The San Francisco police arrested a woman based on dna from her rape kit

W

WhatInThe

SF VIP
The San Francisco arrested a woman using dna from her rape kit. An informant said it's a common practice in San Francisco and through out the state of California. The DA dropped the charges. Considers it an illegal and unethical practice. Also could dissuade future victims from reporting an assault.

https://wgntv.com/news/san-francisco-police-used-rape-kit-dna-to-arrest-victim-da-says/
 

Heard about this on KGO Newstalk from SF. They take the victims DNA, with their permission, to rule it out of any DNA findings. Then it was used against them which I guess is the illegal part.
 
I don't know, if the woman did the crime shouldn't she face the consequences? No matter how the police got her DNA, so long as it was legal.
If it had been fingerprints would people be worried? I know more about fingerprints, I have had mine taken a number of times for employment and things like that. I would not favor keeping those from being used by the police, why DNA?

This seems a bit of a slippery slope...
 

Alligatorob said:
I don't know, if the woman did the crime shouldn't she face the consequences? No matter how the police got her DNA, so long as it was legal.
If it had been fingerprints would people be worried? I know more about fingerprints, I have had mine taken a number of times for employment and things like that. I would not favor keeping those from being used by the police, why DNA?

This seems a bit of a slippery slope...
Click to expand...
You got a point, there. If it's okay with finger prints, then why not DNA?
 
It has been coming for a long time not surprising ....
between military / some employment and in prison they are creating a huge database ... then add the newborn DNA collected.

most likely just downloaded into a system not necessarily why it was taken previously ...
Even the private companies who do DNA testing have loopholes in which police have found answers to many cold cases...

Perhaps there should be a warning line saying DNA would be added to the existing database..
 
Tish said:
Seriously though, rape is very traumatic even for a past criminal.
Click to expand...
I am sure it is.

However we have lots of biometric things from photos to fingerprints to birth certificates. Law enforcement is not restricted from using those, why should we treat DNA differently?

When photographs first became available in the 1800s it made a big difference to law enforcement, I for one am glad it happened. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_forensic_photography
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top