DNA law change

[imdying]

In reference to this article, and specifically this comment:

Giving the Police more power to screw even more innocent people over!! Like, the Police can be blardy TRUSTED - not to plant evidence etc. as they have been doing to secure a conviction?

Really? How many people here honestly believe that the NZ Police would do that? I have no doubt that they're often under pressure for convictions on high profile cases, and sometimes there's that scum bag that's gotten away more times that they can count that they really want to nail hard... but surely the sport in it for the police would be lost pretty quickly? I mean, wouldn't the buzz be 'getting your man', rather than just locking up randoms? I accept that there are going to be crooked cops, but surely they already have plenty of ways of 'stitching someone up'.

Having said that, I still don't believe they should be able to take your DNA in the new manner. Either take everyones DNA, and start taking it from birth, or use it when it's required to tip the balance. If it's good enough to start matching up previous crimes, then why not sample everyone and use it to rip the heart out of the criminal element in this country? Probably because it's not a magic tool like CSI makes out...

[Swoop]

Arthur


Allan


Thomas.




Definately NO gathering of DNA if someone is arrested. That is a complete joke.
After being convicted by a court of law is different, but definately not on an arrest.

[Ixion]

Two words. David Docherty

[Colapop]

If you have nothing to hide then what is the big deal? How many rapes or sexual assaults could be preveted by having a larger DNA data base? Murders, assualts... ?

[Mully]

Definately NO gathering of DNA if someone is arrested. That is a complete joke.
After being convicted by a court of law is different, but definately not on an arrest.

Agreed. Anyone convicted of a jail-able (or Home detention-able) offence should be forced to contribute a sample for the database.

It's a slippery slope when they start taking samples of everyone arrested

[Skyryder]

Arthur


Allan


Thomas.

Add Scot Watson to this list.

On the Thomas thing this only happened due to public pressure as a result of Pat Booths articles. There are still some of the old time cops who still think he is guilty.

Watsons day will come...............just don't know when. Problay when all those that fucked him are either dead or retired.

I personaly don't have a problem with DNA data bases but having said that I'm just not too sure how this can be abused. I'm more concerned about digital finger print profiling. There has been talk that you may be required to give your fingerprints at the side of the road. The technology is developed for this and I'm picking the boy racer problem will be the catalyst that the police will use to promote this. It will be an ID thing which is what was used for the licence photo ID.

Skyryder

[Swoop]

It's a slippery slope when they start taking samples of everyone arrested

Welcome to the land of Big Brother...

[idb]

Is it really any different to submitting a fingerprint impression?

Do they actually do that as a matter of course or is that just an American tv thing?

[Trudes]

If you have nothing to hide then what is the big deal? How many rapes or sexual assaults could be preveted by having a larger DNA data base? Murders, assualts... ?

Agree!
I heard somewhere or read somewhere that every baby born in NZ since ages ago have a blood sample taken to test for some kind of disease (someone who wants to look this up can do a search of some sort) it's for genetic testing of some sort, these blood samples are then sent somewhere to be tested for this disorder and are then kept and stored.
Apparantly they can't be used for any type of DNA proof or anything and you can request to have yours returned to you, but that would depend upon you knowing about a bit of your baby blood being stored away somewhere in the country and caring to have it back,.... anyway, my point is.... I've forgotten, but I guess if someone really wanted to stuff about with your DNA and you were born in NZ, they could somehow get access to your blood swab/smear thing and do something with it, but why bother.

[Mully]

Add Scot Watson to this list.

Actually, that's a point. Didn't they convict Watson on DNA evidence that was shown to be compromised?

And wasn't David Blain convicted on dodgy DNA evidence too?

[Skyryder]

Is it really any different to submitting a fingerprint impression?

Do they actually do that as a matter of course or is that just an American tv thing?

If you get arrested it's mug shots and the finger print pad. I'm not sure if that goes as far as having a drink blood test. Sounds a bit ghoulish but you get the picture.

Skyryder

[MsKABC]

Agree!
I heard somewhere or read somewhere that every baby born in NZ since ages ago have a blood sample taken to test for some kind of disease (someone who wants to look this up can do a search of some sort) it's for genetic testing of some sort, these blood samples are then sent somewhere to be tested for this disorder and are then kept and stored.
Apparantly they can't be used for any type of DNA proof or anything and you can request to have yours returned to you, but that would depend upon you knowing about a bit of your baby blood being stored away somewhere in the country and caring to have it back,.... anyway, my point is.... I've forgotten, but I guess if someone really wanted to stuff about with your DNA and you were born in NZ, they could somehow get access to your blood swab/smear thing and do something with it, but why bother.

Yes, the heel prick test blood is stored away. They test for several serious diseases. It's relatively easy to get the sample back, but not many people know this. The midwife (or other person taking the test) should inform you of this....mine didn't.

If you are convicted of any crime involving harm to another person, your DNA should be kept on record, IMHO.

[Ixion]

If you have nothing to hide then what is the big deal? How many rapes or sexual assaults could be preveted by having a larger DNA data base? Murders, assualts... ?

I have a good deal to hide. My private life for one thing. And I have a great deal to fear. Police corruption and ESR incompetence for a start. David Docherty was falsely accused, convicted and jailed on the basis of DNA evidence (I'm personally sure Scott Watson was, too, but that's not proven). DNA evidence is the easiest evidence of all to fake. Show me why such a database won't make more David Dochertys more likely?

[MSTRS:Me]

What people don't know is that if you have a bone marrow transfusion, you will then produce the donor's dna. AFAIK.

[MsKABC]

David Docherty was falsely accused, convicted and jailed on the basis of DNA evidence ...DNA evidence is the easiest evidence of all to fake. Show me why such a database won't make more David Dochertys more likely?

My understanding is that DD was convicted on the basis of (deliberately?) mis-interpreting DNA evidence. Any type of science is only as reliable and honest as those technicians, officials etc who are using the results. You could make similar statements about any type of evidence e.g. planting physical evidence at the scene of a crime, making evidence "disappear". Anything is possible where corruption is present.

Personally, if I were falsely accused of a crime, I'd rather they had the means to prove me innocent using DNA evidence than not