How do people feel about this? 84 taximen to be asked for DNA samples in rapist hunt

Kamili

What happens if the Gardai use their Gmail email accounts to share your DNA sample with whomever they deem fit?

osarusan

Doesn't Ireland already have a DNA database? One was scheduled to be created about a year ago.

And it has already helped in identifying criminals. http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/crime/new-dna-database-helps-garda-to-solve-more-than-200-crimes-34798698.html

The article is saying that the samples submitted by taxi drivers (the samples that are not a match at least) will not be retained as part of that database. The will be just be destroyed after being found not to be a match.

Damien360

Kamili wrote: »

What happens if the Gardai use their Gmail email accounts to share your DNA sample with whomever they deem fit?

Not sure you understand DNA sequence. Gardai have access to the results of a search, not to the DNA sequence as it is meaningless to anyone but those with the correct software and its corresponding database. It currently has no use for mapping of you in a commercial world. It is too complex. We can read the sequence but have very little understanding of it.

Damien360

osarusan wrote: »

Doesn't Ireland already have a DNA database? One was scheduled to be created about a year ago.

And it has already helped in identifying criminals. http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/crime/new-dna-database-helps-garda-to-solve-more-than-200-crimes-34798698.html

The article is saying that the samples submitted by taxi drivers (the samples that are not a match at least) will not be retained as part of that database. The will be just be destroyed after being found not to be a match.

There is an older database. Anyone who frequents the forensic labs in the last 5 years has had a sample of their DNA taken for elimination of possible contamination. Mine is on file years for that reason and it causes me no bother whatsoever.

Capt'n Midnight

mikeoneilly wrote: »

There was a famous case in the UK where all the men in a village were DNA tested

The murderer was eventually caught when a man let slip in a pub that he had taken the test for a work colleague.

Is this a common procedure to request mass DNA testing?

That was the first time DNA was used in the UK. Without DNA evidence another man would almost certainly been convicted in his stead.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Pitchfork

Junkyard Tom

My natural disposition towards privacy, and bodily autonomy, would be thinking 'no' but I'd say I'd probably be okay with it because, a) I'd want the rapist caught and b) I'd want people to feel safe using a service I was providing.

uch

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Sorry for the tabloidy thread title, character limits

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/84-dublin-taxi-drivers-dna-screened-after-passenger-alleges-rape-1.2918081

When I read the headline, my immediate reaction was to think of the Big Brotherish implications, but as it turns out the headline is quite misleading ("84 Dublin taxi drivers’ DNA screened after passenger alleges rape"). Under the law, nobody can be compelled to provide a DNA sample - it's entirely voluntary and merely makes it easier to be eliminated from the list of suspects for questioning, etc. And the DNA is deleted immediately after the specific investigation for which it was provided has been closed - so the Irish Times' characterisation of it as a "DNA database" is also pretty misleading.

All in all this seems to me to be a fantastic way of potentially proving one's innocence. Obviously if a DNA match is confirmed, then it would still have to go to trial, the issue of consent would have to be discussed and I presume if there are any doubts about the accuracy of DNA science (of which I know absolutely nothing, for all I know it could be 100% or like shooting pigeons in the dark) those would be brought up at trial as well.

In that context, it strikes me as odd that the law is still seen as contentious. Personally if I was accused of anything that I could be easily and quickly ruled out of by providing a DNA sample, I'd actually be quite relieved. It would be a totally different kettle of fish if the DNA was then stored in some sort of mass profiling database as the article's opening paragraphs erroneously suggest ("It is the first case of mass screening since the DNA database was introduced in the Republic in November 2015"), but this seems to be fairly clear cut (and I'd imagine if it was abused / this part of it was found to have been violated, it would be an EU law violation and could be taken up at the ECJ). Fears that the state may lie and actually build a database in secret would potentially be allayed by this - if such a database was ever used as evidence and therefore exposed to the public, I'd imagine the EU would come down on Ireland like a ton of bricks.

I would also imagine that its use would be restricted to cases of serious crime (rape, murder, assault causing harm) and wouldn't be allowed in the case of somebody allegedly stealing a packet of Tayto.

What do people think? Are the civil liberties fears well founded or is this a fantastic development both for victims and innocent suspects?

