Two men appear in court accused of possessing information from PSNI data breach

Two men have appeared before court charged with possessing information around police officers from a major data breach in 2023.

Brian Francis Cavlan, 49, of Coronation Park, Aughnacloy and Rory Martin Logan, 43, with an address given as HMP Maghaberry, appeared before Strabane Magistrates’ Court on Thursday charged with collecting information likely to be of use to terrorists.

The information was described in court as two spreadsheets containing details of serving police officers and staffing members of the PSNI.

The two accused did not acknowledge the court during their appearance.

Their defence argued the data had been downloaded hundreds if not thousands of times by people.

Details of almost 10,000 officers were mistakenly published online in response to a Freedom of Information request in August 2023.

The list included the surname and first initial of every employee, and also their rank or grade, where they are based and the unit in which they work.

Although it was removed from the internet, the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) previously said they believed the information had been accessed by dissident republicans.

At Strabane court on Thursday, a detective sergeant said he believed they could connect both of the accused to the charges.

He said both were arrested on Tuesday under the Terrorism Act in an ongoing investigation into the New IRA and their operational activity.

The officer said Cavlan’s phone was seized from his hand on April 12 2024, and he did not provide his passcode to open the phone, but it was accessed by the police cyber crime unit, and the spreadsheets were located on it.

“The spreadsheet record was found in six locations on the phone. Police would say of significance are two screenshots which capture specific areas of the spreadsheet and highlight a number of specific officers,” he said.

He said they received a report from the cyber crime unit in January 2025, adding that Cavlan did not engage with police interview teams over six hours.

In terms of Logan, the officer said his phone was seized on June 11 2024 and the passcode was again not provided to police.

He said the cyber crime unit examined the phone and contend that the spreadsheet was received via WhatsApp, saved to the device and then deleted.

However, the officer said the information was forwarded to a phone in the name of Logan’s wife, adding that it is “apparent from messages and content on that phone that Mr Logan also uses it and therefore would retain access and control of it on that device although it was deleted on his own”.

Defence solicitor Gavin Booth of Phoenix Law put to the officer that police had known the spreadsheet information had been on Cavlan’s phone for 10 months since last April, to which the officer said yes, adding they were trying to secure “the best evidence we could”.

Mr Booth also said that police accept there has now been hundreds if not thousands of shares of the data on WhatsApp and social media, and questioned whether it would be proven the accused had the data for any “sinister use”.

The officer responded: “It is the case yes, that the spreadsheet has been shared a considerable amount of times.

“They have taken positive steps with the possession of this spreadsheet which takes it beyond simple possession or downloading.

“Mr Cavlan screenshotted a particular area of the spreadsheet on his phone, and it would be our case, that in the case of Mr Logan, although the spreadsheet was deleted, the evidence tells us that he sent it to a phone number which is in his wife’s name which he also has got access to, so he retains access and control of that information without it being on his phone.”

The officer also clarified they do not believe Logan’s wife is involved in any operational New IRA activity.

District Judge Oonagh Mullan said she was satisfied from the evidence she had heard that the accused could be connected to the charges.

A bail application was made for Cavlan to which was objected to on the basis of a claim of a risk of re offending.

The officer said: “He has a list of all of our names and positions and of our staff … and our concerns are simple that this is a risk”, adding: “I can’t recommend any bail conditions to the court that will manage those safely”.

Mr Booth argued that from April 2024 police “were aware that Mr Cavlan had in his possession these documents. They took no steps to immediately arrest him.

“If there was such a risk that is made out today, they would have immediately taken him into custody and taken action.

“That didn’t happen, and 10 months on now he is before the court … to suggest that he won’t abide by bail conditions is fanciful at best by the prosecution.

“If police believed this was so serious and such a risk to their officers and to the public they would have arrested him then and charged him, and he could have been before this court ten months ago.

“He was allowed to be free for 10 months in the community in circumstances where he had no conditions.

“We say that bail can be managed, sureties can be offered and that there is no risk of re-offending.

“His phone has now been seized, he doesn’t have access to this document.”

Judge Mullan said she found it “extremely concerning that both defendants have refused to acknowledge the court”.

“These are extremely serious charges they are facing. They have not co operated with police.”

At the close of the hearing the judge said: “This is a deeply concerning matter given the data that was disclosed and was retained.

“I am concerned as to the management of this if the defendants were released from custody. They haven’t co-operated in interview. That is their right, that is fair to say.

“The risks are very real and very evident, I would be extremely concerned that if these parties were released from custody at this present moment in time that there could be further issues that arise, and there is a risk of committing offences.

“I do not think there are the bail conditions that we could put in place that would justify me granting bail with conditions. I’m refusing bail in this case.”

They are to appear before court next on February 25.