Since 2004, police in England and Wales have been allowed to permanently retain DNA samples taken from people whohavebeenarrested,butnot charged or cautioned.
"The retention of such information has minimal impact on the civil liberties of the suspects involved. However, it assistsgreatlyinthedetectionof criminal acts perpetrated against other members of society," ColinMcKerracher,the chief constable of Grampian Police said.
http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.1394771.0.watchdog_to_examine_use_of_dna_database.php
www.ccels.cf.ac.uk/literature/issue/2006/levitt.pdf
Should the police be allowed to forcibly remove DNA from someone
who has not been convicted of a crime and store it on their database?
- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
Originally posted by Thequ1ckNo, they have done nothing wrong, end of story.
Since 2004, police in England and Wales have been allowed to permanently retain DNA samples taken from people whohavebeenarrested,butnot charged or cautioned.
"The retention of such information has minimal impact on the civil liberties of the suspects involved. However, it assistsgreatlyinthedetectionof criminal acts perpetrated against other members of remove DNA from someone
who has not been convicted of a crime and store it on their database?
No one should be allowed to get hold of my DNA (if I've done nothing wrong), it's personal information.
edit: there's this thing called 'presumption of innocence' of course, if you've been arrested, but you aren't charged with anything, you shouldn't be regarded as having done anything wrong.
Under what conditions can they place you under arrest in the UK without filing charges? My feeling is that, if there is a case strong enough against you to arrest you, then the police need to gather evidence, including your DNA.
At the same time, I'm of the opinion that you should only be placed under arrest if there is a very very strong case for your guilt, and charges are forthcoming. If that's not the case in the UK, I'd say no, they shouldn't be able to collect your DNA.
Originally posted by joneschrYou seem to think that this only applies to serious crimes requiring
Under what conditions can they place you under arrest in the UK without filing charges? My feeling is that, if there is a case strong enough against you to arrest you, then the police need to gather evidence, including your DNA.
At the same time, I'm of the opinion that you should only be placed under arrest if there is a very very strong case for yo ...[text shortened]... . If that's not the case in the UK, I'd say no, they shouldn't be able to collect your DNA.
evidence.
I was arrested for a minor charge that didn't stick,
my DNA was forcibly taken by ripping hairs from my head and
stored on the database (probably under 'freak'😉
The second article talks about a 13 yr old girl who was arrested
for throwing a snowball at a police car.
She was arrested and her DNA taken without her parents concent
and stored on the police database. All legally.
How exactly would DNA evidence help in this case?
Don't you agree that the nature of the crime should be taken into
consideration and DNA only taken upon successful prosecution?
Originally posted by Bad wolfThe police can arrest you and charge you with anything they want.
No, they have done nothing wrong, end of story.
No one should be allowed to get hold of my DNA (if I've done nothing wrong), it's personal information.
edit: there's this thing called 'presumption of innocence' of course, if you've been arrested, but you aren't charged with anything, you shouldn't be regarded as having done anything wrong.
That's what I'm saying, the police do not need proof of guilt to take
DNA and even when you are proven innocent you can't stop them.
Originally posted by Thequ1ckSo.... you live in a place where the police can arrest you and charge you for a crime you didn't commit.... but you're worried about them taking your DNA instead?
The police can arrest you and charge you with anything they want.
That's what I'm saying, the police do not need proof of guilt to take
DNA and even when you are proven innocent you can't stop them.
Having trouble keeping your eye on the ball?
Don't get me wrong, I see your point, but the situation you are describing is either very rare, or should be. If people are getting arrested frequently and being released, there is a bigger problem. See my point?
Originally posted by zeeblebotWhy not? If people are going to commit crimes in the future, I'd like to have DNA evidence be used against them. I have no sympathy for criminals. I have sympathy for innocent, law-abiding people.
nope. do we want to live in a society where people can keep their DNA from examination for future crimes? nope.
Originally posted by Thequ1ckSorry, but no the police cannot arrest you and charge you with anything they want. That statement is absurd. The PACE Act 1984 Strictly governs this, especially S.28
The police can arrest you and charge you with anything they want.
That's what I'm saying, the police do not need proof of guilt to take
DNA and even when you are proven innocent you can't stop them.
One of the hallmarks of a free society especially in the UK is our ability to go about our business without the need to explain to anyone in authority what we are doing. We are free from arbitrary challenge and arrest. This is recognised in the ECHR A.5 Right to Liberty and Security.
There is an obligation by the arresting officer to tell the suspect the reasons for the arrest and this must be done at the time of the arrest. No arrest and I repeat no arrest is lawful unless the person arrested is informed of the grounds for arrest at the time of or as soon as is practicable.
