DNA database of the innocent rejected by European Court.

Samples were always destroyed in Scotland

Terrific news.

It was only 15 to 20 years back that it would have been unthinkable in the first place, British justice being so stong on the " innocent until proven guilty " principle. Oh well, a small victory.

looks like we are all in agreement. The EU doing something right

:0 :0

Iwantyourmoney 04 Dec 12:05


looks like we are all in agreement. The EU doing something right


Not so fast, how have we arrived at the point where they make the final decissions?
When did we agree this?

The EU did something right but what was The House of Lords thinking?

European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) (French: Cour européenne des droits de lhomme) in Strasbourg was established under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) of 1950 to monitor compliance by Contracting Parties. The European Convention on Human Rights, or formally named Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, is one of the most important conventions adopted by the Council of Europe. All 47 member states of the Council of Europe are contracting parties of the Convention. Applications against Contracting Parties for human rights violations can be brought before the Court either by other States Parties or by individuals.

Even got me at it! No it,s not the EU.

It is all part of a devolved nation state.

We should never have got in the situation whereby our rights are dependent on other countries.

Just goes to show how bad this government is. Stalin lovers.

:( :(

will the data really be deleted from the police files,

and who will be able to check ?

Goes to show how little trust we have in this government.

:(

I don`t care much who made it. An excellent decision :)

Means the police will have to solve crimes once again, bet they have forgotten how

Hang on Chippie - is your logic then that though it is the right decision, because it came from Europe, it automatically becomes bad?

Ends justify the means do they?

Well done the EU....!

90% of the HRA has been bad for this country- sad day when Europe defends our liberties because we cannot rely on nulabour and Parliament.

sad day when Europe defends our liberties

Happy, you mean?

Big Brother just sat down.

salmon spray 04 Dec 12:34


I don`t care much who made it.


Don't complain then if one day soon you wake up to be told you are no longer British, but you are infact a European.That's what happened in the USSR and following it's collapse (and the EU will collapse one day too) blood is still been shed to this day.

Don't complain then if one day soon you wake up to be told you are no longer British, but you are infact a European

I don't need to be told that, I've felt that way for years.

It`s a long time since I did geography chippie, but I always thought that the UK was part of Europe.
Moreover The European Court is something entirely separate from the EU. We have signed up for all sorts of treaties with all sorts of nations, particularly The USA of course. I have to agree that not all of them tally with democracy, but was ever thus. Try reading about the reason we had to join in WW1. Only 3 members of the Cabinet knew that an attack by Austria on Serbia was going to involve us fairly quickly.

More nonsense from the EU supported by the usual misguided contributors on this forum.Fifty murderers would still be free without the database.

How many times do you have to be told it is NOT the EU ?

Typical ,lets be pedantic rather than adressing my point.

Your point is a crap one.

The issue is whether innocent people's DNA should be stored just in case they ever commit a crime in the future. We hold children's data, ffs.

Now without wishing to come over all EO, that's liberty at the expense of security if ever I saw it...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7765484.stm

That isn,t the report itself it,s a comment on it from a BBC writer.

I like his conclusion at the end " But the impact on solving crimes might not be as great as ministers and police officers fear" Or to say it another way, we wanted it for the sake of it.

How about the case of a woman although innocent closely matched the DNA of the murderer who was her brother but had no previous conviction.

Like surveillance cameras in town centers,if you have nothing to hide ,what,s the problem.Same with DNA imo.

epicurean.
If you say something is down to the EU, and I say ( correctly ) that it`s nothing to do with the EU, I fail to see how you have the nerve to accuse me of not addressing your point.

looks like we are all in agreement. The EU doing something right

absolutely. the problems arise when they do something wrong. then there is no higher power to rein them in.

Salmon I meant European Court ,now address my point.Doc I assume you understand that adults who commit serious crimes were once children. I repeat nothing to hide whats the problem.

epicurean 04 Dec 23:32

I repeat nothing to hide whats the problem.

