I see no reason why this should "re-ignite the DNA debate".
The man was CONVICTED of his crime in 2003.
The current contentious issue is DNA being held for people NOT convicted of the crimes they are accused of.

I feel uneasy when people suggest that nationwide DNA collection is justified if it helps to solve crimes. Far too few people consider that it may also lead to the conviction of people who are innocent.

So much weight is put on DNA evidence in court and I believe this is a mistake. A DNA trace on something tells you only that person has been there: It gives no information on WHEN they were there. We all go through our lives leaving our DNA everywhere we go and the scientific methods for detecting it are becoming ever more sensitive. You may be somewhere one day, a crime is commited there the next, they find your DNA at the scene and the next thing you know, there's a knock on the door from the police. Life-ruining stuff, and not the kind of world I want to live in!

Jonathan, Birmingham, UK

If this DNA evidence is enough to prove guilt then shouldn’t we be looking at the McCann’s again?

David, Warrington,

I am astonished by so many commentators who are willing to undergo what I consider to be forensic rape. As an individual who has never committed a crime, I expect my privacy (including my genetic make up) to be respected. If one has been convicted of a crime, then it is a different story. The current system enables repeat offenders (like Wright) to be caught.

The naivety of the public with regard to the national DNA database is very troubling. Do you think a database is beyond human intervention or error? That it is a stable and innocent store of information that is resistent to the power of government or some other authority? I am no conspiracy theorist but even I can see the potential fall-out if the most private details of innocent members of the public are available to those in power. Moreover, the infallibility of DNA is utter nonsense - crime scenes are not as simple as CSI would suggest.

Not everything can be solved by computers!

Ella, London, UK

Suppose your DNA reveals a predisposition to a cancer or other disease. Should it become available by misadventure or otherwise -- good luck getting insurance or perhaps a job.

Bob , Ottawa, Canada

did anyone vote for "liberty"? do they represent anyone?

when people like this suffolk-ator are off the streets, surely that's liberty? a sample of my dna or having my photo taken is a small price to pay for freedom.

jem, london, uk

The hysteria surrounding DNA evidence and the DNA database is the worst kind of paranoid rubbish. Anyone who has watched real life forensic TV programmes will know that as well as convicting many appallingly evil people it has also freed innocent people who were falsely convicted of crimes they never committed.

Of course, Shami Chakrabarti or Liberty will never ever point out this inconvenient fact but the point is why are people objecting to the police doing their job? Do they also object to fingerprint evidence or police interviews? What, exactly, do they expect the police to do?

I suspect that many of the objectors are really just a very vocal, vociferous minority who are quick to protest their innocence probably because they’re doing something illegal. They should be duly ignored and the police be given every help or advantage they need to convict lawbreakers.

I know which side I’m on.

Tiernan Allen, Sidmouth, England

I have to admire the naive trust in the good intentions of government shown by so many correspondents! Even here in the US, where our entire system of "checks and balances" and the codified freedoms of our Bill of Rights exemplify the fear of an all-powerful central government held by the Founding Fathers, you'll hear the same refrain: Only the guilty need fear! Naive, and also dangerous!
The natural inclination of any governing body is to consolidate its power, and information IS power; be it the free rein of police to listen to citizens in their "private" moments or a registry of that most personal of data, one's DNA profile, you MUST NOT trust that your government will "do the right thing" at all times.
Imagine the time when research reveals a gene indicating you MIGHT commit a crime: won't your government, "for the good of society", round up and charge all POTENTIAL offenders? Fear the future, protect yourselves NOW!

Geoffrey Tudor, Sequim, WA, USA

Britain fortunately only gets serial killers once a decade. And identifying rapists is rarely a problem. So while it's nice that the DNA database could prevent maybe one serious crime a year, we have to look at the disadvantages.
In particular, a national DNA database is a terrifying prospect. Once the Government has numbered you, the numerous data trails you inevitably leave behind can be linked up to build a vivid picture of your private life. If our DNA becomes public, it will impact whether we can get a job or insurance.
It's the Government who should be afraid of us, not the other way around.

Dave Gould, Bristol,

It's a shame the 'nothing to hide, nothing to fear' brigade cannot think things through. You all say you're happy for your DNA to be on the database because you have no intention of committing a crime. So you're going to burden the police with your useless DNA are you? Give them an even larger haystack in which to search for needles? If you really care about preventing crime, doesn't it make more sense to spend our taxpayers money on something more useful than a collection of DNA samples from innocent people? It's not rocket science, people!

