Britain’s DNA database, the most comprehensive in the world, should remove details of people who are acquitted of crimes.
A “citizen’s inquiry” instigated by the Human Genetics Commission also called for the National DNA Database to be taken out of direct control of the police and government, with oversight handed instead to an independent authority.
The conclusions will fuel controversy about the ethical foundations of the database, which was established in 1995 in Britain — the country where scientists first pioneered the technique of DNA fingerprinting…
The proposal to delete DNA records is likely to be opposed by police, on the grounds that it could make it more difficult to solve past crimes, or “cold cases”.
But, the Home Office admits that almost all of the offenders convicted under the cold case programme have proved to be persistent and prolific violent criminals, whose DNA would be on the database anyway.
Coppers and prosecutors hate like hell to give up anything that gives them oversight of the general population. That’s more a commentary upon the attitudes and ideology of police professionals – than forensic procedures.
This means that more people with criminal records will be convicted with DNA evidence and the people who have not been convicted yet will still be free.
The problem is that a DNA match does not necessarily mean that the person matched is the perpetrator (especially with old, degraded DNA) – even though that notion is still popular in the media. DNA matching only checks 13 chromosomal locations out of possible millions. And, certain gene combinations are not compatible with life. Also, people are closely inter-related. So, a DNA search of a sufficiently large database (say, a statewide search) will find multiple individuals with the same DNA markers.
See “DNA matches aren’t always a lock” at
http://preview.tinyurl.com/5dvwfq
and “How reliable is DNA in identifying suspects?” at
http://preview.tinyurl.com/6q2l7k
So==just how many guilty criminals should be allowed to walk around free to rob, kill, and rape again so that peoples dna information can be kept a secret?
This mindless desire for anonymity should not balance the legitimate non-invasive data base that can do more than solve crimes.
Silly to prevent good solid crime stopping because the imagination as be set free by hyperactive science fiction scenarios. When the minority report becomes possible, we can then relook at the privacy issues involved.
Bobbo, I think I agree with you. DNA collection does not need to be any more invasive than fingerprinting. And, as it is done now, it cannot be used by insurance companies to gauge your cancer / heart disease / etc. chances. It would be more equitable if everyone was fingerprinted. That way, certain minorities that are arrested more often would not be targeted.
I do agree that predators should not be allowed to prey unimpeded in society. My point was that even a DNA match as it is done now does not immediately pinpoint the culprit. And, that pathologists and other expert witnesses lie to a jury when they claim the chance of a match is in the 1:billions range.
#3–Jeanne==I am ragging on Eideard because he makes us liberals look bad. I wonder if he really thinks the looney left things he posts, or if he does it to goad mere lefties like myself.
Well, to your point, the validity and use of a good dna data base is not affected by the misuse of it. Simply correct the misuse. And I do admire you didn’t drag out the misuse for health diagnoses==BUT, on general principles only, I have to doubt that Defense Lawyers are letting false claims of matches go unchallenged?
I can see a gross/simple screen being used to screen OUT suspects, but when one in a billion positive ID’s are made, thats just exactly what it should be? If not, then correct the errors while keeping the baby.
The cost of dna testing is coming down rapidly. Hopefully in a few more years the backlog of 1000’s of samples from crime scenes will be processed and the Statute of Limitations will not have run.
To the Stars—and beyond!!!!!!