1,500 children have DNA taken by police (From York Press)
Get in touch: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting YORK to 80360 or send an email»
1,500 children have DNA taken by North Yorkshire Police
9:30am Thursday 8th November 2012 in News
By Jennifer Bell, jennifer.bell@thepress.co.uk
MORE than 1,500 children as young as ten have had their DNA swabbed by North Yorkshire Police in the past two years, even if they are not charged with any offence.
Human rights campaigners called the practice “illiberal” and “cruel”, said it conditioned youngsters to think breaches of privacy were normal and said it presumed they would go on to live a life of crime.
Last year, samples were taken from 497 boys and 184 girls aged ten to 17, while in 2010 582 boys and 269 girls were swabbed, according to figures revealed under the Freedom of Information Act.
Not all police forces take DNA samples from suspects of crimes, but under Home Office guidelines they can legally take them from anyone over the age of criminal responsibility, which is currently ten years old.
Of the 1532 swab samples taken from children in North Yorkshire in 2010 and 2011, 21 were taken from ten-year-olds, 36 from 11-year-olds, 84 from 12-year-olds, 162 from 13-year-olds, 254 from 14-year-olds, 290 from 15-year-olds, 299 from 16-year-olds and 406 from 17-year-olds.
A spokesman for North Yorkshire Police said: “DNA is a very important and successful tool used in the detection of crimes, some of which have been solved years after they were committed.
“DNA is stored in accordance with Home Office guidelines to help solve crimes and bring offenders to justice.”
But Gus Hosein, of Privacy International, said: “The rationale behind collecting and retaining a person’s DNA depends on two alternative presumptions: either the DNA will help solve a “cold” criminal case, or that person is likely to commit a crime in the future.
“Since ten-year-old children don't tend to have lengthy criminal histories, the former presumption will rarely apply.
“As for the latter, it seems illiberal – if not downright cruel – to presuppose that youngsters who find themselves in trouble with the police before even reaching adolescence will develop into hardened criminals as adults.
“DNA collection and retention is a significant breach of privacy that should be deployed when necessary, not by default. If today’s children come to think of it as commonplace, we should prepare ourselves for a future of invasive policing and repressive government.”
Police are allowed, but not legally required, to take DNA from mouth swabs, hair or blood samples regardless of whether that person is charged with an offence.
Previously they were allowed to keep the DNA profile and fingerprints even if a case is dropped – until the suspect reached 100 years old, but the Protection of Freedoms Bill, introduced earlier this year, requires the automatic deletion of innocent people’s records from the DNA and fingerprint databases, and the destruction of all DNA samples.
The person's records still remain on the Police National Database (PND). Currently, the Bill does not require these records to be deleted if a person is innocent: they will all be kept to age 100.
Of the 1532 children’s samples taken, the vast majority – 1486 – were taken from white North European nationalities.
Comments(15)
Gary Gilmores Eyes
says...
10:20am Thu 8 Nov 12
Except that most police forces are refusing to do this!
An breaking the law into the bargin.
The big Brother State of the UK is here and now not in the future.
Wait until the new communications bill comes in! even worse.
We are all criminals in the eyes of the state, it's just that we have not committed a crime.... yet.
The state has got too big for its people.
ian923
says...
11:14am Thu 8 Nov 12
York1900
says...
11:50am Thu 8 Nov 12
The only problem I can see is if they go on to commit more crimes up to18 and over
we are getting to tide up in rights for those who commit crimes wether they are adult or a child
some of these crimes are not even put forward to court for children because it serves no purpose to do so but the police keep the record as the punishment for the child to keep it's noise clean to 18
this is more of a deterrent than putting every child in front of the courts
.
Gary Gilmores Eyes
says...
12:02pm Thu 8 Nov 12
11:50am Thu 8 Nov 12
most minor records of under 18 year olds deleted at 18'
That is not the case.
All the information is retained on the PNC despite the offences being spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act.
So not really wiped clean at all. This issue will keep many people from visiting the USA in the future.
Gary Gilmores Eyes
says...
12:02pm Thu 8 Nov 12
11:50am Thu 8 Nov 12
most minor records of under 18 year olds deleted at 18'
That is not the case.
All the information is retained on the PNC despite the offences being spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act.
So not really wiped clean at all. This issue will keep many people from visiting the USA in the future.
Pete the Brickie
says...
12:04pm Thu 8 Nov 12
ExPatBob
says...
1:56pm Thu 8 Nov 12
lowbeam
says...
2:25pm Thu 8 Nov 12
ian923 wrote:I totaly agree with you,and before some one get's all high and mighty,in my youth i was a bit of a bad lad and have seen both sides
The simple answer to not having your DNA taken is to not commit offences.
RooBeck
says...
3:34pm Thu 8 Nov 12
turkey kid
says...
3:47pm Thu 8 Nov 12
lowbeam
says...
5:42pm Thu 8 Nov 12
I do not include you in that general saying pete,you are ,like me..grass roots
baldiebiker
says...
9:30pm Thu 8 Nov 12
Big Nic
says...
3:33am Fri 9 Nov 12
If a child, and by child it will be aged 10 and over, commits an offence that it is both necessary and proportionate to arrest them they have their DNA taken by means of a cotton bud wiped inside their cheek. How exactly is this 'cruel'??
If that child goes on to commit further offences it will be useful to have their DNA, if they don't what harm is it doing them??
Remember that DNA can help prove your innocence equally as much as your guilt.
Von_Dutch
says...
11:22am Fri 9 Nov 12
Older Sometimes Wiser says...
10:14am Thu 8 Nov 12
If we wish to avoid a police state there has to be better democratic control of what the Police can do. An assumption of potential guilt, which this infers, without a conviction is one step too far!