Under a bill now passing through the Commons, DNA samples taken from rape suspects will not be routinely retained unless they are convicted.I don't know about you but I think that under those circumstances the samples should not be kept. Now I'm sure that the Labour leader isn't the only one thinking that this would be bad because it would lead to fewer rapes being prosecuted. I'm sorry but that's not a good enough reason to keep samples like that.
To me trying to keep the DNA of suspects that are not convicted sounds too much like, "Okay you may not have done this crime but you might have done something else so we'll just hold on to your sample for later." To me that is just too much freedom with the DNA of a person who was not convicted.
Thankfully there is seems to be measures in place (The Protection of Freedoms Bill and a ruling by European Court of Human Rights that illegalizes a blanket policy on retaining DNA on all suspects) although it worries me a bit that police can apply to keep a suspect's DNA on a case by case basis, I just hope the burden of proof is high.
