Slashdot Mirror


Twins' DNA Foils Police

Hugh Pickens writes "The Telegraph reports that James and John Parr were both arrested after watches worth £10,000 were stolen from a shopping center. Police found blood on a piece of glass at the scene of the crime and traced it back to the 25-year-old identical twins through DNA tests. But James and John both denied the theft and, because they have identical DNA, it has been impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt which twin is responsible. 'The police told us that they knew it was one of us, but we both denied it,' says James. 'I definitely know I didn't do anything wrong. I was watching my daughter that night.' Now the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has concluded that it cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt who was responsible. 'Unless further evidence becomes available, we are unable to authorize any charge at this time,' says CPS spokesman Rob Pett. 'This is certainly not something that we regularly encounter.' Identical twins have hindered police investigations a number of times since the advent of DNA testing. In Malaysia last year, a man suspected of drug-smuggling and sentenced to death was released when the court could not prove whether it was he or his twin brother who committed the crime."

209 comments

  1. Obvious Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Put them both in jail until one of them confesses under penalty of contempt of court.

    1. Re:Obvious Solution by El_Muerte_TDS · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Guilty until proven innocent?

    2. Re:Obvious Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Put them both in jail until one of them confesses under penalty of contempt of court.

      This seems like a great idea. We could do this beyond DNA too.
      The security camera shows the robber had blond hair. Let's put everybody with blond hair in jail until they confess under penalty of contempt of court.

      :rollseyes:

    3. Re:Obvious Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if they both confess and the evidence is conclusive that both of them couldn't be there at the same time?

    4. Re:Obvious Solution by cgenman · · Score: 1

      Obviously the one who confesses is the good twin, so you should immediately arrest the other.

    5. Re:Obvious Solution by eosp · · Score: 1

      Then they both confess, and you're exactly where you are now.

    6. Re:Obvious Solution by shentino · · Score: 1

      Isolate them, and ask each one who the other says is guilty.

    7. Re:Obvious Solution by dissy · · Score: 1

      Isolate them, and ask each one who the other says is guilty.

      If they both actually believe themselves to be innocent, then neither will have admitted anything to the other, and possibly both will blame the other, since no matter now much they 'cant believe he would do that', they would be sure they didn't.

      On the other hand, if one IS guilty and this is a ploy to avoid an arrest, then both will know that one does not have to answer that question at all, let alone truthfully.
      They would both have agreed to say "I know for sure I did not do it, and I just can't believe my brother would do that ever, but I don't know how else to explain the evidence"

    8. Re:Obvious Solution by mysidia · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's called unlawful arrest. It's not legal to hold someone in contempt of court who is not a witness.

      It is unconstitutional (5th amendment violation) to demand someone confess.

    9. Re:Obvious Solution by Froboz23 · · Score: 1

      This case is further complicated by the fact that one twin always lies, and the other twin always tells the truth. And I can only ask one more question before their lawyers show up! What to do??

      --
      Take off every Sig. For great justice.
    10. Re:Obvious Solution by HAKdragon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It is unconstitutional (5th amendment violation) to demand someone confess.

      While I'm not really familiar with the justice system in the UK, I'd have a hard time believing that the US constitution somehow applies there.

      --
      "Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs. We have a protractor."
    11. Re:Obvious Solution by Smauler · · Score: 4, Funny

      No, it's way easier than that. All you have to do is analyse their DNA, and see which of them has the Evil Bit set. I can't believe this hasn't been done yet.

      ps. The evil bit in DNA is not detected by normal comparisons. You need to find a geneticist with 1337 DN4 5C4NN1NG 5K1LLZ. The median age for such geneticists is 13, interestingly.

    12. Re:Obvious Solution by JWSmythe · · Score: 3, Funny

          Actually, neither will confess, and neither one did it. As it turns out they were actually triplets when they were born. The parents had to give one up for adoption. The adopted brother, through cruel twists of fate, turned to crime at a young age. Neither of the "twins" know anything about the third brother.

          But, that's not the whole story. The third brother married into a well connected crime family. He did what the family wanted, but that still didn't make them satisfied with him. In time, there was resentment by some of the "family" members, and even his wife.

          The wife was having an affair with another member of the crime family. One morning the third brother cut himself shaving. She took that blood, and gave it to her lover, and *HE* is the one who committed the crime.

          No one in the crime family, nor even the third brother, knew there were two more people who would positively identify to the DNA match. The third brother remains unsuspected to this day, and those in his circle continue to live free, until the day that his wife finally gets rid of him, one way or another.

          {sigh} don't you people ever watch murder/mystery/detective shows? Hell, even an educated background of Scooby Doo mysteries would have thought of this one. Or the old man who lived in the cabin on the hill. :)

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    13. Re:Obvious Solution by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So obvious it's been (mostly) done before:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Twin

    14. Re:Obvious Solution by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      While we are at it, what happened to the good old "float or drown" technique of evil bit detection.

    15. Re:Obvious Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah yeah.. apartment/flat; hood/bonnet; truck/boot. They have a word for "5th Amendment", but as an American I know people will understand my American English phrasings, and if they don't, I can use caps locks and/or raise my voice until they do.

    16. Re:Obvious Solution by JohnnyBGod · · Score: 1

      It can be argued it was done in Metal Gear Solid, too.

    17. Re:Obvious Solution by stonewallred · · Score: 1

      Lol, Mr.Penrose, this is not the Prisoner's Dilemma Duex.

    18. Re:Obvious Solution by stonewallred · · Score: 1

      Hold up a red piece of paper and ask if it is a dog.

    19. Re:Obvious Solution by tftp · · Score: 1

      Isolate them, and ask each one who the other says is guilty.

      "I have no way of knowing what the other brother may say."

    20. Re:Obvious Solution by Nivlheim · · Score: 1

      Amongst our weapons.. amongst our weaponry are such elements as fear, surprise, ... I'll come in again.

    21. Re:Obvious Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!

    22. Re:Obvious Solution by mysidia · · Score: 3, Informative

      The same basic right exists in the UK, they call it the right to silence, or the right to remain silent, and it comes from the Judges' Rules, and pertains to rights of the defendant to not testify, and rights to not cooperate with police.

      Arguably, potential criminals may have better rights there than in the US, in certain areas.

      The 5th amendment of the US constitution is based on it.

      But see the Police and Criminal Evidence Act of 1984, PACE Code C.

    23. Re:Obvious Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hold up a red piece of paper and ask if it is a dog.

      Pity I only have a yellow piece of paper.

    24. Re:Obvious Solution by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          Funny, I haven't read that book, nor seen the movie. I just made it up. :) I guess Duell was right, "Everything that can be invented, has already been invented".

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    25. Re:Obvious Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sentence first, verdict later.

    26. Re:Obvious Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Put them both in jail until one of them confesses under penalty of contempt of court.

      With that attitude, and if there's a just God, it will be you, even though innocent, who will confess to stop getting butt-fucked.

  2. Poor brother by AniVisual · · Score: 1

    Not only has he to live with such a dull name, his brother is a moron and he is accused of theft. Well, that is unless he is an accomplice.

    1. Re:Poor brother by davester666 · · Score: 1

      Could be worse. Instead of John Parr, he could have been named Pon Farr...

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  3. Um, this is easy by HighOrbit · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Which one has the cut that left the blood behind?

    1. Re:Um, this is easy by Threni · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And which one cut himself opening catfood. You don't go to prison for cutting yourself feeding your cat, right?

    2. Re:Um, this is easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's still entirely circumstantial. There are so many ways to get cut.

      Or, if the brothers are working together, they both could have a cut anywhere on their arms (in different spots). You're still in the same boat.

      Or one more note, an identical twin could leave a sample of his blood and blame his brother.

    3. Re:Um, this is easy by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Who says it was either of them? DNA fingerprints are not unique. There are likely to be 50 other people in the UK with the same DNA fingerprint as the twins and it's entirely possible that one of them was the robber. The depressing thing is that the police seem to think that this is enough evidence to convict even if there is no other evidence, unless they happen to randomly find two people with the same DNA fingerprint.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:Um, this is easy by sznupi · · Score: 2, Funny

      Or one more note, an identical twin could leave a sample of his blood and blame his brother.

      Wouldn't that have to be, on top of identical, a secret evil twin?

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    5. Re:Um, this is easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Or one more note, an identical twin could leave a sample of his blood and blame his brother.