Because my DNA is mine. Not the state's, or anybody else.

Shab so your DNA is so precious .Now I understand .

It is. I own it, so I have the right to say what happens to it.

Let me ask this - would you feel the same way if that same DNA database was taken by the CSA to find absent fathers? Would that be a breach of your rights? It's only right that absent fathers should be found, isn't it?

And what if that same DNA database was used to rate the amount of pension paid by the State Pension?

After all, we have all paid the same percentages, so surely somebody with a lower life expectancy should be paid more than somebody with a longer life expectancy? That would only be fair, wouldn't it?

"Of course", you will say, "that will never happen".

It can't happen, can it? After all, we do have a bill of rights, don't we?

Don't we?

Yes on the first no prob.Lost me on the second .

OK epicurean. I thought your point was anti- EU, but I gather it is in fact pro collecting DNA.
I was once arrested, incorrectly, about 30 years ago. I had my fingerprints taken, but once there was no suggestion of a charge I was assured that they had been destroyed. I think that was probably true. If the procedure you seem to want was in place not only would my fingerprints be on record so would my DNA.
You might say. Fair enough, but as I have no criminal record I can`t see what justification there is for having mine on record and not that of those who have been fortunate to escape being wrongfully arrested. So let`s have everybody`s DNA on the database.
You might say. Fair enough if it means it is easier for the police to solve crimes.
But if that is our only objective the logical conclusion is that we should all be electronically tagged. Assuming the system worked then it would be almost impossible to commit a crime without the police knowing about it. Of course it would also be impossible to do anything else without the police or anybody else they chose to share the information with, inadvertently or otherwise, knowing exactly what you were doing at any time.
If you`re happy with that then fair enough.
I hope that addresses your point.

ok heres my story

about six months ago police arrived at work saying that customer had accused myself and other staff of false imprissonment of a customer.. (customer is away with fairys btw)

statements taken etc, fingerprints and dna swabs...

case has now been dropped due to insufficent evidence...

what happens now.. due they just keep dna etc...

It won't. The if you have nothing to hide posse are far too blinkered to take anything else in. I suspect they would happily have a visual monitoring screen a la 1984 fitted in every house just in case. After all if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear. Innit.

Exactly right EO. What I fear is proving that I have nothing to hide.

Yes, it goes to follow, DNA everyone at birth, why not?

Fit ,em with barcodes at the back of their necks........


If they don,t do nowt wrong they have nothing to worry about..........

people think like this.

A rare moment I have to agree with Dr Elbow patches and "Europe" doing something good for a change.

Goring-I agree-a rare example of something good from Europe. Law of averages says if you are around long enough you will eventually do something right

i agree Noddy's

Surprised to see you have become a Europhile. You will be cheering for straight bananas and the Euro for the Uk next?

The if you have nothing to hide posse are far too blinkered to take anything else in.

Spot on EO.

I do love it when the forum comes together like this...

:)

Wrong again doc .I disagree.

I suggest we all get together to follow epicurean wherever he goes. After all if he has nothing to hide.......

Correct m8.

I suggest we all get together to follow epicurean wherever he goes. After all if he has nothing to hide.......

;)

It may be the case that without the database a small number of murders would remain unsolved, but one really does have to balance that against the massive amount of personal freedom that we as a nation forfeit if all of our DNA codes are held by the police.

Plus, it's 1.01 that some fool will leave the database on a train one day...

I am on the database like you salmon ,for a drink driving offence,but I am not paranoid about being there.

Doc you are happy to have murderers free to kill again when the science is in place to prevent that happening.Never can understand that logic.

Yes, we'll just have to agree to disagree here.

I respect your position, epicurean, but I simply don't want to live in a state where the police hold DNA details of every member of society from birth.

Fair enough doc ,but what are your personal freedoms that are being threatened by the database.

I am NOT on the DNA database epicurean, unless they are being more sneaky than we know. My one arest was 30 years ago, and as I was never charged, never mind found guilty, I presume my fingerprints were destroyed.
In those days I think it was taken for granted that was the right thing to do.

