How secure is your DNA?
Discussion
Following evidence in this trial here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west...
I wonder if this will cause DNA evidence where cases rest on minute samples, to be re-examined?
A pointer towards a suspect or avenue of inquiry - yes, but to base a whole case on...?
I have to wonder why the CPS ever thought that this case would progress to a conviction!
Still, it's only tax payers money!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west...
I wonder if this will cause DNA evidence where cases rest on minute samples, to be re-examined?
BBC report said:
The only evidence produced against Mr Monaghan during the trial was the finding of a minute quantity - a tenth of a billionth of a gram - of his DNA on the handle of one of the guns used to kill Mr Carroll.
The DNA of a lab technician, who had never touched the gun and worked three floors above where it was stored, was also found in the sample analysed by forensic scientists, along with that of three unidentified men.
Defence QC Derek Ogg said: "This incident with the lab worker just shows how mobile DNA is and how it can innocently transfer from one place to another."
You have to wonder if DNA evidence alone would ever be safe to convict on?The DNA of a lab technician, who had never touched the gun and worked three floors above where it was stored, was also found in the sample analysed by forensic scientists, along with that of three unidentified men.
Defence QC Derek Ogg said: "This incident with the lab worker just shows how mobile DNA is and how it can innocently transfer from one place to another."
A pointer towards a suspect or avenue of inquiry - yes, but to base a whole case on...?
I have to wonder why the CPS ever thought that this case would progress to a conviction!
Still, it's only tax payers money!
The police have my DNA from when I was arrested for suspected drunk driving which a station test proved to be nonsense. I did Biomedical engineering and I know that DNA isnt the conclusive evidence that people beleive it to be, and have always worried that if someone with a 90% similar DNA profile committed a crime or if my hair or other loose DNA ended up at a crime scene would I be left in the frame for something I simply cant prove I didnt have any involvement in!
When are we going to be able to get this evidence removed from the database!?
I feel that it is definitely good for police work to keep records of convicted criminals but when youve been arrested in error you still cant get it taken of the database, I only spoke to a solicitor after the event and they had no right to take it in the first place but I was unaware of this and so didnt refuse when asked.
When are we going to be able to get this evidence removed from the database!?
I feel that it is definitely good for police work to keep records of convicted criminals but when youve been arrested in error you still cant get it taken of the database, I only spoke to a solicitor after the event and they had no right to take it in the first place but I was unaware of this and so didnt refuse when asked.
Decky_Q said:
The police have my DNA from when I was arrested for suspected drunk driving which a station test proved to be nonsense.
I feel that it is definitely good for police work to keep records of convicted criminals but when youve been arrested in error you still cant get it taken of the database, I only spoke to a solicitor after the event and they had no right to take it in the first place but I was unaware of this and so didnt refuse when asked.
I'm curious - what was the station result & how long after you were stopped?I feel that it is definitely good for police work to keep records of convicted criminals but when youve been arrested in error you still cant get it taken of the database, I only spoke to a solicitor after the event and they had no right to take it in the first place but I was unaware of this and so didnt refuse when asked.
Decky_Q said:
When are we going to be able to get this evidence removed from the database!?
Legislation to do this was actually just signed into law this week. Not sure when it is due to be enacted but won't be long I'd have thought.DNA is great evidence, but generally useless by itself. Plus as you mention it's just as common to get DNA fragments rather than whole DNA samples. Still pretty good from blood & semen though.
'A teenager who spent months behind bars wrongly accused of rape after a DNA blunder has spoken of his 'relief, anger and disgust' after the charge was dropped. Adam Scott, 19, was due to stand trial next month in connection with a sex attack on a woman at Plant Hill Park in Blackley.'
From:
http://menmedia.co.uk/middletonguardian/news/s/148...
Another case:
'LGC said one of its staff members made a "typographical error" while inputting code, leading Scotland Yard to spend more than a year trying to trace a non-existent suspect. It was confirmed last month, when LGC carried out a review, that the partial DNA profile belonged to a scientist involved in the case.'
From:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/mar/30/gareth-wi...
It's a useful tool but errors and mistakes can and will occur. It involves humans. Humans make mistakes.
If it's vulnerable to human error then it's also open to misuse.
'If you've done nothing wrong.........
Say those happy to give the details of Libyan Asylum Seekers in the UK to Gaddafi's secret police. But Gaddafi was our new mate then wasn't he, and those supposedly elected by us to represent us but seem to work for Rupert Murdoch and inform us they get special a preview to the Leveson Inquiry the day after Council elections used as a political bellweather.
From:
http://menmedia.co.uk/middletonguardian/news/s/148...
Another case:
'LGC said one of its staff members made a "typographical error" while inputting code, leading Scotland Yard to spend more than a year trying to trace a non-existent suspect. It was confirmed last month, when LGC carried out a review, that the partial DNA profile belonged to a scientist involved in the case.'
From:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/mar/30/gareth-wi...
It's a useful tool but errors and mistakes can and will occur. It involves humans. Humans make mistakes.
If it's vulnerable to human error then it's also open to misuse.
'If you've done nothing wrong.........
