Gaughran vs the UK and public acceptability of forensic biometrics retention

Aaron Amankwaa; Carole McCartney

doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2020.04.001

Gaughran vs the UK and public acceptability of forensic biometrics retention

Aaron Amankwaa, Carole McCartney

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/debate › peer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

2 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This commentary provides a response to the European Court of Human Rights ruling in the case of Gaughran vs the United Kingdom on 13 February 2020. The Court ruled that the indefinite retention of DNA, fingerprints and facial images from all convicted adults was disproportionate. Using data from a survey on public attitudes, we examine the public acceptability of the police retention of forensic biometrics from the population.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	204-205
Number of pages	2
Journal	Science & Justice
Volume	60
Issue number	3
Early online date	7 Apr 2020
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scijus.2020.04.001
Publication status	Published - 1 May 2020

Access to Document

10.1016/j.scijus.2020.04.001

SCIJUS_ManuscriptAccepted author manuscript, 412 KBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

Cite this

@article{b8395b08c348487aba328b649a1c7f26,

title = "Gaughran vs the UK and public acceptability of forensic biometrics retention",

abstract = "This commentary provides a response to the European Court of Human Rights ruling in the case of Gaughran vs the United Kingdom on 13 February 2020. The Court ruled that the indefinite retention of DNA, fingerprints and facial images from all convicted adults was disproportionate. Using data from a survey on public attitudes, we examine the public acceptability of the police retention of forensic biometrics from the population.",

keywords = "Forensic biometrics, Forensic databases, Privacy, Public attitudes, Public security, Retention",

author = "Aaron Amankwaa and Carole McCartney",

year = "2020",

month = may,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.scijus.2020.04.001",

language = "English",

volume = "60",

pages = "204--205",

journal = "Science and Justice - Journal of the Forensic Science Society",

issn = "1355-0306",

publisher = "Forensic Science Society",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Gaughran vs the UK and public acceptability of forensic biometrics retention

AU - Amankwaa, Aaron

AU - McCartney, Carole

PY - 2020/5/1

Y1 - 2020/5/1

N2 - This commentary provides a response to the European Court of Human Rights ruling in the case of Gaughran vs the United Kingdom on 13 February 2020. The Court ruled that the indefinite retention of DNA, fingerprints and facial images from all convicted adults was disproportionate. Using data from a survey on public attitudes, we examine the public acceptability of the police retention of forensic biometrics from the population.

AB - This commentary provides a response to the European Court of Human Rights ruling in the case of Gaughran vs the United Kingdom on 13 February 2020. The Court ruled that the indefinite retention of DNA, fingerprints and facial images from all convicted adults was disproportionate. Using data from a survey on public attitudes, we examine the public acceptability of the police retention of forensic biometrics from the population.

KW - Forensic biometrics

KW - Forensic databases

KW - Privacy

KW - Public attitudes

KW - Public security

KW - Retention

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85082870718&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.scijus.2020.04.001

DO - 10.1016/j.scijus.2020.04.001

M3 - Comment/debate

VL - 60

SP - 204

EP - 205

JO - Science and Justice - Journal of the Forensic Science Society

JF - Science and Justice - Journal of the Forensic Science Society

SN - 1355-0306

IS - 3

ER -

Gaughran vs the UK and public acceptability of forensic biometrics retention

Abstract

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this