What puzzles me is that people who oppose the death penalty for people like Huntly argue that an innocent person could suffer the same fate. A reasonable stance.The same people appear to have no problem with innocent people being killed when they could be stopped,because their own personal freedoms are threatened.Illogical and inconsistent imo.

epicurean where does the control end?

Do we have CCTV in our houses?

'If we are not doing anything wrong what is the problem'?

:0 :0

Doc J, have you finally woken up to the socialist labour party?

;) ;)

All stalinist control

epicurean. I can see your point, but try this. If Hitler had had a national DNA database, you wouldn`t have to have done anything wrong to be in BIG trouble.

No sir .Just in town centers and shops.

Bizzare leap there salmon.In dictatorships like that anything is possible .

What if someone gets hold of your DNA and uses it for fraud or a crime epicurean?

Alfie ,what,s it all about , I,m worried now probably have trouble sleeping,but Ihave a feeling that somebody wanting to frame me or you would have a few easier options.

Not that bizarre. Hitler was democratically elected originally.
But if you feel that is stretching things try this. The police would be sitting on a goldmine for Insurance Companies for starters. I wouldn`t put it past this govt ( or a Tory one ) to agree to sell that info to selected parties. Even if they didn`t there would be the near-certainty of negligence and corruption. People with certain types of defective genes would become uninsurable.

Salmon ,only people that are charged with a criminal offence are on the database .I haver said everybody.

have never

Clutching at straws is becoming apparent.

Not true epicurean.

Explain m8.

Nobody can or are prepared to answer my question about the death penalty and DNA I posed earlier. Anybody.

Anybody who is arrested is currently on the database epicurean.
Your point about the death penalty is another argument altogether.

Epicurian - I oppose the death penalty full stop, not for the reason you state. I oppose it not least on the grounds that if a state carries out violent acts (and there is none more violent than to kill a human in cold blood) the members of that state become inured to violence. It has been legitimised, in their own name. Hence the state of the worst areas of the US.

So, 100% proof, and I am still against it.

So the fact that I oppose taking innocent free individuals DNA, on the grounds that it is an appalling abuse of their freedom, has no effect on my views on capital punishment.

Salmon , a recent case makes my point a woman arrested and later cleared had a very close match to a murde suspect who had no criminal record. The police took a sample from her brother ,it was an exact match murder solved. The facts are that many murderers do not stop till they are caught.This is one of many examples where their is a chance innocent people have been saved.The police have my DNA .Please tell me which of my personal freedoms are threatened.

I have already mentioned several. Are you sure you would be happy if the govt decided to sell your DNA to various companies on a commercial basis.
You thought I was going too far when I mentioned Hitler, but in the impeccably democratic Iceland this has already happened.

In that extremrly unlikely event I would have no prob good trade to save the lives of a few people.I,m puzzled why the goverment would do that.Try and do better than that m8,not too impressed so far.

I must give you credit for trying to define threats to my personal freedoms as feeble as they are. The others appear to have no idea.

The reason they would do it is that Insurance Copanies for one would pay a fortune for it. Probably not now, but if the database was more or less complete they would. The Icelandic one is because people were conned into thinking they were part of an academic exercise.

So thats the threat innocent lives should be sacrificed,confused m8.

I would like everybodys DNA to be held and linked to ID cards ,ffsk what have you lot
of wishy washy w ankers got to hide .

