28 2 mins 7 yrs

Police hunting ‘Midsomer Murder’ killer to begin knocking on doors to ask for DNA

Detective Superintendent Nick May of Surrey and Sussex Major Crime Team said: “We want to thank all those men who attended the voluntary sessions in Bosham, Fishbourne and Chichester over the three-week session to give their DNA.

“The response has been positive. We still need those men who have not come forward to do so.

“We will be doing house-to-house enquiries and knocking on doors during a week of action from Monday 6 April to 12 April asking those who have not given their DNA to consider doing so.

“If we don’t get a reply we will also be sending out further letters asking them to attend Chichester police station to give their DNA.

“We have to be tenacious in our efforts to catch the killer.

But we do understand that this is an entirely voluntary process and there is no compulsion for anyone to co-operate with us.

“We simply want to do the best we can for Valerie’s family and for the community in bringing the killer to justice.”

More than 9,500 people have been interviewed as part of the investigation and a £20,000 reward has been offered for information that could help lead to the capture of the person responsible.

Detective Constable Steve Taylor from the Surrey and Sussex Major Crime Team explained: “The process is painless and should take no longer than 10 minutes.

“It is important for the public to understand that we will only use the samples obtained to check against this particular crime and their DNA profile will not appear on any database.”

 

Indeed? In regard to the final sentence from this mealy-mouthed copper, I am reminded of that old saying : If you believe that, you’ll believe anything!

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

28 thoughts on “and what have YOU got to hide; Sir?

  1. what a ridiculous idea. Don’t know whose brainchild this was but anyone who gives them their dna is a git.

    How are they justifying this nonsense? I understand yes yes murder has been committed, they will not solve it this way.

  2. If I lived there, I would give my DNA without a moment’s hesitation (unless I was the killer, of course).
    I believe in this science. It has removed many murderers from the streets and should be supported.

    Only murderers and pansies can have any objection.

  3. I understand the concerns but I would cooperate in a second.

    The hunt for the murderer would trump other concerns.

  4. No Noel your just stupid and being a foreigner can not grasp an american point of view on the subject.

    You’re rights in your countries don’t come from god, mine do. This is a violation of peoples privacy. Not to mention a wast of man power, money, and effort.

  5. Its no violation of privacy to voluntarily give a DNA sample.

    Such procedure has been used by police in the US
    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/dna-dragnet/

    To rule it out completely is to say that there are things more important than catching brutal murderers. Sorry, Mr. Cochran, I won’t go there.

  6. voluntary giving is a waste of time and money, that is just my opinion.

    There is nothing more important than catching brutal murderers. I don’t see the criminal strolling in to “volunteer” their DNA. I am all for once someone is convicted of a FELONY their DNA should be kept on file. Other than that it’s nunya….

  7. If you have a good idea that the murderer is from a certain area, the DNA helps the cops rule people out of suspicion.

  8. Big dilemma here.

    Suppose you gave your DNA, plus name of course, and it matched with some fingerprints you gave many years ago for some minor misdemeanour like being over the limit while driving, or even mistaken identity in another case, do you suppose the police would not then keep your DNA on that database??

    I don’t think so.

  9. Anybody stupid enough to assist the police beyond normal help deserves to be framed:

    “You can just engineer a crime scene,” said Dan Frumkin, lead author of the paper, which has been published online by the journal Forensic Science International: Genetics. “Any biology undergraduate could perform this.”

    John M. Butler, leader of the human identity testing project at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, said he was “impressed at how well they were able to fabricate the fake DNA profiles.” However, he added, “I think your average criminal wouldn’t be able to do something like that.”

    No – but the police or higher ‘agency’ could.

  10. If Valerie Graves had been adequately armed there would be no murder hunt.

    Only murderers and pansies can have any objection.

    And people who understandably don’t want their DNA getting into the hands of a highly corrupt agency.

  11. //No Noel your just stupid and being a foreigner can not grasp an american point of view on the subject. //

    Who’s talking about an American point of view on this?

    Surrey and Sussex are in England, you ignoramus.

  12. “a foreigner can not grasp an american point of view on the subject”

    Oh I can! Don’t give your DNA as the system might fry you for a crime you didn’t commit just because you couldn’t afford a good defense!

  13. A person is innocent until proven guilty. If I refuse to give my DNA, is that considered an admission of guilt ? If not, then this is a waste of time as the killer could just simply refuse. But to refuse might engender suspicion from the police and they might arrest me for no other reason than I simply refuse to give them my DNA because once done, I have no control over whether they wish to keep it and sell the information on to an interested party.