      Wouldn't that have to be, on top of identical, a secret evil twin?

      Only if he has a goatee...

    6. Re:Um, this is easy by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 1

      Couldn't anyone leave anyone's blood?

      --
      <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
    7. Re:Um, this is easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ssshhhhh! You are not suppose to point that out in public.

    8. Re:Um, this is easy by MrMista_B · · Score: 2, Informative

      You fail at reading comprehension. That was his whole point.

    9. Re:Um, this is easy by dontmakemethink · · Score: 1

      Just because a cut's shape is consistent with the broken glass don't make it so. Plus there's the possibility that the blood was planted, which gets better the more police can't tie either brother to the crime by conventional investigation. Who knows, maybe they sold a blood sample to the real thief to throw off the cops knowing it couldn't be pinned on either of them.

      --

      War as we knew it was obsolete
      Nothing could beat complete denial
      - Emily Haines
    10. Re:Um, this is easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes but in the case of twins, they carry their siblings blood with them at all times, its more convenient that way

    11. Re:Um, this is easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes but in the case of twins, they carry their siblings blood with them at all times

      DNA-wise maybe, but unless they've also led identical lives it is likely that there are different [levels of] stuff in their blood hat could be used to distinguish blood samples between the twins - but those analysis might require more blood than that was left by the perpetrator.

    12. Re:Um, this is easy by BobPaul · · Score: 1

      It's been my experience that all identical twins are secretly evil. My brother and I had a discussion about this and, interestingly, he shares this view, so it must be true!

    13. Re:Um, this is easy by Jarjarthejedi · · Score: 1

      "The assumption is that one of them has no cut..."

      That's a ridiculous assumption. Cuts are ridiculously common.

      Not to mention that your premise is flawed and dangerous. What if the guilty one got a nosebleed on the job? And the innocent one has a small papercut from a week or two ago on the job. Presence of a cut != Guilty in this case.

      --
      There are two kinds of fool One says 'This is old therefore good' Another says 'This is new therefore better'- Dean Ing
    14. Re:Um, this is easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The depressing thing is that the police seem to think that this is enough evidence to convict even if there is no other evidence, unless they happen to randomly find two people with the same DNA

      And they're not likely to make any such finding.

      Some time back, I heard an NPR piece on someone who tried to test the system. Since both fingerprint and DNA uniqueness were discussed, I don't recall at this remove which technique was specifically discussed regarding testing.

      In any case, I believe it was the head of the Phoenix lab who wanted to continue the search after a match was found. The FBI stepped on her and effectively said, "You will not challenge our position by extending the search for a match or we will cut you off from our database."

      This, of course, was a risk she could not take. When confronted by reporters, the FBI said they really wouldn't impose such a sanction, but I believe they did not deny making the threat.

    15. Re:Um, this is easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do we know how big the cut that left the blood at the crime scene was? If it was small it could have healed by now, and the innocent twin might still have a visible cut for some other reason.

  4. Old days? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So DNA is the only way to prove guilt and find the truth? I remember in the old days, before DNA, they were still able to catch criminals. Maybe they should find some retired police officers to see how it's really done.

    1. Re:Old days? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sacrificing yourself to spare someone else is generally considered a moral thing to do, so it's more likely that (assuming either is guilty), the innocent one would declare himself guilty. In your world, the state would kill one innocent person and the guilty would go free.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Old days? by Tsar · · Score: 1

      Hanging would work well in this case if the English still had the balls to do that sort of thing. Just declare them both to be guilty and that they'll both be hanged. When they're on the gibbet with their necks in a noose the guilty one would probably speak up to spare his brother, and if not just hang them both anyway.

      If I were the innocent brother and placed in this situation with no other alternative, I'd gladly confess so that my brother could go free, even knowing (as only I would) that he was the guilty one. I'd be a two thousand years too late to claim that it's my original idea, though.

    3. Re:Old days? by Draek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I know dissing new technology and looking to the past with rose-tinted glasses is all the rage these days, but don't you think that if they had any other leads, they would've pursued them as well?

      Besides, not only did the old methods catch only some criminals (so do the newer ones, but for higher values of 'some'), many of those they did catch ended up decades later to not have been criminals after all.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    4. Re:Old days? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not dissing new technology it, but when the power goes off it's nice to know how to survive for a day or two.

      By the same token new technology is not bullet proof. Go google for people who have been wrongly convicted "because" of DNA evidence. It happens a lot. Usually because of relatives' DNA. Doesn't have to be a twin for them to think it was you. Most cases it's a relative the person didn't even know they had.
      So, don't put all you eggs in one basket. A good investigation and prosecution doesn't rely solely on the just technology or just detective work but both.

    5. Re:Old days? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spartacus, Schmartacus, I say hang 'em both and get on with the BBC documentary and a warm beer.

    6. Re:Old days? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If I were the innocent brother and placed in this situation with no other alternative, I'd gladly confess so that my brother could go free, even knowing (as only I would) that he was the guilty one. I'd be a two thousand years too late to claim that it's my original idea, though.

      fuck that.

      my twin is standing next to me at the gallows, guilty as sin, and refuses to admit his guilt in order to save me? he's an asshole and deserves the hanging even more than before.

    7. Re:Old days? by Vellmont · · Score: 1


      I'd gladly confess so that my brother could go free, even knowing (as only I would) that he was the guilty one. I'd be a two thousand years too late to claim that it's my original idea, though.

      In that kind of a "justice" system, the goal isn't justice but retribution and a show of power. As long as someone gets hung for the crime it doesn't much matter if it was the right person or not. The state "got it's guy", so everyone is safe again.

      We're not entirely immune to that today. This guy was the 3rd person FBI tried to finger for the 2001 Anthrax attacks, despite the evidence all being circumstantial. He committed suicide before he could be charged, but the FBI has closed the case essentially saying this was the guy. If you read through the evidence it's very weak. Before Irvins the focus was one another scientist Steven Hatfil, who they eventually abandoned as a suspect. The fact that they seriously investigated Hatfill for so long only shows how poor of an idea the FBI has of who actually committed these crimes.

      --
      AccountKiller
    8. Re:Old days? by xonar · · Score: 1

      +5

    9. Re:Old days? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe the assumption that the DNA was left by the perpetrator is wrong and neither brother committed the crime.

    10. Re:Old days? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      So DNA is the only way to prove guilt and find the truth? I remember in the old days, before DNA, they were still able to catch criminals. Maybe they should find some retired police officers to see how it's really done.

      Yeah, like using the millions of CCTV surveillance cameras all over the UK. Doesn't seem to be working so well...

    11. Re:Old days? by BobPaul · · Score: 1

      Warm? That doesn't seem right...

    12. Re:Old days? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A good investigation and prosecution doesn't rely solely on the just technology

      Thanks, asshole. You've just killed half of broadcast television's content.

    13. Re:Old days? by Xeno+man · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Without DNA they wouldn't even have a suspect. In the old days this would have just been another unsolved crime.

    14. Re:Old days? by stonewallred · · Score: 1

      someone mod this AC up. Not only would I refuse to confess, I'd make my last words be condemning him for his killing of his own brother.

    15. Re:Old days? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right. Find the first minority and convict them immediately!

    16. Re:Old days? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're willing to hang an innocent man just to teach a lesson to a possible guilty man who stole a few watches a lesson?
      You have a strange moral standing. You're willing to commit murder if you can't get a confession.

      What if neither are guilty and someone planted the DNA at the scene? (It's been done before).

      The possibility would lead to what happened to the Rosenbergs.

      The US electrocuted Ethel Rosenberg with flimsy evidence because they were trying to put pressure on her husband to confess.

      It came out later that she most likely had little or no knowledge of her husbands spying activities and that even his involvement was exaggerated. He was also electrocuted.

      You're willing to kill innocent people in the 'hope' of removing a thief from society. So much for justice.

    17. Re:Old days? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd be a two thousand years too late to claim that it's my original idea, though.

      Even earlier, there's the Solomon story.

  5. Just goes to show by azaris · · Score: 5, Insightful

    DNA by itself should never be used as the sole evidence to convict someone. It can be a useful indicator for finding suspects, but there always needs to be more direct evidence to provide a conviction. It is not just that people who don't have twins can be convicted solely based on DNA evidence, while people who do have twins cannot because of the possibility of convicting an innocent person. And that is not even going into DNA collisions or tainted samples.

