Well, I can see here all the usual traits being displayed by the lib-leftists: persecution complex, paranoia and cognitive egocentrism.
That aside, you never know what is relevent in an investigation. Please stop this ridiculous nonsense of a "police state" and let the police get on with it.

Richard, Norwich,

There seems to be an obssesion in certain quarters with ensuring that the consequences of criminal behaviour are always to be minimalised. The well healed who live in safe environments do not seem to care about the quality of life of the decent working class people who sufferer most from the criminals.

The debate will usually start with weasel words such as "trivial" but in no time the definition of trivial comes to include threats of violence and other frightening crimes.

p mckenna, inner city Liverpool,

Police Detective work is all about attention to detail, and very often it is the small observations of another Officer that clears or provides the vital link to the successful investigation. These records are factual records of events - You cannot obliterate or ignore the past! Remove these records and one can justifiably argue why not remove any record of anyone who has not been sentenced to less that say two years imprisonment! This is a dumbing down of Society! Labour tough on crime - don't make me laugh!

Anthony WALKER, Louth, Lincolnshire, UK

I recently rang the British Embassy, Tokyo (boy, are they demoralised) to ask if there was a way I could access my police record (if any), to confirm there was "nothing recorded against". Not that I was planning a visit to UK, but you never know. The thought was that my somewhat less than totally complementary comments regarding the present UK government may have landed me on a Prevention of Terrorism list compiled by those sons of fun at GCHQ, Cheltenham. What used to fall under freedom of speech has now become an offence in Police State UK. The Embassy didn't have a clue, but what else is new? They know less than half of FA, anyway.

Andrew Milner, Yokohama, Japan

Speaking as someone who was convicted of a minor offence 11 years for which I received probation I think that the guidelines set out in the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act for non custodial sentence are followed. This states that once a non custodial conviction is over 10 years it is spent, ie it didn't exist.

This in practice means that for any job I apply for I can state in all honesty I have no criminal record. However if I want to visit the US or emigrate or work for the Government or even a charity I will be banned because this ridiculous conviction is still on the Police Database.

I have not been in any trouble with the law during the past 11 years and in fact am on my local Neighbourhood Safer Police Panel which sets the local Police priorities. Why therefore should I still be penalised for something which happened so long ago and for which I have served my punishment? We all do stupid things in our 20's. It shouldn't be held against you until you're 100!

Stephanie James, London, England

Gary, it is hardly rocket science. You sound as if there would be the need for an individual to reassess all the records. All offenses in the police database have already been assessed by judges and officers of the law.

So let's see, where would a line between a serious and a non-serious offense lie? Maybe that line could be a custodial sentence.

Therefore a rule such as "any criminal offense older than 5 years that did not require a custodial sentence, which was committed by an individual under the age of 18 who has subsequently not reoffended should be deleted" could be applied.

Richard, New Malden,

Where do you draw the law between a serious offence and a non-serious one? Which offences should we keep and which should we drop from the register?

Gary Horlock, Crawley,

I have recently been turned down for a number of jobs, after some investigation I have been told (by a recruitment agency) that someone with the same name was places on the sex offenders register some 10+ years back.

I wonder if I can go public with the names of the companies that haven't bothered to check information properly?

Martin, Bournemouth, UK