Sentences with phrase «of email deletion»

When the Crown Prosecution Service announced in December 2015 that there would be no further criminal action on phone hacking, it said it had considered evidence of email deletion and decided that there were «legitimate reasons for companies to have an email deletion policy... In this case, there is no evidence to suggest that email deletion was undertaken in order to pervert the course of justice.»

Not exact matches

A lawyer with the state attorney general's office said in court papers that neither top officials at the state Office of General Services nor a former adviser to Cuomo should be sanctioned for the automatic deletion of emails concerning the ouster of the Wandering Dago food truck from Saratoga Race Course.

As Gov. Andrew Cuomo faces criticism for a 90 - day email deletion policy being enacted, Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie was cool to the idea of submitting the Legislature to the state's Freedom of Information Law.

«The de Blasio administration does not tolerate intentional deletion of emails that must be preserved,» Mayor de Blasio's spokeswoman, Karen Hinton, said.

Cuomo promised record transparency when he took office in 2011, but through a series of actions he has tightly centralized and restricted the release of information from state agencies, pushed for the automatic deletion of email records after 90 days and once sent aides to screen records that reporters requested from the State Archives.

The show covered many of the potential problems with aggressive deletion of emails.

New York State's email deletion policy is out of step with best practices in the Federal government, in other states like North Carolina and Massachusetts, with good government advocates, and even with the New York State Archives's own recommendations from 2010, which stated «Purging all emails after a defined time period is not an acceptable retention and disposition strategy.»

The Cuomo administration has billed the deletion program as a way to improve efficiency, but workers say it's a hinderance and that they don't feel qualified to decide which emails should be saved in case of lawsuits or FOIL requests.

Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced in March that his office was suspending the auto - deletion policy amid calls from good - government groups and others to at least match a federal standard of retaining emails for seven years.

A lawyer with the state attorney general's office said in court papers that neither top officials at the state Office of General Services nor a former adviser to Gov. Andrew Cuomo should be sanctioned for the automatic deletion of emails concerning the ouster of the Wandering Dago food truck from Saratoga Race Course.

In a Feb. 20 letter to Magistrate Judge Randolph Treece, plaintiffs» attorney George Carpinello of Boies, Schiller & Flexner asked the court to impose sanctions for what he termed the «spoliation of evidence» resulting from the deletion of Liebman's emails.

Acting on behalf of 17 people suing the publisher of the now - defunct News of the World and the Sun over alleged phone hacking, David Sherborne claimed on Monday there were documents, emails and meeting agendas that showed senior executives including Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks pursued an email deletion policy that removed «emails that could be unhelpful in future litigation in which News International could be a defendant».

Brooks's involvement in ordering a general deletion of emails while chief executive of News International was revealed during the criminal phone - hacking trial in 2013 in which she was acquitted of all charges.

It is the governor that should lead by example by issuing an executive order reversing the 90 day email deletion policy and instead follow the lead of the federal government, which requires archiving of emails for seven (7) years.

New York state lawmakers grilled Maggie Miller, the state's chief information officer, at a hearing yesterday, concerned that the deletion of all state worker emails older than 90 days, a policy that is now coming into full force, could impede legal investigations and damage transparency, Josefa Velasquez reports for Capital NY.

The state has started implementing a policy mandating the deletion of emails older than 90 days; state lawmakers are drafting legislation to change the policy, he notes.

The transparency of the executive branch has come under increased scrutiny since it began implementing a 90 - day email deletion policy last month.

You may delete your Edutopia account and end your use of Edutopia Technologies at any time by sending an email to WEBMASTER at EDUTOPIA (dot) ORG requesting deletion of your account.

I will note that if «it took a while for most major trade houses to get their footing» in digital, it might be because their primary response to the advent of e-books was price collusion and double deletion of pesky incriminating emails.

• Archived Items • Battery Replacement • Calculator Functionality • Checking Your Email • Collections • Contacting Amazon's Kindle Customer Service • Converting PDF Documents to Kindle Format • Discussion Boards • Displaying the Time • Download Problems — What To Do • Formatting Issues in a Kindle Book — What To Do • Games on Your Kindle • Gifting a Kindle Book / Gift Certificates • Internet Access (it's free) on Your Kindle • Internet Bookmarks • Kindle Reading to You (Text to Speech) • Lending Books • Losing Your Place While Reading • Lost Kindle Tip • Mobile Websites — Access Them on Your Kindle • Password Protection • Permanent Deletion of a Title • Pictures on Your Kindle • Playing Music on Your Kindle • Popular Highlights Feature — Turning it Off • Reset Your Kindle • Samples of Books • Screen Freeze Fix • Screenshots — Printing Out What You See • Social Networking with Facebook and Twitter • Transferring Books to Your Kindle • Transferring Existing Collections to Your New Kindle • Checking the Weather • Wireless Coverage for Your Kindle • Random Tips • Blogs Available on Your Kindle

DELETION OF INFORMATION AND / OR ACCOUNT You may delete your Design Hotels ™ Community account and the details contained within from the «profile settings» of your account or by following the instructions in the footer of our email communications (deleting your account also removes you from any newsletter communicationsOF INFORMATION AND / OR ACCOUNT You may delete your Design Hotels ™ Community account and the details contained within from the «profile settings» of your account or by following the instructions in the footer of our email communications (deleting your account also removes you from any newsletter communicationsof your account or by following the instructions in the footer of our email communications (deleting your account also removes you from any newsletter communicationsof our email communications (deleting your account also removes you from any newsletter communications).