It would be cool if we all had trackers and personal cctv fitted, then most crime could very easily be solved and/or prevented. The trouble is 'they' would know whenever we had a p, a sh, or a w or more seriously it could be used to exert total control over us if a speaker and microphone was also added.

the idea of centralised, accurate govt databases of personal data terrifies me, not just because of their intent, but because of the sheer incompetence they have demonstrated in looking after this data securely

a single database that stored your address, your history, employment records, birth records, health records, DNA, etc etc... this would be an identity fraudsters wet dream

govts are forever losing this kind of data, the only redeeming thing at the moment is that their systems are so fragmented that only a small amount of data is likely to be lost at any one time

under the whole 'centralised database' concept, one determined hacker or dodgy insider could easily obtain enough info to impersonate, defraud, and empty the bank accounts of anyone in the country

The right to an Englishman's privacy was eroded from the time income tax was introduced in the early 1800's. It was considered an outrage at the time not for the act of taxation per se but the fatc that the you had to declare your income to the state .

unfortunately technology does erode personal freedom and privacy and databases do get lost, stolen , published and then used to invade privacy (Dr J is a good example using the BNP list to go knocking on doors)

Dr J is a good example using the BNP list to go knocking on doors

You really didn't like me doing that, did you simon?

:)

Well f*ck it - if they want to pay money into an openly racist political party, they should be held accountable, imo.

Epicurean,

If they did start a National data base on peoples DNA on the premise that if you are innocent you have nothing to hide, this is the way I would like them to do it......

The moment you are born collect the DNA off the umbilical cord, no escape, so we can all have it pushed in our faces the the state owns us, cradle to grave.

Still no awnser to my question as regards perceived threats to personal freedom. Desperate attempt to give your position credibility in your last post flat.

Mind you,on reflection not a bad idea it would make some people think twice before commiting a crime.

Desperate attempt to give my position credability? lol

The only position I took was on the start of the thread, I agreed with the judgement. Perhaps me agreeing with 13 judges giving a unanimous decision at the European Court of Human Rights has no credability......

My last post was just an illistration of where your thinking leads to.

From my experience most Judges are not in touch with reality. I believe Cherie Blair will soon become a Judge soon. Enough said.

Its credibility and illustration flat btw.

Yeah.....that,s why my Degree is Chem and not English, ok?

At the end of the day, the money spent on this database could be used elsewhere, that would improve far many more lives than any national database will ever do.

Ok m8.

Like helping the victims of crime or more likely on the perpetrators Ernie.

epicurean 09 Dec 17:45
Still no awnser to my question as regards perceived threats to personal freedom. Desperate attempt to give your position credibility in your last post flat.


did you even read my 6 Dec 22:52 post epicurean?

until the govt figures out how to keep sensitive data about the public better protected, there is no way they should be going about anything like this

Hardly an insurmountable problem sub,anything else sub or is that all.

epicurean 10 Dec 11:47
Hardly an insurmountable problem sub,anything else sub or is that all.

given this govts shocking record when it comes to protecting data, your lack of concern is baffling

The debate is about what is best for the country and the people in it.
On one hand if there was a thorough 100% DNA database of all the people in the country, there would be a DNA match for an awful lot of crimes that currently go unsolved. Crime might even be reduced as a result.
On the other hand if the state has your DNA on file, what are chances of misuse of the data either by the state or private organisations who get hold of the data as a result of carelessness or corruption? My own view is that the answer to the question is "every chance" bordering on the inevitable.
I simply would never, ever trust a government to take proper care of such data, and therefore the potential damage to people utterly out weighs any advantages by gathering and keeping it.
I can see some merit in keeping DNA of certain "innocent " people, for example people who have been strongly suspected of child sexual abuse, where the case was never proven. But apart from that I am against the keeping of DNA data for anyone who doesn't want their data kept.
For those who say "there is nothing to fear if you don't do anything wrong" I would say, well maybe you should volunteer to give the state your data, but don't force it on anyone else.
There is a lot to fear. Insurance companies could use the data to refuse health or house insurance, and in the future the data might be able to be used to fit people up for things they never did.

Ruth the insurance companies would not care if they found out you were Jack the Ripper with Aids,aslong as you pay their exorbitant premiums and fees. They would send a thank you letter and a free gift.

Did it make a difference? lol

Did it make a difference? lol

rejected by the court. but a few statutory changes and they will soon approve. all about "making" it legal.

you guys really need to understand the difference between legal and lawful.