DNA decision - right or wrong?

[naomi24]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7764069.stm

[ll_billym]

In principle in a perfect world the authorities should be able to keep innocent people's DNA on file and use it when attempting to find the perpatrator of violent and or sexual or otherwise gross crimes.

The reality is that they will use it for petty crimes, sell DNA data to 3rd parties, lose DNA data, DNA data stolen etc. etc. These are the reasons I don't want them to have my data anyway, not for any human rights reason.

So my answer is "right decision but for the wrong reasons".

[Oneeyedvic]

Completely right decision - and notice that it was unanimous - unusual in itself.

[The Sherman]

gosh Bylium yours is a strange perfect world where police need to keep files on everyone!

In my perfect world there would no police!

[danchip]

if your not doing anything wrong then you dont have anything to worry about if they've got your DNA

The only concern is how safe the storage is, who has access to it and what the likelyhood of it being lost is

[Quinlad]

If you're not doing anything wrong, you've no need to worry if the police show up at your house and search your bedroom.

Maybe we should introduce that too.

[Barmaid]

At the risk of being controversial, the solving of the Ipswich Murders in Jan 2007 (which led to the conviction of Steven Wright for the murders of five women) was only as a result of DNA evidence being held.

A few years previously Wright had been arrested (I do not know whether he was ever charged or convicted) of a minor dishonest offence and when DNA found on one of the bodies was analysed this match appeared.

Mind you I can't help agreeing with II billym about the security and use of innocent people's data.

[danchip]

if your house gets burgled, someone pinches your car, rapes your wife/girlfriend would you want the police to be able to go straight onto a database and get the perpetrator or wait till they get caught commiting another crime or never get caught at all

[Quinlad]

Never get caught at all please.

[danchip]

so you'd prefer someone who raped/ murdered your partner or child never to get caught

[Barmaid]

Seriously though (and I haven't read the full judgement) how far is this going to go?

Will fingerprints also require destroying?
Will those convicted but whose convictions are "spent" have their DNA destroyed?

[R1Geezer]

The decision was correct. I am a victim of this I was arrested tried and acquited, thanks to a couple of switched on Blue rinsers, thanks ladies I owe you one. The old bill still have my DNA + Prints though.

for danchip and others, purlease how naive are you. DNA proves nothing, the presences of DNA is merely a useful tool for the poiice it has no bearing on Guilt. Stop it with this "Holy grail" Cobblers. What Il_Billym said too.

Now how do I get the old bill to destroy my samples?

[danchip]

what have you got to hide, the only people who have a problem with this are criminals or the sort of person who is likely to commit a crime in the future

[Barmaid]

RIGeezer - I am not in the slightest bit naive. I know exactly the uses of DNA and fingerprint evidence. I still consider it to be a useful tool though. Although with DNA its usefulness is generally restricted to sexual and violent crimes and is very often the thing that suggests the link between a suspect and a crime scene.

[R1Geezer]

Ok danchip, what have you got to hide,?ok, don't know if you are a bloke but tlet's assume you are. You Go out, pick up a girl , go back have great sex. Next night she is raped and murdered, your DNA is present......... Follow it through.

Ok next part, deparate old bill, get a sample of your DNA, plant it there, you're nicked.

Too many ways to mis use it. Purlease stop it with this "nothing to hide" buffoonery, think it through...

Do you think they won't be flogging DNA samples to the highest bidders, Can't get life assurance, dodgy DNA you know.

Wise up, stop having niaive belief in this cobblers.

DNA is a useful tool, it get's them looking in the right direction, it's NOT the holy grail. OK??

Oh can I get some compo too then??

[Barmaid]

No, the �36k was awarded on account of costs.

I would write to the Constabulary and ask them to confirm that in view of the ruling your DNA profile has been deleted.

[Oneeyedvic]

Nothing to hide?

How about a hereditary illness that ensures that you can't get life insurance which can be picked up by DNA?

Do you fancy an MRI scan that may be able to prove that you are racist and thus preclude you from having any public sector jobs?
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/11/17/1 069027041644.html?from=storyrhs

[rov1200]

With the human DNA comprised of 3 billion letters and 99% the same in each individual who is going to bother deciphering that lot. We don't yet know the meaning of the letters or genes but all we can do is to look at the differences. Alright you are AACTGATGTGA.... and i'm TCAAATCTGA....etc

[LoftyLottie]

Do people who think that if you've got nothing to hide then you shouldn't worry actually think very deeply!! I think not.

The decision was absolutely right.

[ludwig]

Right decision.