Are "Michael Marper, 45, and a teenager identified only as “S” " also seeking the acquittal of the two individuals recently caught, prosecuted and convicted through exactly this use of DNA samples? I mean, fair is fair, ain't it?

S. Barraclough, Huddersfield, W. Yorkshire

Hang on a second, nowadays the Police will always arrest you for an ALLEGED offence, whereupon you wil be taken to the local Police station, fingerprinted and subjected to an oral swab for your DNA. I emphasise the word "alleged" as in the past you would be simply asked to come to the station and answer a few questions. Now, even if an allegation is completely untrue/false/malicious or even petty (as in the arrest of Chris Tarrant for throwing a spoon onto a fellow diner's table because he wouldn't stop interupting Tarrant's conversation with hsi partner) you will be forced to submit your DNA. Is that fair?

James, Manchester,

This database already exists!!! Get over it!!! It's helping to catch criminals and is a good idea - i do not support a full database but keeping the DNA of criminals, or suspected criminals is just good sense! Even if they were cleared of the charges they were still suspicious enough to be suspected in the first place - why get rid of DNA that we've already collected! If these people were really innocent then why do they object so much to having their DNA on the database - it's never going to be used against them if they never commit a crime!

Gary Horlock, Crawley,

Does anyone really believe that when the government has got everyone's DNA on their database, they will just use it to solve crime by cross matching?

These guys will use it to find new uses, they will sell it to private companies (just as they sell your car registration and your detils already) and will fund research in which the database will be the primary tool.

People, we have GOT to ensure this database is NEVER created. It is the ultimate information weapon.

Edwin, Bucharest,

Relying on DNA alone, is not a full proof way to show guilt. other factors must be taken into consideration. DNA is not infallible.

Generally, DNA is 99.9% reliable. In practical terms, in a city of 1 million people, if a person commits a crime and is identified using DNA, only 1000 other people could have committed the crime.

jayjay, york, yorkshire

Here we are again, the government keeping tabs on everybody.

As others say we are all in the clear till proven guilty, this is the law of the land.

We are already being watched everywhere and recorded, why we may ask, I can tell you we are moving into a control system just like the book 1984 spoke of.

Remember the days when the police were our firends not our oppressors, the labour goverment wants to or should I say is moving towards total control of our lives in every way.

Chips under the skin next folks, just like dogs

John, wellington, UK

Dont they store a record of your DNA, not actually your DNA. There for if the whole database was stolen, you would have a records of how peoples DNA is constructed but you wouldnt be able to reproduce there DNA?

If the above is correct, im not sure what the problem is?

nathan, leicestershire,

If they win this case, it will change very little. The police will continue to arrest people for almost any made up on the spot charge and take their DNA, in order to run checks against the unsolved crime Database.

It cannot be right that innocent people are routinely treat as suspects and have their DNA checked against every crime just because they have been wrongly arrested on some trumped up charge, whilst other innocent people are not checked at all.

Scrap the DNA taken at arrest, and put it back to taken at conviction.

And change the human rights act to exclude convicted criminals

Ken Hall, Barrow in Furness, UK

To Dave, Epping

Why "I will" and not "I have already proudly submitted" ?? You could had done it already, it is voluntary and free, you know.

Ah, it is always safer to blog rather than to do.

Frank Valckx, Maastricht, Netherlands

Unfortunately, our state is completely unable to retain anything in safety.

When your DNA gets into the hands of third parties', and you are unable to get insurance / a morgage, because of a genetic condition which may well not necessarily affect you, how fair will that be?

Your DNA is yours, and private and no-one else has a right to it, unless you have broken the law - then you come under a different set of rules. If we could record thoughts - would everyone be happy to let the police have a copy of them? I'm sure millions of unsolved misdermeaners could be 'solved' - but would that make it right?

Finally, the current situation increases the likleyhood of arrest, where questioning under caution would suffice - because to take your DNA they have to arrest you. Inoccent until proven guilty - and wipe the slate (and records clean) if found innocent.

Mark Roberts, Telford, Shropshire UK

The problem with DNA evidence is that it is considered so foolproof that it effectively reverses the burden of proof so that YOU are required to prove that it WASN'[T you rather than the prosecution proving that it WAS you. The criminal fraternity have been quick to take advantage of this point by 'seeding' crime scenes with other persons' DNA. With an increasingly gung-ho police force, a DNA evidential error may lead to an extremely uncomfortable time (even a Menezes-style execution) for many people with 'nothing to hide'.

Instead of spending so much time and energy on techniques for solving crimes (techniques that will always be circumvented by those with sufficient determination) shouldn't we be looking at the conditions that cause criminality and dealing with those? That way, we all end up winners and we can retain civil liberties that form the basis of a civilised society.

John Levett, Eastbourne, UK

If you are a proponent of the old canard of "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear", I invite you to take your identity, utility, banking, insurance, medical and other personal documentation; keys to your home, your car, your place of work; lists of your passwords for computers, websites, banking, etc.; your personal diaries and journals, lists of those you've slept with, descriptions of your social habits and affiliations, memberships of any societies, pressure groups, political parties, voting record, your education background, work history, previous residences, criminal records, and anything else that you would consider "personal" and give it to your local police station, along with a signed statement that they can use this information as they see fit, can come into your abode as and when they think it's appropriate, subject you to interrogation for as long as they deem necessary, as so on.

