Felix.

He was only charged with the offence also - the ensuing trial presumably found him not guilty based on his circumstances. I don't know why he was charged but they may have been other evidence. We have a criminal in our parish who is confined to a wheel chair but still manages to have a conviction list as long as you arm.

The other examples are from Oz and USA - who are a law unto themselves. I also think that now the hype on DNA evidence has 'settled down' somewhat, it is right to go for a database.

I see no one complains about the fingerprint database. And that is seen as conclusive evidence based on someone looking at a print and deciding themselves if it matches a crime scene one. And it possible to convict on that evidence alone.

Terminator X

iTrader: (7)

Reclaim Your DNA Ten myths about the National DNA Database

"DNA evidence is not foolproof. There are two ways mistakes can happen. Your DNA can be at the crime scene because you were there earlier or later in the day, or because your DNA has been transferred from somewhere else. Or, there might be a false match between your DNA and someone else’s.
False matches can occur by chance, especially if the DNA profile from the crime scene is not complete, or if you are related to the real suspect.
The National DNA Database Annual Report 2005/06 states that between May 2001 and April 2006, 50,434 matches with crime scene profiles, or 27.6% of the total number of match reports, involved a list of potential suspects, not a single suspect, being given to the police, because matches with multiple records on the Database were made."

How long before crims start to flood a crimescene with DNA from multiple sources ...

Don't worry the DNA Database will save us

TX.

Terminator X

iTrader: (7)

"The British Academy of Forensic Sciences has noted that “in reality there are a number of disadvantages” with profiling everyone at birth, which it lists as:
• The scale of the operation would be disproportionate, since only a minority commit crimes
• It would increase anxieties about ‘big brother’, already evoked by widespread CCTV coverage and proposed biometric identity cards
• It might be seen to imply that we are all guilty until proven innocent
• There have, and will be, mistakes, chance matches and false matches with close relatives, made even more likely where profiles are incomplete
• Links will be established all the time between the scene and innocent individuals, leading to false inferences
• It would render every member of the population vulnerable to attack, by for example having their DNA planted at a crime scene
• In future it is possible that profiles could also reveal confidential information about the health of an individual
• It would be impossible to control for the large numbers of people who enter and leave the country, both legally and illegally"

"The number of false matches that occur simply by chance (rather than laboratory errors etc.) is expected to increase significantly when the routine sharing of DNA profile matches across the EU begins in 2011. The large size of the National DNA Database means that a much greater number of false matches is expected than for any other country. This includes false matches with full crime scene DNA profiles, where it will not be immediately obvious that there might be a problem, as well as partial ones. False matches can lead to false accusations and (in a worst case scenario) miscarriages of justice."

TX.

Leslie

I would be quite happy to see a DNA register for convicted criminals. If they are guilty of that type of behaviour then like fingerprints it is right that DNA should be kept on record as well.

I do not go along with a national register of all however as indeed I also do not agree with being required to carry identity cards.

Les