Cost of retrieving telephone records.

Going Forward

What criteria and what is the cost involved for the Guards in relation to telephone records.

A friend was told it would cost thousands to do, by a Superintendent.

The calls were literally one or two in a one month timeframe to a business, presumably on private number from a mobile.

The alleged caller (a business competitor of my mate) was alleged to have impersonated my mates missus, to another business.

bravestar

Phone records would only prove a call took place. Nothing to do with who was on the other end of the phone or the substance of the call.

Going Forward

bravestar wrote: »

Phone records would only prove a call took place. Nothing to do with who was on the other end of the phone or the substance of the call.

I appreciate that, that's why this is not in the legal discussion thread, any idea about the actual costs of retrieval?

goldie fish

It is the phone networks that set the amount, not the Gardaí.

bravestar

Going Forward wrote: »

I appreciate that, that's why this is not in the legal discussion thread, any idea about the actual costs of retrieval?

Before you edited your original thread, removing the last sentence, that's exactly what you implied.

As for the actual cost, that's above my pay grade.

If a crime is being investigated then you wouldn't have to worry about its cost.

If its for something civil, then your in the wrong place.

Going Forward

bravestar wrote: »

Before you edited your original thread, removing the last sentence, that's exactly what you implied.

As for the actual cost, that's above my pay grade.

If a crime is being investigated then you wouldn't have to worry about its cost.

If its for something civil, then your in the wrong place.

I edited it to prevent others wasting time on that point.

The HUGE cost which would be incurred by AGS was the reason given by the Super for not investigating the incident.

bravestar

Going Forward wrote: »

I edited it to prevent others wasting time on that point.

The HUGE cost which would be incurred by AGS was the reason given by the Super for not investigating the incident.

I find that very very difficult to believe that was the sole reason for not investigating it.

However, I don't know and don't want to know the ins and out, so if you feel hard done by, contact GSOC.

Going Forward

bravestar wrote: »

I find that very very difficult to believe that was the sole reason for not investigating it.

However, I don't know and don't want to know the ins and out, so if you feel hard done by, contact GSOC.

I thought it a bit strange myself TBH.

Potential-Monke

I wouldn't imagine it costs thousands. When i was working for O2, i saw how it's done and it's literally a couple of clicks! But, a business will try and make money any way it can i suppose...

kirving

Banks, and other institutions, have to provide documents for a reasonable fee, don't they? I can't see the networks charging thousands, especially if it's to do with a criminal investigation.

If the cost is the real issue, it's probably more to do with the amount of Garda time which would be spent on the case than anything else.

smellmepower

Probably just the Super gently trying to encourage your friend to drop the case,in a criminal aspect anyway.

Mr Simpson

Would that not be covered under a data protection request? As its infor mation held by the company regarding yourself?

That should cost less than €10

Zambia

What is the actual Offence being investigated?

I will clarify like all bodies everything has a cost to benefit ratio. The super could have assessed that even with the evidence from the phone records the chance of a successfull conviction is low.

So he sadly has to budget for the district he has to assess if he wants to use his budget in this manner.

I am no garda but you don't have to be, it's simple economics.

Going Forward

Zambia wrote: »

What is the actual Offence being investigated?

I will clarify like all bodies everything has a cost to benefit ratio. The super could have assessed that even with the evidence from the phone records the chance of a successfull conviction is low.

So he sadly has to budget for the district he has to assess if he wants to use his budget in this manner.

I am no garda but you don't have to be, it's simple economics.

Apologies for delay-

The alleged offence was impersonation, a female impersonating a mate's wife, both in competing businesses, in a phone call to another unrelated business. They ordered items which were then sent to mate's address.

The "impersonator" is actually accepted to be a bit of a loose cannon even by the Guards, so when this was handed on a plate to them, the notion that it would cost AGS thousands just to get the phone records, seemed a bit strange.

This particular "incident" would have been one of many relatively small scale things, but there were also incidences of driving vehicles at my mates family by this lady's partner, also reported, and, interference with premises locks etc which were also reported.

