This week it was revealed that the number of profiles stored on the DNA database by police forces in England and Wales has topped 10% of the population for the first time.
Whilst there is no argument that DNA is an important forensic tool in detecting and prosecuting crime, Labour have been obsessed with growing the DNA database for the sake of it. Guilt or innocence isn’t relevant. In Labour’s database state it’s simply about expanding the amount of information held by government.
This ‘Big Brother’ mindset is evident in the Government’s approach of delay, deferral and do nothing in the face of their policy being unlawful. Nearly a year ago it was ruled that the blanket and indiscriminate retention of DNA profiles of people suspected but not convicted of offences breached the European Convention on Human Rights. Yet rather than deal with this serious situation, the Home Office have been dragging their feet.
After a plan to allow decisions on DNA retention by ministerial rubber stamp ran into problems in the Lords, the Government now promise to introduce new proposals in next month’s Queen’s Speech. The impact of this seemingly positive step is that nothing will happen any time soon. Any new bill would need to complete its legislative process before the general election – a tall order given that it will almost certainly be lumped together with the normal Marsham Street mish-mash of proposals for yet more Home Affairs laws.
We have already announced that a Conservative government would adopt a system where DNA profiles of those not convicted of an offence would only be retained where someone had been charged with a crime of violence or a sexual offence. These DNA profiles would be retained for three years subject to the right to apply to court for a further two year extension. This is a workable approach which balances personal freedom against community safety. The Government could act now. Instead it will continue to treat us all as potential suspects.
( 15 comments ) Tags: dna database
Comment by Glenn on November 1, 2009 at 11:59 am
you are concerned with defending our rights, but with one hand you say you will protect your countrymen and with the other seek to deceive, l will not vote for you
Comment by Lee on November 1, 2009 at 12:01 pm
This is an excellent start, but I hope you will also review some of your own party’s questionable laws, like the changes to the right to silence in the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.
Comment by Rose Warren on November 1, 2009 at 3:38 pm
This idea of holding on to DNA is rather a disturbing idea. If we look at ancient magicks it becomes quite clear that by holding things they intend to use them in a negative way. The main use may be to screw hard on the fear of judgement that individual criminals may have, but to retain even one innocent in this way is wrong and that in my opinion is one of the reasons the labour party has to go. DNA is not a god evidence base if they already have abused one clear principle they will abuse others. By cloning and replicating DNA they can effectively accuse anyone of any crime what so ever. DNA evidence is worthless in my opinion unless the state is willing to be rid of all of its cloned samples and all of its filthy abuse of this science.
Its no use arguing that a degraded sample proves something as this degradation can be achieved by exposing cloned DNA to ultra violet light. It’s a great shame that this data base was built as its existence completely undermines the use if DNA evidences in court. In future all blood letting should be entered into only after a caution as to its uses has been formally made. Obtaining DNA by illegal means should of course be an offence. In addition the practice of Doctors and Nurses simply sticking needles into people will have to be looked at, each individual has the right refuse any treatment unless they are under section, even here if it turns out later that they have used sectioning in a false way the courts will have to bring the Health authorities to account. Non of these things require a change in the law they simple require that laws that have not yet been repealed be used to challenge the existing unhealthy. These are of course my opinions that they carry any weight at all is due to a higher authority which we call Law the Mattianic art. The notion of innocent people being held and considered guilty until proven innocent is abhorrent to me.
Comment by Ray Turner on November 1, 2009 at 5:21 pm
Not sure about this. To some extent I’ll subscribe to the “If you’ve done nothing wrong you’ve nothing to worry about” argument, but what bothers me is that the DNA evidence when it is used in court is couched in terms of probablilties rather than absolute certainties. So it should only ever be reagrded as supporting evidence, it should not be regarded as absolute 100% reliable, infallible proof. We seem to be drifting towards the latter and it is that fact, coupled with the size of the national DNA database, that is the real concern here.
