DNA drama?

In the news this week, two high profile murder trials have finished, with guilty verdicts for both. Steve Wright, was found guilty of murdering five prostitutes in Ipswich, and Mark Dixie was convicted for the murder of 18 year old Sally Anne Bowman in London. Both of these were convicted on DNA evidence.

This has led to calls for a universal database with all our DNA on. Currently, if you are arrested for a criminal offense, your DNA will be put on the database. There are currently about 4.5 million people's DNA on it.

As with everything, there are pros and cons.

The pro is highlighted by the Sally Anne case. Dixie was arrested in 2006 for assault and had his DNA taken. They made the link with Sally Anne and he was arrested five hours later. If there was already a database of all of us, Det Supt Stuart Cundy, the policeman in charge of the Sally Anne case, said he would have been identified in 24 hours. This, therefore, could speed up murder convictions, and minimise risk from re-offenders.

However, there is a obvious con. Does everyone want their DNA on this database? Personally, I don't. Why should the government be able to access the DNA of everyone? Recent stories of the government losing sensitive data, such as bank details of people on benefits, suggests that our DNA data would not be safe either. As technology evolves and cloning becomes more advanced, the government having this sort of data on all of us puts everyone at the risk of cloning, identity theft and general fraud.

Also, the ability to match criminals in this way would not necessarily cut down on crime, just make convictions easier for the CPS. A released murderer could murder again, and the DNA would not stop this.

Luckily, the government rejected the plans. For now.



Sources: DNA database debate urged
Man gets life for model's murder
Suffolk killer will die in prison
Nation of suspects fear on DNA
Mandatory DNA database rejected