MrLouKnee

"Two British men should not have had their DNA and fingerprints retained by police, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled. "

The men's information was held by South Yorkshire Police, although neither was convicted of any offence.


more here

BBC NEWS | UK | DNA database 'breach of rights'

SJ_Skyline

Good!


Even Better

bugeyeandy

In other words European Court of Human Rights judgements stand when it comes to not deporting people convicted of terrorism but when it suits we will ignore it and carry on collecting DNA of innocent people "just in case" they turn criminal on us at a later date.

Tenby

iTrader: (1)

Scotland destroy the DNa/fingerprints already. About time we followed suit

Leslie

A good result, I congratulate the men concerned and the Eu Court.

Les

cster

About f*cking time

unclebuck

The existing law will remain in place while we carefully consider the judgement

Jacqui Smith, Home Secretary


Think again... It won't make any difference to the Zanu Lab project. Nothing will stop the power crazed stalinists except their removal from office.

If I were obne of the brave people who won this case I would be looking carefully over my shoulder and hope that I was not going to 'meet with an unfortunate accident'.

MrLouKnee

todays a bad day for Zanulab, and theres only 1 thing they can do, which is abide by the courts judgement. its a humilating defeat to zanulab and theyre not going to admit they were wrong, hence they "consider the judgement"

effing labour

tanyatriangles

iTrader: (2)

And when they threaten to take their ball home if the law on speeding was changed

Mark'sWRX

Sorry, I disagree. If you do nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear.

Many marders/rapes etc have been solved from having DNA obtained from a relatively minor crime.

When your house gets broken into, your family harmed and your Scoob stolen, would you be happy if they can't catch them because the criminal's DNA has been destroyed because they were not convicted last time?

SJ_Skyline

"In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;


And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;


And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;


And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up."


But don't worry - I didn't do anything wrong so I had nothing to fear

bugeyeandy

Ok , just pootle off to your local Plod station and volunteer your DNA then
I'm sure they'll never use it to solve a crime you never commited, after all they never have in the past

Torquemada

It's the worries regarding what else DNA databases can be used for and also the security of said info if it is utilised for different purposes.

The saying doesn't really cover this.

dpb

what are the chances , again , of confusing two peoples dna ?

Torquemada

Anything's possible hearing some of the things the clowns in charge manage to **** up

Dracoro

Riiigggghhhtttt.....

How many? Most murders/rapes DNA gets solved by matching the dna against potential suspects. Rarely have they found the suspects by scanning through a database. Most of them haven't committed minor crime before anyway.

Again, point me to evidence that this is happening. When most of these criminals are caught, any dna "evidence" is not needed anyway and probably wouldn't help regardless.

In many cases it could cause more hassle for the police, imagine how many people have been in your house/car/office etc. and how much time wasted by having to interview all these people to see if they had alibi's or evidence they weren't at the scene of the crime etc.

Sure some dna collection (e.g. for convicted crims) plays a part but propaganda has meant a lot of people are nieve enough to think "dna evidence" is the solution to all crime. It's not and never will be.

SJ_Skyline

Probably as little as one in 1000 if it's Accenture managing the systems

OllyK

Oh how wrong you are! Find out what the actual legislation and scope of the ID card is.

So, if convicted, their DNA stays on anyway

Except in the case when my car was broken in to, there was no DNA anyway.

OllyK

What's the chances of a data entry clerk cocking things up and registering the wrong DNA against your record? Remember, it's your fault (£1000) fine if they do.

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

I agree with the concerns about the DNA database.

And this is just another example of

ditchmyster

iTrader: (7)

This is one subject that scares me, and i dont think most people understand the magnitude of a DNA data base.
Lets face it if the police refused to take part in giving samples then you know ther is something wrong with the system.
We are being led to believe that DNA is 100% fool proof and that is very far from being the case.
And thats before we take human error into account, which as the use and collection of said data increases will also increase accordingly.
So if by some mix up ones DNA becomes linked with a serious crime and the jury are told catagorically that it was the defendants and its fool proof.
Guilty as charged

Martin2005

Anytime the EU court overalls laws made by the British Sovereign parliament, most definitely CANNOT be called 'A great day for democracy'

Dedrater

Why?

Martin2005

errm because last time i checked we voted for OUR law makers not the EU court

Let's see how quickly views change on here when the EU court makes a ruling against something that you believe in

Dracoro

That makes little logic.

What's important is that the right decision is made, whether or not they are elected by us is irrelevant in this case. In fact, they DO appear to be representing the majority in this case.

The same applies to our elected officials, if they make a wrong decision that everyone disagrees with, is it still "good" for democracy purely because they were elected?

OllyK

Just because they are elected in this country doesn't mean they make the right decisions. While in general I'm no big fan of the ECHR, in this case I think common sense has won the day.

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

All very well, BUT

The problem is what happens when wrong decision is reached, who are they accountable to, what recourse do those on the receiving end have?

Accountability and the means to effect change is the protection afforded to the public by the process of the election of their own government.

Ns04

OllyK

If the government don't like the decision, they can always pull us out of Europe.

Mark'sWRX

If you listened to Jeremy Vine at lunchtime, he listed several examples.

One was the murder of the model in Croydon (Sally-Anne Bowman), whose killer was caught due to his DNA being taken after a fight in a pub.

There were other examples, but I can't recall them all. One was a murderer whose sister was stopped for drink driving and they matched the murder DNA to him somehow and he wasn't even a suspect.

I agree the potential for mistakes is huge, but then the miscarriages of justice that already happen must be far greater.

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

Yes, but there is an element of duress in that isn't there? If you don't like a decision, you can bugger off and lose any other benefits that membership of the larger organisation, of which the court is only one part of!

IIRC the UK government has stood by whilst its citizens got shafted by EU policy on numerous occasions in the past; I'm thinking of the agriculture and fishing policy in particular.

Ns "I'm just bitter cause they said we had to call A Marathon 'Snickers' from now on. Merde!!!!" 04