    Already our private medical records and other ‘personal’ information can be sold to the highest bidder by the State, and I was never consulted or gave my consent to be used in such an underhand way.

    People who are giving their DNA may be innocent, and wish to exclude themselves from police inquiry. But an innocent person who refuses may have as good a reason to refuse as the murder (see above). Are you going to arrest many innocent people who just do not trust the State and ‘force’ them to submit DNA ? An when does the State have the right to act in a violent and coercive manner against freeborn citizens ?

    I wish them luck in finding the killer. But just so not use this as a means to trample over what little rights I now have.

  14. If I lived there I wouldn’t volunteer a sample. There are two scenarios in this case. a) I would be guilty and why would I give them a sample if I was guilty b) I was innocent and thus collecting, sampling and analysing my DNA would simply be a waste of time and resources.

  15. Already our private medical records and other ‘personal’ information can be sold to the highest bidder by the State,

    The British government will sell your private medical and other medical information to the highest bidder?

    I doubt that.

    If it’s true I bid the UK Govt $20 for Allan’s financial records.

  16. Some anonymous health records can be sold to interested third parties, such as the insurance industry. It allows them to check the prevalence of certain illnesses etc so they can know whether they need to screen potential customers for it.

  17. That is a completely different matter – when it’s anonymized, and grouped together with many other person’s information, there is nothing private about it.

    Doctors and hospitals have always done this. And correctly so. Nothing wrong with it.

  18. // If I refuse to give my DNA, is that considered an admission of guilt ? If not, then this is a waste of time as the killer could just simply refus//

    //I was innocent and thus collecting, sampling and analysing my DNA would simply be a waste of time and resources//

    Is this so hard to understand?

    Let’s say that the police know a certain crime must have been committed by one of five particular people (this happens very often: Maybe only five men were in the building, maybe there are only five doctors in the town and they know it was a doctor, maybe only five men in the city drive a yellow Porsche like the one seen driving away etc.)

    You are one of the five. If you are innocent, do you give a sample of your DNA and 1) eliminate yourself from the list of suspects, 2) help the police resources concetrate on a smaller group?

    Or do you refuse because you consider – for some reasons – your privacy and your fears have a higher priority than removing a killer from the streets quickly.

    Remember the categorical imperative: you have to give others the rights you choose for yourself: if everyone refuses, the killer remains at large. If everyone follows my path, he is identified and arrested immediately.

    For you guys, that the police have to continue treating you as a possible suspect doesn’t bother you as as much as the fear of being identified?

    That’s absurd. Take to wearing a burqa.

  19. //as the insurance industry. It allows them to check the prevalence of certain illnesses etc so they can know whether they need to screen potential customers for it.//

    Oh, my god, imagine the terror of being sent insurance brochures?

    Sure what’s a murderer at large in your neighbourhood compared to that!

  20. DNA testing isn’t fullproof. There have been cockups due to DNA. Innocent people have been put in prison. Brian Shivers, the two in the Meredith Kercher killing etc.

    Additionally almost certainly if there were 5 possible suspects that would be small enough sample to allow the police to compel a DNA sample.

  21. Cunning Noel –

    I suspect the police have a suspect list in this case, and in which case it would be quicker and easier to take the NDA of those suspects. But what are they doing instead?:

    “We want to thank all those men who attended the voluntary sessions in Bosham, Fishbourne and Chichester over the three-week session to give their DNA.

    That’s thousands of men. Chichester alone is a sizeable town. But if they’re casting the net that widely then the murderer might have come from further afield.

  22. I see from the linked article that the police only know that the killer’s DNA was male, and not much else.

    Something’s a bit fishy here.
    Either they have the full DNA and are pretending they don’t in order that the killer is more ‘relaxed’ about presenting himself, or they’re assuming it’s a male because of the savagery of the attack.
    My guess is that they have NO DNA from the crime scene, and, because it was 2 years ago, are hoping that a refusal to cooperate could lead to a suspect as progress on the case has got nowhere.

  23. Volunteer my DNA ..not bloody likely.

    I might want to start committing some crimes later on and I’d like half a chance of escaping scot free.

    You want it? Get a court order and then we’ll see. Otherwise shove off. You might be middle class and law abiding but the Police are not your friend. Keep quiet and demand a lawyer every time. Use you rights or lose them.

    Random trawls like this are about the least efficient way of solving a crime that I can possibly think of, short of taking every human in the land and putting them through a court trial. If only there was some people who could oh I dunno maybe do some DETECTIVE work?
    Police …lazy inefficient tools.

  24. I live near here. This didn’t work very well. They got about half the DNA they wanted, a decent number of refusals and one harassment complaint.

Comments are closed.