Innocent people swept up in inquisitorial fervour
[theinquirer.net] THE UK GOVERNMENT has justified keeping the details of innocent people on the National DNA Database with shameless propaganda, according to a report by Genewatch.
The campaign group tackled claims repeated by Prime Munster Gordon Brown for retaining the DNA records of people picked up by the police but not charged with any offence, just in case they really do commit a crime one day.
This was not merely another reminder that the retention of innocent people’s DNA threatens to replace the principle that all people are innocent until proven guilty, with the malodorous mantra that some people are more suspicious than others, we just can’t prove that they are yet: it was a thorough shredding of the arguments used by the government and security hawks for the retention of innocent people’s DNA (such as the Ipswich murderer and the killer of Sally-Anne Bowman).
Dr Helen Wallace, Genewatch campaigner, said today: "The Prime Minister’s claim that ‚in all probability‘ 114 murderers would have walked away had innocent people’s records not been retained on the National DNA Database is false." Brown had been defending the UK’s growing use of sci-fi security technology, saying it brought liberty to the British people by making them feel safer.
There is little evidence that any of it is very effective and that the money might not be better spent tackling social inequalities and the causes of crime. Nevertheless Brown tried to defend the government’s retention of innocent people’s DNA by claiming the practice was effective. "If we had not made this change, 8,000 suspects who have been matched with crime scenes since 2001 would in all probability have got away, their DNA having been deleted from the database. This includes 114 murders, 55 attempted murders, 116 rapes, 68 other sexual offences, 119 aggravated burglaries, and 127 drugs offences," Brown said.
Not only were these claims false, Wallace pointed out, but the government itself had admitted so in 2006. The problems with the claims were many, starting with the fact that they are based on government guestimates with no reference to actual prosecutions. The government has presented no evidence of prosecutions despite the growth in these numbers since it first started touting them in 2004.
But Brown’s numbers are two years old and include references to DNA suspects identified seven years ago. The Genewatch report reminded us of the many reasons why DNA matches can link an innocent person with a crime, the least of which are false matches and the errors on the database. Just one out of every eight DNA matches lands someone with a prison sentence, according to Genewatch. Only two out of every DNA matches lead to a conviction.
Half of those suspects detected on the DNA database, however, had already been identified. And most of those were up for burglaries. The victim’s DNA is what counts in murder cases an rape cases usually hinge on consent.
Genewatch cited examples of where the government had misleadingly used, even in court, evidence of emotive rape and murder cases to justify the retention of innocent people’s DNA. While the National Policing Improvement Agency has said it is not possible to give a number of convictions secured with DNA because people can’t be convicted on DNA evidence alone. Many people’s DNA will be found at a crime scene.
These are some of the reasons the British Academy of Forensic Sciences said keeping innocents‘ DNA was disproportionate. The Scottish Parliament thought so too, having ruled out the retention of innocents‘ DNA twice in the last two years. It did so because it was "vital to strike the right balance between prosecuting criminals and protecting the innocent".
Brown cited that same need for balance in his defence of the retention of innocent’s DNA.
Source: www.theinquirer.net
