Surely its time we are all on a DNA database

[madasahatstand]

DNA database.ID cards chips implanted cctv  ffs even oyster cards now track where u go  Big Brother is watching you well Big brother   GFY

Oyster card tracking evidence has now been used to obtain a conviction.

"Liberty, in modern time, is generally considered a concept of political philosophy and identifies the condition in which an individual has the ability to act according to his or her own will."

Someone having my DNA on record doesn't stop this surely?

If there was a national database or you committed a non serious 'recordable' crime, you would have no choice but to give a sample of DNA, even if you didnt want to. This does not constitute liberty and especially not freedom.

You don't need to have committed an offence, the mere fact that you have been arrested gives the right for police to take the sample by force, even if not charged.

This is highly worrying. Whats the  position on it among your peers Robert? Is it split into those lawyers who defend and prosecute?

[Geo the Sarge]

 The last two days have shown two horrific murders would have been solved in days rather than weeks and months if we had a nationwide DNA database.
 If fact that f***** b****** that got put away today wouldn't have been able to rape and murder that poor girl, because his DNA would have showed he raped and  attempted murder before.

 

There are other databases that would have triggered this guy as a previous rapist/attempted murderere/murder etc. The DNA database would merely assist in estalishing a link with him and his victim. A previous post highlighted in Scottish law that DNA evidence still has to be corroborated with other evidence to secure conviction. I'm sure that you'll find in the recent cases that DNA was only used to confirm a link between victim and accused.

In the Ipswich case it appears that the most damning evidence was a fibre from the carpet in the boot of his car found on one of the victims as he did not deny being with any of the girls and therefore would expect his DNA could be found on them.


I'm not against having the database, however I am concerned, as others have previously posted, on how this info is handled and used.

For many years the fingerprint database was considered one of the greatest tools to the authorities, cases in recent years have shown that to also not be foolproof, how long before someone is incorrectly convicted using the DNA method?

Geo.

[AndrewT]

how long before someone is incorrectly convicted using the DNA method?

Already happened - just ask my twin brother doing twenty years in Wormwood Scrubs.

[Robert HM]

DNA database.ID cards chips implanted cctv  ffs even oyster cards now track where u go  Big Brother is watching you well Big brother   GFY

Oyster card tracking evidence has now been used to obtain a conviction.

"Liberty, in modern time, is generally considered a concept of political philosophy and identifies the condition in which an individual has the ability to act according to his or her own will."

Someone having my DNA on record doesn't stop this surely?

If there was a national database or you committed a non serious 'recordable' crime, you would have no choice but to give a sample of DNA, even if you didnt want to. This does not constitute liberty and especially not freedom.

You don't need to have committed an offence, the mere fact that you have been arrested gives the right for police to take the sample by force, even if not charged.

This is highly worrying. Whats the  position on it among your peers Robert? Is it split into those lawyers who defend and prosecute?

Mad it was brought in as a package of measures and went through with only a modicum of pressure against. We are at a time when even prosecutors believe that Civil Liberties have taken a huge knock and the pendulum has swung massively in favour of the prosecution. At the same time Criminal Defence Legal Aid has been hit by severe cuts causing many firms forced to close or make defence lawyers redundant. I only work part time now. So many people were distracted when many anti-freedom changes were slipped in.

[booder]

interesting film made last year about our civil liberties being taken away.........

Taking liberties

well worth watching.

[steeveg]

we can only be guided by what dna experts tell us, if a dna test is carried out properly and all rules for collecting and testing dna are followed and the top experts tell us the dna sample is reliable in court,it should be, there is not 1 foolproof method of convicting anyone, eyewitness, fingerprinting, all are not 100%, we where discussing our jury system the other week on here and most agree that is also very flawed, there are probably more people wrongly convicted by juries in prison than we imagine, so all you can do is come up with the most reliable system available at the time, it will not be 100%, no system will be, but dna will stop far more miscarriages of justices than convict innocent people, but we cant have it both ways, you cant clear someone of crime through dna then say dna is unreliable to convict as well. the papers do not print all the details of the crimes these people commit, they are sick, horrific and terrifying , these people must stopped by any method within reason available, as long as the database is only used for this purpose i cant see how it affects anyone's rights

[boldie]

we can only be guided by what dna experts tell us, if a dna test is carried out properly and all rules for collecting and testing dna are followed and the top experts tell us the dna sample is reliable in court,it should be, there is not 1 foolproof method of convicting anyone, eyewitness, fingerprinting, all are not 100%, we where discussing our jury system the other week on here and most agree that is also very flawed, there are probably more people wrongly convicted by juries in prison than we imagine, so all you can do is come up with the most reliable system available at the time, it will not be 100%, no system will be, but dna will stop far more miscarriages of justices than convict innocent people, but we cant have it both ways, you cant clear someone of crime through dna then say dna is unreliable to convict as well. the papers do not print all the details of the crimes these people commit, they are sick, horrific and terrifying , these people must stopped by any method within reason available, as long as the database is only used for this purpose i cant see how it affects anyone's rights

ok...so what about implanting a microchip into everybody?..Same thing no?

the point is; Where does it stop?

[thediceman]

It's true the same people who rigg online poker collect DNA from babies.

It's good to see your finally understanding the issue.  

