Posts Tagged ‘DNA

Your Police State at work

with 2 comments

In the further assault on freedom of religion, freedom of association, and the supposed right to privacy, the apparatchiks of the state continue to perpetuate the fraud that they have a duty to protect anyone from anything and/or everything, including themselves.

As Wendy McElroy points out, any old premise will do for the power-mad, even if it’s founded on a complete hoax.

In short, the phone call for help upon which the raid was based is about to be revealed as the complete fraud I pronounced it to be a few days ago. Sarah Jessop Barlow, whose marriage records the Child Protective Service claimed to have found in compound records, apparently doesn’t exist. Meanwhile, the man named as Sarah’s rapist and abuser has been living in Arizona and has not set foot in Texas since 1977. Thus, the police declined to arrest him.

The entire case against the polygamy compound is at stake here. The only evidence of a crime has been collected on the basis of a warrant issued in response to a hoax. Thus, according to precedent and the Constitution, all such evidence should be inadmissible. Nevertheless, the authorities are already staking out the position that the search is on solid legal ground as long as police acted in good faith – or as long as they believed the call was real.

Related: DNA samples taken from polygamists’ kids


Written by mudshark

April 21, 2008 at 6:08 pm

chips & dip

leave a comment »

Not only is it revolting enough that certain people could even consider ‘chipping‘ their children as they would their pets, but now comes this noxious load of tripe.

Primary school children should be eligible for the DNA database if they exhibit behaviour indicating they may become criminals in later life, according to Britain’s most senior police forensics expert.

Gary Pugh, director of forensic sciences at Scotland Yard and the new DNA spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo), said a debate was needed on how far Britain should go in identifying potential offenders, given that some experts believe it is possible to identify future offending traits in children as young as five.

If we have a primary means of identifying people before they offend, then in the long-term the benefits of targeting younger people are extremely large,‘ said Pugh. ‘You could argue the younger the better. Criminologists say some people will grow out of crime; others won’t. We have to find who are possibly going to be the biggest threat to society.

Written by mudshark

March 16, 2008 at 9:28 pm