Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

MP backs DNA testing an entire CITY to find murderer

page: 1
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 02:55 PM
link   
G'day ATS,

I don't know if all of you are aware of the recent murder of Jo Yeates before Christmas.

It seems this case may herald the blanket DNA testing of an ENTIRE CITY!!

BBC NEWS Jo Yeates Timeline

DAILY MAIL: Police searching for missing architect Jo Yeates discover a woman's body



Police searching for missing Jo Yeates say they have found a woman's body close to a golf course.

No identification has been made on the body which was discovered about four miles from the flat she shared with her boyfriend.

The discovery was made today by a couple walking their dogs in the Failand area of North Somerset, an Avon and Somerset Police spokesman said.


This has really taken a worrying turn though. I want the police to find the murderer too, however thisis a step too far IMO:

Jo Yeates murder case: MP backs DNA testing




An MP has backed calls for the DNA screening of all men in Bristol as part of the hunt for the murderer of Jo Yeates.


Miss Yeates' body was found at the roadside on Christmas Day eight days after she was reported missing.

Bristol East Labour MP Kerry McCarthy said if police thought the exercise was worthwhile she believed most men would understand why they were being asked.


BRISTOL has a population over 400,000 and a wider Larger Urban Zone (LUZ) of over a million. This could set an extremely dangerous precedent of mass DNA testing, something that ATS ought to be made aware of.

All the best, Kiwi

edit on 9-1-2011 by kiwifoot because: typo




posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   
It wouldn't be compulsory if they did it and they have done it before, many times, although on a smaller scale than the entire of Bristol.

Actually, the Police would be more interested in those that didn't show up for the test and there has been cases before where people have been caught for other crimes than the one they submitted themselves to the test for, unaware the Police had the DNA on file from the other offence.

I really don't see the problem, as long as it wasn't compulsory. Surely it is a Civic duty to help find this killer and if submitting to a swab of your cheek helps narrow the field of investigation (and you haven't previously been on a murder/raping rampage), what is there to worry about?



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   
I have a lead on the murder!

There is only 500,000 suspects now!

What a joke. They need to fire these detectives...



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:08 PM
link   
and when they find out its not you.
will they erase your date? NO!
they have done it before.
and would you believe them?
when they say they did.
and when they dont find him?
do all of uk? then the world?
and you can bet the list of people who did not summit
to big brother will have there names leak't on the web.
then all your friends think its you. so you have no choice.
do you think they are doing this just to catch the killer?
that's if they have any DNA.

come on be a good citizen and bend over.
edit on 9-1-2011 by buddha because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by buddha
 


You being totally irrational because these kind of DNA testing's are done quite frequently and has the world collapsed or the country descended into a Fascist dictatorship? The Police also have a legal obligation to erase your data if you're not charged with a crime and if they don't, your quids in with a law suit!

I can understand your paranoia, at least where it's coming from, but it's unfounded.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   
Absolutely unacceptable and a violation of the inalienable right of innocent until proven guilty. I hope there is mass resistance to this Orwellian, deceitful initiative.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by wcitizen
 


Why? It won't be compulsory! How is it a violation of "innocent until proven guilty"? Lets boild down your logic, shall we? Under your little fancy-world, even if the Police had a suspect in custody, they couldn't test him, fingerprint him or even ask him questions, because he's innocent until proven guilty! How then do you advise the Police on proving innocence or guilt?

Christ, I do wonder sometimes about people's lack of general awareness and intelligence.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by kiwifoot
 


Shame society can never go back through all police peoples lifes, and see how many crimes where organised by police down the pub at weekend with friends setting out on murder campaigns in effect.

Amazing how the police never use the techs they have on themselves.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by andy1033
 


Right on queue, Andy, right on queue...

What unfounded ramblings are you on about now? Have the Police been microwaving you and your irish friends again?



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


The police spent 18 years trying to get me to commit a crime, and never got there wish. Police are not there to find criminals, they are there to target anyone they want for no reason, and then get them to do something, which i never did.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


I think people have a right to be concerned, as recently as 2009 there was an uproar regarding police illegally having up to 850,000 innocent peoples DNA on file:

news.bbc.co.uk...

You think they care about rules? I wouldn't trust them at all, the only time they seem to follow rules is after their illegal actions are exposed- and we all know how these people treat whistle-blowers, right?



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by andy1033
 


Yes, yes, we know Andy, we know...

