MP backs DNA testing an entire CITY to find murderer

reply to post by wcitizen


Actually, it is you who misread. I said none of that applies, referring to your "just cause" against such testing. If the testing is voluntary, it does not apply. No one is being forced to do anything. I saw your acknowledgement that if it was voluntary then there was no worry, but you went on after that to still try to push a point about some rights violation. There is no IF though, it is voluntary.

EDIT: Also, "keep making inaccurate statements" implies I made serval. The only thing I was wrong on was the date of the article. Everything else I have said is exactly how it is.

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by wcitizen

 

Actually, it is you who misread. I said none of that applies, referring to your "just cause" against such testing. If the testing is voluntary, it does not apply. No one is being forced to do anything. I saw your acknowledgement that if it was voluntary then there was no worry, but you went on after that to still try to push a point about some rights violation. There is no IF though, it is voluntary.

Go back and re-read the posts. You will see that it is relevant.

End of conversation for me.

reply to post by wcitizen


It isn't though, is it? If it was a rights violation, I am very interested to hear exactly why. How can calling for a voluntary DNA screening be a rights violation. It can't, so what you said about such violations is irrelevant.

reply to post by kiwifoot


Thanks for the post Mr.Foot..

what i fail to understand is why the police don't just do there job like they should..

what about the lady who got murdered the next day, or the day after that?(not sure there were more murders,just using this as an example)

does this one lady Jo Yeates mean so much to this city that they act like she was the queen?

not being disrespectful mind you..

just curious as to why does this case merit such intense screening of all males DNA in Bristol..

do you see what i am getting at here? why this young lady?

according to the article , she was an architect...


was she the only one in the whole city and now they can't find a replacement?

you see..it doesn't make any sense to me..

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by wcitizen

 

It isn't though, is it? If it was a rights violation, I am very interested to hear exactly why. How can calling for a voluntary DNA screening be a rights violation. It can't, so what you said about such violations is irrelevant.

As I've said, I'm signing out. Since it seems you really want to have the last word, I'm more than happy to concede the floor and let you have it.

reply to post by baddmove


Murders are very infrequent in the UK, given the population. But, to answer your question, Police dealt with a murder of a man in Bristol at the beggining of December and have suspects in custody. Not entirely sure what point you're making.

reply to post by wcitizen


It's not trying to have the last word, but when you bang on about "rights violations" then can't back it up, that speaks volumes. And it's me that's accused of hyperbole....

reply to post by baddmove


That's just how the MSM operate.

Every now and then a case will come along and they will "decide" to sink their teeth in and hold on for as long as possible. The worst thing that can happen for them is that the murderer is caught quickly and efficiently. They will lambaste the investigators in their newspapers whilst in the board rooms they rub their hands with glee as the case drags on and on.

It happened with the Madeleine McCann incident too.

Which is why, during such events, I make sure to pay extra attention to the "smaller" headlines, because I cant help but think to myself, "what am I missing?"

reply to post by baddmove


I agree, you should see the press coverage it's getting here. Every day Skynews has a breaking story about her death, there's been well over 10 different breaking news stories released. Some of them include:
CCTV footage of her buying a pizza (understandable, last appearance)
Police want to locate the pizza box (not joking)
Mother and Father very sad
Mother misses daughter
Brother misses sister and is distraught
Joanna had a sock missing- article included main picture of PC holding up said sock to press (ridiculous)
Police draft in criminal psychologist (this over a week after her body found)
£50,000 reward for information (fair enough, no point offering a reward which nobody knows about)
Police confident of catching killer

Then there's also been at least 5 more about her landlord, he was the main suspect- though he has now been released without charge.

Now, obviously her death is very tragic, but why all this coverage? Like I say, these were all headlines/breaking news at the top of skynews.co.uk. Some of them are ridiculous, people regularly go missing and are murdered. Again, of course, I am not justifying her death or saying we shouldn't care- but it's gotten silly. Why is a pizza box important? Why tell us it took over a week to draft in a criminal psychologist? Surely that's common place in a high profile such as this. Why print at least 4 stories about how sad her family are? Of course they're going to be sad.

Truly, my deepest sympathies go to her family, I'm not heartless- but why is this given such special treatment in comparison to numerous other murders/disappearances, it's strange.

I should also add, it's quite good, I'm not complaining, it's a much more positive use of the press than the usual celebrity drivel and propaganda fear mongering flu nonsense we're usually subjected to.

Originally posted by stumason

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?

I am sure you don't see a problem like most people wouldn't largely because you might think that a policeman is you friend, that the actual DNA test is without fault and you presume there is no one with similar DNA to yours knocking about committing crimes in the greater Bristol area.

The type of DNA sequencing test the police use is quick, it's cheap and relies on matching a limited set of sequences - maybe 7 or 20.

So when your sample raises an alarm they may do the more extensive testing a few days later proving your innocence but you would have had to suffer a dawn police raid, a media scrimmage in front of your house because a police officer will tip off the media of your identity, you might be kept on police remand for a few days until you are released all because you wanted to do your civic duty.

If the police invited me to do a DNA test, I would forward the letter to legal representation and request under what law am I obliged to submit my personal information.