    1. Re:Just goes to show by sznupi · · Score: 1

      ...and don't forget potential for immunity of genetic chimeras (though certainly not when there's a sample of blood found on the crimescene, since that's what will also be teste)

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    2. Re:Just goes to show by dr_dank · · Score: 1

      There were eyewitness accounts describing the suspect as a man in motion, also in need of a pair of wheels. This could only implicate John Parr.

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    3. Re:Just goes to show by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, DNA evidence has been used to convict someone who was a twin before. Last time I heard it happened, the other twin had an air-tight alibi. He was a guest of the state at the time of the crime.

  6. Shouldnt one of them have a cut? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Find the one with a cut the shape of the glass?

  7. Blood at the Scene by BlueBoxSW.com · · Score: 1

    I've never though that blood at the scene means you were at the scene, or that you did a crime that was committed at that location.

    1. Re:Blood at the Scene by maxume · · Score: 1

      It is as good as any other circumstantial evidence.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:Blood at the Scene by Threni · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You blood at the scene means you get to explain to the police how it got there. If your blood was in my kitchen, next to my wifes body, and there was evidence she fought her attacker, you don't think the police, having matched the mystery blood back to you, wouldn't want a quick word with you?

    3. Re:Blood at the Scene by sourcerror · · Score: 1

      Or that someone wants to frame you. You only need access to some "foreign blood". Hey, what about making a fake blood donation event?

    4. Re:Blood at the Scene by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Jesus. Please never be a juror.

      The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. The defendant making up "any old story", with no corroboration, to explain real evidence the prosecution presents is not enough to remove the doubt from the evidence.

      I'd laugh if the defendant claimed "uhh, someone must have planted it by stealing blood from a fake donation event". The prosecution had presented evidence the defendant was unable to effectively refute.

    5. Re:Blood at the Scene by BobPaul · · Score: 1

      is not enough to remove the doubt from the evidence.

      Well, in that case, the prosecution hasn't done their job yet, so why would the defense need to do anything?

    6. Re:Blood at the Scene by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I had no cuts anywhere on my body that might have provided the blood, I could refute it.

      Actually, there was a local case that did something similar recently: a man ran from the cops and jumped a fence. The next morning, they found several drops of blood on the fence. Later, a man of similar description was found and charged, and he matched the blood on the fence.

      He got off because the fence was blocking the shortest route from his house to the nearest grocery, he claimed he cut himself jumping it earlier that afternoon, and the blood couldn't be timed closely enough to disprove his story.

    7. Re:Blood at the Scene by FuckingNickName · · Score: 1

      In a summer's crowd, how hard is it to collect a bit of blood from someone? From 10 people? All you need is something abrasive on your shoes and you can rub against someone "accidentally". For bonus points, pick up some hair from their shirt - it may even have skin flakes on it. If you're somewhere where everyone is in sufficient hurry and where everyone's packed in, like London's rush hour, there's probably too much adrenaline going around for them to notice they've received a very minor cut.

      Now imagine how easy it is to collect blood from an acquaintance you wish to frame - a work drinking buddy, say, or a lover!

      Frankly, I'm surprised that every single premeditated crime these days doesn't involve some innocent's blood or hair being planted. Do they have an alibi? Perhaps, but if there are enough idiots convinced by DNA, surely those vouching for him must be liars? Hell, if you spend a week or two observing a few people going to and from work and social events every day, you could build up a picture of what times there's likely to be no evidence they're anywhere *else*, couldn't you?

      Anyone in law enforcement can comment on the sophistication of the average criminal? Are you worried that there's too much reliance on particular forensic evidence which can be planted?

    8. Re:Blood at the Scene by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus. Please never be a juror.

      The standard is beyond a reasonable doubt. The defendant making up "any old story", with no corroboration, to explain real evidence the prosecution presents is not enough to remove the doubt from the evidence.

      I'd laugh if the defendant claimed "uhh, someone must have planted it by stealing blood from a fake donation event". The prosecution had presented evidence the defendant was unable to effectively refute.

      Actually, donated blood is often discarded if the label has issues. Rummage in the biohazard bins outside most clinics - locked or not - and you have plenty of foreign blood.

  8. My retirement plan by overshoot · · Score: 1
    Hmmm. This has possibilities. I always wondered how I could make a profit from having identical twin kids.

    Seriously, they might be able to do a serological comparison but I doubt that the technology is there yet.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
    1. Re:My retirement plan by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      I always wondered how I could make a profit from having identical twin kids.

      Well, I'm not sure about the Profit! step, but maybe you can use the Human Mirror idea ( http://improveverywhere.com/2008/07/06/human-mirror/ ) as a starting point.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  9. The clone wars by Krneki · · Score: 1

    Wait until I get some clones, then nothing will stop me from world domination.

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    1. Re:The clone wars by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      Given the amazingly poor security of many law enforcement and medical databases, wouldn't it be easier to simply swap the data with some innocent sucker?

  10. Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Instead of resorting to third-world tactics like that, maybe the police investigators could just do their jobs, investigate the crime scene, and find some less-ambigous evidence that conclusively points to one brother or the other. Oh, and that doesn't mean that they "manufacture" the evidence, either.

    1. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't the fact that they found DNA evidence already show that the police have investigated the crime scene? Aside from finger prints (presumably the wore gloves) and CCTV footage (presumably the worse masks) what other evidence could the police look for?

      While I believe "incompetent", "worthless", "obsessed with political correctness" and "waste of tax payer's money" are all valid descriptions in of the UK police force, in this instance I can't find any fault in their performance.

    2. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What third world tactics? Using DNA and asking questions to suspects is third world?

    3. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          It says in the story that they wouldn't prosecute without more than just DNA evidence. Really though, it limited their suspect pool to two people. One has a legitimate alibi. The other only has his word that he didn't do it.

          This is the UK we're talking about. They have a camera on every street corner. They could review the footage, and effectively follow him from the crime scene back to his house. But gosh, that requires work, and it's easier to just get a confession from one of them. It should have given the police probable cause to search both residences. I don't know UK law, but it should be similar enough for the police to go have a look.

          Some folks mentioned looking for cuts. Umm, obviously. If they both had cuts, then that's inconclusive, but if they don't follow the leads, they're being stupid.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    4. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by mysidia · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Another possibility would be to examine both people's alibi.

      Trying to hold 2 people for 1 peron's crime is just lazy.

      Presumably one of them can't properly account for their whereabouts at the time of the crime. One of their alibis' has got to have a hole in it (unless a 'third' mysterious twin did it)

      At least one twin is lying, and possibly a friend covering their alibi is lying. They couldn't have both really been watching their daughter that night.

      Unless one of them that committed the crime took their daughter with them, that is. It is doubtful both twins wear exactly the same clothing, same vehicle type, and other things, so perhaps if there was some sort of trace evidence left at the scene, they could be fingered..... At a shopping center, there should be at least one witness, unless this was an inside job done while it was closed.

      I also would not neglect the possibility that both twins were involved in the crime.

      If both twins were involved, they could have both planned to point to the other twin and make sure there was not enough evidence to incriminate either of them. In this manner, committing the perfect crime in plain sight.

      I assume the police actually did both nuclear DNA and mitochondrial DNA testing on both twins, and other analysis of blood content?

      Or maybe not.

      Even identical twins don't necessarily eat the same things. The criminal has some different behaviors / different tastes, that they ought to be able to find evidence of.

      They could probably analyze behavior and figure out which one is actually capable of committing the crime that happened

    5. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 1

      They could try to figure out which one recently became richer (or has a friend who recently became richer), or which one rented a storage location in which to store the stolen goods, or any of a bazillion other types of normal evidence they could attempt to locate.

      You know, the kind of stuff they would have tried to figure out back before DNA evidence was ever used.

      Just an idea.

    6. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by eggnoglatte · · Score: 1

      In theory, yes. In practice, crime labs are overloaded anyways, so spending hundreds of thousands of pounds on a 10,000 pound robbery doesn't make all that much sense, especially if the labs could use the time to work on unsolved homicides.

    7. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by m.ducharme · · Score: 1

      Locking two people away until one of then confesses is "third world". but really, it's totalitarian, not third world.

      --
      Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
    8. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by m.ducharme · · Score: 1

      Keep in mind that not having an alibi isn't necessarily sufficient to constitute proof beyond reasonable doubt, especially when any eye-witness or CCTV evidence could apply equally to both twins.

      --
      Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
    9. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by CorporateSuit · · Score: 2, Funny

      Easier than that. Just give them a short test:

      1. What's your favorite hobby?
      a. Watching TV with my family
      b. Curling up with a good book
      c. Twirling my moustache while laughing

      2. If you were to volunteer at an orphanage, what would you feed the orphans?
      a. I would feed them candy
      b. I would feed them something healthy
      c. I would feed them to alligators

      3. Describe your romantic relationship
      a. I just met a girl who has learned to trust and rely on me
      b. I went home and became a family man
      c. Banging a whore, you know... what's her name?
      d. No relationships, but c sounds pretty good.

      4. Describe your family relationship
      a. My parents adored us, if only my brother would understand!
      b. My parents only loved my goodie-two-shoes brother! I will show them all someday that fear is more important than love! Bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha!

      --
      I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
    10. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by TheABomb · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't know enough about British jurisprudence, but here in America, we'll spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to incarcerate you for twenty bucks' worth of drugs or a $1.99 mp3. On the other hand, if your crimes drive enough people into bankruptcy, the government will give you billions of dollars in bailout money. This is somewhere in that big grey expanse between them.

      --
      MSIE: The world's most standards-complaint web browser.
    11. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by bluesatin · · Score: 1

      This is the UK we're talking about. They have a camera on every street corner.

      Which may be true (no idea if it is), but I bet 95% of them are owned by private companies and not the government.

      I'm sure it'd take a large amount of paperwork, and manpower to track all the tapes down for them (if they're even real cameras).

    12. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Did anyone think to search their persons for any cuts that might be healing? One twin or the other left blood on some broken glass? How did the blood get there, unless he cut himself?

      I guess that if it took months to match the twins to the blood, then the cuts are healed - but crap! Did anyone think to LOOK?

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    13. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Errr, no. I'm not British, but I've followed a number of stories regarding video surveillance of British citizens. GP may have exaggerated a little when he said "every street corner" - but not by much. The Brits are obssessed with observing every interaction between every pair of people in their country. If they aren't "Orwellian" yet, they will be within a couple years.

      One story about surveillance mentioned that CPS and/or the schools were considering putting cameras within the homes of "children at risk", or some such nonsense. They were specifically considering kids living in their equivelant of "The Projects". Ghetto housing. They want to make sure the kid is home, and going to bed on time, and that he spent x number of hours doing homework. Good grief!

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    14. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by Thiez · · Score: 1

      I assume the police actually did both nuclear DNA and mitochondrial DNA testing on both twins, and other analysis of blood content?

      Why do mitochondrial DNA testing? The twins would share that DNA too, doesn't make much sense to test it, right?

    15. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      "Even identical twins don't necessarily eat the same things."

      Dude - this is BRITAIN! Everyone eats fish & chips and meat pies. Kidney pies on Sundays, I think. If you're looking for a difference in diet, check their favorite brands of ale or laager. That might show up if anyone took note of body odor. Cheap drink smells bad forever!

      Geez!

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    16. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by Gordonjcp · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is the UK we're talking about. They have a camera on every street corner.

      Since when? If it was outside the central business district of a major city, the chances are there wasn't a CCTV camera within a couple of miles radius.

      The whole "Britain has elventy bajillion CCTV cameras" was a story *entirely made up* by a right-wing tabloid. The figure was derived by counting up all the council- and privately-owned CCTV cameras in a half-mile stretch of the main street of a particularly nasty area of London, and multiplying by the total length of all the roads in Britain. For it to be even *nearly* right, there would have to be a camera every 50 metres or so along *every* road. The track to my house would have three cameras all to itself...

    17. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by stonewallred · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Eh, people were buying donated blood back in the day to leave as evidence. Guy robs stores, fakes cutting hand, leaving a nice blood sample, and if he is ever caught, the blood type doesn't match, and he goes free. And I always liked the idea of visiting several self-car washes and grabbing the bags from the trash cans and vacuums. That way you can make a nice assortment of random evidence to leave, all of it clearly pointing away from you.

    18. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by stonewallred · · Score: 1

      I have commented or you would have some positive mod points, either +1 insightful, +1 funny, or +10 Sadder than shit that it is true.

    19. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          It's much like religion. You don't have to see the cameras to know that they're there. You just have to have faith that Big Brother is watching over you.

          There's more evidence that the government and government owned cameras exist, than God exists. I don't know people would have any trouble believing in it.

          [/sarcasm]

          Really though, even here in America if you are attentive, you'll see that major intersections and other public areas have government owned cameras. The easy way to distinguish them is their location. If they're attached to light poles facing intersections, or on guy wires across the road, they're government owned. If they're on privately owned buildings, they're private. For example, most WalMarts have an impressive array of cameras, facing the parking lot. I've typically seen 16 cameras facing the main parking lot (4 masts with 3 cameras each). That doesn't take into account the number of cameras viewing the sides and rear, entrance cameras, and internal cameras.

          Of course, the millions of privately owned cameras don't count towards big brother, other than the fact that under the right circumstances they can be seized and used as evidence. A pesky amount like $10k doesn't really justify the man hours just to retrieve all the tapes nor process them. It's silly to spend a million dollars on a case to convict someone of a $10k crime.

         

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    20. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by RulerOf · · Score: 1

      The things you suggest though are circumstantial. Might definitely be enough for an indictment (I think) were it the US judicial system, but the problem with circumstantial evidence is, again, reasonable doubt.

      Just a thought, of course ;)

      --
      Boot Windows, Linux, and ESX over the network for free.
    21. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 1

      IANAL, but I'm pretty sure possession of stolen goods isn't circumstantial evidence ;)

    22. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Why do mitochondrial DNA testing? The twins would share that DNA too, doesn't make much sense to test it, right?

      They might share it.

      There's always the possibility of one twin or the other having a genetic anomoly since birth that would distinguish them

    23. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by Aranykai · · Score: 1

      "Proof beyond reasonable doubt" is required to convict, not to prove one innocent. Innocent until proven guilty still applies - unless you are being sued for copyright infringement, of course. You have it backwards.

      --
      If sharing a song makes you a pirate, what do I have to share to be a ninja?
    24. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have commented or you would have some positive mod points, either +1 insightful, +1 funny, or +10 Sadder than shit that it is true.

      Took care of that for you.

    25. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      They could try to figure out which one recently became richer (or has a friend who recently became richer),
      I'll bet the £10K is full retail value not criminal fence value. A few grand of cash can't be that difficult to hide and depending on how valuable each watch was i'm guessing the watches themselves weren't hard to hide either.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    26. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by haruharaharu · · Score: 1

      Answer me this: how many people can actually account for their time on a given night? I mean in a way that will stand up in court - if you're out with a small group of people all night, that works, but if you went to a show by yourself or decided to go wander around on the beach, maybe not so much.

      --
      Reboot macht Frei.
    27. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by clarkcox3 · · Score: 1

      Why should the one that didn't do it say anything beyond "I didn't do it, must've been the other guy"? And why should the one who did say anything other than "I didn't do it, must've been the other guy". The one who didn't commit the crime is telling the truth, and has done nothing to obstruct justice.

      --
      There are no tiger attacks in my area and it's all because this rock I'm holding keeps the tigers away.
    28. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Well, if one twin can account for their time, as they have, and the other cannot account for their time, then by the law of excluded middle, the other twin must have committed the crime.

      That is if it's proven person A or person B committed the crime, and it's proven that person A could not have committed the crime, then it has logically been proven that person B committed the crime.

    29. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've typically seen 16 cameras facing the main parking lot (4 masts with 3 cameras each).

      Next time you're there, you might want to stop at their Vision Center.

    30. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          Don't make me go take pictures to prove it. :)

          Or are you saying that I missed a few? I could go for a detailed look at their security, but in this day and age as soon as I start inventorying all their security cameras, I'm going to get a nice visit from a 3 letter agency, and the word "terrorism" will probably show up in the charges. Only terrorists look for security cameras. :)

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    31. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by Nuskrad · · Score: 1

      Dude - this is BRITAIN! Everyone eats fish & chips and meat pies. Kidney pies on Sundays, I think.

      That's completly untrue, I wish people would stop perpetrating myths and stereotypes about British life. On Sunday, it's roast beef, potatoes, carrots, peas, Yorkshire puddings and lots of gravy. Kidney pies are on Saturdays, during the footie.