Comment by Rose Warren on November 1, 2009 at 6:30 pm
The DNA data base…Errors correction
This idea of holding on to DNA is rather a disturbing idea. If we look at ancient magic’s it becomes quite clear that by holding things they intend to use them in a negative way. The main use may be to screw hard on the fear of judgement that individual criminals may have, but to retain even one innocent in this way is wrong and that in my opinion is one of the reasons the labour party has to go. DNA is not a god evidence base if they already have abused one clear principle they will abuse others. By cloning and replicating DNA they can effectively accuse anyone of any crime what so ever. DNA evidence is worthless in my opinion unless the state is willing to be rid of all of its cloned samples and all of its filthy abuse of this science.
Its no use arguing that a degraded sample proves something as this degradation can be achieved by exposing cloned DNA to ultra violet light. It’s a great shame that this data base was built as its existence completely undermines the use of DNA evidences in court. In future all blood letting should be entered into only after a caution as to its uses has been formally made. Obtaining DNA by illegal means should of course be an offence. In addition the practice of Doctors and Nurses simply sticking needles into people will have to be looked at, each individual has the right to refuse any treatment unless they are under section, even here if it turns out later that they have used sectioning in a false way the courts will have to bring the Health authorities to account. Non of these things require a change in the law they simple require that laws that have not yet been repealed be used to challenge the existing unhealthy ones. These are of course my opinions that they carry any weight at all is due to a higher authority which we call Law the Messianic art. The notion of innocent people being considered guilty until proven innocent is abhorrent to me.
Comment by Rose Warren on November 1, 2009 at 6:46 pm
“So it should only ever be reagrded as supporting evidence, it should not be regarded as absolute 100% reliable, infallible proof. We seem to be drifting towards the latter and it is that fact, coupled with the size of the national DNA database, that is the real concern here.” Indeed lets be clear about this DNA has been blowen up into something it is not. A Ciggeret as an example found at a crime scene has DNA on that happens to link a person to that site. At the moment the way DNA evidence is used is likley to sway a jury because they have been programed to belive in its 100% certinty but in reality it is weak circumstancal evidence dressed up as certinity. We had the case of Barry George recently that proved just how a case can be concocted from this kind of evidence. With DNA evidence the chance of a misscarridge of justice increase by a factor of many times. Now it takes just a simple cloning and a suitable degrading of the DNA to make it appear old. Frankly the DNA database undermines our safty and we should be aware of that fact. I would love to trust the Governement and the Police Force but we know from bitter experience that bad eggs do bad things. I of course accuse no individual but do note that bad individuals show no compassion to those they abuse. If the governement want to continue to use DNA then there should be a body that defends those so accused, with independent labs and access to gene splitters etc. In fact such rquipment can be bought on the internet. The Days of DNA evidence are numbered unless such safegaurds as installed and adheared to in my opnion.
Comment by Rose Warren on November 1, 2009 at 11:25 pm
like the changes to the right to silence in the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994< Yes more bad law. More drift to nepolianic law, wrong in every sence. Uncivilised, dishonest and wicked its no wonder we do not want any part of Labours BS and we must free ourselves from such BS ourselves
Comment by Mr Bilham on November 2, 2009 at 1:20 am
This DNA database is nothing compared to the other ‘control-control-control’ ideas that the Government invest in, develop and use!
I thought that my telephone calls and house-hold rubbish was ‘private’. Not under a Labour Government. Are my emails private? Not under a Labour Government. Is my genetic code private? Apparently not under a Labour Government!
It will get worse and worse. General Election now, November 2009.
Comment by cheryl Bacon on November 2, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Well thoughtout comments as usual
Comment by Dave macU on November 2, 2009 at 12:32 pm
Glad to see this issue getting some airtime!
DNA databases take us back to the days when debtors AND THEIR FAMILIES would be thrown in jail. It’s not just your genetic make-up that the government is gaining vital intelligence about, it is that of all your blood relatives, present and future.
