NI High Court reluctantly holds that police retention of photos and DNA compatible with ECHR
JR 27’s Application  NIQB 143 (Judgment No 2) (23 December 2010)
The judgment of the Divisional Court (Morgan LCJ, Weatherup J and McCloskey J) was given by McCloskey J:
 This is an application for judicial review by a litigant to whom anonymity has been granted, by virtue of his age. The factual matrix, which is uncontentious, can be stated in brief compass. The Applicant is aged fourteen years. On 7th October 2008, he was arrested by the police by reason of his suspected involvement in a burglary. At the police station, in the presence of his solicitor, he was interviewed. Following interview, the Applicant provided two DNA samples and fingerprints and he was photographed (hereinafter described as “the impugned measures”). He neither consented nor objected to the impugned measures. By letter dated 21 November 2008, the Public Prosecution Service intimated that the Applicant would not be prosecuted.
III THE DECISIONS IN S and MARPER.
 … In R (S and Marper) –v- Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police  1 WLR 2196 [ UKHL 39 (22 July 2004)] … by a majority of four to one, the House of Lords held that the retention of the Applicants’ fingerprints, cellular samples and DNA profiles did not interfere with their right to respect for private life under Article 8(1).