Dna Database Breaches Human Rights

[Albert Tatlock]

To clarify the local position:

 

Police Scientific Support Manager, Graham Bell, says Manx legislation in this area has always been out of sync with most of the UK.

 

He explains what happens when evidence is gathered here...

 

"If someone is arrested the DNA sample is taken by a mouth swab. That's sent away to a forensic service provider in the UK who get a DNA profile from it. That's then speculatively searched on the DNA database. In the UK presently, if the person is released with no charge or not convicted of the offence then that DNA is retained on the database. In our case, the person's DNA is removed from the database and the actual swabs are returned to us and we then destroy them."

source

The way you could read that with that sort of wooly wording, suggests to me that it is entirely feasible that our data is still retained on the UK database following the 'speculative search' of the (UK database?) - even if 'destroyed' here and taken off the database here on being proven innocent.

[The Old Git]

Why is this good news? As far as I'm concerned, if my DNA was stored on a database, surely it would assist in the clearing me of any crimes I may be suspected of.

 

If everyone's DNA was stored, surely this would help with catching criminals?

 

It's like people complaining about CCTV cameras infringing on their bloody liberties. If you've done nothing wrong, what are you so bothered about?

 

I've mixed feeling about the pros and cons of the database, especially where innocent people are on it

 

However, in regards to the above quote, in these days of identity theft I'd be slightly worried about the possibility of a suspected criminal giving their DNA but stolen identity details. You'd then have the possibility of some innocent person being charged and possibly convicted in the future because DNA can't possibly be wrong, can it?

[Cronky]

it is entirely feasible that our data is still retained on the UK database following the 'speculative search'

Precisely so. The only possible verification that DNA has been removed fromt he UK database would be from an independent observer who actually witnessed the file being deleted from the database.

 

Liberty make the following comment:

 

“This is one of the most strongly worded judgments that Liberty has ever seen from the Court of Human Rights. That Court has used human rights principles and common sense to deliver the privacy protection of innocent people that the British Government has shamefully failed to deliver.”

 

And the Judgement included the following comment:

 

And the The Court was struck by the blanket and indiscriminate nature of the power of retention in England and Wales. In particular, the data in question could be retained irrespective of the nature or gravity of the offence with which the individual was originally suspected or of the age of the suspected offender; the retention was not time-limited; and there existed only limited possibilities for an acquitted individual to have the data removed from the nationwide database or to have the materials destroyed.

 

With this ruling we have the core arguments with which to build the case for return of many of the civil liberties that New Labour stole from the British people. It will be a long slog but it's a start.

[WTF]

If their is already existing evidence and the police wish to confirm or deny that someone matches this evidence then create procedure to allow them to obtain the DNA. But if the people so checked are found to be unconnected with the crime I do not think that this information should be kept, just in case, for a hypothetical future case.

 

if DNA is kept of suspected crooks who have had there collar felt, it will be easier to identify them should their 'known' DNA ever turn up again. if all the police have is a DNA sample after SOCO have hoovered the place a database of known likely lads that have so far got away with it would be a good place to look after the 'convicted' database throws up empty. after all the police are allowed to issue cctv or photo's of people they would like to talk to, and they could be innocent too. it's not like the database is in the public domain. and as it stands, how many crooks have been caught courtesy of the DNA database that have no 'conviction'?? has keeping the records of ( we'll say innocent, but unconvicted would be more apt ) ever kicked someone up when the police had no idea of who they were after for something?

 

as to the state being our servant ( who ever came out with that ) it is no use a servant with no skills or knowledge or tools at their disposal ( look at our lot ). a usefull servant would be one that had every advantage in carrying out its duty of care and protection to its citizens. tying your servants hands and feet and wondering why he's not doing his job is stupid. i personally wouldn't have a problem with my fingerprints and DNA being kept on record. it is far more likely to prove my innocence than guilt without me having to answer any questions from the police and have my time wasted.

[ans]

Ans - why do you think the police need search warrants? From what you say I'm guess you don't see much difference between the police asking to search your house and asking for a DNA sample - everyone should just be happy to let them do this, apart from the guilty.

 

Course there's a difference.

 

I have my privacy and I have private things in my home. My DNA? I'd post it in this thread if I could copy and paste it. People are wailing left and right about their loss of liberties. Someone call them a fucking Waaaaaambulance. They need to look closely about what it is their actually worried about, rather than just trying to be anti establishment because they think it makes them edgy.

