Should a victim's DNA be used against her as evidence of another crime?

My own leanings aside, this one seems like a juicy issue with two sides.

I get privacy rights, but I also get the interests of society in convicting criminals and not allowing the law to be "abused."

My gut feeling is, we shouldn't let guilty people go free just because they may have been victims in the past, but it kind of raises the question of whether a victim of a crime should report it to an indifferent and impartial deep state that might someday later use it against her.

https://abovethelaw.com/2022/09/this-police-departments-dna-collection-was-so-unethical-new-laws-will-likely-be-made-preventing-it-from-happening-again/

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

SW-User

The good outweighs any (perceived) bad here. And any perceived bad is more rooted in emotion than reason.

Let's remove "her" and "rape kit" from this entirely, and put everyone into a DNA database at birth, just like (e.g., in the US) everyone receives a birth certificate and social security number. Anyone in the database may live their entire life without committing any crime, or having their privacy invaded (e.g., Facebook would have no right to access such a database, anymore that it does now in the scheme of people only being entered into the database upon commission of a crime ... a DNA database is not a "privacy" issue). And if someone does commit a crime, it will be quicker, more efficient and less costly to prosecute and convict them, with lower risk of imprisoning (or worse) the wrong person.

Moreover, when everyone remembers they are now in the database, it may also serve as a bit of a deterrent to committing crimes, at least ones that are not extensively premeditated.

Ideally every country would do this, so when foreign nationals commit crimes in other countries, law enforcement agencies (e.g., Interpol) can easily work together when necessary.

Moreover, whether you're a victim in year one, or a perpetrator in year two, these are separate events and should be treated accordingly. No perpetrator should get a pass because they were also a victim at some point.

Whether or not adults may want to voluntarily allow other services to access their central DNA record, or additional DNA should be collected and submitted to separate, service provider-specific databases (e.g., 23andMe, or your doctor) is a separate, secondary consideration.

LordShadowfire · 46-50, M

@SW-User Winner, winner, chicken dinner. That's exactly what they need to do. A cheek swab from every person residing in the United States. Honestly, it's overdue.

Ynotisay · M

@SW-User Well-stated. I agree. There's plenty of things where our "privacy" is impacted for the safety/protection of others. Cameras in public are now ubiquitous. Is our privacy under attack when we walk in to a store? Or is it a tool to identify criminals who, potentially, could put us at risk. The guardrails around collecting DNA at birth would need to be big and strong. But I think it's doable.