I've seen a couple of documentaries where a person
(or a whole community of people)
was asked to give fingerprints and/or a DNA sample
to help investigators solve a crime.

What happens to fingerprints and DNA samples
that have been provided by such volunteers?

Are they destroyed as soon as "no match" is determined?
Or do they remain on file somewhere, available
to investigators of future crimes?

---

Request for Question Clarification by journalist-ga on 10 Aug 2005 14:30 PDT

For what country?  EX: Apparently, the UK keeps voluntary DNA samples
permanently on record in a database.  See below.

*****************************************

From http://www.spy.org.uk/spyblog/archives/000374.html

""Excepted purpose" means a legal exception to what would otherwise be
a criminal offence under

"Section 46 Offences relating to non-consensual analysis of DNA"

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmbills/049/04049.25-31.html#J377

The Police can already take a non-intrusive DNA sample (usually a swab
of the cells from inside your mouth) from you if they arrest you for
any offence. This can then be analysed and stored on the central DNA
Database which is being built up by the Forensic Science Service.

Astonishingly, if you are found innocent or if you were foolish enough
to give a voluntary sample of DNA to help, say in tracking down a
serial rapist, then your DNA samples and the DNA analysis data profile
is *now retained forever*, instead of, as used to be the case, being
destroyed once someone else was convicted of the crime.

Who knows why the Department of Health is meddling in DNA criminal
justice and data privacy issues, but there it is, tacked onto the end
of this Human Tissue Bill."

*************************************

Best regards,
journalist-ga

---

Clarification of Question by rambler-ga on 10 Aug 2005 14:51 PDT

I'm looking for a general answer that is relevant to the USA.

The UK practice of retaining voluntary samples forever seems unethical,
and may discourage many good citizens from volunteering anything
in the future.

---

Request for Question Clarification by journalist-ga on 10 Aug 2005 15:02 PDT

I figured you meant the U.S. but I wanted to confirm.  Also, please
see my comment below.

Best regards,
journalist-ga

Dear Rambler:

Being an evidence technician this is right up my alley. In spite of
what might be popularly thought, the solicitation of voluntary
fingerprint and DNA samples is not the common, thus the samples, and
information concerning them, are not that plentiful either. It just so
happens however that I have a bit of insight into this particular
matter that might not be common knowledge (it isn't secret but its
probably not something you'd hear your neighbor talking about):

In the United States there is a database for fingerprints known as
AFIS (Automated Fingerprint Identification Systems). Fingerprints are
entered into this system for comparison against all other known
samples. Whether the samples produce a positive match or not, the fact
remains that they are entered into the system. The actual paper
fingerprint (ink) cards onto which the fingerprints are recorded for
submission are scanned and most likely destroyed (I know the ones I am
responsible for are destroyed and I imagine all other are too or there
would be acres of fingerprint cards somewhere). Suffice it to say that
each agency has its own policy where this issue is concerned.

As for the DNA samples CODIS (COmbined DNA Index System), is an
electronic database of DNA profiles that can identify suspects, and is
very similar to the AFIS (Automated Fingerprint Identification System)
database. DNA samples are compared to the known samples in these
databases but whether or not they are permanently entered into it is
not known (presumably they are since this is an FBI brain-child). What
I do know (from processing DNA evidence myself) is that at one time
DNA evidence was considered a biohazard and was destroyed almost
immediately after testing or comparison. Technology however is now
advancing in this area by leaps and bounds. Because of this many
states are cleverly planning ahead and have now begun enacting laws
that require the virtually interminable storage of DNA in the hope
that future technology will be able to do much more with them and
perhaps solve some unsolved mysteries.

I hope you find that my research exceeds your expectations. If you
have any questions about my research please post a clarification
request prior to rating the answer. Otherwise, I welcome your rating
and your final comments and I look forward to working with you again
in the near future. Thank you for bringing your question to us.

Best regards;
Tutuzdad ? Google Answers Researcher


OTHER INFORMATION SOURCES

AFIS
http://onin.com/fp/afis/afis.html

CODIS
http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/codis/index1.htm



SEARCH STRATEGY

SEARCH ENGINES USED:

Google ://www.google.com




SEARCH TERMS USED:


Fingerprints

Latent

DNA

Evidence

AFIS

CODIS

---

Request for Answer Clarification by rambler-ga on 10 Aug 2005 20:06 PDT

What about fingerprints and DNA samples from volunteers?
Are they destroyed as each volunteer is cleared?

Investigators normally need probable cause to obtain such things.
Good citizens can help a specific investigation by volunteering
their fingerprints and DNA.

But if authorities keep them in a database forever
-- without first warning the volunteers --
then they are betraying public faith.

I'm all for catching the bad guys, and I think it's wonderful
that volunteers help by giving their fingerprints and DNA samples,
but betraying those volunteers is not the way to go.

Sorry for getting on a soapbox. Perhaps your answer
will allay my fears.

---

Clarification of Answer by tutuzdad-ga on 11 Aug 2005 06:23 PDT

>>>What about fingerprints and DNA samples from volunteers? Are they
destroyed as each volunteer is cleared?

The answer is PROBABLY. The fact is that in my lab, we have so many
DNA samples that if we kept all of them we?d have to move to another
building ? and NONE of mine are from volunteers. That?s how prevalent
the technology is. I?ve been in law enforcement for more than 20 years
in a city of 40,000 and I can?t remember EVER soliciting fingerprints
or DNA from volunteers. Suffice it to say that if we destroy suspect
fingerprints and DNA that we certainly destroy samples from
volunteers. The question though is not relative to what happens to the
physical samples but what happens to the data gleaned from them. That
information, once entered into the system, remains in the system.
These systems aren?t the input/output type databases where you make a
question of something in your hand and see if something in the
database matches. This is a system whereby samples are entered in and
automatically compared against all other samples. If there is a match,
fine. If not, well, there?s one more sample in the system.

