Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Darth Loo-knee]

Oh dear

Big Winston could be getting a new best friend

Bet Timbuk has his fingers crossed aswell as his legs

[Martin_1962]

Were you DNA sampled?

Taking DNA on all arrestees is all over the news today as people are making an issue of it being kept on file even if they are not charged with anything.

There may be security of data issues that need properly addressing, but surely if everyone's DNA was held, more crime would be solved and prevented which would over-ride any other argument?

Am I missing something?  Why is it not taken at birth and kept on file to cross-reference against crimes?
If a positive result came back, the samples would be checked again at time of arrest to protect against any errors.

Imagine it is nice warm sunny day in the park, you stop, sit on the grass for a few minutes and watch the world go by, you smoke a cigarette, and 2 of you hairs fall out on to the ground.
That night in that spot a attack takes place (use your imagination) The police comb the spot and two hairs and cigarette end is recovered from the crime scene.

Check database, and you are arrested and inprisoned, no need for a trial, as your DNA proves you where there.

OK this is very simple way of looking at it, but how long before the law would change so it was up to you to prove your innocence.

Yes if someone is convicted of a serious crime then there DNA should be kept. but not someone who had a minor car accident but was a bit riled up because of it.

Good point, but in court you could argue the case that you were there earlier and that was the only specimen-on the ground, not on the victim, plus there would be other specimens from the real attacker.  The likelihood of a conviction from this evidence is minimal compared to the benefit.

I'd rather take this minor risk and protect victims from repeat attacks by just knowing who the attacker was, in minutes and getting them caught.

It would save unthinkable amounts of resources and police time too.

Lets say 20 or so people have the same DNA value - you will all be pulled in, lets say you have done nothing wrong in your life, but you could not account for your actions on day xx (at home alone ect).

Why should you be investigated just for having the same DNA value as a criminal.

The values stored are NOT unique

[cruisetopoland]

I know what you are getting at, certainly-but surely the positive aspect of it is worth working towards and setting laws to control?

Depends how much trust you have in government IT and their competence and morals in general.

Either way, it should, IMHO, only be used to eliminate suspects for the reasons discussed, so one wonders how useful it would be against the enormous cost of profiling everybody. :-/

Kevin

It's an interesting topic.
My view is that they should start profiling every newborn from now, if they cannot roll it out across the existing population.

The government's record of keeping data is not great, granted 

[MikeDundee]

Yes a DNA sample/swab was taken from the mouth :-/