posted by
purplecthulhu at 12:20pm on 08/08/2008
The usual government mantra that those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear about the burgeoning databases (ID, DNA etc.) stored about is rather interestingly dented by this case:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08/08/dna_evidence_problems/
Someone matched up to a 1984 rape and murder case through a DNA database trawl was about to go to trial when a double check revealed that there was no DNA match. Errors in the testing lab seem the probably cause. If it hadn't been spotted this man would be serving a long sentence. As a result of this mess, 7000 convictions based on DNA evidence stretching back 20 years are to be reopened.
So this innocent individual had nothing to fear from the DNA database, right?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08/08/dna_evidence_problems/
Someone matched up to a 1984 rape and murder case through a DNA database trawl was about to go to trial when a double check revealed that there was no DNA match. Errors in the testing lab seem the probably cause. If it hadn't been spotted this man would be serving a long sentence. As a result of this mess, 7000 convictions based on DNA evidence stretching back 20 years are to be reopened.
So this innocent individual had nothing to fear from the DNA database, right?
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
A spokesman said "Although they are identical twins, there are differences between them."
Now I freely realise adult identical twins are unlikely to actually be identical due to any differences in lifestyle, but I still found it an amusing statement :)
(I considered looking up the article via google but thought better of it when I was thinking of search terms...)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)