EDIT: On the issue of it being voluntary, one thing I don't know is whether refusing to provide a sample could be used as evidence of suspicion / having something to hide in court. We don't have an Irish mirror to the fifth amendment in Ireland as far as I know, so someone legally minded would have to chime in on this - is remaining silent regarded as something which can be used as evidence of hiding something?

I just read that, your a prick for makin me read that, took 25 mins

B.A._Baracus

Hmmm. If I was in that situation (being asked to provide a sample) don't know how I feel. Like if you are innocent then you would be eliminating yourself from the investigation. But then at the same time as Galway_Old_Man said:

Galway_Old_Man wrote: »

Don't trust the system or the people involved so no, I wouldn't willingly provide a sample.

It's up to the Gardai to prove my guilt, not up to me to prove my innocence.

He's right. It is up to them. Besides, and I know this might make me sound paranoid, but by giving your DNA you are putting your freedom in the hands of some lab tech to not mess up and accidentally mix samples or whatever.

corner of hells

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

Hmmm. If I was in that situation (being asked to provide a sample) don't know how I feel. Like if you are innocent then you would be eliminating yourself from the investigation. But then at the same time as Galway_Old_Man said:

Galway_Old_Man wrote: »

Don't trust the system or the people involved so no, I wouldn't willingly provide a sample.

It's up to the Gardai to prove my guilt, not up to me to prove my innocence.

He's right. It is up to them. Besides, and I know this might make me sound paranoid, but by giving your DNA you are putting your freedom in the hands of some lab tech to not mess up and accidentally mix samples or whatever.

I would imagine with something so serious there would failsafes in place.Possibly your sample being split into an A and B sample.

If a result came back they may crosscheck and do it again.I would assume it wouldn't be just a single lab technician checking the samples.

Atlantic Dawn

Why did it take over a year to get to the stage where they would look for DNA testing when they would have known 84 drivers had dark coloured Prius within days of checking?

Pawwed Rig

If there is one thing that can be taken from the repeated data breaches in this country is that the State cannot be trusted to maintain your privacy. My general experience with the Gardai is that they are fairly technologically illiterate so I would have little faith that they would or could use the data in an appropriate manner.

Kamili

Damien360 wrote: »

Not sure you understand DNA sequence. Gardai have access to the results of a search, not to the DNA sequence as it is meaningless to anyone but those with the correct software and its corresponding database. It currently has no use for mapping of you in a commercial world. It is too complex. We can read the sequence but have very little understanding of it.

uhm, I'm not sure you got what I meant. If Gardaí are using free gmail accounts for Gardaí business, that information is then the property of google, whom can hand it over to whomever they please. I'm sure some of the agencies they could potentially hand it over to would be well versed in how to understand DNA

picturehangup

How I feel about this... is the original question.
As a taxidriver, I would not hesitate to fully co-operate in providing samples, etc.
If I have nothing to hide, why would I? As soon as the baxxxxtard is found, the better for society, and I will play whatever small part I can.

HellSquirrel

Kirby wrote: »

Absolutely 100% incorrect. It is not up to you to prove you are innocent. You have to answer no questions and if you are in the wrong place at the wrong time, it is nearly always advisable to say nothing.

Well, yes, I see your reasoning, but how exactly do you propose crimes are solved without any public assistance? The Gardai (and any other police force) -are- civilians too. None of them have the benefit of being mind-readers.

Where this leads is "if you have an alibi, don't give it. Everyone must stand together against the enemy (the police). And then smack them around when criminals can't be caught."

It's not actually there yet, but we have imported the American distrust of the police too. I don't say that some of the Gardai aren't corrupt, nor do I say that the leadership isn't corrupt, but the sanest thing to do then is to work to eliminate corruption. Be cautious in the meantime, but remember that the police do actually have an important task to do and to block them completely from doing it is a poor excuse to kick them around for not being able to do it later on.

This is not America, even on the internet.

Roger_007

I find some aspects of this story a bit odd.
Why is it only now, over a year after the event, that the Gardai are taking this action?
The victim, according to the article in the IT, alleges "that while being driven to Raheny, north Dublin, the driver raped her". It could be that the article is badly written, but it seems unlikely the she was raped while the taxi was being driven. It would have had to stop somewhere but there is no indication of where the alleged rape actually took place. If it did there might be witnesses who saw the car stopped somewhere unusual, but the Gardai do not appear to be looking for witnesses.
Also, there is no description of the alleged rapist. Surely they could eliminate most of the suspects from the description provided by the alleged victim?

lawred2

Kirby wrote: »

Thats an awful attitude to have. People should be, and rightfully and lawfully are, assumed innocent. A person shouldn't have to prove they are innocent of a crime, or "eliminate themselves as a suspect".

