In case you weren't bored of police related threads...

[Steve]

Saw this on Slashdot this morning:

In 2008 I invited two policemen into my home and voluntarily gave them a DNA and fingerprint sample to help with a murder investigation, as they'd promised it would only be used for that investigation. I was never under any suspicion and could just as easily have said no. Almost a year after the investigation closed they have now confirmed that they've retained my samples and at my request have begun an investigation to see if there are sufficient 'exceptional circumstances' to remove them. I'm not the only one who was told samples would be removed, so if you've had such a promise from the police I recommend contacting their data protection registrar immediately.

http://www.circulartriangle.com/blog/?p=41

Sounds like the officers promised something they were in no position to do so, but with DNA not half as reliable as they make out in CSI, it really does concern me when this sort of thing happens.

[TheAnimus]

The problem with this is that its likely they would give me a trail by jury.

12 average people.... Average been stupid enough to play the lottery.

They are never going to understand the idea that one in million match means there are at least 65 people in the UK alone.

[finlay666]

Isn't that a massive breach of the Data Protection Act?

Personal information may be kept for no longer than is necessary and must be kept up to date.

Well it's clearly no longer needed so should be destroyed.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts1998...en_5#pt4-l1g36

Nothing stating that the fuzz can keep it for longer than required. IANAL but I would contact the police on the matter, breaches of the DPA are quite serious.

[TheAnimus]

I think that europe has already said the DNA database is illegal, and Harriet Harman (who is a long standing winner of my prestigious c*** of the year award.) basically said that we're willing to ignore EU law on something that infringes on the rights and principles of our citizens, meanwhile all the insainity of the CAP is just fine and dandy.

way to take a stand.

I would never vote labour whilst they have any of these dicks in office.
(independants go!)

[santa claus]

Giving DNA and fingerprints is not an assistance I would voluntarily give when not under suspicion. The record should be removed from the database immediately. Sadly though, I suspect that once it's there, it will stay there or stay 'somewhere'.

[Saracen]

T...

They are never going to understand the idea that one in million match means there are at least 65 people in the UK alone.

More like 61 (according to the latest ONS population estimate stats, which has UK population at a tad under 61 million .... at mid 2007. And the latest bulletin (Oct 2009) projects population hitting 65m in 2018-2023.

But I take your point, and agree with it.

[Steve]

Saracen, we need fingerprints and DNA to rule you out in our investigations into rampant pedantry. Up for it?

[Saracen]

Giving DNA and fingerprints is not an assistance I would voluntarily give when not under suspicion. The record should be removed from the database immediately. Sadly though, I suspect that once it's there, it will stay there or stay 'somewhere'.

Me neither, as I said in a previous discussion on police ..... erm .... "information gathering".

But I would have until relatively recently, by which I mean the last few years.

I've watched programs where DNA sweeps have been used to try to identify offenders, and I've often thought "why not". But the way the state now intends to use DNA now tells me why not.

Seen this?

Medical records of relatives to be accessed by police where they've refused to give DNA? If true, the result is that you can't even allow your doctor to do a blood test without the state using it for DNA purposes because a relative is suspected! Talk about the arrogance of power.

Again, if true no flaming wonder it's a "secret" document.

This gives me a real problem come the election. One half of me is tempted to vote Labour so that the muppet that's responsible for much of our current economic woes can be in power when the pain we're going to suffer (safely after the election) hits home, and can therefore firmly get the blame. The other half wants this bunch of idiots out tomorrow, or earlier ... and just wished I had more confidence in the ones we'll get instead. I can't help but feel we're screwed either way.

But, back on topic .... this government seems to be responsible for one erosion of our civil liberties after an other, from the CCTV all over the place and excessive anti-terrorist powers to the national ID and DNA databases and the lengthy detention powers they wanted, and didn't get. And that's just the bits we know about.

[Saracen]

Saracen, we need fingerprints and DNA to rule you out in our investigations into rampant pedantry. Up for it?