The lady in question was eventually later convicted of a serious enough offence.

Section_4

Going Forward wrote: »

Apologies for delay-

The alleged offence was impersonation, a female impersonating a mate's wife, both in competing businesses, in a phone call to another unrelated business. They ordered items which were then sent to mate's address.

The "impersonator" is actually accepted to be a bit of a loose cannon even by the Guards, so when this was handed on a plate to them, the notion that it would cost AGS thousands just to get the phone records, seemed a bit strange.

This particular "incident" would have been one of many relatively small scale things, but there were also incidences of driving vehicles at my mates family by this lady's partner, also reported, and, interference with premises locks etc which were also reported.

The lady in question was eventually later convicted of a serious enough offence.

The Superintendent would have to assess the potential for a successful prosecution based on his assessment of the availability of evidence and other determining factors before deciding to committ scarce resources to an investigation.

Phone records show a phone call was made between telephone number 1 and telephone number 2 at and for a specific time on a certain date. They do not contain a transcript of the actual conversation that may have taken place between during the calls.

Given the fact that most companies don't record the actual content of their telephone calls and those that do typically retain such recordings for 30 days or less it would be extremely difficult for AGS to gather and then provide sufficient evidence that somebody was guilty of deceptively impersonating your friends wife to the extent that the DPP were in a position to bring charges against the person suspected of commiting said impersonation.

Firthermore even if a voice recording of the telephone call were made available AGS does not have a plethora of CSI Miami style audio analysis equipment to enable them to verify that it was indeed the female you suspect doing the impersonation of your friends wife that made the call.

Unfortunately policing in modern Ireland is a numbers game and based on the information you have provided there doesn't appear to be sufficent potential for a successful investigation / prosecution for the Superintendent to authorise a thorough investigation into the matter. This may not be the answer you would like to get but it is the reality of the situation up and down the county. Remember this the next time politicians come looking for your vote and be sure to ask them what they are going to do to improve the resources made available to AGS.

Going Forward

Section_4 wrote: »

The Superintendent would have to assess the potential for a successful prosecution based on his assessment of the availability of evidence and other determining factors before deciding to committ scarce resources to an investigation.

Phone records show a phone call was made between telephone number 1 and telephone number 2 at and for a specific time on a certain date. They do not contain a transcript of the actual conversation that may have taken place between during the calls.

Given the fact that most companies don't record the actual content of their telephone calls and those that do typically retain such recordings for 30 days or less it would be extremely difficult for AGS to gather and then provide sufficient evidence that somebody was guilty of deceptively impersonating your friends wife to the extent that the DPP were in a position to bring charges against the person suspected of commiting said impersonation.

Firthermore even if a voice recording of the telephone call were made available AGS does not have a plethora of CSI Miami style audio analysis equipment to enable them to verify that it was indeed the female you suspect doing the impersonation of your friends wife that made the call.

Unfortunately policing in modern Ireland is a numbers game and based on the information you have provided there doesn't appear to be sufficent potential for a successful investigation / prosecution for the Superintendent to authorise a thorough investigation into the matter. This may not be the answer you would like to get but it is the reality of the situation up and down the county. Remember this the next time politicians come looking for your vote and be sure to ask them what they are going to do to improve the resources made available to AGS.

Thanks. Doesnt actually answer the question but I'm good at reading between the lines;)

Section_4

Going Forward wrote: »

Thanks. Doesnt actually answer the question but I'm good at reading between the lines;)

No problem.

For what it's worth it would take at least one appearance in front of a Judge to obtain a warrant and numberous instances of correspondence between an investigating member and the telephone service providers to actually obtain the call records. This would range in the 20 to 30 hours of one members working time before he/she even looks at the data provided.

Ergo the Superintendent isn't wrong when they said the cost to the state to just investigate the matter would be several thousand Euro (investigating members wages, Juge and court clerks wages, transport to & from court, X number of registered letters etc etc).

shampon

Going Forward wrote: »

Apologies for delay-

The alleged offence was impersonation,

Is pursuing this issue really in the public interest?

Going Forward

shampon wrote: »

Is pursuing this issue really in the public interest?

TBH I'm neither qualified nor detached enough to say, but at least the Super is now fully aware of the lady's actions, potential, and her attitude to the law.

Since her conviction for a seperate matter, the other incidents have also ceased.

Was it right for my mate to report what happened along with his suspicion? Yes of course it was. What was he to do? Ignore it?

And there is another case pending regarding an alleged physical assault by her on someone else, completely unrelated, which will be in the public interest.

Zambia

Going Forward wrote: »

TBH I'm neither qualified nor detached enough to say, but at least the Super is now fully aware of the lady's actions, potential, and her attitude to the law.

Since her conviction for a seperate matter, the other incidents have also ceased.

Was it right for my mate to report what happened along with his suspicion? Yes of course it was. What was he to do? Ignore it?

And there is another case pending regarding an alleged physical assault by her on someone else, completely unrelated, which will be in the public interest.

Garda supers must have very little to do.

Mate you are displaying all the traits of a vexatious complainant.

bravestar

Zambia wrote: »

Garda supers must have very little to do.

Mate you are displaying all the traits of a vexatious complainant.

My thoughts exactly. I think someone needs a hobby

Going Forward

Zambia wrote: »

Garda supers must have very little to do.

Mate you are displaying all the traits of a vexatious complainant.

How so, mate?

How is it that someone who abides by the laws but dares to ask a straight question is classed as a vexatious complainant?

Apart from Section_4, no one else offered any educated or balanced explanation, the question was met with some smart defensive replies and a closing of ranks.

Zambia

Going Forward wrote: »

How so, mate?

How is it that someone who abides by the laws but dares to ask a straight question is classed as a vexatious complainant?

Apart from Section_4, no one else offered any educated or balanced explanation, the question was met with some smart defensive replies and a closing of ranks.

Have you considered train spotting?

BaronVon

Sounds like the Supt is bluffing your mate. While i'm not sure of the exact criminal offence being disclosed, if there is a criminal offence. guards are duty bound to investigate it, regardless of budget.

The main problem with telephone records is that it can take more than 1 year to receive them

bravestar

Going Forward wrote: »

How so, mate?

How is it that someone who abides by the laws but dares to ask a straight question is classed as a vexatious complainant?

Apart from Section_4, no one else offered any educated or balanced explanation, the question was met with some smart defensive replies and a closing of ranks.

Closing of ranks? Any more buzz words/phrases you want to throw around? Glass ceiling, upscaling, down sizing.

You asked a straight question and got a straight answer, re: cost of phone records.

Then you went on and on and ... Hence the vexatious complainant remark.

Going Forward

bravestar wrote: »

Closing of ranks? Any more buzz words/phrases you want to throw around? Glass ceiling, upscaling, down sizing.

You asked a straight question and got a straight answer, re: cost of phone records.

Then you went on and on and ... Hence the vexatious complainant remark.

The straight answer didn't come from you, did it?

Going Forward

Zambia wrote: »

Have you considered train spotting?

Mature response noted.

Zambia

Going Forward wrote: »

Mature response noted.

There is no answer you would be happy with so I got the cbf's

Victor

While it might be simple to do the actual retrieval, doing all the paperwork, by the Garda and the phone company (who would have to have people swear evidence, etc.), will add up.

Going Forward

Zambia wrote: »

There is no answer you would be happy with so I got the cbf's

I've previously thanked two of Section_4's replies, who responded with "No problem......" whilst continuing the discussion.

Hardly the actions of someone who wouldnt be happy with any answer. That was almost two weeks ago, and I left it at that.

The thread was "resurrected" by shampon two days ago when he/she asked me a quite valid question to which I responded.

Maybe the question: "Is pursuing this issue really in the public interest?", was meant to be rhetorical?

BTW, I've no idea what a CBF is TBH.;)