Daily Archives: May 28, 2013

"Book 'em" could carry a whole new meaning at police stations in Canada if lawmakers are swayed to make a controversial change to the Criminal Code.

A growing number of law enforcement representatives are calling for new powers to collect DNA from criminal suspects at the time of their arrest, not just upon their conviction and sentence.

They say the law already allows authorities to get fingerprints and photographs when someone is taken into custody, so is it that much of a stretch to ask suspects to open their mouths for a DNA swab to see if they might be connected to other unsolved crimes?

"In the name of community safety, let's address this issue. I think it's a no-brainer," said Paul Wozney, president of the Alberta Federation of Police Associations, which has been trying to drum up support for the idea through media interviews and appeals to members of Parliament.

Proponents say allowing DNA collection upon arrest would allow police to identify repeat offenders sooner. Years can pass before a trial is held, they say. They also point out convicted offenders who are ordered by a judge to submit a DNA sample - but who are not required to serve jail time - often won't show up to give that sample.

Wozney said police are not looking to get DNA samples from everyone who is arrested, just those who are arrested for more serious crimes, such as murder, kidnapping, robbery, arson and break-and-enter. And if a suspect ends up being found not guilty, the DNA sample would be destroyed.

A similar proposal has been endorsed by the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police. Its members noted in a commentary in 2011 that, under the current system, "an accused who has committed other crimes will go undetected for years while awaiting trial for his current arrest, leaving victims without answers and allowing an accused on bail to continue to commit similar offences, undeterred."

"Police associations are one of the stakeholder groups with whom we regularly consult," said Sean Phelan, a spokesman for Justice Minister Rob Nicholson. "We always take their suggestions very seriously as we come forward with new Justice/Public Safety initiatives. With respect to this particular proposal, there are currently no such plans in the works."

Phelan did point out that the government passed legislation in 2011 requiring mandatory DNA samples from convicted sex offenders.

The rest is here:
Police want DNA collection at time of arrest

Neville Mansfield, pictured outside the Sale court house in 2009. Photo: Courtesy ABC

Neville Mansfield was never a suspect in a terrifying home invasion where a young mother was repeatedly raped and her two children and an elderly babysitter threatened until 14 years later, when his DNA was linked to the crime.

Mansfield, now 52, had masked his face and head with a tea-towel, so that just a narrow slit revealed his eyes, when he entered the Shepparton house through an unlocked door in April 1993 armed with a knife.

He was not caught until 2007 when arrested by Queensland police for other crimes. A DNA sample was taken and matched a sperm fragment of DNA on the Shepparton mother.

During his trial, evidence was given that the sperm sample was 8.4 trillion times more likely to be from Mansfield than from a random member of the population.

Advertisement

Today, Mansfield went to court seeking leave to appeal his conviction and jail sentence.

Defence barrister Dermot Dann told the Court of Appeal's Justices Peter Buchanan, David Ashley and Paul Coghlan that the Crown case against Mansfield was a circumstantial one which relied heavily on DNA evidence.

Mr Dann said the jury at Mansfield's trial was not properly instructed on how to deal with the DNA evidence.

He said other aspects of the case, including the "resemblance evidence", was particularly weak.

Continue reading here:
You will never be safe: DNA link nets rapist 14 years on

Neville Mansfield, pictured outside the Sale court house in 2009. Photo: Courtesy ABC

Neville Mansfield was never a suspect in a terrifying home invasion where a young mother was repeatedly raped and her two children and an elderly babysitter threatened until 14 years later, when his DNA was linked to the crime.

Mansfield, now 52, had masked his face and head with a tea-towel, so that just a narrow slit revealed his eyes, when he entered the Shepparton house through an unlocked door in April 1993 armed with a knife.

He was not caught until 2007 when arrested by Queensland police for other crimes. A DNA sample was taken and matched a sperm fragment of DNA on the Shepparton mother.

During his trial, evidence was given that the sperm sample was 8.4 trillion times more likely to be from Mansfield than from a random member of the population.

Advertisement

Today, Mansfield went to court seeking leave to appeal his conviction and jail sentence.

Defence barrister Dermot Dann told the Court of Appeal's Justices Peter Buchanan, David Ashley and Paul Coghlan that the Crown case against Mansfield was a circumstantial one which relied heavily on DNA evidence.

Mr Dann said the jury at Mansfield's trial was not properly instructed on how to deal with the DNA evidence.

He said other aspects of the case, including the "resemblance evidence", was particularly weak.

Excerpt from:
DNA link nets rapist 14 years on