Try to get my DNA and you'll likely to end up collecting a sample from my fist on your nose.

Up for it?

And will a fistprint do?

[Steve]

Try to get my DNA and you'll likely to end up collecting a sample from my fist on your nose.

Up for it?

And will a fistprint do?

Totally!

But more importantly... they're going to acquire samples from relatives, without the consent of said relatives? Good grief!

[JPreston]

We’d all like to help the police to do their job well. They, in turn, would like to have a massive database with DNA profiles from everyone who has been arrested, but not convicted of a crime.

http://www.badscience.net/2009/07/is-this-a-joke/

In 2008, it was completely routine for police to retain such information when 'collected for the purposes of elimination' and when the officer - correction; "armed govt employee", not like they actually hold an officer's commission or anything - promised this individual that his DNA profile and fingerprints would be deleted he was lying. They weren't deleting anyone. They had never deleted anyone. They barely have since.

It's not so important whether he lied knowingly, or witlessly. He and other uniformed clowns will have told other innocent people the same lie that day, perhaps 100s of them, misleading them into voluntarily including themselves in the police and Home Office's pet surveillance project without them ever being under suspicion. The only 'justification' offered for this massively-intrusive taxpayer-funded abuse of civil liberties is a shrug from the police and the statement "Who knows what future crimes this temporarily innocent person will commit?".

It's now 2010 and after both a European Court ruling and public consultation, both demanding that the records of people voluntarily providing samples are only used for the purpose they were provided and then deleted, they still to this day aren't complying with this.

There is absolutely nothing unusual about the case referred to in the OP. It is just one more example of the police lying to and intimidating the public for no reason except to one day reduce the onerous investigative aspect of their job to nothing more than looking up the database and locking up whoever is unlucky enough to match their forensic sample, solely under that woefully inadequate 'conclusive' evidence and whatever other circumstantial evidence falls into their lap.

So the other day it was an illegal search of a private residence conducted on the personal whim of individual police, and now it's their theft through deception of the most intimate personal information that a person can have. I don't know if there is any length to which the average person will not go to avoid risk being considered 'uncooperative', but sadly for many educating oneself and standing up for one's rights is beyond the pale. Still, if you've got nothing to hide....

[TheAnimus]

More like 61 (according to the latest ONS population estimate stats, which has UK population at a tad under 61 million .... at mid 2007. And the latest bulletin (Oct 2009) projects population hitting 65m in 2018-2023.

But I take your point, and agree with it.

I was obviously adding 4 to coup with the number of visitors

I think 4M must flow through our ports in a year?

[Saracen]

I was obviously adding 4 to coup with the number of visitors

I think 4M must flow through our ports in a year?

I was really expecting a comment comparing the "official" population to the actual population, seeing as apparently nobody, including the government, actually knows who came in and who left over a good number of years, and even that doesn't cover back-of-lorry visitors.

Your 65m may be right .... or an underestimate. I think you missed an open goal there, Animus.

[TheAnimus]

I think when i get my 75th owned by saracen post it should come with a price.

[format]

My old neighbour/friend went to give complain/give a statement that he'd been assaulted on a night out. They took his fingerprints and a DNA sample then advised against taking further action regarding the assault.

[santa claus]

Seen this?

Not good.

This gives me a real problem come the election. One half of me is tempted to vote Labour so that the muppet that's responsible for much of our current economic woes can be in power when the pain we're going to suffer (safely after the election) hits home, and can therefore firmly get the blame. The other half wants this bunch of idiots out tomorrow, or earlier ... and just wished I had more confidence in the ones we'll get instead. I can't help but feel we're screwed either way.

Labour will win because even after all this time the opposition are failing to capitalise on the weaker side of the Government's performance. It doesn't help that all the opposition is thoroughly weak all the way from top to bottom.

George Osbourne complained on Andrew Marr's programme that Andrew never asked Labour Ministers the questions he found tricky to answer. I mean, he'll be telling his mummy next about the Big Bad Media people. Andrew is back on top form btw.