I am interested to hear from those people on this forum who believe DNA is the be all and end all, especially in the wake of the Omagh bombing where it has been suggested that some types of DNA evidence are unreliable.

 

Those of you who think DNA should be taken from all suspects at will, or from all members of the population, what is your opinion now when some types of DNA evidence could be fatally flawed and lead to convictions of innocent people.

 

Do you still support these draconain DNA gathering measures?

I am interested to hear from those people on this forum who believe DNA is the be all and end all, especially in the wake of the Omagh bombing where it has been suggested that some types of DNA evidence are unreliable.

 

Those of you who think DNA should be taken from all suspects at will, or from all members of the population, what is your opinion now when some types of DNA evidence could be fatally flawed and lead to convictions of innocent people.

 

Do you still support these draconain DNA gathering measures?

 

old topic..... but new light has been shed on the subject so ill let it go...

 

yep there have been flaws discovered in it, however the blokes got off on a technicality and if he hadnt been caught he could have done it again, or trained someone else too.

 

dna technology IS the be all and end all ONCE THEY HAVE GOT IT RIGHT. ive always said that it IS an invaluable tool to be used in conjunction with other forensics to prosecute crims. i would remind you of the two cases where dna trapped murderers who undetected could well have gone on to kill again. the parents of the victims are pushing for a national database and i agree.

 

there are many cases where dna alone would be enough to convict, but if its used in conjunction with forensics i see no problem if you arnt a criminal!

But at the momeent it is not the be all and end all. When small amounts of DNA are magnified at the moment the error rate is so significant that it is not reliable, which has led the police to halt all current investigations using this dna evidenca and it has also lead to the cps throwing open all its cases to review where this evidence was used to convict someone.

 

There could be innocent people sitting in jail cells this christmas who have been wrongly convicted using this technique, and that is a hundred times worse than a guilty person walking free

There could be innocent people sitting in jail cells this christmas who have been wrongly convicted using this technique, and that is a hundred times worse than a guilty person walking free

 

true.... but there could also be people walking around now enjoying life who may have been murdered by some serial killer, that is a hundered times better then letting someone off or ignoring potential evidence.

 

NO technique is without potential flaws, we have to go on what we believe at the time to be the best method. i have no doubt that when perfected dna will be pretty infalable.

 

however another day, another breech in security of data which only adds fuel to the 'anti database' ludites armoury.

As far as I'm concerned these flaws that have been brought up recently are more evidence of why we should not have a national DNA database.. It is NOT "luddite" to be concerned about security breaches either Rob, it is entirely reasonable, especially in the light of the recent incompentence surrounding millions of bank details being lost.. Bear in mind people that if we all surrender our DNA to some database, this govt WILL allow just about every single agency, Quango and god knows who else access to it... One recent commentator on this actually put in the estimate of a potential of 300,000 people (and it sure would not only be the police, but a whole bunch of others with no business having it...) having potential access to our DNA - this just isn't on, the govt cannot possibly vet every single person (they cant even sift out the illegal immigrants working in the house of fukkin commons or the home office as cleaners... :lol: ) and all it takes is one idiot to c**k things up or one person with malicious intent to "mess around" with things and utter chaos will ensue.....

 

It's all very well to say that hypothetical murders may be prevented or whatever, but that's not the way the law works in this country, nor should it - you find the evidence to solve a particular, real crime, you build a case against an individual, then you talk about DNA testing, fingerprints and whatnot, seeking court orders where appropriate; you DO NOT assume that every single individual in this country is potential murderer and rapist and keep their records on file from the day they are fukkin' BORN "just in case" a person "might" commit a crime.. This sort of thing belongs in some Orwellian/Kafkaesque nightmare Police State.... I have no wish to live in this sort of society, although there are clearly some people out there that do....

 

I would argue that fingerprints are a far more reliable piece of evidence than DNA, but not one single party MP has ever, to my knowledge made an arguement for keeping any kind of "national fingerprint database" scheme, they all seem rather (too) obsessed with this DNA database malarkay....

As far as I'm concerned these flaws that have been brought up recently are more evidence of why we should not have a national DNA database.. It is NOT "luddite" to be concerned about security breaches either Rob, it is entirely reasonable, especially in the light of the recent incompentence surrounding millions of bank details being lost.. Bear in mind people that if we all surrender our DNA to some database, this govt WILL allow just about every single agency, Quango and god knows who else access to it... One recent commentator on this actually put in the estimate of a potential of 300,000 people (and it sure would not only be the police, but a whole bunch of others with no business having it...) having potential access to our DNA - this just isn't on, the govt cannot possibly vet every single person (they cant even sift out the illegal immigrants working in the house of fukkin commons or the home office as cleaners... :lol: ) and all it takes is one idiot to c**k things up or one person with malicious intent to "mess around" with things and utter chaos will ensue.....

