - a process which may see her released from prison earlier than would otherwise be the case?
 
Mr Bump said:
I would then cooperate full but place an admin charge for the work and simply forward your invoice with the requested docs.
Click to expand...
KIPAX said:
Business wise... I would supply the required documents as requested and maybe evn charge an admin fee :)
Click to expand...
It doesn't work like that, unfortunately. Under the old Data Protection Act you could charge a small fee for responding to data access requests. Under GDPR you can't, unless the request is "manifestly unfounded or excessive".
 
Lost in a move or fire seems to be the usual response in this type of situation.
 
StewartR said:
But that's where the ethical dilemma comes in. This person is very obviously a career criminal, and she has ruined people's lives. So to what extent do I want to co-operate with - or obstruct - a process which may see her released from prison earlier than would otherwise be the case?
Click to expand...

This is where personal ethics in regard to they way they guide your business can conflict........................but as you say, as a business you have legal obligations.

However, I wonder if GDPR has an extenuating circumstances element 'existential' to the data subject i.e. can the data if used by the data subject put others at risk of harm??? That maybe, unless already somewhere in the depths of the legislation, be something for the ECJ to pass judgement on??? But that of course if not for you to judge!
 
tijuana taxi said:
Lost in a move or fire seems to be the usual response in this type of situation.
Click to expand...

it will all be digtal I assume so not really an argument that can be used
 
Mr Bump said:
it will all be digtal I assume so not really an argument that can be used
Click to expand...

Even better, system crash and data lost, lots of lightning earlier this year.
Think I recall Stewart asking about some sort of computer type problem, sorted.
 
Even if the person is a career criminal we do as citizens i a democratic society have an obligation to ensure law and the rules of the legal system are followed. Because a person i a criminal denying to provide the documentation that will ensure a fair retrial will be undermining values that set us apart from banana republics. it's not up to the newspapers or the court of the street to decide how things work
 
Last edited by a moderator:
soeren said:
Even if the person is a career criminal we do as citizens i a democratic society have an obligation to ensure law and the rules of the legal system are followed. Because a person i a criminal denying to provide the documentation that will ensure a fair retrial will be undermining values that set us apart from banana republics.it's not up to the newspapers or the court of the street to decide how things work
Click to expand...
I said in the opening post that I had decided what I would do, and this is it in a nutshell.

Having said that, I don't feel any compunction to co-operate any more than the absolute minimum which the law obliges me to.
 
My post was more directed at the ones suggesting the data should be "lost"
 
Erm, nobody should be playing judge and jury in this matter, that’s why there’s a legal system. Much as this woman might be a loathsome career criminal and it rankles, it’s not anyone’s place to cause delay or interfere with the case. She is entirely entitled to the information for her defence.

TLDR: just supply the information as requested.;)
 
It really is not about what is she is and obviously you are not a judge. I presume she hasn't wronged you in any way and just releasing those invoices would involve very little hassle; probably less than posting this thread. Just do it. Your life and business will not be any worse of because of that.
 
tijuana taxi said:
Even better, system crash and data lost, lots of lightning earlier this year.
Think I recall Stewart asking about some sort of computer type problem, sorted.
Click to expand...
GDPR really does kick in at this point.
We’re legally obliged to look after our secure data properly, which includes secure backups.
 
StewartR said:
Well, in that case you'd be incorrect. But that's a different story and it's not relevant.
Click to expand...

I understand. It is entirely up to you if you take the high road or decide to ignore. I just hope it doesn't result in any further hassle or inconvenience either way. By the sound of it I would not want anything to do with her in person at any time in the future.
 
If someone had given me grief in the past and was a wrong'un I would do all I could to avoid helping them in any way.
 
If it's a case of you being required by law to supply copies of the invoices then fair enough.
Otherwise you have to do what you think is right.
However, if she used your lenses for criminal offences (I really hope it isn't what I'm thinking) then I would hand over copies of the invoices without hesitation.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
It really is not about what is she is and obviously you are not a judge.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree and personally I think it boils down to what she's charged with.
For example as I am an avid animal lover, if was in Stewarts posistion I would do what I have done previously and that is to be as helpful as possible to help get the person prosecuted.
Now, I would like to think the police have done their job properly and I am only basing my opinion on this.

