DCI Gene Hunt

You think!

So the other 65% are all false, not in the public interest (i.e. made up police bollocks that wouldn't stand up in court) and found not guilty because you haven't done your job properly in the first place.....

With improved DNA testing you lazy ******* won't even bother showing up at a crime scene, you'll just send someone to get DNA samples while you sit at work on Scoobynet telling us all how wonderful you are...........

Useless bunch of idiots.......

Gymbal

Or supervising scameras.....

Though I dont agree with DCI's "Useless bunch of idiots......." 35% isnt useless.

Does police training involve discussion of the Nuremberg defence "Just following orders". The two who arrested WW are more of a threat to the population than a geriatric lefty.

Back on topic, are all policemen DNA databased on commencement of training?

Much as I appreciate policing is difficult job I think some policemen (and policies) do not help the public or the perception of the public.
Certain behavoiur must be exposed and resisted.

DCI Gene Hunt

Yes, it is.......... only one third of reported crimes are solved........ that's feckin useless in my book

And even that 35% is probably down to members of the public ID'ing them at the scene, writing car registration numbers down etc.. rather than plod 'detecting' anything.........

Felix.

Gymbal

Yes – we are all DNA’d and fingerprinted on commencement of training



DCI

I’m not saying that all 65% of reported crimes will fall into that category. I am saying that a part of this figure will be made up of this. There will always be genuine crimes which are not solvable despite every effort being taken. And before you say it – I know some cases are handled badly, but don’t tarnish everyone with the same brush; they really are few and far between these days due to quality control.

boomer

Sorry to sound dumb, but what exactly does "detection rate" mean?

• You noticed that a crime has been committed?
• You know who committed the crime?
• You think you know who committted the crime?
• You stitched someone up (e.g. possibly Barry George)?
• You actually got the real crim put away for a decent stretch?
• You successfully NIPed and prosecuted 50% (thus swaying the "overall" figures) of speeding motorists (the remaining half being un-registered, so got off scott-free)?

...and of course (but sadly out of your hands) - how many detected and convicted crims actually got a meaningful punishment? If they don't get what they deserve, no amount of DNA database will make the world a better place (but will inconvenience, frustrate and snoop on the law abiders).

mb

Chris5-0

Yyyaaawwwwnnnn!!


Sorry, just woke up after reading the response to my post!!

So it's basically Tony Blair's fault and he's quietly getting rid of civil liberties for his own political gain?

I'm sorry i thought i asked for non sci fi conspiracy theories. About the only thing you mentioned was 'moral issues'

What moral issues?

I don't give a damn about petrol strikes or your perception of innocent until proven guilty, I was asking about DNA. But once again no-one can actually come forward with any evidence or reason why we shouldn't do it. Your example of a 10 year old DNA'd is mad as!! Surely if he commits a crime at 60 it shouldn't matter, if he is guilty and found guilty because of DNA thats a good thing, or would you rather a 60 year old rapist, murderer, paedophile etc get away with his crimes because we are worried about holding DNA.

Just what do you think we do with all the samples we have?

We cross match DNA found at crime scenes and then use it WITH OTHER EVIDENCE to find criminals!!

I'm sorry if that is such a bad thing!!

Can anyone on here actually tell me an instance happening to them, not a mate or a friend in the pub or something he read, where the taking of DNA has caused them problems???

Gymbal

Chris 5-0, I am sorry if our civil liberties bore you. Do you wear jack boots? I hope your not giving a damn about "your perception of innocent until proven guilty" is personal not professional.

Why do I have to have met them to know of a miscarriage?

By the time our community each knows someone who has had a miscarriage it is far, far, far, too late.

In parallel I know no murderers nor people who have been murdered, does that mean it does not happen?

Shirley Mckie might not agree with your thoughts. Front page times today!

Chris5-0

What civil liberties?? Again, i am asking for examples!! No-one can because your all sat behind your pc's slagging everything off! Give me examples why DNA evidence holding is a bad thing!

In fact i'll make it easier by asking a direct question... Why is the holding of DNA evidence in order to secure future prosecutions of crimes committed a bad thing in these days of terrorism and rampant criminality?

'Why do I have to have met them to know of a miscarriage?'

Because otherwise it's hearsay evidence and useless!!

'In parallel I know no murderers nor people who have been murdered, does that mean it does not happen?'

No, it just makes you unqualified to make comment on something you know nothing about!!

'Do you wear jackboots?'

