The authorities have dropped their theft and computer crime case against a former Local Government Center employee because the center's "careless" and "sloppy" security practices would undermine any charges, according to letters obtained from the Merrimack County Attorney's Office.

The news was a "huge relief" for Ruthanne Bradley, 47, of Concord, who was arrested just over a year ago and charged with concealing backup tapes at the center and manipulating the information on them.

The Local Government Center administers benefits plans for public employees, and its databases hold personal information about thousands of workers throughout the state. Bradley worked for the center's information technology office.

The backup tapes, which were immediately found, unharmed and mislabeled at the center, did not contain medical or pharmacy claim information, center staff said at the time of Bradley's arrest. Staff also said there had been no security breach.

"It's important for me to let people know I didn't have anything to do with this tape issue," Bradley said yesterday. "I want everyone who read the story (a year ago) and may have judged me. . . . I want it to be known that it wasn't me that had anything to do with this."

Bradley's lawyer, W. Michael Dunn, said he and Bradley have been waiting for this conclusion for months.

"Even though the letters are couched in terms of not being able to prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt," he said, "there is no doubt that Ruthanne did not commit any crime, as it is unlikely any crime was ever committed."

Maura Carroll, acting director for the Local Government Center, said she was surprised by Waldron's letter because his characterization of their security system "is inconsistent with our practices internally."

Carroll said, "We have practices in place that assure that the information our members have with us is secure."

She also said an investigative report written by the Concord police in this case would support that assertion.

The Monitor has requested a copy of the police report. It wasn't immediately available yesterday because it must first be redacted of private information, said Lt. Keith Mitchell.

Detective Mark Dumas, who investigated the case, said yesterday he "wouldn't necessarily agree" with Carroll's interpretation of his report. But he declined further comment and directed a reporter to his report.

Six months after Bradley was arrested, the New Hampshire Office of Employment Security concluded the center had wrongly accused Bradley.

In its February finding, the employment security office said it found Bradley's statement that the tapes had been innocently mislabeled and mislaid "more credible" than the center's allegations that she had concealed the tapes and manipulated the content to get back at her immediate supervisor because she'd allegedly been overlooked for his job.

Bradley said she never applied for the job.

But the criminal investigation continued, and with it the possibility of criminal charges and a long prison sentence if Bradley had been convicted. Those fears weighed heavily on Bradley, her husband and her daughter, she said. "I still wake up in the middle of the night with anxiety," she said.

It brought no relief when the city prosecutor's office dropped its charges in November because Bradley knew the intent was to let the county take over the case and indict her on felony charges.

On Wednesday, Deputy County Attorney George Waldron notified the Local Government Center by letter that he was dropping the case.

He said he would not be asking a grand jury to indict Bradley because the center's own security practices left too much doubt about what had happened.

"I have concluded that the Local Government Center's careless security practices created a situation where reasonable doubt exists," Waldron wrote.

In a similar letter notifying the Concord police the case was over, Waldron described the center's security system as "sloppy."

In both letters, Waldron identified what he considered nine security problems, including the fact that secure areas were not locked, sensitive data was accessible by more people than necessary and that the center's software system had no way of tracking which user or computer was manipulating data.

The Monitor obtained the letters through a right-to-know request. In addition to the above problems Waldron noted, he also said the police investigation showed that employees were allowed to prop open doors that were supposed to be locked, and that as many as six room keys were issued to areas that were supposed to be secure.

Waldron said multiple employees had the password to the server and he found, as Bradley had claimed, "there was a long history of (information technology) staff mislabeling backup tapes" and "misusing the backup machine."

Waldron closed the letters with a suggestion "that the Local Government Center take steps to correct these problems so that if in the future there is a breach of security, the source of the breach may be accurately identified and disciplined properly."

Carroll said the center is reviewing Waldron's letter with its attorney. She said she did not know whether there had been a decision about how to respond.

The response, she said, does not need to involve a reworking of the security system as Waldron suggested.