Mugger Beat Ex-Soldier, 79.

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2328187/Richard-Christie-beat-ex-soldier-Bill-Hopkins-badly-died-stealing-wallet-containing-just-40-card-wifes-memorial-service.html

Obviously this cretin must have had a police record for them to have his DNA on file, it is through this that the police were able to trace him and bring this piece of pond life to justice.

With this in mind the question that must be asked is "should everyone's DNA be on file"?

[jake-the-peg]

Not sure who that's aimed at fred but I think there is a difference in perception with DNA.

Not probably with Judges and there shouldn't be so with Police officers - but I suspect that varies. But there is a perception of DNA as a magic bullet solution.

The moment you start talking about DNA evidence people start thinking 'open and shut case' you see it on threads here all the time - People say things like we should have the death penalty if there is DNA evidence for example.

That DNA of yours in the Taxi might not even prove you were in the taxi - it might be a hair transfered from a friend or relative.

I'm sorry but I don't think the police (ours or the Spanish) are ready to be trusted with a global DNA database yet

[jake-the-peg]

//Idiot?...no you are the only one that fits that description so far. //

Oh lookee someone's getting rattled and not even off of the first page yet!

Is everybody who disagrees with you an idiot sqad? Is your ego *that* big?

Maybe you should scuttle back to making puerile comments about lingerie in chatterbank for a rest

[bazwillrun]

@JTP

every reply youve given in this post just about sums you up, same as your joy and apparent glee towards the loss of this country and its liberty and ability to govern itself to the eussr

[Sqad]

Jake the Peg.

\\\\Maybe you should scuttle back to making puerile comments about lingerie in chatterbank for a rest \\\

Well at least you read them.

The word "idiot" was introduced into this thread by.......YOU.

[Svejk]

Lol jake. You'd hardly be convicted in this country if you were caught on film and signed a confession.
I wouldn't worry about that stray hair of yours.

[dannyk13]

If everyone's DNA was on file it would come in useful for circumstances other than crime. For instance the identification of unknown bodies in air crashes,sudden deaths etc.

[anotheoldgit]

/// That is like saying eveyone should have their photograph taken because it would help to catch shoplifters. ///

Or everyone who needs a passport, drive a car, or take up some forms of employment, they all have to have their photos taken so what's the problem?

/// The police had his DNA because he was a criminal. The present system seems to work. Break the law and fingerprints, DNA and a photograph are kept. Do not break the law, and you do not have to submit uour details. ///

So one is much safer from being arrested via DNA, if it is your first crime, no matter how serious?

[anotheoldgit]

This thug wasn't convicted on his DNA alone, it was the fact that his victim managed to get hold of one of his gloves, then through the DNA records the police knew where he lived, and consequently found the other glove in his property.

[Gromit]

Didn't 6 irishmen spend 16 years in prison on the strength of forensic evidence that wrongly said they had handled explosives?

Didn't the police hound Colin Stagg who had nothing to do with the crime they were investigating.

(incidently, Both resulting in huge compensation bills for the tax payer).

[anotheoldgit]

triggerhippy

/// Going on holiday, driving a car, getting a job are all choices AOG. ///

So it's all down to choices eh?

There are many things in this world that we do not have a choice about, so why should this be different?

[anotheoldgit]

Gromit

Just because of a few cases where the evidence proved to be wrong, shouldn't stop the thousands of times when the police get it right.

[ummmm]

So the police DO get it right without having us all on a database.

[Octavius]

Occasionally yes, but they also rely heavily on private suppliers of DNA testing who also get it wrong. For example LCG Forensics and the rape case against a 19 year old man.

[ChillDoubt]

Oh dear, the usual 'yooman rights, criminal and terrorist supporting rice-cake munching' appeasers are having their weekly rant.

Light a joss stick and chillax, just cos you're paranoid doesn't mean they're all out to kill ya.....

As ever, I dare say it's the fault of society and all its failings that this miscreant was at his lowest and and thus felt compelled to beat up an aged gentleman in order to steal money for food. He needs love, care, understanding and attention, not the full weight of the law.

[ChillDoubt]

It's generally implied by the usual suspects trig.

And yes Gromit, you're right, those things happened in the bad old days.


They wouldn't now as a result of a DNA database, would they?

[Octavius]

"It's generally implied by the usual suspects trig."

Wow, if only the police applied that logic instead of this wasteful DNA baloney!

[ChillDoubt]

Wow, if only the police applied that logic instead of this wasteful DNA baloney!
-----------------------------------
So DNA evidence doesn't prevent the sorts of miscarriages we saw with the Birmingham 6 etc?

Thankfully, such 'baloney' in this modern era prevents anything similar happening again, doesn't it?