Because, if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear, right?

BM, Edinburgh, UK

Imagine a DNA database in the hands of a man like Hitler and then vote for it if you're really stupid!

Michelle, Stoke on Trent, UK

The problem with this DNA database is that it is a very powerful tool and like anything powerful if its in the wrong hands then it will more than likely do more damage than good.

How do you stop it from going into the wrong hands? Well, don't give it to this government for a start...

D Mitch, Dundee,

One problem with the DNA database is that it could make it easier for an unscrupulous person to frame the innocent.

DAL, London, UK

Of course there should be a national DNA database if is practicable.

This vital tool will be diminished or lost because paranoid fools belive the "state are out to get them". Get over your own importance.

I will the first in the queue to give a sample as I have yet to hear any credible reason why I should be afraid to do so.

Dave, Epping,

To be in favour of complete DNA records you have to persuade yourself that:
1) The Home Office will guard the data capably;
2) The police and politicians are incorruptible;
3) The complex software will be reliable;
4) The DNA result will provide absolute proof.
If you believe all (or any of) this you would believe anything.

The latter point seems little understood. The DNA only provides a probable match. Big odds, yes, but do you buy lottery tickets?

Rhewllwyd, Carmarthen, Wales

So basically the Goverment want a "Computer says No" Criminal Justice and Crime Prevention System.

Ironic when they lose Disks containing confidential information for a large number of people in the Nation.

They keep trying to save costs but it is looking more and more like a bunch of self centred squabbling children in goverment and sadly running the country.

Liam Ryan, London,

How is a DNA database going to prove you innocent? I cleverly carry my DNA with me in case I need to prove who I am.

Paul, London,

For all those in favour of retention of the DNA of innocent people, here are a couple of points to consider:

First, when you are searching for a needle in a criminal haystack it is the logic of the madhouse to add more hay to the stack, by adding the DNA of millions of law-abiding citizens. And if false positives should implicate some of these law-abiding citizens in crimes they did not commit? Well, I suppose that would be their problem, not ours.

Secondly, the most efficient way of ensuring that every single innocent person is placed on the DNA database would be to take the DNA of every new-born baby in the land and add it to the database, to become the property of the State.

Oh, and let’s not forget their little fingerprints, too. Babies have an uncanny aptitude for knowing right from wrong and may wriggle about a bit, but they must be compelled to surrender their little fingerprints, by force if necessary. No new-born child should be allowed to escape the net.

G J Taylor, Devon, UK

Here's a possible scenario that we must never forget...

1 The economy goes sour, so
2 We vote in a new government, but
3 The economy gets worse and we go to 3 day weeks again so
4 The Red Tops blames the immigrants, and
4 We vote in a more extreme government...
5 who decides to evict all the Eastern Europeans
6 and knows who they are and how to find them because it has their DNA.

The ultimate cleansing tool!

Stuart, Chichester,

Havent we learned the goverment cant be trusted with data. what is to stop them using DNA for experimentation it is a invasion of our rights at some point we have to take a stand and protect our rights otherwise big brother will become reality.

paul kerr, kilmarnock, east ayrshire

All those naive people who believe that biometric data could prove innocence or that if you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear should offer their DNA sample on a voluntary basis.

I just look at the long string of wrong convictions over the last 20 or 30 years and I know an innocent man or woman CAN be found guilty and go to jail.

These convictions include a number of cases where police have assisted the evidence to ensure that they get a conviction.
What could an over-enthusiastic copper do with your DNA sample?

R Bingham, Lauzun, France

Under the law, we are all innocent until convicted or an offence. A person who is taken to court and found not guilty, a person who is not charged and a person who has never been arrested are all deemed to be equally innocent. And quite right too. It cannot be right that DNA profiles are kept of people who are arrested and not charged or who are acquitted, unless a universal database of everyone is kept.

Neil, Luxembourg,

To all thouse with nothign to fear or hide, if dont mind having your DNA on the datebase go put it on, or even better seeing as your so inocent lets put CCTV in your house and watch you 24/7 after all you have nothing to hide so whats to fear?

MR W Jones, Liverpool, England

We all know a huge percentage of acquittals are due to lack of evidence or poor conviction procedures.

Destroying these records will inevitably let many real and dangerous criminals escape detection and innocent lives will blighted or lost as a consequence.

If you are a decent law abiding citizen, having your records on a database is a tiny inconvenience, unless you have something to hide. I do hope common sense will prevail, and if it doesn't God help us.