    32. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by rhook · · Score: 1

      DNA results take months to come back and there's usually a long waiting list to even get it into the lab. Its not like CSI where you find some blood and have a match in minutes.

    33. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right. He shouldn't have made you think that you're not able to see correctly. Instead he should have come straight out and said what a dumbass you are for thinking that 4 x 3 = 16. But then again, maybe you should go back and count again and maybe, just maybe you should visit their Vision Center.

    34. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      Indeed, all they need is a photograph or some video of the culprit and they've got him!

    35. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by JWSmythe · · Score: 1

          Actually, it's 16. I just ran short writing out the explanation.

          4 poles on the roof, 3 cameras each. Each front corner has two cameras. 2+3+3+3+3+2=16.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    36. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by haruharaharu · · Score: 1

      And how often is this proven? First order logic works for abstract stuff with absolutes, while the real world is all muddy. Fact of the matter is that finding DNA that matches to someone is, by itself, crap evidence. I think that DNA analysis will suffer quite a bit once the FBI's assertions about uniqueness get thrown out.

      --
      Reboot macht Frei.
    37. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1

      the chances are there wasn't a CCTV camera within a couple of miles radius

      I am pretty sure that I am on camera pretty much from the moment I leave my house until I get into the office. There are speed cameras outside the house, multiple cameras on the bus (internal and external), cameras in the town centre and in the car parks of the office blocks I walk past. They are not linked up though, so anything short of a rape or murder will probably not get anyone looking at most of the footage (until computer data mining becomes more powerful of course - lets say 8-10 years?). Certainly if the police did something naughty to me I would expect that the footage was all mysteriously unavailable, and they really cannot be bothered if it is a pickpocketing or some such thing.

      The means of transport (oyster card) tracks where I get on the bus and in and out of each train/tube station. Sure I can walk or use a taxi or pay (a lot) extra for paper tickets and not be tracked but that is inconvenient.

      In theory the government can look at what I am watching on my television/dvd/games system (van ecke freaking) but they tend to do that just on people who don't pay their TV license. So I pay mine and hope that my neighbour pays his. Maybe that doesn't work so well on LCD screens as on CRTs?

      A huge proportion of the society has their details stored on the police DNA database (about 37% of all black men and over 5% of the population have their DNA stored according to an old wikipedia statistic)

      Whether or not the original story was made up, the amount of data the UK government holds on its subjects is bloody scary if they wanted to use it for evil.

    38. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1

      Well sometimes that could work, e.g. when one twin goes to the gym and the other doesn't :-)

    39. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The place I work for recently set up 32 cameras in a new Kwiki Mart in Portsmouth. It's in an area that is mostly housing but with shops on the main road (North End, if anyone knows it).

      The police made installing the cameras a condition of getting a license to sell alcohol. They cover every centimetre of the shop. There are even cameras right over the counters and the staff have to hold the money you give them in their hand palm up before putting it in the till so that the camera can record exactly what it was. There are also cameras outside the shop covering the area around it.

      So yes, maybe the police/government don't have cameras everywhere themselves, but because they force businesses to install them there is actually much more coverage than people realise. The guy who owns the small chain of Kwiki Mart shops gets dozens of requests for video by the police every month and has invested some considerable funds in meeting their demands. Of course it's free for the police so they love it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    40. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by easyTree · · Score: 1

      Is it so much of a stretch to believe that one brother might give the other a gift? Now which one is guilty?

    41. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by easyTree · · Score: 1

      One story about surveillance mentioned that CPS and/or the schools were considering putting cameras within the homes of "children at risk", or some such nonsense. They were specifically considering kids living in their equivelant of "The Projects". Ghetto housing. They want to make sure the kid is home, and going to bed on time, and that he spent x number of hours doing homework. Good grief!

      As usual, the US is ahead of us here in the UK - A PA school already spies on its students via their laptops' webcams.

    42. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by sjames · · Score: 1

      Lack of a decent alibi is quite common. Pretty much any time you're somewhere with only people who would lie for you, you have no decent alibi. At a friend's house, at home, etc. Any time you're in a crowded place where you don't stand out, you have no alibi.

      There's no point in doing mitochondrial DNA on twins, it will match. Different diet is unlikely to show up in trace evidence and even if it does, without adequate studies it wouldn't hold up in court.

    43. Re:Or maybe the police could do their jobs! by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      Really though, even here in America if you are attentive, you'll see that major intersections and other public areas have government owned cameras

      Around Glasgow (and presumably other cities) you'll find that most traffic light-controlled junctions have a CCTV camera on the top of one of the light poles, watching the junction. These do not get recorded unless there's some specific reason to do so, and are very rarely monitored. The whole point of them is that if the sensors for the ATC start reporting traffic problems (a queue building up and not dissipating) or if there's an accident reported, someone working at the traffic control centre can watch the junction and manually tweak the lights - or even just turn them off and let the police control traffic.

  11. Defeating Gattaca by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

    So the solution to genetic privacy is for us all to clone ourselves!

    Good thing we"ll have all those genegeneered crops to feed them clones.

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

    1. Re:Defeating Gattaca by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No, we don't need to clone ourselves, just mutate our DNA by exposing ourselves to radiation.

      If my understanding of science is correct, we'll also get super-powers, which in turn will lead to us not having to turn to a life of crime.

      Because we'll either be super-heroes or super-villains, and well, who needs to rob banks when you can take over the world?

       

    2. Re:Defeating Gattaca by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the solution to genetic privacy is for us all to clone ourselves!

      Yeah, if I could be cloned and change one thing physically about myself it would be my penis. I would want my clone to have a much smaller penis. It's been a burden I've carried with me a long time(literally) to have such a gigantic member. Women are usually afraid of it when they first see it and often times it causes a lot of pain and destruction.

      Pretty much all Anon's have huge cocks. Or maybe we just act like it since we are anon. ;-)

    3. Re:Defeating Gattaca by DryGrian · · Score: 1

      If my understanding of science is correct,

      Gold.

      --
      For optimal comment enjoyment, take red pill now.
  12. That's not the real problem here by algormortis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...a man suspected of drug-smuggling and sentenced to death...

    I'm surprised nobody has said anything about this. Sentenced to death for smuggling drugs? That's more of a problem than twin's getting away with theft and... well... drug smuggling.

    1. Re:That's not the real problem here by Broken+scope · · Score: 2, Informative

      If I recall correctly, death sentences for drug smuggling are pretty common in the region.

      --
      You mad
    2. Re:That's not the real problem here by AdmiralXyz · · Score: 1

      China, Taiwan, Malaysia, the Philippines and probably a bunch of other countries in the region carry the death penalty for drug smuggling, and have for decades. This is nothing new.

      --
      Dislike the Electoral College? Lobby your state to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
    3. Re:That's not the real problem here by stonewallred · · Score: 1

      Lol, how about Iran, with public mass hangings of drug smugglers. And still one of the worst heroin/opium addiction rates in the world.

    4. Re:That's not the real problem here by digitalchinky · · Score: 1

      The Philippines abolished the death penalty in 2006.

  13. What happened to the rest? by magus_melchior · · Score: 1

    I know that DNA testing was a huge breakthrough that solved a great many cases that were previously unsolvable, but it's not like police never got convictions before then. So why is this law enforcement organization apparently so dependent on DNA testing that they comparatively look like idiots when something like this foils the DNA evidence?

    Surely they have other evidence at the crime scene, or in plain sight on the suspect(s). If one of the twins left blood, one of them was probably wounded by the broken glass. There may be glass particles in the perpetrator's clothing*, etc.

    * Yes, I watched too much CSI...

    --
    "We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
    1. Re:What happened to the rest? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      They didn't even do thorough DNA testing. There *ARE* DNA differences between identical twins. Certain sequences aren't stable, and either stretch or shrink with each cell division, to the point that by the time one is "adult" (before 12 years) it's possible to tell the difference between identical twins. But you need to be a lot more thorough than just testing at 12 sites (or whatever they use this year).

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    2. Re:What happened to the rest? by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      What is with all these nonsensical comments implying that the police in this case haven't done any investigative work beyond DNA testing? Traditional investigative techniques didn't magically solve every case, plenty of times nothing of value could be found. Obviously investigators looked at the scene of the crime and the only clue they found was a blood sample, so what more do you think your old-time gumshoe can do with that?

      I imagine a microscopic particle of glass embedded somewhere in two people's combined wardrobes would be almost impossible to find especially if they ever did laundry and it's not very good evidence anyway unless the source of the glass could be confirmed.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    3. Re:What happened to the rest? by orkysoft · · Score: 1

      I know that DNA testing was a huge breakthrough that solved a great many cases that were previously unsolvable, but it's not like police never got convictions before then. So why is this law enforcement organization apparently so dependent on DNA testing that they comparatively look like idiots when something like this foils the DNA evidence?

      It's a bit weird that it can be used as the sole evidence at all. DNA testing is like comparing md5sums of files. Many different files map onto the same checksum, even if the file size doesn't match.

      Surely they have other evidence at the crime scene, or in plain sight on the suspect(s). If one of the twins left blood, one of them was probably wounded by the broken glass. There may be glass particles in the perpetrator's clothing*, etc.

      Good luck finding out which clothes the perp wore during the crime, especially when you don't know who the perp is.

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
    4. Re:What happened to the rest? by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      News flash, not every case gets solved.

    5. Re:What happened to the rest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. I don't get it. Cells *do* genetically differentiate during your life from zygote to adult, and there should be consistent differences between the two of them if they test the right parts of their genetics.

      So, call a geneticist, subpoena the blood samples, and get on with it.

  14. Network Effects. by headkase · · Score: 1

    DNA to find out if you've been at a crime-scene gets all the attention but what about family? Using genetics it is possible to narrow down whether or not someones DNA who is on file is a relative of someone's who is not. So, all of a sudden the police may have probable cause to investigate families instead of individuals. Privacy is an issue here, can I be compelled to add my DNA to a database because I happen to be in the same branch of genes as someone who committed a crime? And what is crime: with the radicalization of thought the Federalist Papers today would be filed under "Domestic Terrorism." Does this mean that something which arguably for the better can be nipped in the bud before it gets off the ground? To me, the only way I would accept full DNA profiling of an entire population is when law itself has no gray areas and is amendable to change. If you can't legally change then you need privacy to commit "crimes."

    --
    Shh.
  15. Had this occured in China, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "In Malaysia last year, a man suspected of drug-smuggling and sentenced to death was released when the court could not prove whether it was he or his twin brother who committed the crime."

    both would have executed

    1. Re:Had this occured in China, by zill · · Score: 1

      I feel sorry for their family.

      They will be forced to pay the bullet fee twice.

  16. Well, good. by bmo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is the way it's supposed to work. DNA is not a magic bullet (heh) for solving crimes.

    So the Crown will have to use good old fashioned police work to prove the case, like finding the watch in either twin's possession and/or fingerprints on the broken glass. Even genetic twins have different fingerprints. If the Crown (or any other prosecutorial system based upon English Common Law) cannot do this, then they go free, as per the design of the system.

    It's better to let a hundred guilty go free than to jail (or execute!) one innocent person.

    --
    BMO

    1. Re:Well, good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > It's better to let a hundred guilty go free than to jail (or execute!) one innocent person.

      Says you! For every hundred of people who believe as you do, there are a thousand more who believe we should kill them all just to make sure.

    2. Re:Well, good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > It's better to let a hundred guilty go free than to jail (or execute!) one innocent person.

      Says you! For every hundred of people who believe as you do, there are a thousand more who believe we should kill them all just to make sure.

      Fine. We'll kill you first.

      Gee ... Was that a change of heart we just heard?

    3. Re:Well, good. by vosester · · Score: 1

      This is the way it's supposed to work.

      But not all of us have a twin to share doubt with.
      If this guy had been an only child, then they would have convicted him solely on DNA.

      This is a real problem with public knowledge about DNA, The masses think it's some magic barcode that proves 100% that is belongs to the subject.

      DNA like Barcode's have a margin of error.

      Such as Reflection,Quality of barcode,Optical Efficacy and their is also a fair amount of error checking going on.

      DNA has the same kind of problems and government's are content with this status quo.

      A lot of people blame shows like CSI for making the population aware of how to avoid leaving DNA.
      The worse thing that CSI has done is reinforce the fallacy that once they have DNA, The suspect is arrested and the case is over.

  17. It was my evil twin! by NixieBunny · · Score: 1

    Actually, he's not evil at all. He's just into bigger engines than I am. http://www.selectric.org/ vs http://www.cathodecorner.com/

    --
    The determined Real Programmer can write Fortran programs in any language.
  18. Alternative by Dracil · · Score: 1

    They BOTH did it.

    1. Re:Alternative by moteyalpha · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, my theory is they are telling the truth. What they lied about ( by omission ) is that they are triplets and if they had found the third he would have admitted to the crime.

    2. Re:Alternative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Birth records might throw a wrench in that line of thought.

      Just sayin'

    3. Re:Alternative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not if the third works as an assassin for MI6 and the Crown doctored the birth records so they could erase his existence.

      Just sayin'

    4. Re:Alternative by moteyalpha · · Score: 1

      I thought of that, but more realistically there could be a situation where twins are adopted to different homes and birth records are sealed. As a result the other twin could really screw up the other's life by committing crimes only near the twin.
      In fact I think there was a movie about that even.

  19. KaDeWe heist suspects released because of twin DNA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's a similar story from last year. I wonder if they are made up, because that's so unlikely.

    http://www.thelocal.de/society/20090319-18121.html

  20. This happened to me... by goodmanj · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ... not as defendant, but as a juror.

    I served on a jury last summer for a case of armed home invasion. The victim, if you can call him that, was a multiply-convicted white crack user. The victim claimed the defendant forced his way into the defendant's house with a gun, as part of a dispute over the defendant's missing cell phone following a drug deal.

    The defense attorney's goal was to convince us that there was no way to determine beyond a reasonable doubt whether the defendant committed the crime, or his brother. The police did a horribly sloppy job of gathering evidence, the DNA was so contaminated that while it matched the victim, it also had good odds of matching the defendant's brother or about 1 in 5 random people off the street. The victim lied on the stand several times and showed no reliability as an eyewitness, and all the other evidence (phone calls, evidence collected at defendant's house) pointed to *some* member of the defendant's family, but no way to know who.

    So we found him not guilty. Kind of a shame since the defendant probably *was* a drug dealer, but no way to prove it wasn't his brother. And the kicker: if they bring the brother to trial, he can use the same defense.

    1. Re:This happened to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) What's "white crack"
      2) Was the DNA contaminated or did the defense just point out that DNA evidence can not be used to convict someone because the same DNA test (with no contamination) can match multiple persons. DNA can prove someone innocent, on the other hand, if there is no possible match.

  21. Um, this is easy: bacterial forensics by Kozz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If the twins have not been living near-identical lives (sharing cars, apartments, etc), they probably have distinct bacterial colonies, and bacterial forensics (an emerging science) could be the key.

    http://www.sciencefriday.com/program/archives/201003193

    This method cannot conclusively place an individual at the scene of the crime, but if combined with DNA evidence, I think you'd have a pretty air-tight case.

    --
    I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
    1. Re:Um, this is easy: bacterial forensics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the twins have not been living near-identical lives (sharing cars, apartments, etc), they probably have distinct bacterial colonies, and bacterial forensics (an emerging science) could be the key.

      I'm not sure how true it may have been, but, in a recent CSI-type show, a similar situation occurred. The case was resolved when it was found that one twin had gone on a safari to Africa (do they do safaris anywhere else?) and her blood (after immunizations) was found to have acquired antibodies that her twin did not have.

      For what it's worth, I just received a couple of transfusions. I am O-neg (universal donor), but my transfusions were delayed a couple of days because I have numerous antibodies. While typing was easy, cross-matching was a problem.

      This raised a couple of questions for me. First, if I needed an emergency transfusion , would I have to do temporarily with only plasma? Second, what DNA would show up if an analysis were done afterward -- mine, one or both of the two donors or some combination of the above?

  22. Hurray for Malaysia! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They acknowledged the absolute irreversibility of the death sentence, and that acknowledges that Man and his laws and courts are often incorrect, hateful or racist. Too much so to claim such power over another human being by claiming for their laws some kind of God-given right to murder. As if the Law was never wrong. As if Man, by invoking God enough, is made never wrong. Citing God in Law is not only wrong, it's a contradiction.

  23. Yes, I've been waiting forever to use this: by nukeade · · Score: 1

    When two people are on an elevator and one farts, they both know who did it.

    1. Re:Yes, I've been waiting forever to use this: by trevor_oke · · Score: 1

      I still give the other person a dirty look.

    2. Re:Yes, I've been waiting forever to use this: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But if there are 3, then 2 of them can't be sure

  24. Ooops!! I crapped my pants! by AmigaHeretic · · Score: 1

    Unless they are like my grandpa. Farts? Hell he craps his pants sometimes and is completely oblivious to it.

  25. It's actually worse than that by ChrisCampbell47 · · Score: 4, Informative

    DNA has been getting relied on heavily lately to solve otherwise cold cases. States have started running crime scene evidence through DNA databases wholesale, and then running with whatever match they get, even if it's just a partial.

    Think about it: if there's a one in a million chance that the DNA will match, and you have a 20 million person database, then you're going to get 20 matches. Now just find the guy who's most convenient to prosecute. Boom, instant cold case conversion!

    DNA's Dirty Little Secret: a forensic tool renowned for exonerating the innocent may actually be putting them in prison
    http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2010/1003.bobelian.html

    Also:

    New Rule Allows Use of Partial DNA Matches
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/25/nyregion/25dna.html

    DNA Evidence Can Be Fabricated, Scientists Show
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/18/science/18dna.html

    1. Re:It's actually worse than that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find the last sentence of this part of that first article especially scary:

      "In Puckett’s case the actual chance of a false match is a staggering one in three, according to the formula endorsed by the FBI’s DNA advisory board and the National Research Council, a body created by Congress to advise the government and the public on scientific issues. But the jury that decided Puckett’s fate never heard that figure. In fact, his lawyers were explicitly barred from bringing it up."

    2. Re:It's actually worse than that by BrookHarty · · Score: 1

      Exactly, courts can bar evidence and approve your defense. With that, its hard to see how anyone gets a fair trial.

      Oh wait, they dont. The federal government does this on all marijuana cases. You can be legal under state, so your permit to grow pot isnt allowed in court, your plea of innocent, isnt allowed in court.

      Thats why people plea bargain, you cant defend yourself, might as well take the offer they give you, or face 25+ years to life.

    3. Re:It's actually worse than that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hear,hear, We rely too much on DNA evidence even 'Low Copy Number' which is putting innocent people in prison! Believe me !!

  26. What worries me... by Blazarov · · Score: 1

    What is troubling for me to understand is why was their DNA already in the police's database? Have they committed other crimes? Or is the answer as simple as "This took place in the UK"? I don't know about you, but I would be rather pissed if I'm on some database for no reason...

    --
    Regards, Boyan
  27. Fuck that! by mosb1000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As an identical twin, I can tell you that your idea stinks. If my brother commits a crime, and I deny it, I don't think I should be charged with obstruction of justice. I don't know what he's doing at any given time of the day. I couldn't tell you what he's doing right now. He could be robbing a jewelry store for all I know.

    1. Re:Fuck that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I couldn't tell you what he's doing right now. He could be robbing a jewelry store for all I know.

      Hey! No I'm not!

    2. Re:Fuck that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      well, he knows you're not, but he's trying to pin it on you now while he's at the jewelry store.

    3. Re:Fuck that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You two want to do gay porn together? I can give you a good price.

    4. Re:Fuck that! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He could be robbing a jewelry store for all I know.

      Ah ha! how did you know we were investigating a robbery at a jewellery store?

    5. Re:Fuck that! by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1

      I can give you a good price.

      There is no picture on his homepage but I suspect from previous posts that they are older than the average Miami Studios models so you might want to rethink that offer!

      Slashdot is probably *not* the best place to talent scout for glamour models :-)

  28. The Kray brothers would have loved this by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

    For folks that are familiar with Monty Python, the Piranha Brothers (fictional, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piranha_Brothers were inspired by the Krays (real, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kray_brothers).

    The Krays stayed out of prison for a long time by intimidating witnesses. DNA evidence cannot be intimidated, but given this case, one the brothers could commit a crime, without worrying about leaving DNA behind. Both would claim innocence. They could have called it the "Other Other Other Other Operation.

    But the last I heard Reggie (Doug) was dead and Ronnie (Dinsdale) was in prison.

    But would the Piranha Brother let death get in the way of committing crimes?

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  29. I know this one... by mdemonic · · Score: 1

    they just have to ask what the other twin would have said if he was asked

  30. From where? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Authorise. Not Authorize.

  31. That's nice, but... by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    When are the courts going to get it through their heads that it doesn't take identical twins to make DNA tests fallible and utterly unsuited as sole evidence?

  32. The obvious solution... (tongue in cheek)... by mark-t · · Score: 1

    ... is to make being an identical twin illegal. Bang. Problem solved. Both are guilty of something.

  33. Other differences in blood chemistry? by mikael · · Score: 1

    Surely, there are other tests using standard blood chemistry that could be performed? A standard annual blood test would test for a whole variety of things - glucose levels, hormone levels, antibody levels.

    Wouldn't the brothers have different glucos levels, immune responses or ratios of antibodies?

    --
    Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    1. Re:Other differences in blood chemistry? by topham · · Score: 1

      Glucos varies constantly, so unless one developed a condition like Diabetes it won't help. As for the rest, you'd still have to prove it's sufficient to identify a person. If it hasn't been used to do so in the past it is unlikely to pass muster in court.

      Never mind that most of the differences would have degraded in the sample to meaningless crap, DNA is pretty hardy stuff.

  34. Don't go to Malaysia! by pellik · · Score: 1

    "In Malaysia last year, a man suspected of drug-smuggling and sentenced to death..."

    Wait, he was sentenced to death on suspicion of drug smuggling? If you are going to kill people because you think they might have committed a crime how DNA obfuscating the facts really make that much of a difference?

  35. Look for the obvious mark of the evil twin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The one with the goatee!

  36. Simple: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Find the twin that has a cut in their skin. Blood isn't going to just magically appear on the scene.

  37. should be 60 mutations between them by peter303 · · Score: 1

    But to detect that, you'd have sequence much of their DNA. Perhaps partially sequencing using a SNP array chip might catch a mutation or two (23andMe uses these chips). Both techniques would be expensive. Conventional forensic DNA analysis looks at 30 markers. These would be the same for most identical twins.
    The 60 mutation number comes from a study reported a few weeks ago fully sequencing parents and an offspring.

  38. freedom is a clone away by tbj61898 · · Score: 0

    how long before a commercial company sells a brand new twin of your little son so that he will have one more chance in court?

    --
    nop, nop, nop #VBLANK
  39. You joke but... by DrYak · · Score: 2, Informative

    I know you're joking, but ....

    As it turns out they were actually triplets when they were born.

    In fact finding a "hidden" 3rd person with the same profile isn't that much impossible.

    Given the small amount of tested loci finding a perfect match doesn't even require a true twin brother or triplet, but could also be someone different, who just had the bad luck to have the same DNA only on the dozen of tested loci (and could have different DNA elsewhere).

    The wikipedia entry about DNA profiling mentions a case of a "perfect" random match of 13 loci among 30'000 persons.

    In short : DNA profiling is a nice tool to have, when the police have a short group of suspect and wants to know who is the one who might have done it. But if you have no idea and are just hitting a database to give you auto-magically the guilty criminal, there's an even increasing chance (as DNA databases are growing bigger) , that the request might return 1 or 2 people who have nothing to do with the case and just happened to share the same loci.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re:You joke but... by JWSmythe · · Score: 2, Interesting

          I went reading up on it, beyond Wikipedia. :) Most of it was stating the statistical impossibility of DNA matches. They were all forensic reports used by the police, so it's in their best interest to say it. Come court time, forensic reports will outweigh Wikipedia.

          I do recall reading in the past that "identical" twins do have different DNA. Sure a sample of a few markers may show an identical result, but if they did better tests with more markers, they could easily determine who the blood "donor" was. If the 13 in 300,000 number is correct, with a population of 1 million, you'd potentially have 43 duplicates. I'm assuming that there was other police work done to even attempt to match these two guys, but that assumption is likely wrong.

          They didn't say how many markers were used in this test.

          I've actually read up a good bit on DNA testing. My mother has been tracking our family tree back for many generations. There are a few companies that have large databases of DNA, so you can match potential family members, although separated generations ago, who may have information on the tree that may be otherwise unavailable. "Family bibles" were a great resource, and were generally handed down over the generations. They'll frequently list all births, deaths, and marriages, so someone in a branch of the tree 5 generations ago may have some key information. I believe they would only link the trees, and not actually give up the information on the living members of the family though.

          In reading their information though, I found that they weren't testing enough markers, which could lead to false positives, and even fail to match distant family members. There was not enough advantage for me to include myself in it. Unless there was a good chance of success, and a valuable source of information to be had, it wasn't worth putting my DNA into some corporations database regardless of how warm and fuzzy they made their privacy policy sound. I don't trust the government, and I trust corporations even less. For all I know, I may match the twins in the article on a sample of just a few markers. I'd hate to find out that law enforcement had access to the database (although quietly), and I'd suddenly become a suspect due to flawed methodology. I'd actually be safe in this case, being on the wrong side of the pond and all. :)

          I do appreciate that DNA testing has exonerated people from crimes. A definite negative is still a negative no matter how you look at it. I'd hate to be that guy who had a positive due to insufficient testing, and rot in jail for someone elses crime.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
  40. The FBI doesn't want you to know by witherstaff · · Score: 2, Informative

    Researchers have found cases of genetic matches in the FBI DNA database far more frequently than the 1 in 113 billion figure they use. Scarily enough, many states and the FBI now prohibit such genetic collision searches from taking place. FBI officials argue that, under their interpretation of federal law, use of CODIS is limited to criminal justice agencies. In their view, defense attorneys are allowed access to information about their specific cases, not the databases in general.

  41. april fools? by skoony · · Score: 0

    this story has one magor flaw. why did'nt the police do a body search. that scar there looks new,does'nt it? wish it were true regards, mike

  42. It could be one of them or... by SupremoMan · · Score: 1

    Or maybe a criminal put the evidence there knowing that it would lead police to a dead end, thus ending the investigation. The police cannot charge either twin, while the real criminal gets away. If all they have is the blood DNA evidence, then I would say it's rather silly to believe it could not have been planted.

  43. Sherlock homes said... by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

    Rule out everything that it can't be, and what you are left with is the correct answer. If they both have the same DNA, and one has an ironclad alibi, then it has to be the other twin who did it. Jesus H. Christ, hasn't anyone heard of logic before?

    --
    -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
  44. Goatee by acheron12 · · Score: 1

    Obviously, the one with the goatee is guilty.

    --
    there is no god but truth, and reality is its prophet
  45. The obvious answer and the remaining mystery by barath_s · · Score: 1
    All of you clearly missed the discovery and reporting that there are 92 other identical clones out there.

    Except that in the ultimate twist, it turns out that none of the 94 clones actually did it, it was their progenitor who having successfully faked his death, and having consumed anti-agathic drugs, decided to break into the shopping center and steal the watches and got cut doing so.

    Now the only remaining detective work is to find out why he dun it . And before you smart alecs come out with answers like, "the glass was sharp" , I clearly meant why did he break in and steal the watches. The leading theories :

    1. Just to keep in practice doing evil things

    2. Because the watches were just so *shiny*

    4. It was meant to distract you from the other break in in the other shopping center

    5.. i)Fake death ii) Consume anti-agathic drugs iii) Clone yourself iv) Steal watches. v)????? vi) profit.

    6. Because the watches had inscribed on them ancient mystic Tibetan runes, that when read together would open the bowels of hell, or entitle the reader to 10% discount in Wally's world rides.

    7. ..............

    Godwin, fail us not, now.

  46. No right to silence in the UK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 provide statutory rules under which adverse inferences may be drawn from silence.

    failure to mention a fact when questioned, which the defendant might reasonably have been expected to mention, and which is used in his defence (at s.34).
    refusal to testify in his own defence in court or, having taken the oath, to answer questions without good reason (s.35).
    failure to account for objects, substances of marks found on his person (s.36).
    failure to account for being in a particular place at a given time (s.37).

    Under the Terrorism Act 2000 Schedule 7 (Port and Border Controls) states that "a person who is questioned under paragraph 2 or 3 must give the examining officer any information in his possession which the officer requests." The purpose of this is supposed to be "determining whether he appears to be a person falling within section 40(1)(b)." That is, whether he "has been concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism." But Article 2.4. of the mentioned Schedule goes on to say that "an examining officer may exercise his powers under this paragraph whether or not he has grounds for suspecting that a person falls within section 40(1)(b)."

  47. Octomom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, can we expect Octomom to start running a crime syndicate then?

  48. Don't worry by Weezul · · Score: 1

    No civilized country would charge even the guilt party for obstruction of justice for failure to confess. duh!

    --
    The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
  49. Amen! by Weezul · · Score: 1

    DNA evidence isn't nearly so strong as police imagine, especially if they're using the evidence for finding the suspects. We'll eventually see courts overturning convictions that depend too heavily upon DNA evidence.

    If you read the article, they say "the only evidence was blood at the scene which the police tracked to the twins through DNA tests." I'd say that's an acceptable method for finding your suspect, but you've just invalidated your DNA evidence once you've used it for picking out a suspect from a massive database. So you best find more evidence like CCTV, finger prints, shaking down his fence, etc. A competent defense attorney should get their client off if you've only got DNA evidence that's been "statistically contaminated" by a database search.

    --
    The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
  50. Incentive for cloning by cyberfringe · · Score: 1

    This "loophole" in the law augers an era where gangs of clones can commit crimes with impunity. You heard it here first.

    --
    There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're talking about. -- John von Neumann
  51. Nature or Nurture? by PingPongBoy · · Score: 1

    A debatable point has been the prevention of crime by identifying people who are prone to commit heinous acts by analyzing genetics. Is it possible to have an evil twin, the diametrically opposite twin? Good and evil twins would serve as a counterexample of the use of genetics to determine whether someone is evil or subject to weaknesses.

    --
    Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
  52. Happens without DNA too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A good friend in Sydney was driving with his girlfriend, and forced off the road by some "ethnics", some of whom in area have taken to what is known as "aussie-bashing", which amounts to random physical violence against the "non-ethnic" whiter looker people. They reach in through his driver's window and smash his face in. Friendly shit, huh? So he uses the licence plate to identify the guy, and finally gets to court so the thug in question can be dealt some justice, but because he's "ethnic", he's allowed to claim he can't speak English, and is entitled to an interpreter. Which he does, and his chosen interpreter happens to be his near-identical cousin, which makes it impossible for my friend, or his girlfriend to identify the thug in the court room.

    So the judge summarily dismisses the case, and the two boys laugh out loud and taunt the victims, publicly, in the court room. You don't need fancy DNA shit to have injustice. What do we do - send both of them to jail? Sometimes, the bear eats you....

  53. Actually, the DNA "evil" gene does exist. Test how by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's right next to the gay gene and has the similar test procedure as the gay gene. The gay gene is just like how God made all animal meat other than beaf taste the same, kind of like how frog and eagle all taste like chicken; the gay gene test is determined by detecting any flavor whatsoever of male semen. If you can determine a taste in semen, then you have the gay gene: I mean any flavor, even if semen tastes like water then you have the gay gene.

    To test for the DNA "Evil" gene, you have to determine if you are cross on the Pleasure and Pain principles. What is thought to be massochistic or sadistic is nothing more than mental training to assume pain as pleasure, but the DNA "Evil" gene is actually the fact that you feel pleasure from somthing you never learned to be painful. Meaning, if you find "cutting" or anal sex to be pleasurable, then you have the DNA "Evil" gene.

    I'm conducting a test study at my clinic in Illinois, just 40 miles outside of Chicago, for anyone willing to get tested for this DNA "Evil" gene. Must be petite at around 5-foot-5inches tall, under 160 pounds with no medical history of Polyps and AIDS and Naggers Sindrome (what was that gameshow called, hmm).

  54. Bringing the evidence with them by dugeen · · Score: 1

    If we are to continue with DNA profiling, the collection and storage of specimens needs to be taken away from the police and shifted onto an impartial public service which favours neither prosecution or defence. We also need to ensure that samples are only taken from people against whom there is a reasonable suspicion of involvement in a specific crime. The police should not be able to arrest someone for a minor offence, DNA-rape them and then run the sample against millions of other unrelated offences.

  55. That settles it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    next time I rob a jeweler, I'm framing a twin.

  56. New plan! by Geminii · · Score: 1

    1: Create clone army of self. Replicate any distinguishing features - scars, hairstyles etc.

    2: Commit crime(s), leaving DNA evidence.

    3: Profit!