What a stupid quote, i am a serving Police Officer sworn to protect ALL parties from crime and criminality, i investigate and put facts before others who make judgements, i do not make, nor attempt to influence others on decisions of innocence or guilt!

'I hope "your perception of innocent until proven guilty" is personal not professional.'

You didn't read my post, i was saying i don't care whether innocent or guilty, as above, i investigate and present fact!

We are all DNA sampled and fingerprinted and i see no problem with it, far as i see it stops me being hauled in if theres a murder down the road from me and DNA is recovered from the scene!!

NEXT!!

Gymbal

Still Shirley Mckie

Gymbal

Chris5-0, I am apalled at you. If this was 1930 Germany where would YOU stand. That was my jack boot comment. Nothing personal, until your response, that is.
Terrorism (and murder, I think, if you will let me) is an awful crime, but apparently "Because otherwise it's hearsay evidence and useless!!" it does not concern me (or any other non involved citizens). However I am involved, I do not wish to sit back and be trampled. I also have an opinion, sorry.

What is YOUR opinion (though I accept you probably do not know him nor the officers involved and so it is invalid (to you)) on the events reported and filmed surrounding Mr Wolfgang?

Just follow your orders.......

mart360

Chris,

because its baloney and you know it!

Ok you have mr chavs dna on file, he commits an offence and gets nicked, you cross match his dna, and find he,s commited hundreds of other offences , he goes to court , asks for the hundereds to be taken into consideration and gets? F*ck all. Then you start wimping out about its not us its the courts that let them go, What good is gathering data if its not followed through properly. Lets face it, your (and not you personally) track record of detection and resolving crimes isnt that good at the moment, so what will this do? oh yes help in the war against terrorism, nice to know that this scaremongering tactic is still being used as a medium to push through many non democratic changes to our legitimate freedoms.

If you were phoned one night and asked to provide the last three digits of your bank account, by someone staing its just junk data and for storage only, would you give that data? if you had a minor account problem and you went overdrawn beyond your limit, would you be happy if the bank took your data and passed it to a debt collection agency, for statistical purposes only, and then 30 years later, the data was used aginst you to decline a mortgage?

your, prove us wrong stance it exactly what this whole debate is about. You have identified the people who challenge the idea guilty, and are effectivly asking us to prove our innocence by giving a suitable reason why.

now if we are as you say innocent, YOU provide the data to prove us wrong.

given that if the statements to the chief constables are correct telling them to refuse to destroy evidence, when it is a requirement of the system. then i think you need to provide clearcut evidence as to why this happening.

what happens when the data collected isnt enough, will it be a small tatto on the inner arm, (for anti terrorism purposes of course), or a chip in the forehead?

how long before profiling of certain data is applied, and people removed as they dont meet the profile?

a shower before your journey sir?


Mart

matty01

If you're a crim scumgag then iagree it's an infringement of your right to steal and pilage in anonimity ,if you're a decent chap though i can't see the problem it will after all help to lock you err sorry the criminals up in butlins err sorry jail...

Felix.

A detection is where the perpetrator has been identified and brought to justice. Remember speeding figures won’t come into this as it isn’t a crime. So the rate will be the proportion of detections against total number of recorded crime.

And yes – I agree the sentences should be harsher, but due to civil liberties (which is what most people are all for on here) the punishment does not fit the crime.

scoobynutta555

What's not mentioned with these detections is the practice of crims admitting other crimes at the same time. Like the hypothetical burglar that gets caught and asks for 99 other offences to be taken into consideration. I bet these confessed crims are counted as detections as well.

Felix.

Mart – I think you panic too much

DNA is used to capture criminals. It is therefore used to solve so called ‘cold cases’ from years ago & vice-versa held for future crimes yet to occur.

So if you want us to ‘provide the data to prove us wrong’. Consider a rape victim of 10 years ago who has been living a life of misery knowing her attacker has never been caught. Suddenly with DNA – he is caught and punished. The victim can now move forward with her life.

Is this not a positive thing…?

scoobynutta555

Conversely, the rape victim might have succeeded in putting the crime behind her and got on with her life. The guy then gets caught and she has to relive the whole thing again through court etc etc.

Felix.

TIC's don't happen very often. In 6 years service its only happened to me once. And yes they will be treat as a detection because each offence he admits to will relate to an individual crime. Therefore each crime is detected to him.

Felix.

