Composition of offender databases (Dr. Jason Gilder, Forensic Bioinformatics)

The past decade has witnessed an extraordinary growth in DNA databases for use in criminal intelligence and health research, ranging in size from a few hundred to a few million samples.

The United Kingdom has led the world: its National DNA Database (NDNAD) is the oldest, largest and most inclusive national forensic DNA database in the world. Founded in 1995, it now contains DNA samples and profiles from more than 2.5 million individuals and is expected to expand over the next few years to include some 5 million people, nearly 10% of the country's population. [1,2] On file is DNA drawn from people convicted of a wide range of crimes, including serious violent crimes and minor public order offenses, as well as arrestees, many of whom have not been convicted of any crime.

The United States has followed closely. In 1998, three years after NDNAD went live, the FBI began operating its national database, along with a software system — the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) — that enables local, state, and national authorities to share DNA profiles electronically. CODIS now contains more than 2.3 million offender DNA profiles.[3] Since 1998, all 50 U.S. states have actively collected DNA from varying populations in the criminal justice system, and by 2004, all 50 states were connected by CODIS.

The trend established by the UK to require sampling of ever-widening categories of individuals, including the most recent and disturbing precedent — the decision to collect and permanently retain DNA from people who are merely arrested — is dangerous and must be closely scrutinized. By examining how the United States has closely followed Britain's lead, we argue that the policies, trends and practices adopted in the UK are likely to be globalized, with potentially serious consequences for privacy and human rights, and uncertain, if not dubious, benefits for law enforcement

Materials

Presentation

N Morris. Curse of the DNA register. The Independent. July 30, 2008.

T Simoncelli and B Steinhardt. California’s Proposition 69: A Dangerous Precedent for Criminal DNA Databases. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. Summer 2005.

T Simoncelli and H Wallace. Expanding Databases, Declining Liberties. GeneWatch. 2006;19(1).

T Simoncelli. Dangerous Excursions: The Case Against Expanding Forensic DNA Databases to Innocent Persons. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics. Summer 2006.