Morning:
14°c
DNA of one million innocent people held illegally by police
Robert Mendick, Chief Reporter04.12.08
DNA samples of up to a million people held by police on a national database may have to be destroyed after the Government lost a landmark European legal ruling today.
The European Court of Human Rights ruled that keeping the DNA of people with no criminal convictions was unlawful. The case, which had previously been rejected by the House of Lords, had been brought by two Britons who had demanded that police destroy fingerprints, DNA samples and profiles kept after their arrests in 2001.
The decision was welcomed by civil liberty campaigners but greeted with dismay by the Home Secretary Jacqui Smith and by police.
Ms Smith now has until March to decide how to respond to the European ruling. It is highly likely she will be forced to order all samples of people without convictions to be removed from the national DNA database.
Ms Smith said today: "DNA and fingerprinting is vital to the fight against crime, providing the police with more than 3,500 matches a month, and I am disappointed by the European Court of Human Rights' decision."
It is estimated that of 4.5million DNA samples held in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, about 20 per cent are from people without current convictions.
The Home Office admitted today it had no idea how many people might be affected by today's judgment, although the Tory estimate was a million people. Almost a quarter of all samples added each year come from the Met police.
The Association of Chief Police Officers said the judgment could have a "profound impact" on the way police use DNA to tackle crime. Chris Sims, spokesman on forensics and Chief Constable of Staffordshire, said today that 200,000 DNA samples on the national database between May 2001 and December 2005 would have had to be removed "as they were taken from people charged but not convicted of offences".
He said that of those cases, 8,500 profiles of individuals "have been linked with crime scene profiles involving nearly 14,000 offences", including murders, rapes and burglaries. That included 114 murders, 55 attempted murders, 116 rapes, 68 sex offences, 119 aggravated burglaries and 127 of the supply of controlled drugs, he said. The judges in Strasbourg ruled that keeping the DNA of innocent people on a criminal register amounted to discrimination and a breach of the "right to respect for private life" under article eight of the Human Rights Convention.
Michael Marper, 45, was arrested in March 2001 and charged with harassing his partner, but the case was dropped three months later after the two were reconciled. He had no previous convictions. In a separate case, a 19-year-old named in court only as "S" was arrested and charged with attempted robbery in January 2001 when he was 12, but he was cleared five months later.
The men, both from Sheffield, asked for their samples to be destroyed but South Yorkshire Police refused, saying the details would be retained "to aid criminal investigation". The two men were awarded a total of £36,500 in costs but no cash damages.
Shadow home secretary Dominic Grieve said: "This vindicates all that we have been saying about the Government's wrong-headed approach to this issue, which has caused so much resentment amongst the law-abiding majority and done so much to undermine confidence in the criminal justice system."
Reader views (18)
I have known two people who recently had their dna taken without committing any offence. One was arrested for breaking a plate in someones house and accused and arrested for criminal damage. This kept three police in the station drinking coffee all day and filling in a few forms. After being locked in a cell for the day she was released (obviously without charge)and her dna taken. The police must have known the CPS would never prosecute this ridiculous allegation so why go through with the charade? Its either to take dna off as many people as possible or to have an easy day. For those who say "if youve done nothing wrong, theres nothing to worry about" try telling that to Barry George who was convicted with absolutely no evidence. If you happen to be at the scene of where a crime has been or will be committed how do you prove your innocence if you have no witnesses to say you werent there? Taking dna off innocent people is an infringement of human rights, however there are no longer any rights left. Taking the dna of innocent people off this register is at least a start.
- Mark Windows, london uk
Innocence is no protection against over-zealous, lazy or downright thick police officers.
Read the story of a bloke who was wrongly arrested for criminal damage (someone else subsequently put their hands up for the crime). Later, he was arrested as a suspect in a stolen mail investigation as his fingerprints were all over some recovered envelopes.
He was pressured to accept a caution and sort the matter out quickly.
He refused the caution as his fingerprints had been found on Christmas cards that he had posted to his own family some time previously!
Whilever the public are at risk from this kind of weapons-grade idiocy (i.e. forever and a day), I think that the remit of theDNA and fingerprint databases should be as narrow as practicably possible.
No innocent retention is a good start.
- Bob Ginger, Manchester, England
I'm one of the Nutters who wouldn't want my DNA on anyone's database.
1. Look at how rubbish the British Government is at maintaining the confidentiality of its existing databases.
2. Look at how many cases of identity theft there are in the UK.
3. Anyone who has worked with ANY kind of computer inventory will know how easy it is to get items muddled up - the integrity of the database is only as good as the people maintaining it.
4. Look at how the Police have just behaved in arresting an MP: they held him without charge whilst they went through his properties - without any independent third party overseeing them - to LOOK for 'evidence' so they could charge him. It is one small step away from planting evidence.
5. Relying on a DNA database means the Police will slacken their efforts in other areas of policework: the fact is, DNA can be at the scene of a crime for any number of reasons, from being there innocently, from cross-contamination, from being planted - the Police should still be doing a thorough 'old fashioned' investigation as well.
