The Daniel Morgan Independent Panel report is delayed again. It began in May 2013 with the claim it would report in 12 months. Within that first year, the original chair resigned and one of the panel members did not take up their appointment. These events delayed the panel’s work. Along the way, the Metropolitan Police and News International (the former parent of the defunct News of the World and now reborn as News Corporation) were slow to provide documents.
The panel, with a new chair (appointed July 2014), began work in January 2015, but was delayed further. Over the next three years, other events created more documents. They had to review these documents. The panel estimates there are 1.5 million documents. The reason for delays is often explained as the number and complexity of the documents. The police claimed in 2014 that they had over a million pieces of paper. In 2018 they reiterated this claim as one of the reason for the delays.
One million pages of information might sound like a lot. For someone familiar with records management and e-discovery, it is a small amount. In 2009, as US court directed Anton Valukas to investigate Lehman Brothers collapse. In a little over a year, he and his team published their 2,200-page report. To do this they had to access over 2600 different IT systems as well as interview hundreds of people. They had to review more than 3 petabytes of data. That is about 350 Billion pages. The Met’s pages are just over 1.5 gigabytes. A petabyte is one million gigabytes.
Even paper documents can be scanned into an electronic document records management system to be identified, coded, and indexed for searching and analysis. Such systems are common across the legal and investigatory world.
What is curious is that does not appear to be the case with the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel. [Update 30 May 2018: The Papers have been digitised.] [The claim that a large number of documents is difficult to manage would make it appear] as if in the 21st century where the most advanced electronic tools are available we have the police and the Home Office working as if they were Bob Cratchit and Uriah Heep with a quill and ink pot.
When someone says they provided many documents, they want you to believe that the volume and complexity are the reason for delays. In this sense, it is a dodge. It is used to mask the reality that the documents contain embarrassing revelations and they provide evidence of deeper wider problems than the inquiry. For these reasons, there has been a delay not because there have been one million pages. Instead, there are other reasons which suggest that the Met is not minded to cooperate with the Panel in any way that does not serve its interests. So, the next time you hear the police talk about one million pages you should think of this video and treat the claim accordingly.
 As the Panel’s Frequently Asked Question (FAQ) page explains, there were delays:
“…the material requiring to be analysed was not made available to the Panel by the Metropolitan Police Service and others until after the beginning of January 2015, some sixteen months after Panel members were appointed.”
https://www.danielmorganpanel.independent.gov.uk/?s=faq Alastair Morgan, Daniel’s brother, had to write to Rupert Murdoch in 2015 to encourage News International’s cooperation. https://fothom.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/daniel-morgan-letter-to-rupert-murdoch-28th-anniversary-of-dm-murder-rev-rb.pdf
“A number of events occurred during 2016-2017, including the hearing at the start of 2017 of a civil action by Mr Jonathan Rees and others against the Metropolitan Police Service. A trial was held and findings made by the court and, as a consequence, additional documentation was received by the Panel during 2017, which then had to be considered in depth. The Panel is also now considering a large volume of material which is being incrementally provided to the Panel during 2018.”
 http://www.theposselist.com/2010/03/20/the-valukas-report-on-the-lehman-brothers-collapse-and-e-discovery-stratify-and-caselogistix-win-the-day/ see also http://www.theprojectcounselgroup.com/2010/03/20/the-valukas-report-on-the-lehman-brothers-collapse-the-e-discovery-aspects/
People cooperated with the review because the legal power behind the review. The people understood the rule of law and they respected. Even though Barclay’s which had taken over Lehman Brothers holdings had confidential documents within those systems they were able to quickly agree an approach to compartmentalizing those documents to preserve and protect their interests.
 https://www.legaltechnology.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/eDisclosure-Systems-Buyers-Guide-2018-V6_0.pdf is probably the best free buyers guide you can find on edisclosure (UK) or edisovery (US) systems. Please note that e-discovery is not the same as e-disclosure even though they are often used to describe similar practices they are different in law and in their implications. http://www.mondaq.com/uk/x/626152/disclosure+electronic+discovery+privilege/Civil+litigation+Discovery+is+not+the+same+as+Disclosure+forensic+eproviders+please+note