ECHR takes dim view

MaliA · **Posted:** Thu Dec 04, 2008 11:59

Jaqui Smith, unimpressed.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7764069.stm

myp · **Posted:** Thu Dec 04, 2008 12:05

She can fuck off, frankly.

Peter St. John · **Joined:** 26th May, 2008 **Posts:** 298

What is it about the Home Secretary position that turns almost every occupant into a scary authoritarian? It's like there's an injection given at the start of your term that suddenly makes you think that ID cards and chaining pregnant women to their beds are great ideas...

DBSnappa · **Posted:** Thu Dec 04, 2008 12:10

She really is a pantomime witch isn't she. Wish she'd fuck off onto the rural stage rather than the international one

Jon · **Joined:** 2nd Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 225

DBCracker wrote:

She really is a pantomime witch isn't she. Wish she'd fuck off to Kansas

Fixed.

chinnyhill10 · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 15695

This is excellent news.

[goes and buys superglue while cackling madly]

Kern · **Posted:** Thu Dec 04, 2008 12:36

That has cheered me up no end.

No doubt the Home Office will attempt to ruin our day for us.

Dudley · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 8679

Quote:

The government claims the DNA profile from people who are not convicted may sometimes be linked to later offences, so storing the details on the database is a proportionate response to tackling crime.

So might ANYONE be linked you insufferable cu....oh shit what have I said now?

Dr Lave · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 5979

Fuck yes!

Good day!

Also: Fuck you Jacqui Smith.

DavPaz · **Joined:** 27th Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 38464

Quote:

The government claims the DNA profile from people who are not convicted may sometimes be linked to later offences, so storing the details on the database is a proportionate response to tackling crime.

Why don't they just forcibly sample us all now then, instead of waiting for us all to be arrested. or get a load of pre-cogs so they can see crime before it even happens. CONSPIRACY to commit conspiracy to commit a crime

BikNorton · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 10078

If only people didn't have to go all the way to fucking European court of human rights, what the fuck is wrong when even the High Court has drunk the Kool-Aid?

Dudley · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 8679

davprezzie wrote:

Quote:

The government claims the DNA profile from people who are not convicted may sometimes be linked to later offences, so storing the details on the database is a proportionate response to tackling crime.

Why don't they just forcibly sample us all now then, instead of waiting for us all to be arrested. or get a load of pre-cogs so they can see crime before it even happens. CONSPIRACY to commit conspiracy to commit a crime

Exactly. Arrested but not charged == innocent

There's zero reason to expect them to be implicated any more than you or me.

DavPaz · **Joined:** 27th Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 38464

so under what circumstances do they sample dna now? If I was arrested for say taking a quick pee in a dark alley (which I know a guy who was) would they take dna? If then someone I know was assaulted and my dna showed up on their clothes (possible, people do touch each other, cough, sneeze, shed skin or hair) would I be a suspect?

BikNorton · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 10078

Dudley · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 8679

davprezzie wrote:

so under what circumstances do they sample dna now? If I was arrested for say taking a quick pee in a dark alley (which I know a guy who was) would they take dna? If then someone I know was assaulted and my dna showed up on their clothes (possible, people do touch each other, cough, sneeze, shed skin or hair) would I be a suspect?

If you are arrested for ANYTHING they will take and keep a DNA sample even if you are never charged, let alone convicted.

DavPaz · **Joined:** 27th Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 38464

correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't they just arrest anyone for any old jumped up charge (slander, very hard to prove) sample them and let them go then? They might as well just make it part of the passport/driving license. I'm thinking like a home secretary now

chinnyhill10 · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 15695

davprezzie wrote:

correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't they just arrest anyone for any old jumped up charge (slander, very hard to prove) sample them and let them go then? They might as well just make it part of the passport/driving license. I'm thinking like a home secretary now

All you need now is a face like a smacked arse and you've got the job.

Dudley · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 8679

davprezzie wrote:

correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't they just arrest anyone for any old jumped up charge (slander, very hard to prove) sample them and let them go then? They might as well just make it part of the passport/driving license. I'm thinking like a home secretary now

Yes. They could.

Supergluing door locks for instance.

DavPaz · **Joined:** 27th Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 38464

davprezzie wrote:

correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't they just arrest anyone for any old jumped up charge (slander, very hard to prove) sample them and let them go then? They might as well just make it part of the passport/driving license. I'm thinking like a home secretary now

chinnyhill10 wrote:

All you need now is a face like a smacked arse and you've got the job.

Done!

Dudley wrote:

Yes. They could.
Supergluing door locks for instance.

Sounds like the voice of experience there dudley...

Dudley · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 8679

It is but not me, you're missing an in joke I'm afraid :attitude:

GovernmentYard · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 5318

First thing I thought of when hearing this on the radio was :attitude:

chinnyhill10 · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 15695

Goatboy wrote:

First thing I thought of when hearing this on the radio was :attitude:

Presumably it was Talksport. :DD

Hero of Excellence · **Joined:** 23rd Nov, 2008 **Posts:** 674

DBCracker wrote:

She really is a pantomime witch isn't she.

Worse than Blunkett or Reid Or Charles Clarke even. Lowest of the low.

BikNorton · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 10078

A BBC News piece on this last night ended with the guy saying "But think about Prostitute Murdering Trucker Guy - he was only caught because his DNA was on file from a conviction for something much more minor - WHAT IF THOSE CHARGES HAD BEEN DROPPED?!"

I nearly fucking destroyed my TV, Daily Mail sensationalism like that is not what I fucking pay my license fee for.

Then there was something nearly as enraging on the local news immediately following, and I died of The Comicals.

DavPaz · **Joined:** 27th Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 38464

I'm all for DNA being used as a matching tool, but surely it should only be used to support other evidence. On its own, DNA evidence is very circumstantial

CraigGrannell · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 1639

davprezzie wrote:

I'm all for DNA being used as a matching tool, but surely it should only be used to support other evidence. On its own, DNA evidence is very circumstantial

Plus didn't they do that report in the US that suggested the likelihood of matches is actually something like 1 in 100,000, due to the techniques used? It's cited as a definitive means of capture, but shortcomings mean it's conceivable for dozens (at the very least) in a country the size of the UK to be a 'match' in any given instance.

GazChap · **Posted:** Fri Dec 05, 2008 12:34

Yeah, DNA evidence is shockingly unreliable when you look at the potential for mismatches. But of course the media (and the police, they're just as guilty) make it sound like the be all and end all of criminal identification.

DavPaz · **Joined:** 27th Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 38464

and besides... and don't flame me if I'm the king of wrongtown here, but isn't dna between siblings almost the same?

Be Excellent To Each Other

ECHR takes dim view
of DNA database

Who is online

Be Excellent To Each Other

ECHR takes dim view of DNA database

Who is online

ECHR takes dim view
of DNA database