NP Rank:
UK: Just in Case You Ever Commit a Crime, We Want Your DNA NOW.
This is the original headline: "573,639: The disturbing number of Britons with no criminal record but now registered on Labour’s DNA database". This figure includes 40,000 innocent children.
Before 2001, the police could take DNA samples during investigations but had to destroy these and the records derived from them if the people concerned were acquitted or charges were not proceeded with.
The law was changed in 2001 to remove this requirement and changed again in 2004 so that DNA samples could be taken from anyone arrested for a recordable offence and detained in a police station.
Neither the Home Office nor the National Policing Improvement Agency would explain the reason for the apparent huge increase in the number of people not convicted of any offence being added to the system.
Neither of the above 2 agencies would explain the reason; but it seems it was "sort of" explained by:
And a Home Office spokeswoman said: ‘The National DNA Database is a key intelligence tool which has revolutionised the way the police can protect the public through identifying offenders and securing more convictions.‘It provides critical investigative leads for police investigations, providing on average about 45,000 matches per year.’
The spokeswoman pointed to the case of Abdul Azad, who was arrested for violent disorder in his Birmingham home in February 2005.
He had a DNA sample taken and was released without charge.
Later that year a rape happened in Stafford, 25 miles away. There were no clues until skin from beneath the victim’s fingernails was profiled and found to match the DNA taken from Azad. He was jailed for six years.
Shades of Minority Report. Azad was arrested, so the current laws allow it; what are all those innocents doing in the database? DNA is sometimes taken from victims and witnesses to aid in catching criminals:
Police can take DNA fingerprints from anybody arrested on suspicion of a recordable offence.But DNA taken from victims and witnesses to separate it from suspects’ samples at crime scenes can also be added to the database.
The information can be stored indefinitely and potentially matched with samples at crime scenes, even if the suspect is innocent.
Civil rights campaigners and MPs have been calling on the Government to change the law to force the police to destroy the DNA records of anyone without a criminal record.
Ask people if we want the government spying on every aspect of our lives and controlling our being, we say "No!"
Ask people if we want government to have the powers they need to identify and catch criminals, we say "yes"
Where is the middle ground? Are the cops lazy, or in this modern world is this the only way to keep up with criminals? In the US, there has not yet been any honest discussion by Democrats or Republicans about how social conditions contribute to crime, even though sociological research has documented the links between inequality in wealth and income distribtution and all manner of social ills, including lower IQ's, performance in school and on the job, as well as poverty, illiteracy, disease, death rates including infant mortality, as well as crime and violence, for over a decade. Quality of neighborhood, home life and class are the best predictors of future success, not genes, race or education:
PBS- Unnatural Causes 2008
Wealth, Income, and Power by G. William Domhoff 2005
#497 - Economic Inequality and Health Rachel.org 1996
NowPublic on Facebook
Crowd Power
-
Erik Larson
Washington, District Of Columbia, United States





Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (3)
at 21:20 on August 18th, 2008
Erik Larson, I like this story. It's good stuff.
at 15:57 on August 19th, 2008
Erik Larson, I like this story. It's good stuff. There are many things which our Government create that are extremely unpopular, but If taking DNA increases the crime detection rate, then it is a good thing,
at 17:57 on August 19th, 2008
catching criminals is good; abuse of power is not. It's disturbing the 2 agencies involved wouldn't explain why they're keeping the DNA of nearly 600,000 people, incl. almost 40,000 kids, who haven't been convicted of a crime, that may have only been victims and witnesses. If they ever commit a crime the database may help catch them; but currently it appears there are few regulations regarding who accesses the database and how the data is used; at a minimum there should be effective oversight and accountability for security, but I'm inclined to agree with the civil liberties advocates who want the data of innocents purged.
The government needs to explain why they're doing this, and there needs to be public debate over the issue.