Magilla Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Silly woman... Indeed, it seems she's had to backpeddle somewhat:- http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/01/11/mp_says_she_was_misquoted_over_dna_test_call/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melthebell Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 apparently now, ALL her 100 or so facebook friends are going to be DNA tested, should you be worried? you have a few online "mates" have banter on forums etc, on msn or email, or an online game next minute something happens to em and the police come knocking on your door..........and youve never met em ever? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fake Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I would want the police to have a good chance of matching that DNA to someone whether they had been convicted of something else or not. Sorry to cut it down but I don't think you understand how DNA profiling works. The one thing it does not do is match DNA with a specific person and is one of the reasons why no one can be convicted by DNA alone. It is used as supplementary evidence to a prosecution case and can be useful for eliminating certain classes of people. It only gives a likelihood and not a certainty. I will have the same DNA profile of my brothers and possibly similar DNA to other male relatives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oddgitt Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I reckopn the boyfriend knows more than everybody assumes! How so, when he wasn't even in the city when she went missing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oddgitt Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Sorry to cut it down but I don't think you understand how DNA profiling works. The one thing it does not do is match DNA with a specific person and is one of the reasons why no one can be convicted by DNA alone. It is used as supplementary evidence to a prosecution case and can be useful for eliminating certain classes of people. It only gives a likelihood and not a certainty. I will have the same DNA profile of my brothers and possibly similar DNA to other male relatives. Perhaps an inaccurate view things such as CSI give us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oddgitt Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Indeed, it seems she's had to backpeddle somewhat:- http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/01/11/mp_says_she_was_misquoted_over_dna_test_call/ DNA profiling takes a while anyways - if a single profile takes a few days (which I reckon is optimistic. It could take, say, 3 million man days to do. (bit of an over estimate, but you get the picture). Presuming that the person who is responsible is even in that sampled group, and there is actually DNA evidence to compare against. Very stupid comments by idiot MPs who have no idea of how things work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twiglet Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 apparently now, ALL her 100 or so facebook friends are going to be DNA tested, should you be worried? you have a few online "mates" have banter on forums etc, on msn or email, or an online game next minute something happens to em and the police come knocking on your door..........and youve never met em ever? It's a very good place to start if the police have a strong suspicion she knew her killer. Their DNA will be taken for elimination purposes only and destroyed after comparison. They won't be added to the national database. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fake Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Perhaps an inaccurate view things such as CSI give us? I've not watched it (no TV) so I cant comment much only to say that its not like some "magic" bullet that some seem to think it is. The cases you hear about when DNA has helped solved a past crime are few but its those that get highlighted in the media to try and justify its use. It should be scrapped as its about as much use in solving crime as the I.D. card system would have been in stopping terrorism. Its expensive to do, approximately £45 per person and that does not include the costs of running any database. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oddgitt Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 I've not watched it (no TV) so I cant comment much only to say that its not like some "magic" bullet that some seem to think it is. The cases you hear about when DNA has helped solved a past crime are few but its those that get highlighted in the media to try and justify its use. It should be scrapped as its about as much use in solving crime as the I.D. card system would have been in stopping terrorism. Its expensive to do, approximately £45 per person and that does not include the costs of running any database. Appreciate your point of view, but your bold seems to be going a bit far. I'm pretty sure there's plenty of families who can thank the assistance of dna in helping solve crimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 For the NDNADB, will they be storing the "fingerprints" or more specific information about the individual's genome? The fingerprint, I believe. I assume that the sample will be stored too. Just for checking, like:suspect: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now