 

It's all very well to say that hypothetical murders may be prevented or whatever, but that's not the way the law works in this country, nor should it - you find the evidence to solve a particular, real crime, you build a case against an individual, then you talk about DNA testing, fingerprints and whatnot, seeking court orders where appropriate; you DO NOT assume that every single individual in this country is potential murderer and rapist and keep their records on file from the day they are fukkin' BORN "just in case" a person "might" commit a crime.. This sort of thing belongs in some Orwellian/Kafkaesque nightmare Police State.... I have no wish to live in this sort of society, although there are clearly some people out there that do....

 

I would argue that fingerprints are a far more reliable piece of evidence than DNA, but not one single party MP has ever, to my knowledge made an arguement for keeping any kind of "national fingerprint database" scheme, they all seem rather (too) obsessed with this DNA database malarkay....

 

but they WERE actual murderers that WERE caught thanks to dna. just what information if made available to whoever could be used against us?... i am me! im not scared or concerned that anyone could see who i am, because theyd only find it out anyway!

 

nahhh.... theres no reason why this database couldnt be a very good thing ONCE all the flaws are ironed out.

 

i also bare in mind that you were arguing that the smoking ban in pubs would be a disaster, mass closures, businesses failing, dead pubs, ghost towns etc.... dispite your eloquent and well thought out arguments you were WRONG. i now breathe clean air in pubs that have not suffered in the slightest. so im very sceptical about your anti-dna argument as so far you have not raised to me any serious cause for concern...

i also bare in mind that you were arguing that the smoking ban in pubs would be a disaster, mass closures, businesses failing, dead pubs, ghost towns etc.... dispite your eloquent and well thought out arguments you were WRONG. i now breathe clean air in pubs that have not suffered in the slightest. so im very sceptical about your anti-dna argument as so far you have not raised to me any serious cause for concern...

 

This is slightly different argument to smoking in pubs though.... And it's still a bit early to tell... Things down here have certainly taken a turn for the worse, quite a few good club nights have gone t*ts up over the past year or so since the ban came in, and people in the know tell me that numbers were falling because of the ban, probably things in your plasticy wetherspoons-ey, no-atmosphere, "family oriented" gastro pubs are okay, but I'm not talking about those.... -_-

 

And if you honestly aint concerned about what the Govt is gonna do with your DNA once it has it on file, then you're clearly not smelling the coffee.... Fair enough if you want to live in a Orwellian society mate, I for one, do NOT, and am perfectly prepared to leave the country rather than surrender my right to privacy to the State.... No other EU country is proposing these sorts of draconian "security" measures, even the US - the home of the wretched "Patriot Act" - isn't talking about forcing its citizens to comply with this sort of thing (it's probably downright UN-Constitutional)... That should tell you everything....

nah...i dont want to live in an orwellian society, but i do want to live in a modern, safe, society and will support anything that will get us there! the point is.... im prepared to give it a go, but would be right behind you IF the info was being used against us for the detriment of society.... we could always kick it out!

nah...i dont want to live in an orwellian society, but i do want to live in a modern, safe, society and will support anything that will get us there! the point is.... im prepared to give it a go, but would be right behind you IF the info was being used against us for the detriment of society.... we could always kick it out!

 

Could we...? I mean, really...? And would the powers-that-be actually let us..? Since when has the govt actually taken the thoughts and opinions of the ordinary citizenry of this country seriously anyway...? Remember the war protests...? We ALL warned these stupid fukks that a 9/11-style attack was more likely because of the war, and we were right, and now we're in a situation in Iraq that we really cannot get out of... We might be in the process of pulling the troops out, but if you look at the amount of UK private "security consultants" (ie, Mercenaries) that are going out there, that number is rising exponentially every year....

 

And I would've thought as soon as the info is out there, surely that's it.... This is one genie that cannot be put back in the bottle mate.. I'm sorry, but I'm not prepared to "give it a go" just because it might work out.... Recent examples of security breaches in the HMRC and the NHS have proven to me that the Govt and Govt agencies are not to be trusted with this sort of information...

 

yes we could.... we still live in a democracy and if the powers abused them so much we would still get off our arses and kick em out....

nah...i dont want to live in an orwellian society, but i do want to live in a modern, safe, society and will support anything that will get us there!