Trinity, Gateshead,

'I can also see very good reasons for not trusting the government in any way to be in charge of that database. ..Laurel700 France'

I quite understand Laurel's reservations but this raises another question - who else? There needs to be a white paper on this for national discussion and for a system of stringent (more so than those we already have) safeguards with equally stringent oversight and compliance auditing with NGO participation. The same can be said for fingerprint and blood sample databases or any other which impact on the liberty of our citizens.

Adam Gardiner, Larnaca, Cyprus

I agree that a database is needed, however it does leave alot of questions. For instance if some one was to give DNA during an investigation and then they were cleared does their DNA go into this database? If it gets destroyed how sure can we be? Who is trustworthy enough to run this? How susceptible is it to corruption?

Marin Kyriacou, Larnaca, Cyprus

It's time to bring back capital punishment. As a law-abiding tax payer, I don't see why I should have to contribute to this person's living and security expenses until the day he dies.

David, Poole,

How can the success of this conviction incite such debate? The database has achieved a result and now we question whether this is right. It makes no sense at all.

Sarah, London,

This is the same lunatic logic that accompanies the debate about ID cards.

The only people who have something to fear from a universal DNA database or ID cards are those who intend to break the law. It is just that simple.

ken, Northampton,

What Lisa and many others with the 'nothing to fear' mantra fail to realise is that while no-one objects to murderers being sought by their DNA, a complete database would allow the Police/Government to identify anyone involved in any activity they deemed threatening. This could include political activism, investigative journalism - even voting for a particular party if samples could be obtained from ballot papers.

MDHinton, sieradz, Poland

As some people have already pointed out the key word here is CONVICTED. He had been convicted of a crime before and so his DNA is fair game. The problem is with keeping the DNA of people NOT CONVICTED of any crime. By all means when the police arrest someone they should take their DNA and test it to see if it matches the crime and their database but IF that person is not CONVICTED then those samples should be destroyed.
By keeping those samples the police are giving the impression that they think this person is 'a bit guilty'. It adds to the 'them and us feeling' which is damaging the relationship between the public and the police.

Roger, L:ondon, UK

Collecting evidence, now, means much more. Such a database makes life easy, whereas gives a big power to police and government.

ozan, istanbul, turkey

A hypothetical: You smoke a cigarrette in a bar and put it out it in an ashtray. Someone else picks it up, commits a crime and drops your cigarette at the scene. The police arrest you because your DNA links you to the crime. Frightening.

Arantxa , Cadiz, Spain

I really can't make up my mind on the DNA database thing. However, it seems as though many people are promoting either one side of the debate without considering the other.

On the one hand; if everyone were on it from birth then a huge number of crimes would be solved and maybe they wouldn't be comitted in the first place.

On the other hand; the Government cannot look after the data it already has on us, and do we really want the entire populations DNA stored in a central repository for ever more for any future Government to do as they please with? We cannot predict what sort of Governemnt we may have in fifty years time. I mean, do we want a future BNP Government to have access to such data? What would the Nazis' have done with this information had the whole of their conquered lands had databass like this?

The point isn't really what good could come from this but rather what the potential that such a database provides for evil.

AJL, Newcastle, UK

The rather aptly named 'liberty' rights group clearly feel that theh human rights of a rapist and murderer are more important than that of his innocent victims. 'Liberty' would have given freedom for Wright to kill more women if the Government had agreed with their stance on keeping the DNA of offenders.

nick w, Coventry, Warwickshire

Douglas Cook in Glasgow asks, "What could anyone have to fear as an innocent party?" The answer, Mr Cook, is simple: crime scenes are littered with DNA. Most of this "evidence" will be the DNA of innocent people. However, try explaining that to the police when they come knocking at your door. By all means, store the DNA of the criminal fraternity. But a national DNA database would make us ALL guilty unless we can prove otherwise.

Dave Cook, Newcastle,

I am totally opposed to the introduction of a compulsory DNA database for all citizens, as this would be a fundamental breach of our liberties and a chilling extension of state powers. For the same reason I would take all possible steps to avoid being issued with a compulsory ID card.

