http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/ ... ers-tackle

To quote Bratty, 'Is that legal?'

Also, where do you even start with the criteria for justifying a check?

There is a domestic violence legal centre in Baltimore that engraves a brick with the name of every women that has died in domestic violence that they have been dealing with. There are literally hundreds of engraved bricks in that wall. Since most women are more likely to die at the hands of their partner than a stranger in a violent act something needs to be done to reduce the risks. Though no idea how to do it.

My initial thought is that it isn't, its in breach of both data protection legislation and the human rights act.


Nothing that would stand up in court.

That's a very odd sentence I'm afraid.


Indeed, but I have a strong suspicion this isn't it. You could start by telling judges that whether two people are in a relationship is irrelevant to sentencing, which right now patently isn't the way things are done.

If he isn't first obtaining written permission from the partner whose information he is passing on, he is breaking Data Protection law...

On the one hand, I understand his motives, but it isn't something that he can legally do. Morally? It is a grey area, he is trying to save lives and suffering on the one side, but where next? Posting the names of pedophiles living in the town on lampposts?

I think women are more likely to become a victim of violence within the home than out and about. Like most rapes are by someone the women knows rather than by a stranger. Sorry I did was not clearer.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.