S.24 of PACE sets out stringent guidelines on when a police officer can arrest someone. I am not going to go into these now, as I can't quite remember them, and I cannot be bothered to go through my books, but needless to say do you really think that a police officer would jeopardise his career by arresting someone just for the sake of it?
An adept and switched on defence solicitor would eat him for breakfast 😉
Those DNA data bases.....do they belong to any one group of people in particular?
If so, why? And what if they do, is that wrong somehow? Is it wrong for a civilization to protect itself from a segment of society that is known for having a prediliction towards criminality and violence?
Originally posted by joneschrI'm saying that the police make mistakes and when they do,
So.... you live in a place where the police can arrest you and charge you for a crime you didn't commit.... but you're worried about them taking your DNA instead?
Having trouble keeping your eye on the ball?
Don't get me wrong, I see your point, but the situation you are describing is either very rare, or should be. If people are getting arrested frequently and being released, there is a bigger problem. See my point?
the person they arrest still has his/her DNA taken.
I'm saying that there is a bigger problem. The bigger problem
in my opinion is not the arrest, but the storage of DNA for trivial crimes
,false arrests and juvenile crimes.
Originally posted by sangfroidYeah, right LOL. You been to London recently??
Sorry, but no the police cannot arrest you and charge you with anything they want. That statement is absurd. The PACE Act 1984 Strictly governs this, especially S.28
One of the hallmarks of a free society especially in the UK is our ability to go about our business without the need to explain to anyone in authority what we are doing. We are free from ar or the sake of it?
An adept and switched on defence solicitor would eat him for breakfast 😉
The boys here have free reign thanks to TB and the terrorist bill.
I know I look like a schmuck but I've been stopped and searched
for the most trivial of reasons, ie
once under the terrorist bill for smoking a rolled up cigarette
and another time for looking confused.
http://gizmonaut.net/bits/suspect.html
Originally posted by Sam The ShamWhat, a 13yo girl with a snowball??
Is it wrong for a civilization to protect itself from a segment of society that is known for having a prediliction towards criminality and violence?
Imagine it was your daughter who was arrested and her profile
was somehow leaked to insurance companies or research companies.
Oh, my mistake, it's legal too for the police to send your profile to research companies.
The authorities can, and have, abused their power many times in the past. It probably happened numerous times today.
I see no problem in using DNA to prove or disprove guilt. But, under what conditions is storage of that persons DNA correct?? Is an innocent persons DNA removed from the databank?? It appears that once a sample is taken, it will continue to be stored indefinitely.
One of my main concerns with DNA storage is who will have access to it, and what will they be allowed to "look" at in the future?? The use of DNA in crime is only one issue. What if, in the future, someone decides that all color blind people should be prevented from having children?? What if, in the future, the particular DNA sequence is found to determine who will get certain forms of cancer, or how long they will live?? Or, what if, in the future, it becomes possible to determine a person's IQ based on DNA?? What if the cost of health insurance is adjusted based on DNA tendencies?? Is it right to allow DNA related tendencies to influence what type of jobs we are allowed to perform, or where we can live??
I anticipate a day, in the not distant future, when DNA samples will be taken at birth and "registered-for future use" as a routine action.
We have seen regularly, that if a discovery that can do both good and bad, and the only thing to prevent the bad thing from happening is the will power of the people, that the bad will be done. Maybe not by the people that make the discovery, but by someone else that has less moral character. How many times do we need to hear that something has "fallen into the wrong hands"??
I think there is a much larger issue than the connection between crime and DNA. I think that the medical repercussions will ultimately outweigh the criminal connections to DNA analysis. It becomes easier for people to be segregated if there is DNA evidence that supports it. I also think that there is no way to prevent some of these more obvious consequences. Our society has reached the information age and as a consequence, we all lose individual freedom and privacy. The people that control the masses will use any tool at their disposal to help them continue to control the masses and in the process remove threats to their continued power.
"Soylent green is people." Even though a few people become aware of a tragic misuse of power, the masses will be too hungry or preoccupied with living to raise an effective challenge and the misuse of power will become part of the accepted way of life.
How do we guarentee that our politicians will be motivated by positive ethical and moral desires to see all people encouraged to become better people and to be able to reach their greatest potential?? I don't think we can. We can vote in someone that seems to have our greater good at heart, but how many of those same people will change, after being put in power, to being motivated by greed instead. How many of the current political powers do we trust as actually working for our greater good?? Maybe we can use their DNA to determine who will be the best managers of the masses.
These same politicians are who hold the reins of DNA databank access.
The storage of the information is not a bad thing, but using it to influence how we live our lives is a gross invasion of privacy and a gross misuse of power.
I enjoy debate of difficult issues. I think that discussions like this can only help to distribute information and raise the general level of concern and awareness.
Sorry for the novel. I'll get off my soapbox now.
Putz