Not if she doesn't want to. The victim will be approached and if she says 'No', then that is that - she can't be forced. CPS will then probably go ahead with an unsupported prosecution. (ie Trial without the victim, only using her original statement as her evidence)

Dicke C

You don't even need to be on the database to be caught now. If someone in your family is, they use a new method called “familial searching”.....
http://www.forensic.gov.uk/forensic_...case=23&y=2004

DCI Gene Hunt

Its not far off the fecking thought Police "Pre-Crime about to be committed" (that's from Minority Report BTW)...........

Leslie

We had a lot more under a Conservative government DCI.

Les

Felix.

A lot more what..?

Chris5-0

Gymbal,

Murder is an aweful crime but what i was saying was that unless you have specific info pertaining to DNA retainment in murder cases where it has been an infringement of civil liberties you have no evidence to get involved in an argument where you are so vociferous in your damnation of the subject. Opinions are fine but don't expect to be taken totally seriously if yours is an uninformed opinion.

as for the 30's crack, its old and lame, i uphold laws passed by a DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED government which i believe does have its citizens safety at heart. I carry out lawful orders which i believe protect people, to insinuate i would get involved in other things is disrespectful. We are not **** Germany, nowhere near in fact.

Chris5-0

What?

Is it just me or does that not make any sense?

Ok you have mr chavs dna on file, he commits an offence and gets nicked, you cross match his dna, and find he,s commited hundreds of other offences , he goes to court , asks for the hundereds to be taken into consideration and gets? F*ck all. Then you start wimping out about its not us its the courts that let them go, What good is gathering data if its not followed through properly.

So we shouldn't clear up crimes because the criminals don't get the time you expect? Why is DNA retention to blame for that, you yourself say he has been matched to hundreds of crimes, which will be detected therefore keeping people like you happy! Don't understand your point, thats a lawcourt argument not a DNA argument (not passing the buck, thats fact!)

oh yes help in the war against terrorism, nice to know that this scaremongering tactic is still being used as a medium to push through many non democratic changes to our legitimate freedoms.


Scaremongering tactic? You think the London bombs were scaremongering? You think there aren't plots to kill YOU and people like you and your family happening NOW in this country? Would you rather i hang up my Glock and get back out walking around on the off chance a terrorist comes up to me on the street to give him/her self up? Get a grip and realise we live in a dangerous world, you keep going on about this Big Brother concept and crying foul, well unfortunately the Big Brother has been here longer than you or me and i can assure you it's kept people from doing some rather nasty things to ordinary civilians like us! But again, the argument is DNA, it is used in anti terror jobs and thank god it is!

If you were phoned one night and asked to provide the last three digits of your bank account, by someone staing its just junk data and for storage only, would you give that data? if you had a minor account problem and you went overdrawn beyond your limit, would you be happy if the bank took your data and passed it to a debt collection agency, for statistical purposes only, and then 30 years later, the data was used aginst you to decline a mortgage?

Ok, definitely no idea now?? How is this relevant to the post? The first would never happen and is just common security sense, the second happens all the time. You heard of Experion?? Credit checks? Adverse credit? What has this to do with DNA retention? I wonder sometimes if you ever come from behind your pc into the real world Mart!!

what happens when the data collected isnt enough, will it be a small tatto on the inner arm, (for anti terrorism purposes of course), or a chip in the forehead?

Isn't enough for what? What are we planning to do if we need more data?? Anyway how would a tattoo help?? Again i think you've watched too much TV. Or is it the **** Germany thing again?? Because i as a police officer am so stupid i'd go along with something like that?? Please!

how long before profiling of certain data is applied, and people removed as they dont meet the profile?

a shower before your journey sir?

Not even bothering!

I lose my patience with fools and personally i think your a fool ,you have no evidence, you have no fact you just shout about civil infringement without really understanding anything about the world or threat we face at this time. Please go away, do some research (MI5 or MI6's websites contain current threat analysis) then come back with pertinent comment.

scoobynutta555

Not directed at me, and I have no time for a detailed reply anyway. Just thought that last comment was amusing.

45 minutes anyone?

_Meridian_

iTrader: (1)

Godwin gets it right again....


M

DaveMiddleton

Great idea to get everyone's DNA. It has already caught several people for past crimes. (Even via close relative's DNA!!!) I have no fear of giving mine voluntarily and believe seriously that you should only be concerned if you are potentially going to break the law.

mart360

Big mistake there, every crime does not have DNA hit, white collar crime (fraud) blackmail or electonic crime does not leave DNA.