I am appalled to read that a Tory MP is 'not averse' to the DNA database being extended to everyone if this helped clear up crime - I trust that this is not official Tory party policy! We know that the Labour government wishes to control more or less every aspect of our lives. The Tories should seek to protect (not further erode) our basic freedoms.

In any case, DNA evidence is not 100% safe and over-reliance on DNA evidence (particularly in murder/rape cases where the mere presence of DNA can sometimes be sufficient to lead to prosecution despite the absence of any other evidence) would inevitably lead to miscarriages of justice.

James, Cheltenham, UK

It is one thing to record and store DNA information from convicted criminals, but it is quite another to record and store everyone's DNA information. There are still dangers in the former.

When increasingly small amounts of DNA, or, other forensic evidence, are, by themselves, used to persuade us of an individual's guilt. I for one become increasingly uncomfortable that we may be neglecting to consider other possibilities for the presence of such material at a crime-scene -- explanations either accidental or deliberate. Can we always trust the police or so-called forensic experts?

More importantly, beyond issues of innocence or guilt, DNA information is not just a means to identify an individual: it provides far more information about ourselves than of interest to the police alone.

Why should insurance companies not be given access to that information, once collected, 'if you have nothing to hide'? Why should employers not be given access to such information (some employers may think that DNA information is more reliable that superstitious 'graphology'). Why should marketing companies not have access to it? Hilter would have loved to have access to it, but I am forgetting, we are so far beyond repeating that sort of thing now.

I think we need to think very carefully about our relationship to the State. The State does not own us, and the more it tries to control us the more we should have cause to fear. Nor should the State be confused with a Parliamentary Government, nor our Parliamentary Government with democracy. And even if we had a democratic government in full control of the State, I would still not want to hand over my DNA.

Lee, London,

Lisa from Richmond says: "If one has no criminal tendancies, one should have no fear of their DNA being in a database".
However, this begs the question, does it not? What is going to be declared "criminal" tomorrow? The present government have shown themselves to be a bunch of control-freaks who have passed thousands of new laws. How many could you name? I have no doubts that I could be protesting about the Peking Olympics and find myself charged under anti-terror legislation, or some such rubbish.

A freedom, once given up, goes for ever!

Brian Clacey, Croydon, UK

Forcing women to work on the streets is what killed these women. Legalize brothels and you can forget about the DNA debate.

Alfred, Ryde, Isle of Wight
_______________________________

I agree that brothels should be legalized, which would probably mean licensing of some sort. However, lets face facts, it wouldn't help the vast majority of women who work on the streets as there is no way in the world that Heroin addicts would ever be allowed to work in a legally licensed sex establishment.

If Heroin addicts were prescribed free heroin then street prostitution would all but disappear. In fact, the entire heroin trade would disapear overnight as there would be no market left for it.

AJL, Newcastle, UK

Bring back capital punishment for serious crimes . Legalize prostitution and accommmodate them in designated areas such as they do in Amsterdam and Lahore though I must admit I haven't visited these brothels {as a student of human behaviour,of course ! } for a nomber of years.
There are also other supportive measures to rescue the prostitutes from risking their lives but I should leave that to the Government and the prostitues families, Local Authorities and Voluntary sector.

And how about appointing a Prostitution Tsar ?

Abdul Jaleel (Dr.), Darlington, England

While I am against carrying ID cards despite having nothing to feel guiilty about, I can see no reason for anyone not giving their DNA. The only reason for not wanting to, is that you have something to hide. Not only would it help solve crimes, it could help identify people.

I am still against ID cards though....

Gareth Jones, Gillingham, Kent

Wouldn't a DNA database make it very easy for innocent people to get framed for crimes by people planting their DNA at the scene of the crime?

CJ, London, England

"I have no objection as a law abiding citizen to my DNA profile being held on a database for the purpose of elimination.

What could anyone have to fear as an innocent party"

Mr Cook, what if your DNA profile (or rather a slice of it) appeared to match that found at the scene of a crime? Would you be so confident of being eliminated from suspicion, even if you had what you thought was a pretty solid alibi?

Keith, Birkenhead, Wirral

The point is not that the innocent have nothing to fear...it is both a principle of freedom and the worry where such intrusion would end.

Those who would sacrifice a little freedom for a little security deserve neither. Benjamin Franklin.