[Tugger]

That's right, Ans, the only reason anyone here doesn't want their DNA retained by the police, on the basis that they've committed the heinous crime of being - gasp! - wrongly arrested, is so that they can appear edgy. I mean, fuck, what other concerns could anyone have about their personal data being kept by the police, or indeed any executive branch of government. It's not like they could lose it, or misuse it, or anything.

 

You're a tit. Seriously, go and hand over your DNA to the police now. You have no business telling me whether I have to

[Amadeus]

Ans - why do you think the police need search warrants? From what you say I'm guess you don't see much difference between the police asking to search your house and asking for a DNA sample - everyone should just be happy to let them do this, apart from the guilty.

 

Course there's a difference.

 

I have my privacy and I have private things in my home. My DNA? I'd post it in this thread if I could copy and paste it. People are wailing left and right about their loss of liberties. Someone call them a fucking Waaaaaambulance. They need to look closely about what it is their actually worried about, rather than just trying to be anti establishment because they think it makes them edgy.

I can see where you're coming from, but the UK has moved towards police state at a scary pace in recent times. This has nothing to do with wanting to be "edgy". The UK already has the highest prison population in Europe, highest number of cctv systems probably anywhere in the world, and the place is still a mess.

 

Another example is ANPR, the automatic number plate cams the British fuzz is so proudly showing off at every occasion. The old bill in ze heimatland saw that and decided they want them, too - only for the highest court in the land to say No Way - infringes privacy rights. The police have no right to nillywilly scan all cars in the hope of finding one that's dodgy - it fundamentally goes against "innocent until proven guilty".

 

And let's not forget that we can really trust any government with all sorts of data. They would never make mistakes, lose some of it, or get false results - no, never...

[Lost Login]

If an official has on record my name, address, picture, finger prints, DNA etc I could not realy be bothered. Maybe I am wrong not to be concerned but it does not effect me in the least on a day to day basis and to be honest whether or not such information is held it would make absolutely no difference to me.

 

There are many human rights and civil rights issues that I am concerned about but this is not one as I struggle to see how it could be abused

[ans]

It's not like they could lose it, or misuse it, or anything.

 

That's the point. What exactly do you think they're going to do with it? If you had my DNA profile on a CD right now, tell me one thing you could do with it that would bother me.

 

Seriously, go and hand over your DNA to the police now

 

They already have it.

[Tugger]

In that case, as someone who has clearly already been arrested for something, I don't see how you should have any say in what happens to me, as I haven't. I am not a criminal

[Chinahand]

Another example is ANPR, the automatic number plate cams the British fuzz is so proudly showing off at every occasion. The old bill in ze heimatland saw that and decided they want them, too - only for the highest court in the land to say No Way - infringes privacy rights. The police have no right to nillywilly scan all cars in the hope of finding one that's dodgy - it fundamentally goes against "innocent until proven guilty".

 

And let's not forget that we can really trust any government with all sorts of data. They would never make mistakes, lose some of it, or get false results - no, never...

I think there is a big difference between using technology to help process publicly displayed information such as number plates and maintaining databases on the general public in the hope that they may in the future commit a crime.

 

I know which activity is closer to the Stasi and I want to keep as far away from Stasiland as possible.

[ans]

In that case, as someone who has clearly already been arrested for something, I don't see how you should have any say in what happens to me, as I haven't. I am not a criminal

 

I didn't say I was a criminal. You're making assumptions.

 

You also didn't answer my question. Probably because you don't have one. All this bluster and no substance. Disappointing.

[Albert Tatlock]

That's the point. What exactly do you think they're going to do with it? If you had my DNA profile on a CD right now, tell me one thing you could do with it that would bother me.

Your car and life insurance rates double, because from leaked/lost/traded DNA data, word get's around that you have a predisposition to not concentrate or think things through properly and therefore have a higher chance of hurting youself and claiming.

 

Your employer makes you redundant, because the traded DNA data made available at unregulated-nolaw-sodoff-data.gon leads him to believe you have a predisposition for a condition which may lead to you taking time off in the future.

 

Plus numerous options for officials that don't like you to frame you.

 

Etc.

[ans]

I guess that's the difference eh? Some of us live in the real world, the rest of you are on Planet Paranoia.

[jimbms]

Here you are all going on about if the DNA database is right or wrong, what I want to know is what has the National Dyslexic Assaociation done to offend you all?