>I have no issue with collecting DNA from those convicted and sentence of a major crime. While the justice sysem still has gross lapses, I do mind - for the mo

>I have no issue with collecting DNA from those convicted and sentence of a major crime. While the justice sysem still has gross lapses, I do mind - for the most part. A guy who gets released after 20 years, because he was proven innocent, is still going to be in the database. There are no protections for the accused in that scenario. So, let's assume that the manufacturing of a specific genome sequence becomes much easier and much cheaper. What's to prevent a police office, with a justice boner and who infallibly believes that the guy is guilty - despite evidence to the contrary, from abusing the information and "discovering" this individual's DNA at another crime scene? While it might seem like a far-fetched idea, there's been a history (though it may be seldom) of people abusing the "solid science" position to frame people. There's another comment[0] in this thread that demonstrates that this is not only plausible but it has happened. [0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18997702 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18997702