National DNA databases—practice and practicability. A forum for discussion
Introduction
DNA databases for criminal offenders and unsolved crimes have now become established in many countries as an everyday tool for use in the investigation of crime. Also, there is now very little challenge to their use in courts of law. However, the collection and storage of personal data has always been an emotive issue as there is a public perception that either the scientists or the authorities might use the information for something other than the stated purpose.
While it is universally accepted that DNA profiles obtained from all crime scene samples should be automatically entered and retained on a database, the subject of the entry of personal profiles from suspects or convicted persons continues to be debated. Given the robustness and reliability of DNA profiling, it has been suggested that everyone should be placed on a DNA database. While there is no argument with this logic, there are practical concerns for its implementation not least of which is the cost.
It is taken for granted that all DNA profiles which are obtained from scenes of crime should automatically be added as data for future comparison. This cannot infringe any civil rights issues as initially these results are not assigned to any individual.
In general terms, there is now almost no objection to the existence of national DNA databases as they have had considerable success in crime investigation and in the identification of possible perpetrators of very serious offences. There remains, however, considerable discussion about which individuals should have DNA profiles entered onto the databases and which samples should be retained for future analysis.
Section snippets
The current situation in the UK
The UK DNA database was first established in 1995 and is now used as a routine step in the investigation of crime. In the initial stages, the need for a National DNA Database (NDNAD) was identified to aid in crime reduction. As past records have shown in the UK, the majority of those who commit serious crime have previous convictions for minor offences. Consequently, in the UK, there was a decision to allow for the retention of personal DNA profiles from offenders convicted of minor as well as
The current situation in Europe
The majority of European countries now have either operational NDNADs or are in the process of implementation (see Table 2).
In the UK, the law is comparatively liberal and comprehensive by allowing profiles to be obtained and retained from a wide range of individuals who are either suspected or convicted of crimes. There is also the legal right to keep all samples for further analysis if required. This situation does not pertain to all European countries and Table 3 illustrates the wide
The current situation in France
Although the necessary legislation for the French NDNAD was enacted in 1998, the database is still in its infancy. Originally, it was implemented to hold profiles only from those found guilty of sexual assaults and offences against minors. In 2001, the law was changed to include serious offences against persons and property and in 2003 another law was enacted to include almost all categories of serious offences. This new law also allows for a police officer to take a buccal sample, for DNA
The current situation in the USA
The NDNAD in the USA came into existence following the enactment of the DNA Identification Act of 1994. In its initial stages, the database was designed to cope with entries from a number of DNA technologies but its mainstream activity has now settled on a system of entry and search against profiles obtained from 13 STR loci that can be typed for with commercially available kits.
The FBI designed and implemented the system and now has overall responsibility for an operation which includes input
National DNA databases issues
In the early stages of development of NDNADs, there was considerable challenge to the accuracy and statistical relevance of matches, especially in the adversarial forms of criminal justice practiced in such countries as the UK and USA. Nowadays, there is relatively little challenge to the evidence and this has allowed the scientists more time to concentrate on the quality issues associated with the detailed maintenance of the databases. While all countries have legislation to prevent the
Future
Without doubt, the evolution of NDNADs has been a success story and the creation of large searchable databases will continue to be an invaluable asset in the investigation of crimes. The very success, however, is in some way, a potential bar to technological progress. The profiling of such large numbers of samples has involved a great deal of work and a substantial cost and embracing a change in the technology would require an overwhelming amount of work. It is generally agreed that, although
Acknowledgements
This report has been prepared from the presentations made by Bruce Budowle (FBI, Washington, DC, USA), Peter Gill (Forensic Science Service, Birmingham, UK), Isabelle Goanvic (Ministère de Justice, Paris, France), Vince Pascali (Università Cattolica del S. Cuore, Rome) and Peter Schneider (Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany) with additional commentary by Peter Martin.
In the process of setting up the forum, it was appreciated that many countries have well established, successful DNA
References (0)
Cited by (14)
Developmental validation of the PowerPlex<sup>®</sup> 21 System
2014, Forensic Science International: GeneticsCitation Excerpt :Short tandem repeat (STR) analysis is essential in forensic DNA casework and database applications. Today, many countries maintain DNA databases [1–6]. Larger multiplexes allow for better identity statistics and increased overlap between world-wide standards.
Integrating forensic information in a crime intelligence database
2013, Forensic Science InternationalCitation Excerpt :They are generated by the comparison of situational (e.g. MO, loot, spatiotemporal) and forensic information (e.g. DNA, shoemarks, images), as well as the analysis of stolen and recovered vehicles. In this context, links are considered as an aid to interpret globally the crime environment for intelligence purpose or for investigations, but not as proof of common source dedicated to a Court [1,9]. Crime events data are integrated on a daily basis by each state unit and classified according to a harmonized doctrine including modus operandi, loot, spatiotemporal information and a dedicated classification system of events.
Evaluation and comparison of 15 short tandem repeat loci of south and west Indian population for use in personal identification applications
2023, Journal of Applied Biology and BiotechnologyExperiences, challenges and the future direction of forensic dna databanking in Malaysia
2019, Journal of Sustainability Science and Management