THIS image of a suspected burglar preying on vulnerable people can only be published today – three months after the crime - as council officers feared it would breach his rights.

Publication of the CCTV from Sanders House sheltered accommodation has also been delayed by police and broken equipment, The Argus can reveal.

It is only now being published in a bid to identify the burglar after The Argus stepped in following a local councillor’s efforts.

Beverley Weaver, who lives at the sheltered housing scheme in Ingram Crescent West, Hove, said the situation had been an “absolute nightmare”.

She added: “They are talking about data protection to protect a suspected criminal but what about the residents? We need security.”

A television and other electronics equipment were taken from the communal lounge of the building sometime between the evening of Saturday, November 21 and the morning of Monday, November 23.

Police have yet to make any arrests and encourage anyone who recognises the man in the CCTV from the building to get in touch so they can question him about the theft.

The images were not handed over to police by the council for around two months due to a broken disc drive, The Argus understands.

Then police did not publish the images and when councillors Robert Nemeth and Garry Pelzer Dunn pressed council officers to release them, they were warned that passing it on to the media might be a breach of data protection.

A council officer added she had been advised this was “because this person has not been convicted and it is not impossible that we would be distributing images of a person who is innocent”.

The council’s information team said “it would not necessarily be ‘fair and lawful’ to make this public, for “a relatively low impact crime” adding they needed to “be mindful of creating any kind of witch hunt or social media frenzy”.

Councillor Robert Nemeth, who represents Wish ward, said the stance was ludicrous, adding: "We have pushed and pushed for action and have at long last managed to secure images to help police investigating this cowardly theft from our residents."

Sussex Freemasons raised £400 to replace the equipment.

The council declined to comment citing the ongoing police investigation.

‘WE’RE MINDFUL OF CREATING A WITCH HUNT’

The Argus:

IN JANUARY council officers said the images should not be published of the suspected thief at Sanders House by the city council because the Information Commissioner advised that should be done by a law enforcement agency. 

After hearing that police were happy for the council to use the images to help identify the suspected burglar, the council’s information security team said: “[...] we are both of the opinion that it would not necessarily be ‘fair and lawful’ to make this public, for a relatively low impact crime[...] and the ICO guidance refers the making of it public a law enforcement issue. 

“Whilst Sec 29 (3) of the Data Protection Act may be relied upon to share this information, if it is likely to prejudice the detection of a crime, we still need to demonstrate that it is in accordance with one of the conditions from Schedule 3 of the act.

“We do not see that one of these conditions are particularly relevant, as the information, while only a CCTV still is likely to be sensitive information as it is relating to the commission of an offence.

“Therefore we would be making it public on precarious grounds.

“We obviously need to be mindful of creating any kind of witch hunt or social media frenzy, which could then lead to allegations that we have breached DPA, especially as the footage is so poor that it could lead to an innocent person being identified.

“We have discussed the possibility of showing a copy of the still to the residents, as part of trying to establish the identity, possibly at a residents’ association meeting. 

“Whilst we would be required to do it on the same grounds as above, it is far more proportionate to do it this way – rather than placing information in the press/on the web site. 

“This would need to be controlled by us to prevent a copy being taken out of our control and used/shared disproportionately.”