UK - Beware: Minor offences could land you on the

[buckthesystem]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...d=1770&ct=5

Beware: Minor offences could land you on DNA database...for life

by JAMES SLACK

Drivers stopped for speeding - or even for failing to wear a seatbelt - could soon be placed on the 'Big Brother' DNA database for life.

The most trivial offences, such as dropping litter, would also lead to samples being taken under sweeping new powers which police are demanding.

The samples would stay on the database, alongside those of murderers and rapists, even if the people involved were later cleared of any wrongdoing.

__________________________________________________________________________

Read more...

Speed camera detectors to be banned under crackdown on drivers who escape penalties

__________________________________________________________________________

Campaigners condemned the plan as a step too far which could affect someone's job prospects for many years.

Under current rules, a person can have his or her DNA and fingerprints taken only if stopped for a 'recordable' offence - a crime serious enough to carry a jail term.

Minor offences such as allowing a dog to foul the footpath are excluded.

But police - backed by the Crown Prosecution Service - want to take DNA samples, fingerprints and even imprints of footwear for all offences.

They argue that, just because a person initially commits a low-level misdemeanour such as dog fouling, it does not mean they will not progress to the gravest crimes.

A chance to take their DNA - making any future crime far easier to solve - would be missed without new powers. Police also want to take samples - usually a mouth swab - at the scene of the "crime".

They say having to take offenders to the police station, as happens now, is too "bureaucratic".

The Home Office suggested the new powers to police in a consultation document earlier this year. Ministers are now under pressure to confirm the change.

There are already four million samples on the database - including those of a million suspects who turned out to be innocent.

Helen Wallace of GeneWatch UK said last night: 'There is significant potential for the loss of public trust in extending the taking and use of biometrics. They pose a serious threat to individual privacy and are unlikely to be an effective way to tackle crime.

"Any attempt to take DNA samples outside a police station is clearly unworkable."

Sonia Andrews of the Magistrates' Association said: 'We would find it difficult to justify extending the ability to take biometric data to cover nonrecordable offences.'

The Information Commissioner's Office warned of the danger of people being turned down for jobs if checks reveal details of minor offences committed many years ago.

Under the current system records of such offences are deleted after time. But if they are tagged to a DNA sample on the database they could remain 'active'.

But the idea is backed by police across the country, according to consultation responses published yesterday.

Inspector Thomas Huntley, of the Ministry of Defence Police, said failing to take samples 'could be seen as giving the impression that an individual who commits a nonrecordable offence could not be a repeat offender.

"While the increase of suspects on the database will lead to an increased cost, this should be considered as preferable to letting a serious offender walk from custody."

Pete Hutin, of Sussex Police, said the "taking of DNA samples in custody is unnecessarily bureaucratic".

David Evans, of the CPS, argued that the move would allow a 'more comprehensive database'.

The Home Office said: 'The DNA database has revolutionised the way the police can protect the public through identifying offenders and securing more convictions.

"The database provides police with, on average, over 3,500 matches each month and in 2005-6 alone led to matches against 422 homicides, 645 rapes, 1,974 other violent crimes and over 9,000 domestic burglaries.

"The consultation is about maximising police efficiency and ensuring that appropriate and effective safeguards are in place. No decisions have yet been made and any detailed proposals will be subject to a further public consultation next year."

The police demand was revealed as the Human Genetics Commission, the Government's independent DNA watchdog, launched an inquiry into the database. Panels across the country will gather evidence on public opinion.

[Afal]

My opinion is that this is totally unacceptable, but if it were to happen, then they might as well just make it compulsory for everybody in the UK to give a sample for this DNA database and then we could really say that

BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU!

[eric]

I'll check under my bed before I retire for the night and see if there's anyone there.

[amor]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...d=1770&ct=5

Beware: Minor offences could land you on DNA database...for life

by JAMES SLACK

Drivers stopped for speeding - or even for failing to wear a seatbelt - could soon be placed on the 'Big Brother' DNA database for life.

The most trivial offences, such as dropping litter, would also lead to samples being taken under sweeping new powers which police are demanding.

The samples would stay on the database, alongside those of murderers and rapists, even if the people involved were later cleared of any wrongdoing.

It can also get you convicted of previous serious crimes, which doesn't seem such a bad thing. This guy was convicted of murdering a child who went to a local school. He was caught after having DNA taken for a drink driving offence

[buckthesystem]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...d=1770&ct=5

Beware: Minor offences could land you on DNA database...for life

by JAMES SLACK

Drivers stopped for speeding - or even for failing to wear a seatbelt - could soon be placed on the 'Big Brother' DNA database for life.

The most trivial offences, such as dropping litter, would also lead to samples being taken under sweeping new powers which police are demanding.

The samples would stay on the database, alongside those of murderers and rapists, even if the people involved were later cleared of any wrongdoing.

It can also get you convicted of previous serious crimes, which doesn't seem such a bad thing. This guy was convicted of murdering a child who went to a local school. He was caught after having DNA taken for a drink driving offence

Wonderful! And it can also get to the stage where you - and your descendents including those not even born yet - could be refused insurance because maybe you have a inherited susceptibility towards heart disease or cancer.

