• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Mass DNA test for town

DNA

Certainly this is ridiculous. So if you don't volunteer your DNA, the police will hassle you more and everyone will eye you suspiciously.

Why don't they just start also searching everyone's cars and homes, etc. And maybe just give everyone a lie detector test. Surely everyone is guilty of something.

Evidently the police have caved in on this case and have gone into a wild panic.

Ridiculous is even not a good word for this. What a trend to start. Sheesh.
 
rikzilla said:
That could be true in some specific instances, but DNA left at a crime scene does in most cases place you at the scene. It's possible you were there before, or after the crime....but you were there unless you can prove that evidence was planted. In the case of semen or blood though, it's pretty hard for cops or an enemy to plant this without you giving it over in the first place.

Much of what you say is true....but the fact is...if you were defending a guy who's, ahem, "DNA" was found inside a dead person....you'd have one hell of a job ahead of you.

-z
Click to expand...

Your argument appears to be that it is impossible for your DNA to be present somewhere you haven't been. That is simply wrong and does not require evidence to be planted. In the context specifically of DNA recovered from semen, it appears that your DNA could still be present in your partner 3 or more days later (source: http://www.genelex.com/paternitytesting/paternitybook2.html). So your DNA could perfectly easily be present at a crime scene in a building, town, state or country that you have never even been to.

So it will not necessarily be particularly unusual to have totally innocent parties whose DNA is found inside a dead body. Guess they had better hope that you are not on the jury for their trial? That's exactly the problem I have with DNA.
 
Reputedly, juries are becoming more and more willing to take the prosecution's scientific evidence at face value....because they see all the exciting science on CSI, and conclude that police evidence is infallible.

Add to that that expert witnesses are a dime a dozen, and it's not hard to find experts who disagree.
 
DNA

And don't forget juries now days will convict without any forensic evidence, and even give the death penalty.

Scientific evidence is no longer really needed to find anyone guilty any more.

Just find someone and let the media demonize them for a while, and you have your "instant perpetrator"! Case solved!
 
Re: DNA

nightwind said:
And don't forget juries now days will convict without any forensic evidence, and even give the death penalty.

Scientific evidence is no longer really needed to find anyone guilty any more.

Just find someone and let the media demonize them for a while, and you have your "instant perpetrator"! Case solved!
Click to expand...

Which is what his defense attorneys always argue on Michael Jackson's behalf. He's the utterly innocent victim of media persecution!
 
Jaggy Bunnet said:
innocent parties whose DNA is found inside a dead body. Guess they had better hope that you are not on the jury for their trial? That's exactly the problem I have with DNA.
Click to expand...

Add that to the list of risks of unprotected sex for guys. She might get pregnant and make you pay child support, you might get a disease, and if she's murdered in the next few days you are in the frame.
 
Re: Re: Mass DNA test for town

Elind said:
No doubt this may sound terribly naive to many here, who live in fear of identification for reasons best known to themselves. If something like that happened in my little town I would be happy to comply. Why the hell wouldn't I? I can't think of a single good reason, and if I was blown to little pieces one day, someone would be able to identify my remains with the DNA as a bonus.
Click to expand...

This is an interesting thread for me because in my city a serial killer from 20 years ago has recently resurfaced (BTK) and one of the steps our police department is taking is collecting DNA samples (voluntary only) from a large number of people, some of whom are suspects and some of whom are police officers involved in the original investigations. DNA testing wasn't available at the time the murders were committed.

At least one former police officer, who is not considered a suspect, has refused to provide a DNA sample because he considers it a violation, not just of his own right to privacy, but also of his children/grandchildren. Apprarently he feels that the DNA sample, once on file, will not be kept private and has the potential to impact his children's lives some day.

This seems to me to be a legimate reason for an innocent man to say no to the request. No one can predict with certainty how such samples with be used in the future.
 
Re: Re: Re: Mass DNA test for town

Beth Clarkson said:
This seems to me to be a legimate reason for an innocent man to say no to the request. No one can predict with certainty how such samples with be used in the future.
Click to expand...

Or we could say, that it will only be through the concientious work of citizens like this officer (with continued support from the ACLU) that we can prevent things like DNA information being misused.

Don't let officials mistreat you now, in order to prevent them from using it as an excuse for mistreating others in the future.
 
Jaggy Bunnet said:
Your argument appears to be that it is impossible for your DNA to be present somewhere you haven't been. That is simply wrong and does not require evidence to be planted. In the context specifically of DNA recovered from semen, it appears that your DNA could still be present in your partner 3 or more days later (source: http://www.genelex.com/paternitytesting/paternitybook2.html). So your DNA could perfectly easily be present at a crime scene in a building, town, state or country that you have never even been to.

So it will not necessarily be particularly unusual to have totally innocent parties whose DNA is found inside a dead body. Guess they had better hope that you are not on the jury for their trial? That's exactly the problem I have with DNA.
Click to expand...

I originally didn't respond to this because it seemed silly to continue the conversation. It still seems that way.

But then I thought "what the hell?" and surfed around for an instance in which a man became suspect because his semen was found inside a dead woman...yet was not found guilty of her murder. Like you said, it's theoretically possible....yet has not ever happened.

Finding your semen inside a murdered woman is a bit like finding your fingerprints on the murder weapon. There may be an innocent reason for your DNA or fingerprints to show up at a crime scene,...but all things being equal you are probably the perp.

You might want to look this up

-z
 
By Jonathan Finer
Washington Post
January 14, 2005

"In southern Louisiana, an investigation into a series of killings committed beginning in 2001 included taking DNA samples from more than 1,000 white men who drove a certain type of truck. That effort failed to turn up a suspect. Derrick Todd Lee, an African-American, was ultimately arrested in May 2003 and was convicted of murder in October."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom