Finally the British police with their Stasi-like tendencies to monitor
all of us have had their collars felt, their wings clipped. And it
isn't because of nitpickers like me, but because professional bodies
have intervened to say, this time, boyos, you've gone too far!

At last some semblance of balance has been restored. I have always
taken the view that any criminal convicted of a *serious* crime, i.e.
not a lad nicking a 99p packet of meat in 1984, would warrant
inclusion in the national DNA database. But it was always hugely
disproportionate to include EVERYone who has been arrested, even if
later declared innocent. Let alone the thousands of children's
profiles on the database.

But - how true to form - already the police are using the memory of
lickle Holly and Jessica, to combat this ruling by the Information
Tribunal:

"Ian Readhead, deputy chief constable of Hampshire and spokesman on
data protection and freedom of information for the Association of
Chief Police Officers, said: 'We are very disappointed with the
decision of the Information Tribunal, which could have far-reaching
implications for the police service as a whole. The Bichard inquiry
which followed the tragedy of the Soham murders recommended that
forces should reconsider the way in which records are managed. It is
now important that clear national guidelines are put in place so that
forces take a consistent approach to the retention of criminal
records.' "

Who said anything about Soham, Ian? Surely it's the trivial cases of
theft involving a 99p packet of meat and similar cases that do not
warrant a DNA profile being retained until the dastardly perpetrator
reaches the age of 100 years?

The police can appeal this ruling, and I'll bet they get it
overturned. The threats behind the scenes will be too great to ignore.

But it was nice while it lasted, to think that maybe Britain's Stasi
mentality will die in infancy, like any self-limiting malformation.

MM