tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3875365454966245098.post2419230207939927436..comments2023-06-11T13:12:20.435+01:00Comments on The Anger of a Quiet Man: The guilt of the innocent.Quiet_Manhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09575652127079681825noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3875365454966245098.post-2993358745544674022009-11-11T22:09:20.187+00:002009-11-11T22:09:20.187+00:00If I give my fingerprints to eliminate me from an ...If I give my fingerprints to eliminate me from an inquiry, I would expect them to be destroyed immediately after I have been eliminated (from the enquiry).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3875365454966245098.post-89702204188879021372009-11-11T21:06:30.402+00:002009-11-11T21:06:30.402+00:00Perhaps they're constructing a new Boris?Perhaps they're constructing a new Boris?James Highamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14525082702330365464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3875365454966245098.post-48737013172134569992009-11-11T20:22:09.691+00:002009-11-11T20:22:09.691+00:00Whilst I can see the point on a technicality, the ...Whilst I can see the point on a technicality, the law does have to be equal for all. One way around this would be for the Crown Prosecution Service to request that the DNA be kept for 6 months during further investigations, this would then put the onus onto a judge. If no new evidence comes to light then it's destroyed.<br />Even then we're partially into double jeopardy territory.Quiet_Manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09575652127079681825noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3875365454966245098.post-33289527622420562772009-11-11T20:21:59.345+00:002009-11-11T20:21:59.345+00:00No-one should be permitted to store a person's...No-one should be permitted to store a person's DNA without that person's specific and freely-given permission. DNA is not like a physical fingerprint: it is the biological blueprint of a person's physical identity. If your DNA goes 'astray', as it will, it may end up in the hands of people who will use it for means you would never agree to. They could even clone you, just as soon as they can do that reliably.<br /><br />Without DNA 'evidence', it may well be more difficult for the Police to 'tackle crime', as they like to describe it. That's just fucking tough. Thay simply cannot be trusted with DNA. Not with anyone's, terrorist or not.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3875365454966245098.post-10291071870089755522009-11-11T20:01:46.274+00:002009-11-11T20:01:46.274+00:00I agree that the DNA should be removed from the re...I agree that the DNA should be removed from the records with immediate effect once someone arrested is released without charge or not convicted — although there might be case for exemptions for serious crimes where someone was let off merely on a technicality or loophole. That's one to ponder.<br /><br />This is something to press an incoming government on, once they've got their feet under the desks and have done all the immediate stuff — probably just a month or two in. If there has been no announcement or action on this by then, it'll be time to start pestering them on it.John M Wardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06251285057595626917noreply@blogger.com