Just wait until all employers have the ability to pay the government and trawl the DNA database for genetic information on potential employees and you just might find that you are turned down for jobs "right, left and centre" and then become unemployable because "your genetic makeup says that you may have the potential for getting sick too often and we can't take that risk".

Better still, when your grandchildren or greatgrandchildren are living in a world just like the film "Gattica" (everybody know it?) then they can be sure to note your agreement to "take that first step on the slippery slope".

Another thing: Do you suppose that if the civil servants at the time had known that Ronald Regan would get Alzheimers disease, he would have been able to stand for president?

[buckthesystem]

Oh, another one I forgot, Amor: (Seeing as you seem to be happy that DNA samples can be taken from motorists) I read of a case, not long ago, whereby a woman was "caught" for drunk driving and her DNA sample taken and automatically compared to DNA found at the scene of unsolved crimes. A "match" was found to the DNA taken from a rape and robbery scene, they figured that as she was a woman she couldn't have "done it", so her brother was arrested and treated horribly while he was interrogated and yelled at for some time, then charged with the offence and "put on remand".

It turned out that on further analysis there was actually no match at all with the DNA and "somebody" had "made a little mistake".

I wonder how many times that has happened.

People seem to forget that when the government takes a sample of someone's DNA, they actually have access to the genetic information of the whole family. Even if it is just mitochondrial DNA (that which you might get from a hair without the folicle or a skin flake or something) from a "suspect", it will be the same as the mother's mitochondrial dna or female siblings.

[buckthesystem]

I'll check under my bed before I retire for the night and see if there's anyone there.

Good on you eric, you can't be too careful. Maybe you should wear your tin-foil hat too. Now I don't want to alarm you but I'm sure I saw a fleet of black helicopters heading your way, I tried to pick up their radio signals on my scanner but they must have changed the frequency.

[buckthesystem]

My opinion is that this is totally unacceptable, but if it were to happen, then they might as well just make it compulsory for everybody in the UK to give a sample for this DNA database and then we could really say that

BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU!

I think they are making it compulsory for everybody, by stealth. Soon, the only people who won't have their DNA on the database will be the little old couple who only leave their council flat to go to the grocers once a week, or those who are disabled or housebound, or living in hospitals or assylums. They will find a way to get DNA from the disabled "on medical grounds" and they don't care about the elderly because, as Adolf Hitler said in "Mein Kampft": "........................What are you? You will pass on. Your decendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing but this new community"

Who, amongst us, can genuinely say that they have never broken a law? Even a really silly one like "not wearing a seat belt"?

[amor]

Oh, another one I forgot, Amor: (Seeing as you seem to be happy that DNA samples can be taken from motorists) I read of a case, not long ago, whereby a woman was "caught" for drunk driving and her DNA sample taken and automatically compared to DNA found at the scene of unsolved crimes. A "match" was found to the DNA taken from a rape and robbery scene, they figured that as she was a woman she couldn't have "done it", so her brother was arrested and treated horribly while he was interrogated and yelled at for some time, then charged with the offence and "put on remand".

It turned out that on further analysis there was actually no match at all with the DNA and "somebody" had "made a little mistake".

I wonder how many times that has happened.

People seem to forget that when the government takes a sample of someone's DNA, they actually have access to the genetic information of the whole family. Even if it is just mitochondrial DNA (that which you might get from a hair without the folicle or a skin flake or something) from a "suspect", it will be the same as the mother's mitochondrial dna or female siblings.

I'm sure mistakes can happen, but as in the anecdote you mentioned the nature of the technology means that any evidence can be checked and triple checked. Given the numbers of people falsely convicted by les forensically sound methods DNA testing does have the advantage of giving a fairly clear result. I for one am happpy that people who commited crimes in the past can now be bought to justice. Do you think in would be better to alllow murderers and rapists to go free then to take advantage of this technology.

[sweetycakes]

My opinion is that this is totally unacceptable, but if it were to happen, then they might as well just make it compulsory for everybody in the UK to give a sample for this DNA database and then we could really say that

BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU!

I think they are making it compulsory for everybody, by stealth. Soon, the only people who won't have their DNA on the database will be the little old couple who only leave their council flat to go to the grocers once a week, or those who are disabled or housebound, or living in hospitals or assylums. They will find a way to get DNA from the disabled "on medical grounds" and they don't care about the elderly because, as Adolf Hitler said in "Mein Kampft": "........................What are you? You will pass on. Your decendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing but this new community"

Who, amongst us, can genuinely say that they have never broken a law? Even a really silly one like "not wearing a seat belt"?

Guess I'm going to be public enemy number one in some future time, then.

Well.....at least it would be 'fame' in one sense of the word. I always said I'd be famous one day, by 'hook or by crook'

Seriously, though, I have just been reading about this in the Daily Mail (my regular paper).

Although I can't argue with the fact that being able to catch criminals by 'matching' them to the scene of a crime is undoubtedly a good thing, my worry is that in the not too distant future, such an all-encompassing technological ability could quite easily fall into the hands of the wrong people. Imagine if Robert Mugabe had such power at his disposal, for example.....

This response should not fall under the 'conspiracy theory' umbrella