J.Wilkes, Gloucester,

To the oft repeated question, "If law-biding, what's to fear?", I bid you remember an American ex-prosecutor and disbarred lawyer named Nifong, a rape case, a college sports team and, now, a lawsuit.

DanO, Mount Vernon, USA

did anyone vote for "liberty"? do they represent anyone?

when people like this suffolk-ator are off the streets, surely that's liberty? a sample of my dna or having my photo taken is a small price to pay for freedom.

jem, london, uk

DNA should be sampled from the population. Nothing to hide, nothing to fear. Phone calls and internet access should be monitored. Nothing to hide, nothing to fear. All vehicles should be fitted with a tracking device. Nothing to hide, nothing to fear.

You data is in safe hands. The state is infallible. The will be no data theft. There will be no corruption. There will be no leaks. There will be no manipulation. If you believe otherwise, you have something to hide.

PT, Tynemouth, UK

Amazing how naiive people are about DNA. They have been watching too much CSI, where tests are always 100% accurate, never a false positive. It's very easy to introduce someone's DNA to a crime scene, so you could be framed very easily - even if you were lucky enough that other evidence cleared you, you would have a distressing time as a suspect, and your personal reputation would be trashed. And are the target-led police going to look any further once they have found "DNA" evidence that you are guilty, even if the evidence is spurious. And what about the fingerprint case in Scotland, where fingerprint evidence was falsified because the truth was politically inconvenient? But then again, a DNA database could show all the fraudulent "relatives" brought in by immigrants, and how many women have children where their husband is not the father - more divorces anyone? Maybe more people have something to hide than you think?

Anonymous, Manchester,

DNA is a very private thing and can provide extremely important genetic information which could be useful to many commercial organisations. How long would it be before the politicians saw the commercial gains that would be availble by selling this data? How long before scientists were given access ( for the common good of course!!) to conduct thier experiments to decide those of us who are predisposed to violence ( according to them anyway ) and could then be locked up before they committed any offence? The possibilities are endless and it is time the general public woke up to the dangers in this governments use ( or abuse ) of technology as a method of control.

john, Wakefield, West Yorks

surely the question about what does an innocent person need to fear by DNA retention by the state leads to all people should have their DNA on file. i for one of many am not remotely comfortable with this.

equally those who have DNA taken on arrest and are subsequently proven innocent should have the record immediately erased.

nigel, london,

A number of people have stated that if you are law abiding you have nothing to fear from a nationwide database.

Why was there such uproar about bugging devices?

If you have nothing to hide why not let the powers that be have your DNA and listen to your conversations??

G., Porstmouth, Hants

If all those who were either already incumbent ,or preparing to seek office, would be first on the list then maybe it would be worth doing.

The desire of the government to monitor and control the population while avoid those controls themsleves is starting to get excessive

Jon Dawkins, Bristol,

Douglas Cook,

"What could anyone have to fear as an innocent party"

This is a rather naive statement - even the most simple mind could comprehend a situation where an innocent person's DNA was found in a place where a crime had been comitted, and hence lead them to being a suspect. I hope you're never in charge of decisions on keeping DNA data...

Chris, Newcastle, UK

you would never have to worry about your DNA being on a database if you are a decent law-abiding citizen. even if there was a mistaken match to a crime, other evidence would then come into play. What do we have to hide?

Deborah, Milton Keynes, UK

An interesting thing just happened. On my first look at Steve Wright's picture I thought you would never think he was a killer; he looked ordinary, kind, a bit sad. Then I read further down that he was rude & aggressive, looked back at the photo, and saw his face as very different indeed.

Deborah, Milton Keynes, UK

My DNA profile, like my fingerprint, is mine: it is not the property of the State and I will not give it to them willingly.

If someone commits a serious crime, then they have disregarded the rights of others in doing so they forfeit some rights that the law-abiding take for granted. This includes the right to liberty; and also the right to privacy (including their genetic privacy within their DNA). For those of us who commit no such crimes, these rights should be absolute.

S Foster, Doncaster, UK

You need to be a criminal to think that the DNA Database is dangerous to your freedom. No, it is a great tool to help keep us free from crime.

Weng L Lim, Canterbury, Kent

All this crap like 'I have no objection as a law abiding citizen to my DNA profile being held on a database for the purpose of elimination. ' just shows how stupid the public can be.