Do you suppose bankers have a sense of civic duty?

reply to post by Ilovecatbinlady


Actually, no, I don't think that. There was case in NZ a few years ago with a man convicted of murder on DNA evidence. Turns out, another man of ploynesian descent had the exact same DNA profile! He eventually got acquitted, but the system isn't infallible. That said, there is only a 1 in 2 biilion chance that would happen.

And no, I don't believe the fuzz are my friend, but I am well aware of the Law and my rights so don't get bullied or coerced into doing something I don't want to or have to. You are well within your rights to ignore any call for DNA screening, no need for a lawyer at all.

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by Ilovecatbinlady

 

Actually, no, I don't think that. There was case in NZ a few years ago with a man convicted of murder on DNA evidence. Turns out, another man of ploynesian descent had the exact same DNA profile! He eventually got acquitted, but the system isn't infallible. That said, there is only a 1 in 2 biilion chance that would happen.

And no, I don't believe the fuzz are my friend, but I am well aware of the Law and my rights so don't get bullied or coerced into doing something I don't want to or have to. You are well within your rights to ignore any call for DNA screening, no need for a lawyer at all.

edit on 9/1/11 by stumason because: (no reason given)

The odds of a a billion or two is after the full sequence or a detailed comparisons are made. The quick test only compares a few and the odds are more like one in one or two million.

The issue is not whether you know your rights, it is having to suffer the police violating it. The police are very good at working out the right amount of distress to cause you yet ensure that it is not worth your time to take it to court if they have a mind to.

Ignoring the call for a DNA is what I would strongly advise particularly since the police are known for hoarding the details and DNA of innocent people when they can get it. The Association of Chief Police Officers even floated the idea of taking the DNA of every new born and profiling future criminals according to the kind of family they are born into.

Of course they will not profile psychopath bankers.

reply to post by stumason


Please! What fantasy world do you live in? They will not delete your info after they spend all that money just trying to collect and categorize it! Wake up! Yeah like a simpletons law suit over the police having his DNA on file will last 2 seconds in court. You would get laughed right out of the court room and probably harassed with some lawsuit too. This isn't a perfect world and most of the people in places of power are corrupt and answer to their corporate ring masters. They are collecting DNA just because they want too and now have a reason to try, and it isn't even a good reason at all. Murders happen all the time. What's next? If someone robs a place then they go door to door putting in swipe card systems on all of your houses so they know when you come and go to verify you have an alibi? Welcome to the world of no rights! You will have the right to shut up and do as your told when your told or you will be incarcerated and scorned if you disobey.

Of course if they start DNA testing whole cities the MO of many murders will change as they try to escape the city soon after they commit the murder. Just a thought.

I was on a murder, rape, baby killing, kidnapping, torture, gun smuggling, drug dealing, robbery, assault rampage a month ago and I gotta say if these tests happened where I live i'd be a very upset man. I am going to call my local MP and demand that this idea not be passed where I live.

reply to post by stumason


It's all about control of the population. I don't want to or need to be controled. It's in every area of our lives For Heavens Sake where will it end.
How come they didn't demand this when others are murdered? Oh yes I forgot - they're not important enough.

The Powers that be are all running scared now - they know what's coming. The masses are more educated than they have ever been and have seen right through them.

They have all killed eachother for years in power struggles - I bet their DNA isn't on the list.

Originally posted by stumason
How is it a violation of "innocent until proven guilty"?

well that's an easy one ... because it is Innocent until Proven guilty ... NOT we think you may be guilty so prove to us you're innocent.
Nothing could convince me to volunteer my DNA to prove my innocence, ever.
I was born innocent, when that changes, charge me, until then, i have Nothing to prove.

now for a closing, how'd you say it? ... oh yeah, (minus the religious offense) ... geeeeesh, I do wonder sometimes about people's lack of general awareness and intelligence.

reply to post by stumason


I don't know what sort of standards you have there.. but I don't think this would fly in America.

You can't force someone to incriminate themselves, so you can't force them to a DNA test without evidence.

Also this must cost a LOT of money to do.

Am I the only one here that thinks blanket DNA testing is a good idea? I mean if you have done nothing wrong then what is the harm? If they're not retaining the DNA for any more than the duration of the case, what is the issue here?

I know this is a conspiracy website, but not everything the Governments do is for personal interest. People scream and yell from the hilltops when justice isn't served and yet when things like blanket DNA testing are brought up which would help increase the odds of finding the killer people scream and yell from the hilltops.

Originally posted by DigitalSea
Am I the only one here that thinks blanket DNA testing is a good idea?

perhaps

I mean if you have done nothing wrong then what is the harm?

truthfully, tooooo many to list but mostly, because we are born innocent, the harm is in the assumption of anything other than our innocence.

If they're not retaining the DNA for any more than the duration of the case, what is the issue here?

because this will Never happen as stated.
heck, there are many offiicial groups (not just the judiciaries) who lose, misplace, destroy, randomly release and occasionally, even sell evidence ... much as i do trust some deputies, i do not trust the system, one bit.

Not speaking in conspiracy mode here but ... if you were an (unknown) relative of the criminal DNA structure sought, with enough 'match points', your life would be subsequently destroyed while the 'truth' was investigated ... however long that may be.
You willing to take that risk? among many others.