The course was obviously successfull, as its message has been accepted as gospel, ( you can say no cant you?? )

luckily there are a few of us who still have the ability to think beyond what is happening now

Mart

mart360

[QUOTE=Chris5-0]What?

So we shouldn't clear up crimes because the criminals don't get the time you expect? Why is DNA retention to blame for that, you yourself say he has been matched to hundreds of crimes, which will be detected therefore keeping people like you happy! Don't understand your point, thats a lawcourt argument not a DNA argument (not passing the buck, thats fact![QUOTE=Chris5-0]

No i said he asks for hundreds of others to be taken ito account, and gets a tap on the wrist. Will it be detected? A guy i worked with had his Motorbike stolen from a secure location, cctv etc. the evidence was caught on tape and passed over, The response, sorry cctv isnt good enough , we have to catch them in the act, ok, so how would dna help here, ok it would tie them to a crime, then it comes down to taking into account, which means they could have done worse, but it only gets treated as a minor added offence

[QUOTE=Chris5-0]
Scaremongering tactic? You think the London bombs were scaremongering? You think there aren't plots to kill YOU and people like you and your family happening NOW in this country? Would you rather i hang up my Glock and get back out walking around on the off chance a terrorist comes up to me on the street to give him/her self up? Get a grip and realise we live in a dangerous world, you keep going on about this Big Brother concept and crying foul, well unfortunately the Big Brother has been here longer than you or me and i can assure you it's kept people from doing some rather nasty things to ordinary civilians like us! But again, the argument is DNA, it is used in anti terror jobs and thank god it is!
[QUOTE=Chris5-0]

No one disputes there is a war on terror, but why is every minor legislative change linked to this and is made to be priority number one? Priority number one, would be to have effective border controls, and to start getting rid of the undesireables.


[QUOTE=Chris5-0]
Ok, definitely no idea now?? How is this relevant to the post? The first would never happen and is just common security sense, the second happens all the time. You heard of Experion?? Credit checks? Adverse credit? What has this to do with DNA retention? I wonder sometimes if you ever come from behind your pc into the real world Mart!!
[QUOTE=Chris5-0]

DNA is data, pure and simple, just as your ip address and phone number is. Both of which can be linked back to you, Given that data fraud is rapidly becomming the next biggest crime statistic, your argument of common sense is a little hollow. Your credit hisory is held on file, and judgements are made on that data. Again that word "Data" And please dont tell me you havnt heard of anyone who hasnt has troublle with credit scoring at some time in ther lives.
[QUOTE=Chris5-0]

Isn't enough for what? What are we planning to do if we need more data?? Anyway how would a tattoo help?? Again i think you've watched too much TV. Or is it the **** Germany thing again?? Because i as a police officer am so stupid i'd go along with something like that?? Please!
[QUOTE=Chris5-0]

And will you do anything about it if they do? You are paid to serve, and if your masters decree it, you will do it, Its called following orders.



Oh and by the way will you answer the question you manged to avoid?

Mart

Gymbal

Meridian. Very amused by Godwin, though I feel it may devalue my (attempted) point of sleepwalking into a situation comparable with 1930s Germany. Would an Orwellian nightmare circumvent Godwin? Is the NKVD experience and Stalinist purges covered?

However,getting back to the thread: SHIRLEY MCKIE.
Is that evidence of (apparent) malpractice for you regarding my points? As this was fingerprint evidence rather than DNA (and fingerprint) evidence. The principles of malpractice are apparent
It could happen to me or you..... what makes you untouchable where Ms Mckie and her family were not?

Regarding antiterrorism "scare mongering" though I seem to have heard about definite terrorist attacks and deaths, I also ask again for your opinion about the use of antiterrorism law to detain and remove a geriatric heckler. Those police officers (IMHO) were "just following ("lawful")orders". IMHO they let themselves and the populace they would claim to represent down. Nuremberg proved such a defence is invalid.
Though I have no problem with DNA as a tool, bearing in mind the limits of sampling and genetic pooling and the aggressive use of "statistical science" to attempt to bamboozle jurorsand other members of the public, I think checks and balances are essential. You, Chris-5o may be a good policemen, I certainly have no evidence either way, will you vouch for ALL your colleagues?
quis custodes custodiet?

ps What evidence is there that I dont know about DNA?

pps Personally an uninformed opinion (in a democracy) is equally valid. And as for not to be taken seriously....LOL My pride is easily recovered, if it really matterred , my freedom not so.