 

I suppose you're pefectly happy with "Control Orders" as well arent you...? Well, let me tell you what a "Control Order" actually does - A Control Order effectively puts ANY citizen in this country under house arrest, but the person who is the subject of that control order is not allowed to ask why the control order has been put out on them, they're not actually charged with an offence, nor are they put on anything even remotely approaching a criminal trial as we would understand it, they are not allowed to effectively appeal this decision except under a "special judicial hearing", which they are not actually allowed to attend, nor is their lawyer. Their representative at this totally closed hearing is a Govt appointed advocate whom the person is not actually allowed to meet before the hearing, nor are they allowed to question the decision afterwards.... And even when a control order is rescinded, it can be activated again under any caveat at all, and is for an indefinite period of time.... In essence, a Control Order can be a virtual life sentence in a prison without bars.... The person who dreamt up this legislation clearly ODed on Kafka's "The Trial" and misinterpreted Kafka's intentions that it be a warning of impending state control, not as an idea for how a free society should act....

 

A second point - the "anti-social behaviour" legislation which is supposed to be purely for dealing with groups of lairy kids and yobs hanging round streets and causing trouble can also be used to disperse "unofficial" demos and protest actions. Anti-terrorist laws have also been (mis)used for dealing with pensioners heckling Jack Straw, protestors on Parliament Square, peace campaigners such as Brian Haw and that young lass hauled off into a big, black van by a platoon of coppers simply for reading out the names of the Iraqi war dead at the sodding CENOTAPH, and, oh, the small matter of the police murder of Jean Charles de Menezes... Are these things so apparently badly written and "rushed" by accident, or is it more by design...?

 

Would you accept torture evidence as "acceptable" as well...? That seems to be quite the "in" thing for our Govt as well.... <_<

 

Not living in an Orwellian/Kafka Society..? Mate, we're already there, and it's dangerous, ill-considered legislation like this and DNA databases that have got us to that point....

 

ID Cards, CCTV, Control Orders, "anti-social legislation", "anti-terror legislation".... All of which is being used against the ordinary citizens of this country to some extent, not just criminals.... You want a "safe" society, well I regard freedom and civil rights as being our safety.. Our safety net against the controlling powers of the State... As a great man once said "The country that sacrifices freedom for security is deserving of neither".. I agree with those words.. A Free Britain is worth fighting for, the "Britain" we have at the moment is not worth a tuppeny damn as far as I'm concerned.

 

 

There could be innocent people sitting in jail cells this christmas who have been wrongly convicted using this technique, and that is a hundred times worse than a guilty person walking free

Undoubtedly true.

 

What happened to innocent until proven guilty? :cry:

What happened to innocent until proven guilty? :cry:

 

Exactly.. The Govt now seems to want us all to "prove" that we're innocent, shifting the burdern of proof from the police and the courts to us, the citizens of this country.... That aint how a democratic country is supposed to work, I expect this sort of thing in some tinpot totalitarian state, but not in a supposedly 'free' society....

I suppose you're pefectly happy with "Control Orders" as well arent you...? Well, let me tell you what a "Control Order" actually does - A Control Order effectively puts ANY citizen in this country under house arrest, but the person who is the subject of that control order is not allowed to ask why the control order has been put out on them, they're not actually charged with an offence, nor are they put on anything even remotely approaching a criminal trial as we would understand it, they are not allowed to effectively appeal this decision except under a "special judicial hearing", which they are not actually allowed to attend, nor is their lawyer. Their representative at this totally closed hearing is a Govt appointed advocate whom the person is not actually allowed to meet before the hearing, nor are they allowed to question the decision afterwards.... And even when a control order is rescinded, it can be activated again under any caveat at all, and is for an indefinite period of time.... In essence, a Control Order can be a virtual life sentence in a prison without bars.... The person who dreamt up this legislation clearly ODed on Kafka's "The Trial" and misinterpreted Kafka's intentions that it be a warning of impending state control, not as an idea for how a free society should act....

 

A second point - the "anti-social behaviour" legislation which is supposed to be purely for dealing with groups of lairy kids and yobs hanging round streets and causing trouble can also be used to disperse "unofficial" demos and protest actions. Anti-terrorist laws have also been (mis)used for dealing with pensioners heckling Jack Straw, protestors on Parliament Square, peace campaigners such as Brian Haw and that young lass hauled off into a big, black van by a platoon of coppers simply for reading out the names of the Iraqi war dead at the sodding CENOTAPH, and, oh, the small matter of the police murder of Jean Charles de Menezes... Are these things so apparently badly written and "rushed" by accident, or is it more by design...?

 

Would you accept torture evidence as "acceptable" as well...? That seems to be quite the "in" thing for our Govt as well.... <_<

 

Not living in an Orwellian/Kafka Society..? Mate, we're already there, and it's dangerous, ill-considered legislation like this and DNA databases that have got us to that point....