Say those happy to give the details of Libyan Asylum Seekers in the UK to Gaddafi's secret police. But Gaddafi was our new mate then wasn't he, and those supposedly elected by us to represent us but seem to work for Rupert Murdoch and inform us they get special a preview to the Leveson Inquiry the day after Council elections used as a political bellweather.
Edited by carinaman on Friday 4th May 19:38
Edited by carinaman on Friday 4th May 19:41
Edited by carinaman on Friday 4th May 19:42
Edited by carinaman on Friday 4th May 19:44
Sorry, it's bellwether. 
My mistake. What can I say? I am human.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/bellwether
One that serves as a leader or as a leading indicator of future trends: "The degree to which the paper is censored is a political bellwether" (Justine De Lacy).
I should eradicate it from my vocabulary I came across it in a business meeting.
My point was those in authority who rely on 'Those that have done nothing wrong have nothing to fear' continually show themselves to be untrustworthy, incompetent or have little grasp on the subject. Many of them seem to believe that anything appearing on a screen or written down must be true. They just repeat it ad nauseum like some religious chant.
My mistake. What can I say? I am human.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/bellwether
One that serves as a leader or as a leading indicator of future trends: "The degree to which the paper is censored is a political bellwether" (Justine De Lacy).
I should eradicate it from my vocabulary I came across it in a business meeting.
My point was those in authority who rely on 'Those that have done nothing wrong have nothing to fear' continually show themselves to be untrustworthy, incompetent or have little grasp on the subject. Many of them seem to believe that anything appearing on a screen or written down must be true. They just repeat it ad nauseum like some religious chant.
Edited by carinaman on Friday 4th May 20:38
Mill Wheel said:
I have to wonder why the CPS ever thought that this case would progress to a conviction!
Still, it's only tax payers money!
My guessStill, it's only tax payers money!
a) they succumbed to public pressure
b) they would look bad if they did not LOOK liek they were doing soemthing
c) they probably have lots of info to say he did it but can't use it as evidence
I spose this is the problem when the authorities bowed to public/media pressure.
carinaman said:
Sorry, it's bellwether.
My mistake. What can I say? I am human.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/bellwether
One that serves as a leader or as a leading indicator of future trends: "The degree to which the paper is censored is a political bellwether" (Justine De Lacy).
I should eradicate it from my vocabulary I came across it in a business meeting.
My point was those in authority who rely on 'Those that have done nothing wrong have nothing to fear' continually show themselves to be untrustworthy, incompetent or have little grasp on the subject. Many of them seem to believe that anything appearing on a screen or written down must be true. They just repeat it ad nauseum like some religious chant.
The derivation of Bellwether is that in olden times a flock of sheep would often be led by a castrated ram (called a wether) that would have a bell around its neck. By listening for the bell you could find the flock.My mistake. What can I say? I am human.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/bellwether
One that serves as a leader or as a leading indicator of future trends: "The degree to which the paper is censored is a political bellwether" (Justine De Lacy).
I should eradicate it from my vocabulary I came across it in a business meeting.
My point was those in authority who rely on 'Those that have done nothing wrong have nothing to fear' continually show themselves to be untrustworthy, incompetent or have little grasp on the subject. Many of them seem to believe that anything appearing on a screen or written down must be true. They just repeat it ad nauseum like some religious chant.
Edited by carinaman on Friday 4th May 20:38
I don't doubt that there is strong opinion that the man charged was guilty, and that other evidence might exist that was not admissible into court, but that does not excuse an attempt to convict on such flimsy evidence.
There is now a further revelation in todays news.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west...
Justice has to be done, and seen to be done, with proper evidence, correctly collected and presented in court, or the perpetrators of these crimes will continue to be able to go free.
In a parallel, it is about time the cosy arrangement between speed camera manufacturers and those that promote their use was looked into. All too often, so called expert testimony is presented by persons having a clear conflict of interest - such as law officers providing endorsements of products on the manufacturers websites!
There is now a further revelation in todays news.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west...
BBC news item said:
SPSA forensic Alison Colley told the hearing that a single particle was insufficient to draw any scientific conclusion from.
But she said she had been asked to form her conclusion using the particle at the request of a detective superintendent involved in the investigation.
The judge said he found her claim "disturbing".
He told the court: "My understanding is that the SPSA is an independent body, distinct from the police, and its reports are intended to express independent expert statements of opinion."
It is about time that some officers realised that it is not acceptable to attempt to convict at any cost.But she said she had been asked to form her conclusion using the particle at the request of a detective superintendent involved in the investigation.
The judge said he found her claim "disturbing".
He told the court: "My understanding is that the SPSA is an independent body, distinct from the police, and its reports are intended to express independent expert statements of opinion."
Justice has to be done, and seen to be done, with proper evidence, correctly collected and presented in court, or the perpetrators of these crimes will continue to be able to go free.
In a parallel, it is about time the cosy arrangement between speed camera manufacturers and those that promote their use was looked into. All too often, so called expert testimony is presented by persons having a clear conflict of interest - such as law officers providing endorsements of products on the manufacturers websites!
ExChrispy Porker said:
I don't know.
What is his background?
I think he means this sort of thing:What is his background?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/bori...
RH
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff