Slashdot Mirror
Military DNA Registry Used in Criminal Case
bubblegoose writes "The Reading Eagle has a story about a man sought in a Reading, PA. murder who was arrested Thursday in Puerto Rico. This is the first time anyone has been apprehended in a criminal case based on DNA collected by the military. Apparently the DNA registry has a stringent set of rules that must be met for a blood sample to be released and those were satisfied." The DNA registry catalogs DNA samples from all US armed forces, ostensibly for identifying remains (although if that were the only reason, the samples would be automatically destroyed at the end of the servicemember's contract.)
I got fingerprinted when I joined the Canadian Militia and it's put a total crimp on my potential career as a felon.
If everyone's DNA was on file it would be hell on crime. The technology is coming where they just run a vacuum all around a crime scene and the computer will match up everyone who shed a skin flake there.
It's Christmas everyday with BitTorrent.
You may not have the choice. What if you wanted to join the army? What if you needed it to get a job (in the scary world that many predict).
What indeed, if you needed to submit to DNA testing to get a government ID card so that you could get basic services?
I have no idea if we're going that way - but that case is completely different to the case under discussion... they did not use the DNA except as a fingerprint substitute
Johns: Well, how does it look now? Riddick: Looks clear.
DNA sampling and profiling will be the single most important weapon against physical criminals (as compared to the slimy cyber sort). Scream all you like, but a national registry is inevitable: the promise will be that if you're innocent you have nothing to fear and if you're guilty, you can't escape.
Step 1: DNA matching to try to find perpetrators of murders, rapes, etc.
Step 2: DNA profiling to try to identify characteristics of perpetrator: gender, height, hair color...
Step 3: full-blown facial reconstruction from DNA samples. Expect this around the same time as it becomes possible to _fake_ DNA samples, and smart criminals leave mickey-mouse DNA lying around. Lucky for the honest people, most criminals are stupid.
Step 4: replacement of 'standard' tools such as fingerprinting and eye-witness identification (which is really, really unreliable).
This seems inevitable. Joe Public has two options: accept it and try to live with it, or fight it and watch it happen anyhow.
Ceci n'est pas une signature
Absolutely. DNA evidence has freed many (dozens?) of people convicted of crimes they didn't commit. But can we trust the military? Are their processes governed by the same strict rules that govern civilian DNA testing? Remember, just because it was done in a lab by a contractor does not mean the same standards are adhered to.
Consider the Anthrax vaccine. Sure, different science, different subject. But while there are many questions about its safety, DoD refused to address these issues. And remember Gulf War Syndrome and Agent Orange? DoD studies dismissed these issues as well.
Given the militaries sloppy and slack and just plain corrupt handling of other high tech health issues, how can we trust that the DNA records are correct, the samples handled correctly?
Those of us who chose (note the choice is willing and uncoerced) were made fully aware that we were being DNA catalogued, that the DNA could be used not only to identify our remains, but also for prosecution under the UCMJ, and for identifying potential genetic diseases. We were also made fully aware that once we undertook the oath of service, our collective buttocks belonged to Uncle Sam.
I do not see any invasion of privacy here. I see a choice made by someone that perhaps failed to think through the consequences of his actions. Based on the tight security rules involved in acquiring that DNA information, they had to have sufficient evidence and reasonable suspicion, as well as several levels of security clearance. It's not like Joe Doughnut can just walk up and say 'I have a case here, lemme get some DNA'
I could see this as a problem under other circumstances, but not when someone made a choice.
You can have it fast, accurate, or pretty. Pick any 2.
No Constitutional issues are involved? That's absurd. I happen to be preparing a 4th Amendment legal brief for the Army JAG Corps on the this almost this subject exactly.
Requiring a DNA sample is a "search" for purposes of the U.S. Const. 4th Amendment. Because it is a suspicionless search, the interest of the gov't must outweigh the privacy interest of the individual. One factor of the privacy interest of the individual is that the individual have a legitimate expectation of privacy that society would recognize as such.
Because this man was a soldier, the extraction of DNA and placement of same into the DoD Repository was not unconstitutional; however, there are serious 4th Amendment issues implicated when the DNA in the repository is obtained and used against an individual in a criminal proceeding after an individual's tour of duty is complete.
I would say that this individual has a very case for a 4th Amendment violation. However, there is one caveat: if this man had finished his tour of active duty, but was still in the reserves, the DoD did have a compelling interest in preserving his DNA samples (remains identification), which then could be subpoened by a court order from a court of competent jurisdiction.
Very interesting constitutional issues indeed!
All the best,
Alex http://www.VerizonEatsPoop.com