[Royal Flush]

we can only be guided by what dna experts tell us, if a dna test is carried out properly and all rules for collecting and testing dna are followed and the top experts tell us the dna sample is reliable in court,it should be, there is not 1 foolproof method of convicting anyone, eyewitness, fingerprinting, all are not 100%, we where discussing our jury system the other week on here and most agree that is also very flawed, there are probably more people wrongly convicted by juries in prison than we imagine, so all you can do is come up with the most reliable system available at the time, it will not be 100%, no system will be, but dna will stop far more miscarriages of justices than convict innocent people, but we cant have it both ways, you cant clear someone of crime through dna then say dna is unreliable to convict as well. the papers do not print all the details of the crimes these people commit, they are sick, horrific and terrifying , these people must stopped by any method within reason available, as long as the database is only used for this purpose i cant see how it affects anyone's rights

ok...so what about implanting a microchip into everybody?..Same thing no?

the point is; Where does it stop?

One is passive, one is active.

[boldie]

we can only be guided by what dna experts tell us, if a dna test is carried out properly and all rules for collecting and testing dna are followed and the top experts tell us the dna sample is reliable in court,it should be, there is not 1 foolproof method of convicting anyone, eyewitness, fingerprinting, all are not 100%, we where discussing our jury system the other week on here and most agree that is also very flawed, there are probably more people wrongly convicted by juries in prison than we imagine, so all you can do is come up with the most reliable system available at the time, it will not be 100%, no system will be, but dna will stop far more miscarriages of justices than convict innocent people, but we cant have it both ways, you cant clear someone of crime through dna then say dna is unreliable to convict as well. the papers do not print all the details of the crimes these people commit, they are sick, horrific and terrifying , these people must stopped by any method within reason available, as long as the database is only used for this purpose i cant see how it affects anyone's rights

ok...so what about implanting a microchip into everybody?..Same thing no?

the point is; Where does it stop?

One is passive, one is active.

why is one active and one passive? The chip wouldn't be used untill DNA of a certain someone had been found on the scene and the police wanted to find that person immediatly..thereby prevent more crimes.

[Royal Flush]

we can only be guided by what dna experts tell us, if a dna test is carried out properly and all rules for collecting and testing dna are followed and the top experts tell us the dna sample is reliable in court,it should be, there is not 1 foolproof method of convicting anyone, eyewitness, fingerprinting, all are not 100%, we where discussing our jury system the other week on here and most agree that is also very flawed, there are probably more people wrongly convicted by juries in prison than we imagine, so all you can do is come up with the most reliable system available at the time, it will not be 100%, no system will be, but dna will stop far more miscarriages of justices than convict innocent people, but we cant have it both ways, you cant clear someone of crime through dna then say dna is unreliable to convict as well. the papers do not print all the details of the crimes these people commit, they are sick, horrific and terrifying , these people must stopped by any method within reason available, as long as the database is only used for this purpose i cant see how it affects anyone's rights

ok...so what about implanting a microchip into everybody?..Same thing no?

the point is; Where does it stop?

One is passive, one is active.

why is one active and one passive? The chip wouldn't be used untill DNA of a certain someone had been found on the scene and the police wanted to find that person immediatly..thereby prevent more crimes.

Sounds like a good idea to me then

[steeveg]

we can only be guided by what dna experts tell us, if a dna test is carried out properly and all rules for collecting and testing dna are followed and the top experts tell us the dna sample is reliable in court,it should be, there is not 1 foolproof method of convicting anyone, eyewitness, fingerprinting, all are not 100%, we where discussing our jury system the other week on here and most agree that is also very flawed, there are probably more people wrongly convicted by juries in prison than we imagine, so all you can do is come up with the most reliable system available at the time, it will not be 100%, no system will be, but dna will stop far more miscarriages of justices than convict innocent people, but we cant have it both ways, you cant clear someone of crime through dna then say dna is unreliable to convict as well. the papers do not print all the details of the crimes these people commit, they are sick, horrific and terrifying , these people must stopped by any method within reason available, as long as the database is only used for this purpose i cant see how it affects anyone's rights

ok...so what about implanting a microchip into everybody?..Same thing no?

the point is; Where does it stop?

nobody is saying implant chips in people, it just makes people get emotional and think of a big brother monertering us all  for some sinister reason, and forget  the real reason for using dna testing, to stop little children being murdered by some pervert who we may easily of been caught years ago, where will it all stop, as far as using the dna database is concerned, that's all it should be used for, sex attacks and murder,,a grey area could be serious assault, but progress will never stop ,as soon as they come out with a more reliable system than dna i am sure the world will use it,this will happen no matter what happens with dna testing.

[doubleup]

the real reason for using dna testing, to stop little children being murdered by some pervert who we may easily of been caught years ago,

When will you ppl stop believing that these things are common occurences and therefore have some grasp of the proper use of resources.

a) such a proposal assumes that everyone is a potential criminal and this has overtones of repression
b) it won't stop crime
c) there is potential for abuse by future governments, they are imo only entitled to information that they require to provide me with services like any other organisation.
d) what are you going to do to the many who will refuse - jail them? -take samples by force?
e) there is huge potential for miscarriages of justice due false positives/contamination, at the very least many people will have to prove innocence.

Finally,  I'm sure the Nazis would have been far more efficient in purifying the Reich with such a database.

[doubleup]

ok...so what about implanting a microchip into everybody?..Same thing no?

They would only implant microchips in ppl who had the genes that the scientists think make them possible criminals ldo

[Bongo]

as long as the database is only used for this purpose

lol