I'm not going to speculate what she is accused of, I think the nature of Stewarts business and certain words in his opening post can give us an educated guess.
I can't think of any other reason as to why her legal team would want copies of invoices for hiring lenses unless they relate to the crimes she is accused of.
I could of course be barking up the wrong tree but my gut instinct tells me differently.
 
hashcake said:
I have to disagree and personally I think it boils down to what she's charged with.
For example as I am an avid animal lover, if was in Stewarts posistion I would do what I have done previously and that is to be as helpful as possible to help get the person prosecuted.
Now, I would like to think the police have done their job properly and I am only basing my opinion on this.

I'm not going to speculate what she is accused of, I think the nature of Stewarts business and certain words in his opening post can give us an educated guess.
I can't think of any other reason as to why her legal team would want copies of invoices for hiring lenses unless they relate to the crimes she is accused of.
I could of course be barking up the wrong tree but my gut instinct tells me differently.
Click to expand...

Let me speculate * wildly * a completely hypothetical case here.
Let's imagine the defendant was seen running around with some hefty lens near a broken in camera store. In this case a rental document may give a defendant an alibi that they were not connected with the crime and just happened to be in that place covering news. It wouldn't automatically disprove anything, but would provide material for the case of defence.

In any case a court of law and a judge have far more information on a given case and hopefully spend ages reading and deliberating (well we know there are exceptions like the famous 45 min case from arrest to prison which would warrant stripping a judge of his authority).

Let's remember that people should be presumed innocent until convicted (OK that is the case here already). And unless the evidence is obvious and unquestionable you should always consider there may be more to it, or case could be falsified with fake evidence. All of that happens.
 
tijuana taxi said:
If someone had given me grief in the past and was a wrong'un I would do all I could to avoid helping them in any way.
Click to expand...

Including perverting the course of justice? Because thats what Stewart would be doing by pretending the info had gone astray?
 
Stewart this person ,(and I haven’t a clue who it is ) may well have been wrongly convicted , to withhold pieces of paper that could PROVE there innocence would leave you very much in the wrong ,it has nothing at all to do with ethics or morals , many innocent people get stitched up by by crooked officials while the guilty ones lie there arses off .
I will give a actual example a few years ago one of my work mates ( taxi drivers) was being beaten up outside the office by a drugged up customer, I went out and pulled him off of John , and the druggy promptly took a swing at me hitting me in the face , I grappled him to the ground and placed him under citizens arrest, the police arrived shortly after and arrested him , they asked if I wanted to press charges and I agreed .
This incident took place on a crowded station forecourt with lots of witnesses . When it got to court the druggies solicitor when cross examinening me posed this question to me “ do you make a habit of beating up your customers” I was totally gobsmacked and without lots of other witness statements it could easily have backfired . The only winners in courts are those that can argue and tell lies the best .
In your case I would willingly hand over the receipts just in case it’s a stitch up by smart arsed lawyers . It might come to nought or it might prove her innocence at least you will be able to sleep at nights
 
[QUOTE="LongLensPhotography, post: 8255425, member: 16301Let's remember that people should be presumed innocent until convicted (OK that is the case here already). And unless the evidence is obvious and unquestionable you should always consider there may be more to it, or case could be falsified with fake evidence. All of that happens.[/QUOTE]

I do believe in being innocent before proven guilty but I was thinking of 2 particular crimes that are vile, evil and nasty. Sadly I know of a few people who have been been the victims of these crimes and to hear their stories is heart breaking.
One of them opened up to me before their trial had started so in cases like those I can't consider innocent until proven guilty.
 
Donnie said:
Including perverting the course of justice? Because thats what Stewart would be doing by pretending the info had gone astray?
Click to expand...

Don't suppose old bill would be putting themselves out too much looking into it if this person deserves a stretch in the nick.
 
StewartR said:
But that's where the ethical dilemma comes in. This person is very obviously a career criminal, and she has ruined people's lives. So to what extent do I want to co-operate with - or obstruct - a process which may see her released from prison earlier than would otherwise be the case?
Click to expand...

Ethics cuts both ways. Regardless of what she's done, she has a right to proper legal representation and to lay her best possible case before the court. It's not for you to decide that she is so bad that she doesn't deserve this evidence. It's for the court to decide that it doesn't mitigate what she's done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top