HC Deb 19 April 1932 vol 264 c1388
24. Mr. McGOVERN

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if his attention has been drawn to the case of an individual who was recently charged with a crime in Glasgow and discharged as innocent; and why his finger prints, which were taken at the time of arrest, were not destroyed, thereby saving the man from taking action in court seeking their destruction?


I am aware of the case to which the hon. Member refers. I understand that, in accordance with practice, the finger prints and other records were destroyed when the charge against the accused man was found not proven, and that his agent was informed to this effect some time ago.


Why is it necessary for this man to apply to the court if the finger prints have already been destroyed, and why was no assurance given in the court that such a course had been pursued?


I do not know whether it is necessary for him to apply or not, but the case is still sub judice.

Forward to