If I was asked to provide a DNA sample I would refuse. You have no idea what will happen with that sample. Mistakes happen, and more often, misconduct happens.

That's toss anyway. If you happened to be at the scene of a crime and that can be shown to be the case then you very quickly have to eliminate yourself as a suspect...

arayess

i think this is a story floated by the gardai to smoke out their suspect or try to force them into a move that will incriminate themselves.

the dna sampel itself is probably a smokescreen and bare in mind we have a tiny fraction of the details the gardai will have


that said - I'd never give my DNA willingly.

suicide_circus

Keep the state at arms length where possible.

mattser

What would be the case, if it was a female relative of those on here who would not submit ? I'd hazard a guess that the Gardai would be hounded go get DNA.

mattser

mattser wrote: »

What would be the case, if it was a female relative of those on here who would not submit ? I'd hazard a guess that the Gardai would be hounded go get DNA.

If, after a year, they hadn't managed to eliminate the vast majority of the 84 suspects, I'd certainly be hounding them alright...

If they got it down to four or five genuine suspects, then i'd be hounding them on DNA but not before they had done the proper police work first.

LordSutch

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

If someone has nothing to hide then I see no problem giving a sample.

I totally agree, I mean what else are the police going to do with my Taxi driver DNA, clone me?
Personally speaking I would have no issue with them taking a DNA swab, that way there would be one less Taxi driver to worry about in their hunt for the rapist.

Ineedaname

There have been cases around the world where innocent people have been convicted as a result of DNA evidence. Usually caused by cross contamination during examination.

Given the guards fairly nonchalant attitude to privacy and standards in this country I most certainly would not hand over my DNA willingly.

Oodoov

Wouldnt provide one myself as i in no way trust the Gardai or justice system in this country.

El_Duderino 09

if it wasn't compulsory then I'd tell them to check everyone else and that would eliminate me -assuming I hadn't done anything.

DNA is great but it's no as reliable as people think and there could be false positives. I don't understand how these tests work so I wouldn't bet my freedom that these things can be explained to a jury of my peers In short, no-way Jose.

Capt'n Midnight

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

Besides, and I know this might make me sound paranoid, but by giving your DNA you are putting your freedom in the hands of some lab tech to not mess up and accidentally mix samples or whatever.

That could be corrected later on. And lots of people get off if there is any mess up there.

What could be more worrying is that commercial nuclease based DNA tests can be proprietary and may not be as specific as they sound. So very good at proving innocence. Tests with sequencing would be more authoritative, but would be more expensive, though the prices are tumbling.

Another problem is the CSI effect, where juries expect real life to match the bad fiction of black and white stories on TV where they always catch the guilty and there's never any mistakes. For example in most murder cases the witness is dead so circumstantial evidence is very, very important.

Pawwed Rig

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

That could be corrected later on. And lots of people get off if there is any mess up there.

In the meantime you are suspected of rape and that is something that will stick to you for possibly the rest of your life.

Rented Mule

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

If someone has nothing to hide then I see no problem giving a sample.

You have two kidneys. I see no reason why you shouldn't donate one.

Now as insane as that statement may seem, I equate your 'If someone has nothing to hide then I see no problem giving a sample'.

You will never see me give a sample of anything without my consent. The fact that you feel that it is OK to profile anyone because of their job is disturbing.

Why not randomly stop people on the streets and frisk them?

Let's take that one step further, let's randomly round up people and fingerprint/process them to see if they come up for any ongoing investigations.

Why not create a DNA database of children when they start school? Surely they have nothing to worry about.

The Gardai/government/military will never, ever take a sample of anything from me without first charging me with a crime. I would fight this down to my last breath.

I would rather die standing than live on my knees - Zapata

Widdershins

I'm not into conspiracy theories but DNA is too important and serious to trust anyone with.

Your Face

A DNA sample should be given as part of the licence application.
Taxi drivers occupy a position of trust and safeguards need to put in place to make sure that trust isn't being abused.