>>>Investigators normally need probable cause to obtain such things.
Good citizens can help a specific investigation by volunteering their
fingerprints and DNA.

True. Investigators normally need probable cause to obtain samples but
voluntary samples are ?given up? freely, therefore the law enforcement
agencies may do with them what they wish ? with or without the donor?s
permission or knowledge. Good citizens CAN help, but then again the
GOOD CITIZENS have nothing to fear.

>>>But if authorities keep them in a database forever -- without first
warning the volunteers --then they are betraying public faith.

Nope. See above. Think of these fingerprint and DNA samples in terms
of a verbal statement. Let?s say an investigation is going on and the
police would like you to make a statement. You haven?t done anything
and have nothing to fear so you willingly provide a statement. Is this
the end?  No way. That statement will go into a local database, along
with your name, phone number, description, date of birth, driver
license number and probably even your physical description. Why?
Because that?s the way the database works. You can attribute a
statement to someone who is not in the database, so the first thing
that happens is you get an entry into the system. Several years down
the road if a crime happens they might pull you up as a possible
suspect based on the description provided. Yes, you guessed it, these
databases contain the good, the bad and the ugly all crammed together
in eh same database. There is no good guy list or bad guy list. We?re
all lumped together.

I'm all for catching the bad guys, and I think it's wonderful that
volunteers help by giving their fingerprints and DNA samples, but
betraying those volunteers is not the way to go.

>>>There?s no betrayal. As I said, samples were given freely and once
they are voluntarily donated they are released from ownership. You
have to remember that most BAD GUYS were once VERY GOOD GUYS (Wayne
Williams, John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy, etc). Perhaps someone who wants
to help today becomes a serial rapist tomorrow. There would be little
soap boxing on that sicko?s behalf when that case is solved from a
sample he might have donated years before. In fact, the method would
likely receive great praise.

---

Clarification of Answer by tutuzdad-ga on 11 Aug 2005 06:26 PDT

Correction:  "You CANNOT attribute a statement to someone who is not
in the database, so the first thing that happens is you get an entry
into the system.

I'm grateful to have such a clear and thoughtful answer from a
well-respected researcher (even though I'm disappointed, politically,
with the implications of that answer).

Greetings Rambler,

I believe I have located a fairly solid reference to the fact that DNA
samples in the U.S. are currently kept by law enforcement. To add to
the UK blurb I provided above, visit a UK law at
http://hgc.gov.uk/insideinformation/iichapter9.pdf

*************************************

From http://newstandardnews.net/content/?action=show_item&itemid=1044
September 27, 2004

"Over the last three years, police have used this investigative
technique [DNA Dragneting] to look for a serial murderer in Baton
Rouge, Louisiana and a serial rapist in Omaha, Nebraska. According to
local news reports, the dragnet in Baton Rouge ensnared more than
1,000 people over the course of ten months, netted no viable suspects,
and gave way to a lawsuit accusing the police of violating the Fourth
Amendment rights of those sampled without written consent. The lawsuit
is also asking that police destroy or return the DNA samples of those
exonerated of any wrongdoing."

This translates to me as the police do keep them, and don't
necessarily destroy them.

***************************************

Here's a 2004 report "DNA Fingerprinting and Civil Liberties Project
Report of Workshop 1"
http://www.aslme.org/dna_04/work1/report.php

***************************************

From "Liberty, Privacy, and DNA Databases" by Christine Rosen

It appears hospitals can keep DNA samples:

"In 2002, the Mayo Clinic formed a partnership with IBM to develop a
genetic database of patient information from the clinic s extensive
archival data.  Some of these databases, with their capacity to run
large-scale epidemiological studies quickly, yield important findings.
 In August 2002, for example, researchers at the University of
California, San Francisco, followed a hunch about hypercholesterolemia
a condition that causes dangerously high cholesterol levels by
searching a 12,000-person genetic database of patients maintained by
the UCSF Cardiovascular Research Institute.  Using the database, they
eventually succeeded in locating the genetic defect that causes the
disorder."
http://www.ccr.buffalo.edu/Workshop03/newatlantis.html 

and note this from the same article

"The first Virginia database stored DNA samples only from convicted
sex offenders, but within a year, the law had expanded to require DNA
samples from all adult felons.  Juveniles over the age of fourteen who
committed serious crimes were added in 1996, and beginning in January
2003, any person **arrested** for a violent felony or burglary must
give the state their DNA [not convicted, only arrested].  When I asked
Ferrara whether he was concerned about the compulsory sampling of
people who were, by law, innocent until proven guilty, he replied that
these expansions were all passed by the legislature.   Besides, he
noted, the sample and records of those arrested are destroyed if the
charges are dismissed."

Please read the entire article.

***********************************************

I haven't been able to discover what happens to fingerprints, but if I
do (and can quote the law or the nonexistence of one), I'll post all
my research as an answer.

Best regards,
journalist-ga


SEARCH STRATEGY

"voluntary DNA" use law united states
"voluntary fingerprint" samples use law united states
voluntary "fingerprint samples" use law united states
"fingerprint samples" use law united states
"fingerprint samples" destroy law united states
voluntary fingerprint sample "consent form" united states
voluntary fingerprint samples use law united states -DNA

To journalist-ga:

Thanks for all the great info!

If I understand you correctly, some states destroy DNA samples
after suspects have been cleared, and other states do not.
(1) Louisiana does not destroy DNA samples.
(2) Virginia does.

What about DNA samples from volunteers?

I noticed the word "volunteer" in your search strategy,
but I didn't see the word in the main text of your comment.