 

ID Cards, CCTV, Control Orders, "anti-social legislation", "anti-terror legislation".... All of which is being used against the ordinary citizens of this country to some extent, not just criminals.... You want a "safe" society, well I regard freedom and civil rights as being our safety.. Our safety net against the controlling powers of the State... As a great man once said "The country that sacrifices freedom for security is deserving of neither".. I agree with those words.. A Free Britain is worth fighting for, the "Britain" we have at the moment is not worth a tuppeny damn as far as I'm concerned.

 

you sound like youre scared of the dark....lol

 

if you notion of a 'free society' means that the vast majority of criminals get off because they cant be nailed 100% then no...i dont want it.... as nothing can be proven 100%. all too often are we seeing known crims 'get off' on a technicallity... abit like oj simpson who you are so quick to (rightly) condem. if a free society means these wife beating murderers can get off scott free then to me that isnt a free society.

 

in the absence of religion, there has to be some strength somewhere in our society to keep feckless crims in line. religion may well be bollox, but if it does help us have a free-er society then it does have a place.

 

no evidence can ever be 100%, so we as a nation must continue to do what it always has done, use all available tools to gather the necessary information to convict those who have supposedly done wrong. its indisputable that dna would greatly assist this process.

if you notion of a 'free society' means that the vast majority of criminals get off because they cant be nailed 100% then no...i dont want it.... as nothing can be proven 100%. all too often are we seeing known crims 'get off' on a technicallity... abit like oj simpson who you are so quick to (rightly) condem. if a free society means these wife beating murderers can get off scott free then to me that isnt a free society.

 

The "vast majority" of criminals do NOT get off, that's just utter and total bollocks mate.. IF the police and prosecution doesn't fukk up and gets its case right (which is exactly what happened in the OJ trial - they put a corrupt, racist sack of sh!t copper on the stand - good one... <_< I've ALWAYS been more critical of the DA and the LAPD than the actual verdict itself, because I totally understand why the jury had to deliver that verdict, the coppers and the prosecution royally shot themselves in the foot and gave Simpson a get-out-of-jail-free card. That verdict was 100% THEIR fault, not the fault of the law itself. Of course, I do agree that if OJ had been some working class black guy with an over-worked, underpaid Public Defender, the fit-up would probably have stuck, and revelations about Mark Fuhrman and his links to white supremacist groups would not have gotten out..) then crims will be prosecuted 100% of the time, you're just making excuses for laziness, corruption and incompetence... The law does have its faults, but I would much rather there be the legal safeguards in place which guarantee our freedom from state control and tyranny than what you are suggesting, and Control Orders, ID cards and DNA databases are the most insidious attacks on the personal liberties of the people of this country since the Combination Acts of the 1800s...

 

And you still aint answered the question regarding torture, is it okay in Mushyland for coppers to go around torturing suspects then...?

no it isnt acceptable for coppers to go around torturing people... thought that was too stupid to reply too..

 

but crims under your ideaological regime would get off.... as you dont accept dna because it has its faults (dispite being 95% or something accurate), but are willing to accept other forensics that are often less accurate! if every bit of info has to be 100% in grimly world then no one would ever get prosecuted!

 

ive said before that ALL relevant info should be used (and yes by competant coppers) to secure prosecution, this includes dna, which is a huge addittion to the prosecuters armoury.

but crims under your ideaological regime would get off.... as you dont accept dna because it has its faults (dispite being 95% or something accurate), but are willing to accept other forensics that are often less accurate! if every bit of info has to be 100% in grimly world then no one would ever get prosecuted!

 

ive said before that ALL relevant info should be used (and yes by competant coppers) to secure prosecution, this includes dna, which is a huge addittion to the prosecuters armoury.

 

No, I didn't say that I wouldn't accepet DNA evidence in individual cases done on a needs basis, only that I do not accept the idea of a massive database, which is absolutely fraught with all sorts of problems - such as the management of the thing, maintaining the integrity, ensuring that information does NOT fall into the wrong hands... NONE of these things have been effectively dealt with in OTHER database schemes, and there have been MAJOR c**k ups in HMRC, Home Office and NHS systems... What the hell makes you think these morons would get a DNA or ID database right...? Answer - They WONT, and it's pretty damned obvious they wont.... The NHS, Home Office and HMRC systems were almost designed to fail, there have been several reports that I've read in non-mainstream press publications (such as Private Eye and New Statesman) which if you had read, would honestly make your head spin at the sheer stupidity of it all, and be in total agreement with me.... I tend to believe what the non-mainstream sources say, because they've no vested interests and no particular party affiliations, whereas the mainstream press does....