Does the loss of 25 million records not worry people? Imagine the damage that could be done if your DNA went missing, or simply how easy it would be for someone to 'contaminate' a crime scene with other DNA, given how the police and government up the whole DNA concept like it's the holy grail among crime solution.

Arthur, Newcastle,

mark day, london says 'The DNA database is dangerous to our freedom.'

However, the LACK of a DNA database would be very dangerous indeed for women in Suffolk. Many more could have been killed without this evidence.

Bill, Yeovil, UK

I would like to see us have colour coded LEDs impregnated into our foreheads. GREEN for honest upright citizens of superior moral fibre like myself. ORANGE for those who look a bit shifty and if presented with irresisatble temptation would not be able to risit and RED for people with dangerous delusions of the importance of freewill and and free society. After all, if you've got nothing to hide.........

Colin, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Many women, including me, would feel much relieved if there was a countrywide comprehensive DNA database (including us of course). People who object protest too much for my liking, Evil murderers were all children once, get them on it too I say. This case proves that now we have the technology it ismost remiss of us too not use it to its full extent. Should also be mandatory for all immigrants - everyboody basically. What have we got to lose but criminals?

Sunita Russell, Northwood, Middlesex

DNA should be taken from everyone at birth and retained. Those that have done nothing wrong, have nothing to fear.
A National Database is the obvious step. This latest success shows it is well worthwhile.

Dave, Blackpool, UK

How long before the motto is 'guilty until proven innocent' ?

Arthur, Newcastle,

What is dangerous to our freedom is people who commit violent offences not being caught. The vast majority of women are under a self imposed curfew because they do not feel that they are safe.

That is loss of freedom and maybe as a man the previous post will not understand that.

L Hallam, Maidenhead,

I wonder why Mark Day does not want his DNA available to solve crimes or anything else.....is he already be guilty of something.

Like other normal people what do I care if anyone has my DNA...I have nothing to hide and have done nothing wrong.

E.Bee, Toulouse, France

Forcing women to work on the streets is what killed these women. Legalize brothels and you can forget about the DNA debate.

Alfred, Ryde, Isle of Wight

"Only became relevant because one of the bodies was dumped in a stream" still means he is now off the streets and cannot murder again. Also if the 1 million people who have had their DNA stolen are innocent what exactly do they have to worry about? Only those who have something to hide need worry about a DNA database.

Mal, Devon,

The DNA database is dangerous to our freedom. There is 1 million totaly inocent poeple including children who have had DNA stolen from them by this dangereous government

mark day, london,

I have no objection as a law abiding citizen to my DNA profile being held on a database for the purpose of elimination.

What could anyone have to fear as an innocent party

Douglas Cook, Glasgow, UK

Why stop at DNA? Why not make us all wear tags? As this case showed the DNA only became relevant because one of the bodies was not dumped in a stream.

Frank, Barnsley,

His DNA was taken and held after being CONVICTED of a crime; however no DNA should ever be retained from someone found innocent or released without charge. If I haven't broken any laws then the state has no right to demand to retain any piece of me. Given the current (wrong) view that DNA evidence is 100% proof of guilt then it would require me to prove I wasn't guilty rather than being assumed innocent.

Take & retain the DNA of those who commit crime - leave the innocent alone.

D Whyte, Romford, Essex

Graham, Strassen, Luxembourg

re: you comments

You also need to recognise we live in an imperfect society where Government is totally incapable of looking after our data safely and securely.

Rod Munch, Northampton, UK

Bring back the death penalty ASAP !!

Ian Payne, Walsall,

If one has no criminal tendancies, one should have no fear of their DNA being in a database.
I. for one, am all in favour of DNA databases being compiled and maintained of all people who are convicted of any crime. This case just proves the value of such a database.
Human rights, schnuman rights - what sort of ideal world do these people live in? This is the real world, not some Utopia devoid of violence, crime and injustice. Any means of identifying criminals should be employed to increase their chances of being caught if they commit crimes again.

Lisa, Richmond, Surrey

I can see very good reasons for having a dna database, however, I can also see very good reasons for not trusting the government in any way to be in charge of that database. They have not, after all, given evidence of their responsibility or any concern for the rights of society in so many other areas. So, how can anyone trust them on this?

Laurel700, Toulouse, France

Liberty have good intentions but they should recognise that we live in an imperfect society. A more complete national DNA database is required.

Graham, Strassen, Luxembourg