"You Fit the Profile..."
---
...the profile being, of course, "male" --
There is no fundamental difference between "everyone's a suspect" and "guilty until proven innocent." This was a murder. But next time will it be a rape? A burglary? Will the dragnet be people in "the neighborhood" or the town or the county or the country? If you believe in dragnet DNA sampling, then why not cut to the chase and simply require mandatory DNA sampling of everyone, period? Instead of that cute footprint they make when you're born, they can take a drop of blood instead.
No one wants brutal crimes to go unsolved. But that's not the same as saying "crimes must be solved at all costs," especially when the cost is the civil liberties of the innocent.
---
Related:
Remember the saying, "It is better to let ten guilty men go free than to condemn one innocent man..."? Apparently it's now better to let 24 innocent men go home than to let one guilty man go to work.
Welcome to the New World Order.
Four thousand men face DNA testing in a bid to find the killer of Sally Anne Bowman. The 18-year-old model was bitten, sexually assaulted and stabbed to death just metres from her home in Croydon, Surrey, last September.And if you don't "voluntarily" provide your DNA, then what? Does that make you a suspect? Will the police simply seek a warrant compelling you to give a sample? Will you be added to some permanent list of "non-cooperative citizens"?
...
Detective Chief Inspector Stuart Cundy said it was believed the killer has an "incredibly strong local connection". He may live or work in the area or have family there, said DCI Cundy, who is leading the investigation. There may be up to 2,500 local men who fit the description of the attacker.
DCI Cundy warned those people who did not step forward to give DNA via fingerprinting and a mouth swab could expect to be visited by police.
"The letter asks men who live or visit the South Croydon area, who are white or light-skinned and were born between 1965 and 1985 to voluntarily provide their DNA,'' he said.
There is no fundamental difference between "everyone's a suspect" and "guilty until proven innocent." This was a murder. But next time will it be a rape? A burglary? Will the dragnet be people in "the neighborhood" or the town or the county or the country? If you believe in dragnet DNA sampling, then why not cut to the chase and simply require mandatory DNA sampling of everyone, period? Instead of that cute footprint they make when you're born, they can take a drop of blood instead.
No one wants brutal crimes to go unsolved. But that's not the same as saying "crimes must be solved at all costs," especially when the cost is the civil liberties of the innocent.
---
Related:
A Baton Rouge hospital, hoping to get to the bottom of an office prank, is ordering 25 employees to undergo DNA testing or be terminated.Now the profile is "you work here." And keep in mind there was no real crime — no murder, no rape, no theft. Just a childish prank.
Leaders at Woman's Hospital say a man who works in Building Operations returned from several weeks off to find that someone had placed urine in his toolbox.
After hearing of the incident, hospital administrators sent a memo to 25 employees who also work there telling them that DNA testing would be done unless someone came forward admitting guilt. Since no one came forward, the hospital said the DNA testing will begin within the next few weeks.
Remember the saying, "It is better to let ten guilty men go free than to condemn one innocent man..."? Apparently it's now better to let 24 innocent men go home than to let one guilty man go to work.
Welcome to the New World Order.
Posted by Kip on
2 March 2006
To comment on this post, please visit the new blogsite.



