The Introduction of a Compulsory DNA Database
The DNA database currently holds DNA samples of convicted criminals, suspects, witnesses, victims, children and people who were not charged with an offence. An article written in the telegraph states that, once on the database, your DNA profile cannot be removed. (George Jones, 2006). Ben Quinn of the Guardian explained that, a call for a nationwide DNA database has been made. (Ben Quinn, 2008) In this report the DNA database is discussed showing issues, both for and against the database. Certain issues raised are social and ethical issues, medical and economic issues and issues with the crime system.
With a DNA database in place, there could be instant recognition after a crime, if DNA evidence was left at the scene. For the argument against, problems can occur with DNA transfer. In an article in The Sunday Times, Professor Allan Jaimeson explains that If DNA is found at a crime scene that has been unintentionally transferred by another person, this could cause a conviction of an innocent person being wrongly accused for example: person A shakes hands with person B. Person B gets into a car that was later stolen and used in a crime, person A’s DNA would be in that car even though they had not been involved in the crime, and may be charged with the offence. (Richard Woodsands and Daniel Foggo, 2008) Evidence could also be planted at a crime scene by someone else e.g. a few strands of hair. If corrupt police officers investigating a crime had access to the DNA samples they could plant evidence at a scene just to make sure they got a conviction. Cold cases could be re-opened and the DNA samples can be analysed again to find the criminal, if they were on the database. (George Jones, 2006).
There is also an issue with illegal immigrants entering the country and committing crime. The database would not hold their DNA profile, so they would not be caught.