header-logo header-logo

23 March 2007
Issue: 7265 / Categories: Legal News , Local government , Public , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Plans to extend police powers are panned

Proposals to relax fingerprinting restrictions and allow police to question suspects until the time of their trial—even after charges have been made—have been attacked by lawyers and civil rights campaigners.

The Home Office plans, laid out in a consultation paper reviewing the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 last week, also float the idea of allowing police to site short-term detention centres in shopping malls.

The government says existing rules, which require suspects to be taken to police stations, take too long and clog up space in police custody. The cells could hold suspects for up to four hours to enable fingerprinting, photographing and DNA sampling.

DNA samples and fingerprints could be taken from those suspected of petty crimes. Liberty policy director Gareth Crossman says: “Six years ago, DNA sampling was about combating serious crime. Today dropping litter is proposed as a lame excuse for an ever-growing national DNA database.”
The consultation looks at areas of police work ranging from how suspects are bailed to how stop-and-search operations are conducted.

Criminal

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll