FOI 1210-2025/26- Drink spiking reports

Request:

I would like to submit a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) regarding reports of drink spiking. Please provide the following information regarding drink spiking reports recorded between 1 January 2023 and 31 December 2024:

Q1. The total number of drink spiking reports recorded per year. 

For each year, a breakdown of reports by: 

Q2. Victim gender (male, female, other, unknown)           

Q3. The following victim age groups : 11-20, 21-30, 31-40, 41-50, 51-60, 61+.             

Please could I have the response in an Excel spreadsheet in the following format:

Column A: Year (2023, 2024)

Column B: Total number of reports

Column C: Number of male victims

Column D: Number of female victims

Column E: Number recorded as other / unknown

Column F: Age group 11-20

Column G: Age group 21-30

Column H: Age group 31-40

Column I: Age group 41-50

Column J: Age group 51-60

Column K: Age group 61+             

Q4. For the month of December 2024 only, copies of any crime memos relating to drink spiking reports.               

In regards to question 3, I understand that such material may contain personal or sensitive information. I am content for any identifying details to be redacted. If full documents cannot be disclosed, I would be grateful for anonymised or redacted versions. Alternatively, if disclosure of the documents in full is not possible, I would welcome a summary of the recorded circumstances for each report during that month.

If “drink spiking” is not a specific recorded category, please advise how this data is identified within your systems (e.g., keyword search, home office classification, etc.).

Response: 

Extent and Result of Searches to Locate Information

To locate the information relevant to your request searches were conducted within North Yorkshire Police.

I can confirm that the information you have requested is held by North Yorkshire Police. 

Decision

North Yorkshire Police have noted your preference in receiving this information in excel format however, it is our responsibility to protect the personal data and other sensitive information which may be contained within our data sheets. As you may be aware excel data sheets may contain hidden information which may contain personal or sensitive information that, if exposed, could lead to a data breach. It is for this reason we have decided to provide you with the requested information in an alternative format

Q1. Please see the table below showing the number of crimes related to op Lester (operation linked to spiking incidents) between 01 January 2023 and 31 December 2024, broken down by calendar year.

Year	Count
2023	86
2024	95
Total	181

Q2. The above broken down by victim gender and calendar year.

	Calendar Year
Victim gender	2023	2024	Total
Female	61	70	131
Male	15	16	31
Not recorded	10	10	20
Total	86	96	182

*Please note there can be more than one victim linked to a crime

Q3. The above broken down by victim age group and calendar year.

	Calendar Year
Victim Age Group	2023	2024	Total
11 - 20	44	40	84
21 - 30	21	30	51
31 - 40	10	13	23
41 - 50	4	9	13
51 - 60	4	3	7
61+	2	1	3
Not Recorded	1	0	1
Total	86	96	182

*Please note there can be more than one victim linked to a crime

Q4. I have decided to exempt any additional information to that provided above namely the full MO remarks pursuant to section 40 (Personal Information) and section 31 (Law Enforcement) Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act). This is to prevent the identification and protect the anonymity for those involved in each case. In addition, the public make reports to the police, (some of which are highly sensitive) in confidence and regardless of whether all personal information is redacted to protect the identity of those involved, the details of a report made to the police could potentially impede the victim’s future confidence in the police. Please see the exemption below.

Exemption Explanation

Section 17 of the Act requires North Yorkshire Police, when refusing to provide such information (because the information is exempt) to provide you the applicant with a notice which: (a) states that fact, (b) specifies the exemption in question and (c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies.

Section 40(2) – Personal Information

Section 40(2) is an absolute class-based exemption, which does not require a public interest test, but requires the balancing of the legitimate interests of the public against the interests of the individual under the first Data Protection Principle; in that processing of personal data must be lawful and fair (DPA 2018 35(1), EUGDPR Article 5(1)).

Where an individual can be identified by such data, releasing it would clearly breach the first data protection principle of being ‘fair’ to the data subject.

This exemption applies because the right given under the FOI Act to request official information held by public authorities does not apply to the personal data of third parties where disclosure of that information would not be fair to the individual, and where there is no legitimate public interest in disclosure.

In all the circumstances of the case it has been determined that the duty to the individual under the Data Protection Act 2018 & EU General Data Protection Regulations, and the public interest in maintaining the exemption from disclosure of personal information held by the force in such instances, outweighs the public interest in disclosure. In this instance, personal information can only be disclosed to the individual concerned.

Releasing personal details to a person other than the data subject would not only breach the data subject’s Data Protection rights it may also breach the obligations placed on an authority under the European Convention on Human Rights

Section 31 – Law Enforcement

Section 31 is a prejudice-based qualified exemption and there is a requirement to articulate the harm as well as carrying out a public interest test.

Evidence of Harm

As you may be aware, disclosure under FOIA is a release to the public at large. Whilst not questioning the motives of the applicant, disclosing details of crimes committed would allow patterns of offending to be recognised which may compromise Law Enforcement and any future tactics or plans to apprehend offenders. This would be to the detriment of providing an efficient policing service and a failure in providing a duty of care to all members of the public.

The MO remarks of a crime report are sensitive to the reporting person and albeit it can be redacted to protect their identity, disclosure of such information may impact the future relationship between the victims and the police. This could subsequently also affect any future reports they may wish to make, due to the risk of that information would be released into the public domain, via FOIs.

Furthermore, the Police are there to support the public and deliver effective law enforcement, including the investigation of suspects and the protection and safeguarding of victims. Releasing any MO remarks could compromise the personal safety of any victims if an offender is unaware their crime has been reported and in turn potentially impact any subsequent/future investigation.

Providing details of how specific offences have occurred out may also facilitate future crimes. It is widely known that Freedom of Information is utilised and exploited by criminals to gain intelligence of policing activities. The release of MO remarks can give other criminals knowledge of how to commit similar, and in some cases more sophisticated, offences.

Information that adversely affects public safety and confidence will have a negative impact on law enforcement.

Factors favouring disclosure under Section 31

Releasing information would allow the public to see the type of offences reported, making them more aware of such offences which would enable them to take any necessary precautions to protect themselves.

It would show how public funds are being spent in relation to protecting the public.

Factors against disclosure under Section 31

A fear of crime would be realised by the public.

Victims could be placed at risk if the offender is unaware of police involvement as the MO remarks can provide specific details about the offence.

Any offences reported, are sensitive in nature and individuals need to ensure that the reports they provided are confidential. Individuals may therefore become reluctant to provide information, which could assist an investigation, due to concerns that the information provided may be requested and released under Freedom of Information requests.

Balance test

The safety of the public is of paramount importance and the Police service will not divulge the information, if to do so would place the safety of individuals at risk or compromise law enforcement.

Whilst there is a public interest in the transparency of policing, ongoing criminal activity and providing assurance that the police service is appropriately and accurately recording and investigating crime, there is also a very strong public interest in safeguarding the integrity of police reports and those that report crime especially in the highly sensitive areas such as sexual offences and offences involving children.

As much as there is public interest in knowing that policing activity is appropriate and balanced this will only be overridden in exceptional circumstances. It is our opinion that for these issues the balancing test for exempting your request for information is not made out.

Pursuant to Section 17(1) of the Act this letter acts as a refusal notice under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 in relation to part of your request.

Please note that systems used for recording information are not generic, nor are the procedures used locally in capturing the data.  It should be noted therefore that this force’s response to your questions should not be used for comparison purposes with any other responses you may receive.