_Whimsical_

I think alot of people are nervous about putting their dna on file in any database anywhere in case at a later date wider powers for use of that dna might be granted, eg it could be used for profiling, for assessing genetic traits associated with criminality or mental illness for example, alll purposes that might be in the public interest but not necessarily in the individuals interest. I think it's a decision that I would not take lightly personally.

Galwayguy35

Rented Mule wrote: »

You have two kidneys. I see no reason why you shouldn't donate one.

Now as insane as that statement may seem, I equate your 'If someone has nothing to hide then I see no problem giving a sample'.

You will never see me give a sample of anything without my consent. The fact that you feel that it is OK to profile anyone because of their job is disturbing.

Why not randomly stop people on the streets and frisk them?

Let's take that one step further, let's randomly round up people and fingerprint/process them to see if they come up for any ongoing investigations.

Why not create a DNA database of children when they start school? Surely they have nothing to worry about.

The Gardai/government/military will never, ever take a sample of anything from me without first charging me with a crime. I would fight this down to my last breath.

I would rather die standing than live on my knees - Zapata

Well I would willingly give a DNA sample to rule me out of an investigation so the cops don't waste time following up leads that would allow the culprit to escape.

You've been watching too many sci fi films, nobody is out to get you.

kleefarr

If you have nothing to hide then giving a DNA sample should not be an issue.

Galwayguy35

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Well I would willingly give a DNA sample to rule me out of an investigation so the cops don't waste time following up leads that would allow the culprit to escape.

It was a year ago ffs and the cops still have 84 suspects. What on earth have they been doing?

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Your Face wrote: »

A DNA sample should be given as part of the licence application.
Taxi drivers occupy a position of trust and safeguards need to put in place to make sure that trust isn't being abused.

What? That's madness.

What about teachers? Bus drivers? Pilots? Chefs? Hairdressers? etc etc.

"If you have nothing to hide...." - That's an idiotic statement. Why are people so willing to offer up their freedom?

Your Face

Leonardo Uptight Rationalist wrote: »

What? That's madness.

What about teachers? Bus drivers? Pilots? Chefs? Hairdressers? etc etc.

"If you have nothing to hide...." - That's an idiotic statement. Why are people so willing to offer up their freedom?

Maybe edit your posts a bit better.
You're all confused there.

Rented Mule

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Well I would willingly give a DNA sample to rule me out of an investigation so the cops don't waste time following up leads that would allow the culprit to escape.

You've been watching too many sci fi films, nobody is out to get you.

I would respect you making the choice to submit a sample. You are completely in your right here.

It has nothing about anyone 'being out to get you'.

My issue lies in 'a taxi man committed a crime, everyone who worked that night needs to submit a sample' is an invasion of their privacy.

Widdershins

I don't mind ordinary police investigations involving basic questions for those present or in the vicinity of a crime but dna is taking it too far, too much of an imposition. If they had narrowed it way down, and had other reasons to be suspicious, then maybe..

osarusan

Reluctance to give a sample for reasons of principle could lead to being under suspicion for this crime/being blamed for it not being solved more quickly.

Pawwed Rig

If you look at an average country anywhere in the world and look at what type of government they have had over a short period of history (say 100 years) then it is not beyond the realms of possibility to think a DNA database might be abused.
You never know what is around the corner.
Trump for example - would anyone think it beyond the realms of possibility that he would open up a DNA database to private business? Insurance company's for example?
It is a dangerous thing to take your liberties for granted as they are easily lost.

mulbot

Do the Bloodcards from the heel prick on infants get stored away? Could DNA be taken from these for any individual at any time?

Avatar MIA

mulbot wrote: »

Do the Bloodcards from the heel prick on infants get stored away? Could DNA be taken from these for any individual at any time?

A few years back it was announced older ones (over a certain number of years) were being destroyed and you had to ask if you wanted them kept and sent to you. This was for data protection purposes.

