07/05/2009
A teacher has won a High Court battle to have his DNA destroyed after he was unlawfully arrested by police when accused of assault by a pupil.
It is perhaps unusual for judicial review proceedings which have been settled to be noteworthy because they do not establish a precedent. However, the concessions made by Northumbria Police in the case of Matthew Wren are an exception.
Mr Wren is a teacher. In early 2008 a pupil made an allegation of common assault against him. Quite properly the police took the matter seriously and arranged with Mr Wren’s solicitor for him to voluntarily come in for interview. On arrival at the police station Mr Wren was arrested and detained for the interview, despite protestations from his solicitor that he had attended voluntarily and arrest was unnecessary. Apart from the distress caused by arrest it meant that police could take his photograph, fingerprints and DNA sample, and these would be retained indefinitely irrespective of whether there was any case against him. Furthermore, the Police National Computer was marked “CJ arrestee”, which might lead to the disclosure of his arrest to a future prospective employer on an enhanced CRB check.
Mr Wren was interviewed, answered all questions and was released without charge. With the support of his Union, the NASUWT , he challenged the legality of his arrest, sought destruction of the samples and DNA, fingerprint and photograph records, damages and costs. The High Court granted permission, but a few days before the full hearing the police conceded, agreeing to a Consent Order declaring the arrest unlawful, ordering the deletion of the photographic, fingerprint and DNA records, amendment of the PNC, damages and costs.
Pursuant to Section 24, PACE a constable can arrest anyone he reasonably suspects of committing an offence, but only if it is necessary to do so. The necessity criterion was added to the section by amendment contained in Section 110 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005, which came into force on 1 January 2006.
It seems that many police forces have operated a general policy of arrest in such circumstances and this case may make them think again. Unless an arrest is necessary it will be unlawful.
Mr Wren was represented by Pete Weatherby of GCN, instructed by Craig Hunn of NASUWT's lawyers Thompsons Solicitors .
> 7/5/09 - Teacher Matthew Wren wins battle to have DNA records deleted (The Times)