Comment by actuary21c on November 2, 2009 at 12:57 pm
I am generally supportive of Conservatives on current issues and I agree with the concerns about Labour’s DNA database, but in other Home Office issues Conservatives really need to rethink their current support for the sacking of Prof. Nutt in the ScienceGate scandal (see “Politicians must keep out of science & Conservatives, that’s you as well as Labour” at http://www.actuary21c.com/?p=1078).
Comment by Jeremy Thomass on November 2, 2009 at 1:46 pm
I must agree with Lee here, James. You’ve certainly made a good start here, but I know many good, conscientious defence barristers continue to worry about the consequences of the abolition of the right to silence, especially for suspects who have learning difficulties, as is quite often the case.
Comment by neil scott on December 18, 2009 at 4:36 pm
Neil Scott Mr Bob Ainsworth (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Home Office; Coventry North East, Labour)
I congratulate my hon. Friend Mr. Bell on initiating a debate about the investigation of misconduct in Cleveland police, which continues to attract interest and concern locally and nationally. I shall not be able to answer all my hon. Friend’s points in the time that he has left me, but he well understands that. He believed that it was more important to get his comments on the record.
Public confidence in the police service rests on a reputation for integrity. When allegations of corruption or misconduct are made and the service’s reputation is brought into question, it is important that thorough scrutiny takes place to establish the facts and determine the appropriate action…. See More
It would have been entirely wrong if the force had not investigated the serious allegations of corruption. Cleveland police acted robustly by initiating an investigation into allegations in the case that we are considering. Although the investigation concluded in November 2000, the disciplinary process has ensured its continued high profile. That has been especially true of the case involving Ray Mallon.
Mr. Mallon, a senior police officer has, according to his own unequivocal admissions, committed serious acts of misconduct. They include failing to investigate allegations involving the misuse of drugs and giving false statements. Integrity has to be fundamental to the police service, and those matters are therefore serious. Six other officers remain suspended.
I am sure that my hon. Friend appreciates that if any appeals result from a disciplinary hearing, the Home Secretary may be called to make the judgment as the appellate authority. It is therefore not for me to comment on the details of any ongoing case.
As my hon. Friend stated, neither Mr. Mallon nor anyone else has appeared in court because of Lancet. The Crown Prosecution Service decided that no criminal charges should be brought. Again, that is a matter for the police and the CPS, not Ministers.
My hon. Friend said that there had been calls for issues arising from Lancet to be resubmitted to the CPS. That is entirely a matter for Cleveland police. Neither the Home Secretary nor I can play any role in that.
Let me ensure in the time remaining that I answer all my hon. Friend’s specific questions. I can confirm that Ray Mallon entered pleas of guilty on two separate occasions to all 14 disciplinary charges.
The specific charges were serious, and because of that, Mr. Mallon was required to resign from the police service forthwith. He pleaded guilty to giving false statements at interviews, and my hon. Friend is right that the police authority has asked the chief constable to consider resubmitting the issue to the CPS. My hon. Friend knows the answer to his question about whether the issues have been before a court. I can confirm that Mr. Mallon’s case concerned failure to investigate allegations involving the misuse of drugs.
I appreciate that the considerable cost and time taken by the investigation has been a source of concern and frustration and that such major investigations can place a significant burden on the budget of a small force such as Cleveland.
