1 / 8

Taking bioinformation

Criminal investigation and trial Dr Carole McCartney Project Manager and Lecturer in Law, University of Leeds. Taking bioinformation. Police can take bioinformation without consent from people arrested for recordable offences Our view:

whittl
Download Presentation

Taking bioinformation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Criminal investigation and trialDr Carole McCartneyProject Manager and Lecturer in Law, University of Leeds

  2. Taking bioinformation • Police can take bioinformation without consentfrom people arrested for recordable offences • Our view: • this is proportionate to the aim of detecting and prosecuting crime • but the distinction between recordable and non-recordable offences is arbitrary and list should be reviewed

  3. Taking bioinformation II • Government is consulting on proposals to allow police to take bioinformation without consent from people arrested for ‘non-recordable’ offences • Our view: • this is disproportionate to the aims of identifying a person and confirming whether or not a person was at a crime scene

  4. Retaining bioinformation • Currently, police can retain indefinitely bioinformation from people arrested for recordable offences in England and Wales • Government consulting on proposals to allow retention from all arrestees • Our view: • bioinformation should only be retained indefinitely for people convicted of a recordable offence, in line with Scotland • Exceptions for serious violent or sexual offenders

  5. An alternative focus… We recommend: • Higher priority given to crime scene analysis • Crime scene samples should be retained indefinitely • More research on contribution of bioinformation to criminal justice • Better collection of statistics on forensic uses of bioinformation

  6. The DNA Database: further recommendations • Volunteers: should be able to remove DNA without giving reason • Ethnic minorities: we welcome equality impact assessment • Minors: should be a presumption in favour of removing children’s DNA from the Database unless there is a good reason not to

  7. Population-wide DNA database? • We are against a population-wide forensic DNA database: • hugely expensive • difficult to maintain • increased risk of function creep • unlikely to have much impact on public safety • ‘potential offenders’ rather than ‘citizens’ • The intrusion of privacy incurred would not be outweighed by benefits to society

  8. Trial We recommend: • disclosure of all DNA and fingerprint evidence to all parties in pre-trial stages • clarification that fingerprint specialists are giving expert judgment • minimum understanding of statistics for legal professionals • information about capabilities and limitations of DNA evidence provided to members of the jury

More Related