Paul Tilling, London

Paul Tilling, London, UK

As the general public is believing more and more in the power of DNA to find and convict someone, at the same time believing that if you do nothing wrong then what have you to fear!?
Well My worse nightmare would be, for example, that one evening I might get close to a girl in a bar/club, such that my DNA is all over her. Then on her way home She is brutally murdered by some Psycho with my DNA all over her! No body ever believing that I was innocent, even if I was acquitted.
Or even worse being 'fitted' up in the future by authorities using a sample of my DNA..
Having faith in the 'power' of DNA to convict someone, and faith in the authorities to keep DNA sample information safe and confidential is complete Madness!!! As is believing that in this country if you do nothing wrong then you have nothing to fear from the Criminal Justice system!!!

WW, Brentford, Middx.

Barry's comments demonstrate perfectly why innocent people should be concerned that they will remain tainted by suspicion even if unconvicted.

I wish them well with their case.

Darren Howell, London,

sorry but going all this way to have your records destroyed just cos you are innocent reeks to me as if you are guilty, or plan to be guilty of something

stuart, Fareham,

So these two guys want their DNA samples destroyed ... why ?
99.9% of us who go about our lawful business need not worry in the slightest... indeed DNA samples would often go a long way to protecting our innocence in the event of mistaken arrest or whatever.
Whenever i read about incidents such as 'S' who was acquited of attempted robbery i ask myself 'hmmm, no smoke without fire' .. i simply cannot imagine a case whereby an inocent bystander going about his lawful and innocent business is suddenly and without any reason whatsoever accused of robbery. and hauled before the beak ! ... invariably he was up to no good and some clever laywers have done a good job .. or else why on earth do they fight to have their DNA samples destroyed !

andy, Lardieres, france

Get it straight. They are not convicted but not necessarily innocent.
One case was dropped after a reconciliation - the other resulted in acquittal.
Innocent before the law - certainly - innocent in fact - at least in the 1st case probably not.
How many rapists have been acquitted in multiple cases because juries are denied relevant information. The human rights act should be renamed the criminal rights act as it only benefits criminals and terrorists.

jamie stclare, perth, australia

Can't see the problem with having your DNA on a police file, it can prove you innocent just as much as proving someone guilty, if you've done nothing wrong then what are you worrying about?

They are quick to start talking about human rights, but what good is it when someones dead? why should it take 15 years for a killer to be caught?

Rob, Nottingham, UK

The chances not all samples will be destroyed anyway. Whats in a court decision...not much. An old sergeant told me some years ago when I was getting my fingerprint records destroyed at the end of my police career, "you dont really think they will all be destroyed anyway do you"?
Cops tend to hang onto things...and you know... with the great increase in world crime...I dont blame them one bit!
You ordinary folk need watching!

Graeme Gibson, Sydney, Australia

I can see why having a DNA database might be useful.

However we should all be on it or only those convicted should be on it. Adding people just because they have been arrested and never convicted is illogical.

If the lawyers and home office ministers/officials think that keeping these two men's DNA is such a good idea, then they should have their own DNA added to the database. After all they have nothing to hide. Otherwise they should concede the arguement and not waste our taxes on fighting this.

zem, Basingstoke, UK

To imj from Abu Dhabi, the reason it is different in Scotland is because Scotland has a wholly separate legal system. Scots law pre-dates the Treaty of Union in 1707 and was protected by that same Act. Additonally, Scotland has a separate legislature in the Scottish Parliament. It is sod all to do with Gordon Brown, thankfully.

Andrew, Suffolk,

World turned upside down! Innocent people have nothing to fear. There is no death penalty in the UK (so far), the absolute worst thing that can happen is that someone is inconvenienced for a while. The CPS has to PROVE guilt before someone is convicted. DNA is only one of the criteria used. No-one, repeat no-one has yet been convicted on a DNA basis ALONE. There have always been other reasons for suspecting them - presence near the scene at the time, witnesses, etc. The DNA can point the finger, but the trial convicts. Don't forget that the database can also ELIMINATE people and prove innocence! Where do I go to offer my sample?

David L, Brussels,

Good luck to these two men, though it is unlikely that the EU court will decide in favour of the individual over the state.

Simon, Chatham, Kent

How innocent was 'S' attempted robbery, makes one
suspicious, would like to know how he got off. The other chap was probably guilty partner dropped the case. So for my money the police should keep their DNA, the benefit's of solving crime particularly serious
crime far out ways any disadvantages to individuals.
Once again Britain should just tell the European Human Rights out fit to get lost and plan to get rid of
the labour government that brought this rubbish into the country.

Barry Holmes, Christchurch, New Zealand

Why is it different in Scotland! Surely this is discrimination against the English. Does this Make Gordon Brown a racist?

imj, Abu Dhabi, uae

and when the day comes when they are found guilty on other charges, are these same men going to the EU courts arguing DNA would have proved them innocent but their records weren't complete? If you have nothing to hide why be so set on having it destroyd? I find it bizarre that people are so set on their own rights, believing the governments take swabs all over the city to track your every move, get over yourself, your importance is so small in the global scene that no one cares, Billy I am sure you will support the DNA collection acts when a loved one gets killed and the killer gets caught based on this information, extremely sortsighted indeed.

Frank, Cape Town, ZA

Let's hope they win

Billy Barnett, HK,