the facts are that ray criminal mallon as mayor of middlesbrough has continued his quest to have others take the blame for his actions and have endeavoured to cover up his missleading and abuse of authourity given to him as mayor of middlesbrough,at the turn of 2002/3 ray mallon was allowed to be mayor by no exsisting authourity willing to stop the corruption in middlesbro/mbro,he has continued to abuse his authourity towards neil scott,mallon abuised the rights to work by allowing police to slander scott in a crb after 21 arrests,allegations of crimes,hearsay evidence, unconvicted by any court,stopped scotts rights to live ,by stopping his benefits,jsa council tax,rent,causing scott debts that he cannot pay or get out of,to loose his home because of debts,no benefits,stops scott from eating ,thE END RESULT IS THAT GOVERNMENTTAX THE INNOCENT AND NOONE STOPS THEM
Yesterday at 16:49 · DeleteNeil Scott also its sad that an innocent man can be convicted of a crime based on hearsay allegations without evidence and without a court passing judgement of guilt it happens in a crb when cleveland police state that if your arrested for a crime /allegation,your crb disclosure contains the arrest ,reguardless of if you did it or not,neil scott stopped from working for 7 years after 21 arrests unconvicted of any of the offences
Comment by neil scott on January 14, 2010 at 4:49 pm
HOLDING dna against a person will,
CRBdisclosures given out to employers to stop a person evr working again in england
IS JUST PLAIN SELFISH AND AGAINST A PERSONS human rights
Comment by NEILSCOTT on March 8, 2010 at 1:25 am
• 18,000 personal records from the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP): In December
2007, it was revealed that 18,000 personal records were found at a former DWP contractor’s
home. The contractor still had unencrypted compact discs containing the details of thousands
of benefit claimants, despite having stopped working for the DWP a year before. The two discs
held up to 9,000 names each (BBC Online, 1 December 2007).
• DVLA data:In December 2007 Transport Secretary, Ruth Kelly, was forced to admit that the
personal details of more than three million learner drivers had gone missing. The names,
addresses and telephone numbers for every candidate who applied for a driving theory test
between September 2004 and April 2007 were on a computer hard drive which was lost in May
at a supposedly secure facility in the US. (Hansard, 17 Dec 2007, Column 624)
• MOD data:In January 2008, it emerged that a laptop computer containing the details of
600,000 people was stolen from the MOD. The laptop listed the personal information of
recruits to the Royal Navy, Royal Marines and Royal Air Force, and of others who had
expressed an interest in joining. It contained passport details, national insurance numbers,
drivers’ licence information, family details, doctors’ addresses and NHS numbers. The
Ministry of Defence said the laptop was stolen from a Royal Navy officer’s car parked in
Birmingham on 9 January but it had decided – after consulting the police – not to disclose the
theft immediately. Defence Secretary, Des Browne, later admitted the loss of two further
laptops containing more sensitive information (Hansard, 21 Jan 2008, Column 1225)
• MoD admits 658 laptops stolen: Defence Secretary Des Browne was forced to re-issue and
revise upwards previous estimates of the number of laptops stolen from 347 to 658 in the last
four years after ‘anomalies in the reporting process’ were discovered. In addition the MoD said
that 89 laptops had been lost. The department also said that 26 portable memory sticks
containing classified information had been either stolen or misplaced since January. In a
separate response, ministers said that 131 of the department’s USB memory sticks had been
taken or misplaced since 2004 (The Telegraph, 19 July 2008).
• National DNA database: Under Labour, the National DNA database has grown to five million
samples, the largest in the world per head of population. The costs of service delivery have
doubled since 2002, when the rules were changed to allow permanent retention of innocent
people’s DNA (National DNA Database Annual Report 2006/7). Yet, total detected crimes in
which a DNA match was available have dropped by 16.5 per cent between 2002-03 and 2007-08
(Hansard, 4 February 2009, Column 1244WA). There are thought to be a million innocent
people on the database and yet there are over two million people with a police record without a
profile on the DNA database (Hansard, 5 November 2008, Column 602WA). In 2008, the
European Court of Human Rights held that the government’s arbitrary approach breached the
right to privacy (S. and Marper v. United Kingdom, 4 December 2008). The Government has
long ignored calls from the Conservatives for a Parliamentary debate on the database and for it to
be put on a proper statutory footing. In May 2009, and despite the Marperruling, it announced
that innocent people’s DNA would still be retained for a maximum period of 12 years.