The Bush administration argued, and though I disagree with some of the things they did I do not disagree with the general policy, that they need to have a certain level of privacy to effectively operate (not so much as to preclude investigatory capacity however, such as in the «accidental» deletion of millions of White House emails from their originating source, as well as the multiple back up servers... «accidentally» of course).

And the deletion of emails in response to FOIA is actually illegal (as if it were enforced).

I guess I'm not supposed to notice that the «CA claim» is what prompted the initial Jones request for email deletions and that the «loads of emails» that were purged «about two months ago» that mentioned «a certain Canadian» were not at all any of the same FOI emails «re AR4.»

The Muir Russell Report Amazingly, the Muir Russell panel failed to interview either Jones or Briffa on the deletion of emails (see discussion of the fall hearing below).

For example, there might be retention policies governing the preservation and deletion of emails (or other data) that applied in general, not only once a FOIA request arrived and FOIA sec. 77 came into play.

Stringer resisted Muir Russell's attempt to divert discussion to the impact on IPCC and double - checked Muir Russell's amazing admission that his panel had failed to ask Jones (and Briffa) about the deletion of emails:

They noted their lack of success in getting a coherent explanation from Muir Russell on the (untrue) finding of his panel on email deletion:

If there is anything to conclude from this latest «revelation» — aka attempt by certain people * cough * to smear Mann yet again and drum up further cynicism — it might be that the terms of the PS inquiry around deletion of emails and its report could / should have been clearer and more pertinent.

The first is that deletion of emails by Wahl is of absolutely no consequence since he was not bound by FOI legislation and the substance of the deleted material was minor.

Dr. Mann and many of his «peers» were implicated in the Climategate scandals, obstruction of legitimate FOIA requests via deletion of emails, manipulation of global warming temperature data and research, and the politicized funding system that kept them and their institutions awash in government / taxpayer dollars.

Do you believe that an adequate investigation of the suspected deletion of emails would require (at least) 1.

His letter to UVA's Sullivan (of course) does not note his IPCC deletions as he explains the integrity of his and Mann's «science,» but it does characterize their emails as «personal.»

In particular, even though Jones» email initiating the deletion enterprise was marked re «FOIA» and was a direct response to Holland's FOIA request, Muir Russell obtusely reported that there was no pending FOI request at the time of Jones» deletion email.

Muir Russell's subsequent report then contained findings on email deletion that were blatantly untrue and known to be untrue to hundreds, if not thousands, of readers who've followed these events.

Maybe if the AGW proponents stopped calling those skeptical of their hypotheses «deniers», and did something about the continued tenure of those who engaged in unscientific practises such as data bending, opaque statistical massaging and weighting, email deletion, undermining the peer review process and subverting journal editor's independence, then the big bad nasty «deniers» might stop using the «Alarmist» tag and highlighting climategate.

Although «inquiries» are supposed to leave evidence taking for a proper «investigation committee», the «inquiry» stage took evidence and incorrectly said that there was no prima facie evidence for Mann actually participating directly or indirectly in the deletion of emails.

Because Wahl's deletion of the emails took place prior to him becoming an employee of NOAA, NOAA policies on record retention were not applicable.

Instead of adhering to ORI procedures, Penn State purported to make final findings on key issues (including deletion of emails) without a full investigation.

Wahl pops up saying he'd deleted the emails, as Mann was asked to ask Wahl to delete the emails, and there are no direct references to Wahl from Jones it raises the question of what instigated Wahl's deletion of the emails.

Combine this with the hockeystick, hide the decline, hide my data, non-compliance with FOIA, deletion of emails etc. and is it any wonder there is erosion of trust.

Sure enough, it turns out that McIntyre did discuss his interview with the NSF (in a discussion criticizing the NSF's finding with regard to deletion of emails) in September of this year.

Regardless of whether Mann deleted his own emails regarding AR4, Mann participated in the conspiracy to delete emails when he assured Jones that he would contact Gene Wahl about Jones request for deletion of emails regarding AR4.

A third grader could and would conclude that at a minimum, Mann participated indirectly with the deletion and / or destruction of emails.

Section 77 is intended to penalize deletion of information in order to defeat disclosure — which is EXACTLY what Jones did with respect to the AR4 emails.

Kris (203): Section 77 is intended to penalize deletion of information in order to defeat disclosure — which is EXACTLY what Jones did with respect to the AR4 emails

New documents show that Acton did not even meet with Briffa or Jones in his supposed «investigation» of the deletion of emails.

More news on Acton's supposed «investigation» of the deletion of emails.

The FOI request was directed at untrue evidence given to Parliament by UEA Vice Chancellor Acton in connection with the notorious deletion of emails by Briffa, Jones and associates.

In this they differ from emails, which can be subject to a deletion policy, if there is one as part of an organization's e-discovery policy.