RDM_83 again

Roger_007 wrote: »

I find some aspects of this story a bit odd.
Why is it only now, over a year after the event, that the Gardai are taking this action?
The victim, according to the article in the IT, alleges "that while being driven to Raheny, north Dublin, the driver raped her". It could be that the article is badly written, but it seems unlikely the she was raped while the taxi was being driven. It would have had to stop somewhere but there is no indication of where the alleged rape actually took place. If it did there might be witnesses who saw the car stopped somewhere unusual, but the Gardai do not appear to be looking for witnesses.
Also, there is no description of the alleged rapist. Surely they could eliminate most of the suspects from the description provided by the alleged victim?

This is going to sound bad but is it possible that its a racial thing
e.g it was a black male taxi driver, the garda already know this and are investigating the pool of suspects but a description is being withheld because there is no point and it would be viewed as stereotyping.

mulbot

RDM_83 again wrote: »

This is going to sound bad but is it possible that its a racial thing
e.g it was a black male taxi driver, the garda already know this and are investigating the pool of suspects but a description is being withheld because there is no point and it would be viewed as stereotyping.

Surely this would be considered a waste of police time and resources-If the suspect is a black male then would it not be better policing to concentrate on the actual Black males? I don't see how it could have a racial element to it.If the suspect is Black then look for a Black person,If suspect is White then concentrate on a White person!!

RDM_83 again

mulbot wrote: »

Surely this would be considered a waste of police time and resources-If the suspect is a black male then would it not be better policing to concentrate on the actual Black males? I don't see how it could have a racial element to it

Because they already have a list of suspects I presume, when I say a racial element I mean a racial sensitivity element.

The victim was probably impaired only has a general idea of what the attacker looked like.

Announcing something like the suspect taxi driver is an african male aged 25-50 isn't going to narrow the search at all, what it will do is cause a lot of bigotry from one group and outrage from another.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Your Face wrote: »

Maybe edit your posts a bit better.
You're all confused there.

Edit them to say what exactly?

Your suggestion to take a DNA sample as part of getting a taxi license, is an outlandish one at best.

Why stop at taxi drivers? Why not teachers, pilots doctors etc etc.

osarusan wrote: »

Reluctance to give a sample for reasons of principle could lead to being under suspicion for this crime/being blamed for it not being solved more quickly.

It shouldn't be either of those things. Gardai shouldn't suggest otherwise.

the_syco

Nomis21 wrote: »

I was driving a car belonging to a friend in Northern Ireland because he had a hangover. In a routine stop by PSNI the car was found to be uninsured and I was arrested and had my DNA taken along with fingerprints. I was given a piece of paper saying that my DNA would be added to the UK database and if my DNA was discovered even in 'The Vicinity' of a crime, I could be brought in for questioning.

That is the rules in UK. Do we really want that here?

Yes. Pavee Point wouldn't like it, though!

Sand

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

I think alot of people are nervous about putting their dna on file in any database anywhere in case at a later date wider powers for use of that dna might be granted, eg it could be used for profiling, for assessing genetic traits associated with criminality or mental illness for example, alll purposes that might be in the public interest but not necessarily in the individuals interest. I think it's a decision that I would not take lightly personally.

Yep, the argument of 'If you've nothing to hide...' becomes a slippery slope where suddenly it becomes normal to take and hold a database of all citizens, all the better to help solve crimes. All the guards will need to do is screen the site of the crime for DNA and then consult their library - crime solved. Everyone wants to help the police solve crimes, so if you object you must have something to hide.

And then there is the potential for commercial exploitation of DNA records - insurance companies would love to be able to get even more information on who is more at risk of certain costly diseases in later life and charge them a premium. Employers may not want to take on workers who are more likely to drive up their health insurance costs. The penalty points scandal has already highlighted how senior Gardai are happy to trade favours and information for gain.

Avatar MIA

Sand wrote: »

All the guards will need to do is screen the site of the crime for DNA and then consult their library - crime solved. .

You say that like it's a bad thing.

I wonder if finger printing had similar issues when first used. Oh, and rural electrification.

Sand

Avatar MIA wrote: »

You say that like it's a bad thing.

I wonder if finger printing had similar issues when first used. Oh, and rural electrification.

It is a bad thing. You'll figure it out if your DNA turns up at the location of a crime you didn't commit and the police aren't interested in looking at it any further now they have you to close the case.

Avatar MIA

Sand wrote: »

It is a bad thing. You'll figure it out if your DNA turns up at the location of a crime you didn't commit and the police aren't interested in looking at it any further now they have you to close the case.

How is that any different to finger prints?