But, you see, you're not widely believed because:



  1. You never back up claims or reply to anyones questions with any kidn of sense
  2. Your claims are wild and flase. You once claimed the UK Government uses microwaves to brainwash the Irish, even when irish people have come on and denounced your craziness
  3. Your stories are inconsistent, details change over time and you appear to a little unhinged



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by buddha
 


The Police also have a legal obligation to erase your data if you're not charged with a crime and if they don't, your quids in with a law suit!

I can understand your paranoia, at least where it's coming from, but it's unfounded.


I have to disagree with you.

It is my belief (and I could be wrong) that current law allows an innocent person’s DNA profile to be kept for up to 12 years. With an estimated 4.5 million profiles, the DNA database for England and Wales is the largest in the world, and includes adults and children as young as 10.

The thought of my DNA being in a database without even committing a crime does worry me.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by wcitizen
 


Why? It won't be compulsory! How is it a violation of "innocent until proven guilty"? Lets boild down your logic, shall we? Under your little fancy-world, even if the Police had a suspect in custody, they couldn't test him, fingerprint him or even ask him questions, because he's innocent until proven guilty! How then do you advise the Police on proving innocence or guilt?

Christ, I do wonder sometimes about people's lack of general awareness and intelligence.


If it's not compulsory, and not done in a coercive fashion, and it really is totally voluntary, then it's not such a violation. Apologies if I got that wrong. However, the guilty party isn't going to volunteer, is he! I guess it might reduce the number of potential suspects, but I think we have to be very, very careful about this constant erosion of individual rights. It has been reported several times that DNA and other details which should NOT be stored on police computers actually often IS. For that reason I would refuse. I have every sympathy for the victim and her family, don't get me wrong, but in today's climate of over-control, over-surveillance and secret surveillance I would definitely say no.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ScepticalBeliever
 


Indeed, but that was mainly them just not bothering to follow the rules because people don't exercise their rights (the very same people who will bleat about their rights being taken away, when they don't even know what they are). If you submit DNA and are not charged, you have a legal right to know how it is used and that it is destroyed after use. If it isn't, say goodbye to your mortgage and hello to a nice holiday home..



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by wcitizen
 


Why? It won't be compulsory! How is it a violation of "innocent until proven guilty"? Lets boild down your logic, shall we? Under your little fancy-world, even if the Police had a suspect in custody, they couldn't test him, fingerprint him or even ask him questions, because he's innocent until proven guilty! How then do you advise the Police on proving innocence or guilt?

Christ, I do wonder sometimes about people's lack of general awareness and intelligence.


You are taking your logic to ridiculous extremes just to try to put someone down. Haven't you heard of probable cause? Reasonable grounds? If not, go do your homework. If you have, you're deliberately using hyperbole in a very dishonest way.

Wanna talk about lack of general awareness and intelligence? Let's talk.
edit on 9-1-2011 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by buddha
 


I completely agree with your sentiments and have given you a star. And when they catch the crimnal will they destroy the innocent people's DNA? At what cost?
edit on 9-1-2011 by tiger5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by LiveForever8
 


Actually, in 2008, the European Court ruled it unlawful to retain the data of anyone not charged with a crime and even questioned the retention of those that were. For what it's worth, I am in the latter category due to a transgression some years back, and it hasn't affected my life in the slightest.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


I am not interested, are the police going to come on here telling you they organised a person for follow to around to every job. Are they going to come on here telling you they perve into our home and for no reason other than to perve in to it, so they can ridicule us. No is the answer.

Amazing amount of ignorant people claiming how the police are not some sort of crime gang, like my life has proven.

You have your opinion and i will have mine(which 18.5 years has backed up by facts, not ones you want but ones my family and me want).

Do not ever tell me and others about how the police are only good people lol.

Plus for any of the others, i have never been arrested in my life, and had no record, they just did this to me to ridicule my life and try and get me to do something, i never did. You can say or what, that police try desperately to organise crimes and they do absolutely. Get it i have never been arrested, they just made up this stuff to stay in my life and never let me live a life for last 18 years. I cannot sue these people.

Amazing how this crime group, that is called police just goes along trying to cause as many crimes as they can, and people cannot speak out.



posted on Jan, 9 2011 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by wcitizen
 


Noen of that applies to this, so your trying to compare apples and space monkies. All that probable cause stuff only applies to a compulsiry taking of samples such as fingerprints, DNA or breath. This would be a voluntary exercise and I even said in my first post that the Police are more interested in those that DON't show up. It narrows the field and infringes no-one's rights.






top topics



 
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join