Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Home Office denies DNA database U-turn

Rob Hastings
Tuesday 26 July 2011 19:00 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

The Home Office denied making a U-turn on its promise to delete the DNA records of innocent people yesterday, after it emerged that the samples will remain in forensic-science laboratories but in anonymised form.

This was revealed in a letter from the Home Office minister James Brokenshire, in which he said it was "theoretically possible that a laboratory could identify an individual's profile from the barcode, but only in conjunction with the force which took the original sample, by giving details of the barcode of the force and asking for the individual's name".

The Home Office said in a statement: "Our position remains the same – we will take and retain the DNA of the guilty and remove innocent people from the database. Our proposals will see all profiles of innocent people removed from the DNA database. Police will not be able to access any profiles given by innocent people and any attempt to do so would be a criminal offence."

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in