I have never had anything to hide so go for it is what I say.

I have never had anything to hide so go for it is what I say.

 

So if your mother was robbed, the police find your prints all over the place, and you, coincidentally, don't have a concrete alibi you would be cool with going to jail for it?

So if your mother was robbed, the police find your prints all over the place, and you, coincidentally, don't have a concrete alibi you would be cool with going to jail for it?

One would presume, a child would have fingerprints at the home, of their parents. If investigations are conducted like that, we're all in trouble regardless.

 

I'm not sure it would preclude proper Police and investigative techniques but it would certainly, aid in whom to consider and possibly rule out as a suspect or label, a person of interest.

I think the Justice system is a little smarter than that.:thumb:

One would presume, a child would have fingerprints at the home, of their parents. If investigations are conducted like that, we're all in trouble regardless.

 

I'm not sure it would preclude proper Police and investigative techniques but it would certainly, aid in whom to consider and possibly rule out as a suspect or label, a person of interest.

 

A lot of crimes are committed by someone you know. DNA is used to corroborate other facts and evidence. After the search is narrowed to specific individual the presence of key DNA can be matched to add to the evidence. And it is not 100% fool proof even then. If everyone's DNA is recorded it would be very easy to nab the wrong person. DNA is everywhere, and it would be entirely too easy to cut corners and get the wrong guy. I'm not convinced the perceived goods outweigh the very real possibilities of abuse.

I think the Justice system is a little smarter than that.:thumb:

 

So, then, if they are that smart, then why is DNA evidence, even now, not 100% accurate? Are you trying to say people are never wrongly convicted? Even with the corroboration of voluntary DNA?

A lot of crimes are committed by someone you know. DNA is used to corroborate other facts and evidence. After the search is narrowed to specific individual the presence of key DNA can be matched to add to the evidence. And it is not 100% fool proof even then. If everyone's DNA is recorded it would be very easy to nab the wrong person. DNA is everywhere, and it would be entirely too easy to cut corners and get the wrong guy. I'm not convinced the perceived goods outweigh the very real possibilities of abuse.

I realize crimes, are often committed by someone you know or within your community but would samples of DNA or fingerprints, help more in cases that they would hurt.

 

For example:...Ms Smith lives at home, on 4th Street. She has no known connection, to Mr. Jones, who lives on 32nd Street but his fingerprints and DNA, were found near the crime scene. At the same time, numerous other family members were also found.

 

Could that scenario, give the investigators informative information, regarding who all had access to the house on 4th Street and at least, a beginning to conduct the investigation. Normal Police procedures, would then be followed.