6. In the 1930s Germany tasked one of today's well-known computer companies with the creation of a national database of everyone's ethnicity: it was used by the State a few years later to select victims for Genocide.
7. We have no idea what technological advances, cultural changes or horrors the future may hold: we should safeguard against potential abuses.
My thoughts . . . Nutter that I am!
- Roz, Chamonix, France
To those who say they wouldn't be worried if their DNA was held and have nothing to worry about.
What happens when your DNA is mixed up or labeled as somebody else. Then a crime is commit a crime and the DNA matches with your name. You are arrested and go to court protesting your innocence. Then the court says that the DNA is yours and there is a one in a bilion chance that it is someone elses. How do you prove that?. Thats what you should be worried about.
- Brian, London
Im innocent and th epolice has my finger prints. and so what??? who cares?? if i ever do anything wrong in the future i will deserve to be punished.. ifi kill someone i will be caught.. and should be.. shouldnt i??
those who disagree needs to be victim of crime before they really knows how it feel to be a victim and the aggressor never caught because of no dna or weak evidence
- Paul, Manchester
It is a nonsense that Smith has until March to respond to a very clear judgement.Sadly one can wager that this arrogant overpromoted harridan will drag out her decision for the full time confirming views that she is a dangerouus control freak.of course she was appointed by Gordon Brown,the prime bully/minister.
- P.Doff, filey uk
The "right way" for police to use DNA is surely for them to request that a suspect provides a DNA sample to prove his innocence. If he does, and if it does eliminate him from their enquiries, then justice requires that the sample should be destroyed. Only convicted felons should have their DNA retained.
It's an utter disgrace that our government thinks otherwise. One effect of keeping the DNA of innocent people is that many, including myself, might refuse to offer a sample, for fear of what might be done in the future. Sell it or leak it to insurance companies, for example, if medicine advances to the point where DNA yields accurate prediction of life expectancy. Or allow someone to discover that your father is not your father, and blackmail him. Or even allow a future state to take pre-emptive action against those with real or imagined "violence genes".
Promise it won't happen? German Jews received similar promises in the 1890s when they were asked their religion. Believing the promises doomed them and their children forty years later. The Gestapo had all the records. Your DNA on record could do the same for you or your children.
- Nigel, London
If you are innocent what do you have to worry about someone holding your DNA?
That is just about what every totalitarian regime ever has relied upon... When Mr plod is arresting an MP in the house,
because he exposed a lying Government. We should all be very worried.
Things have changed since New Lab, in case you didn't notice. This is no longer the fair, genteel place it once was. Sorry old boy.
- Fredflintstone, little rock
Thank goodness for the European Court of Human Rights. The plethora of muddled-headed oppressive rules in the UK need to be trimmed. Most British citizens seem to be sleep walking into a society where draconian rules can be applied at the expense of our rights.
Those who wish to stop this drift need to stand up and be counted now before it is too late.
- Charles Lucy, London UK
I don't get this... they can have my DNA - I don't care, I'm not a criminal, I have nothing to worry about. I'm sure it would help the fight against crime quite a lot. I hate all these human rights nutters, its because of them criminals laugh at the justice system.
- Mc, London
No Jacqui Smith and Gordon Brown .... Spend our money wisely and reduce crime that way. How about working toward a fair and just society?
- Mark Johnston, Sheffield, UK
It is possible to prevent the police from taking your DNA etc when you are falsely charges. It happened to me. Simply tell them that, since you are innocent, under no circumstances do you intend allowing them to do it.
- Keith Price, Luton, England
The "if you are innocent" argument doesn't hold up here. Our Govt. is on the borders between hostile and benign. I wouldn't put it past them to fit people up for political gain. Ideally all our DNA should be on a database.
This would improve crime detection rates considerably. Unfortunately our Police and elected officials have no credibility so this would not be accepted by the public.
- Adam, Harrow, UK
Fingerprinting has been shown to not always be foolproof, and DNA is widely understood (in the Scientific community at least) to be very hit-and-miss indeed. The overruled policy has not "done so much to undermine confidence in the criminal justice system", but has made a mockery of the "innocent until proven guilty" principle it's founded on. I sincerely hope Jaqui Smith learns her lesson and stops pursuing such invasive counter- crime and terrorism measures.
- Bob B, Warrington
Great news! I work for the Home Office and im disgusted by the ignorance of senior staff. Common sense and empathy have been eroded. Government is created by people and its purpose is to serve them, instead it is run by an incompetent and power/money hungry hoarde.
- Eljefe, London
another blow to the future Police state! Yes!
- Yoof, london
I cant believe this, this is idiotic. If you are innocent what do you have to worry about someone holding your DNA? Just goes to show that there is no justice in this country.
- Nicholas, Cardiff, UK
I wonder if they will be returning the Shadow Forign Ministers DNA?
Course they will - its one law for them and one for the rest of us!
- George, Bexleyheath UK
