It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
no one dared question it because "terrorists hate us for our freedoms". With the precedents set, it wont be much longer before every state begins adopting this tactic of extracting DNA from anyone who comes into contact with police. It wont be long before the police are jamming a cotton swab in your mouth the next time you get stopped for a traffic violation.
ALBANY, New York (Reuters) - Fortune-tellers beware: palm-reading could land you in New York state's criminal DNA database.
Convicted graffiti artists, subway turnstile-jumpers and anybody who writes a bad check could also end up with their genetic information permanently on file under a proposal by Governor Andrew Cuomo.
The Democrat on Wednesday proposed expanding the database, which was created in 1996 and collects DNA samples from people convicted of felonies and some serious misdemeanors. Cuomo wants it to include anyone convicted of a crime under the state's Penal Law.
If the measure passes, New York would have the most expansive DNA database in the country.
For years, supporters have said a larger DNA bank would help lock up criminals and exonerate innocent people.
"DNA is the state of the art, and it's a sword that cuts both ways," said Sen. Stephen Saland, a Republican who last year sponsored a bill to expand the database.
According to the state Division of Criminal Justice Services, the database holds more than 445,000 DNA samples and has aided in more than 13,000 investigations.
Misdemeanors excluded from the database include "numerous crimes that are often precursors to violent offenses," Cuomo said Wednesday in his annual State of the State Address. Under current law, 46 percent of convicts are required to submit their DNA.
Critics including civil rights groups and state legislators say policymakers have been blinded by "the CSI effect," as it is called by Robert Perry, legislative director for the New York Civil Liberties Union.
He said people falsely believe DNA technology is infallible, due in part to its depiction in movies and television shows such as the popular CBS series "CSI," short for crime scene investigator.
"To have your sample included in the database means you're under surveillance 24/7," Perry said. "If your DNA ends up matching DNA at a crime scene, you now become subject to criminal suspicion, but there are plenty of innocent reasons for folks' DNA to turn up at a crime scene."
DNA evidence is given great weight by police investigators and prosecutors, Perry said, meaning they may often overlook traditional police work that points to a different suspect.
Lawmakers who support the expansion had little sympathy for New York's fortune-tellers and graffiti artists.
"Regardless of the nature of the crime," said Assemblyman Joseph Lentol, a Democrat who has pushed for years to reform the way the database is used, "sometimes you will get a hit that solves a really heinous crime."
Originally posted by boymonkey74
They do this in the UK but only if you are charged and then if you not convicted of any crime the police must destroy the samples.
I am not sure about it tbh, yes it can help catch people who do lots of crime but my question is how easy would it be to stitch someone up with dna evidence?
Since April 2004, the police in England and Wales have been able to take DNA samples without consent from anyone arrested on suspicion of any recordable offence. The law in Northern Ireland is the same but has not yet been fully implemented. Recordable offences include begging, being drunk and disorderly and taking part in an illegal demonstration. Both DNA profiles (the string of numbers used for identification purposes) and DNA samples (which contain unlimited genetic information), are kept permanently, even if the person arrested is never charged or is acquitted. A massive expansion in the number of individuals on the Database has not led to any noticable increase in the likelihood of identifying a suspect. GeneWatch believes the current practices are wrong and has a number of concerns about the governance of the database.
The scientists fabricated blood and saliva samples containing DNA from a person other than the donor of the blood and saliva. They also showed that if they had access to a DNA profile in a database, they could construct a sample of DNA to match that profile without obtaining any tissue from that person.
“You can just engineer a crime scene,” said Dan Frumkin, lead author of the paper, which has been published online by the journal Forensic Science International: Genetics. “Any biology undergraduate could perform this.”
Originally posted by vogon42
Just because they have your DNA profile does not mean they can plant your DNA at a crime scene.
The scientists fabricated DNA samples two ways. One required a real, if tiny, DNA sample, perhaps from a strand of hair or drinking cup. They amplified the tiny sample into a large quantity of DNA using a standard technique called whole genome amplification.
Of course, a drinking cup or piece of hair might itself be left at a crime scene to frame someone, but blood or saliva may be more believable.
The authors of the paper took blood from a woman and centrifuged it to remove the white cells, which contain DNA. To the remaining red cells they added DNA that had been amplified from a man’s hair.
Since red cells do not contain DNA, all of the genetic material in the blood sample was from the man. The authors sent it to a leading American forensics laboratory, which analyzed it as if it were a normal sample of a man’s blood.
From a pooled sample of many people’s DNA, the scientists cloned tiny DNA snippets representing the common variants at each spot, creating a library of such snippets. To prepare a DNA sample matching any profile, they just mixed the proper snippets together. They said that a library of 425 different DNA snippets would be enough to cover every conceivable profile.