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

Clarke Willmott—Megan Bradbury

Clarke Willmott—Megan Bradbury

Corporate team welcomes paralegal in Southampton

Howard Kennedy—Paul Moran

Howard Kennedy—Paul Moran

London firm strengthens real estate team with partner appointment

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll