ACPO disagrees with Home Office to extend DNA collection

This move by the ACPO shows a good degree of common sense whilst maintaining the view of the effectiveness of the DNA register for those crimes that warrant such use.

The Home Office proposals for extending the taking of DNA are considered by most to be extreme, ill thought out and overall in line with their current draconian policies which show little regard to the views or liberties of the public.

At the moment anyone picked up for a non-recordable offence cannot have a sample
taken without their consent to confirm or disprove their involvement in
that offence, or to create a record in a national searchable database.

722,464 profiles were entered onto the database in 2006/07, thats one entry every 45 seconds.

Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman
Nick Clegg, said: “The Government's onward march towards a
surveillance state has now become a headlong rush. “They seem determined to hoover up the DNA details of as many people as they can, regardless of guilt or innocence.

Tony Lake, ACPO lead on Forensics, Chair of the National DNA Database and Chief Constable of Lincolnshire Police said:

“ACPO
has real concerns about the proposals to extend the taking of DNA and
fingerprints for non-recordable offences such as speeding or dropping
litter. ACPO maintains the position that any proposal to take DNA or
fingerprints has to be reasonable and proportionate to the crime.

“The
use of the Intelligence database (using DNA or fingerprints) continues
to help resolve a substantial number of crimes by either detecting
those responsible or eliminating people from police enquiries. It is
important to remember that DNA is only one part of the investigation
and that prosecutions are brought based on other evidence such as
witness statements, CCTV footage etc.”
(source)

The view/statement from the Libertarian Alliance.

NuLab – Destroying Britain from the inside out.

Advertisements

About IanPJ

Ian Parker-Joseph, former Leader of the Libertarian Party UK, who currently heads PDPS Internet Hosting and the Personal Deed Poll Services company, has been an IT industry professional for over 20 years, providing Business Consulting, Programme and Project Management, specialising in the recovery of Projects that have failed in a process driven world. Ian’s experience is not limited to the UK, and he has successfully delivered projects in the Middle East, Africa, US, Russia, Poland, France and Germany. Working within different cultures, Ian has occupied high profile roles within multi-nationals such as Nortel and Cable & Wireless. These experiences have given Ian an excellent insight into world events, and the way that they can shape our own national future. His extensive overseas experiences have made him all too aware of how the UK interacts with its near neighbours, its place in the Commonwealth, and how our nation fits into the wider world. He is determined to rebuild many of the friendships and commercial relationships with other nations that have been sadly neglected over the years, and would like to see greater energy and food security in these countries, for the benefit of all. Ian is a vocal advocate of small government, individual freedom, low taxation and a minimum of regulation. Ian believes deeply and passionately in freedom and independence in all areas of life, and is now bringing his professional experiences to bear in the world of politics.
This entry was posted in Main Page. Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to ACPO disagrees with Home Office to extend DNA collection

  1. Anonymous says:

    Perhaps I am too jaundiced in my old age, but I don't think for one moment that the ACPO has received an infusion of conscience. Maybe they have realised that the political calculations are too far adrift for them to con the public into it yet. More likely in my opinion is the idea of the “good cop, bad cop” routine so beloved of Kojak and other of the same vintage. Lets enjoy it while it lasts, because they will be back for it later, just like the 90 day internment because you looked the wrong way at a police officer (sorry, because he had a real belief that you were about to perform an act preparatory to terrorism, etc).