DNA: The Crime Cracker
 

By Kim Dyne, Second Grade, Chonnam National University High School
 

A few years ago, there was a heated controversy in Great Britain when the Prime Minister Tony Blair said that the national DNA database should be expanded to include every citizen. Hearing this, British human rights groups and Mr. Green of the Conservative Party stood up and criticized him for his remark. They claimed that collecting DNA from every citizen is like treating those citizens as potential criminals. I also disagree with Tony Blair’s idea of a national DNA database compiled using “every” citizen. However, when it comes to brutal criminals and rapists, I take a different point of view. Because the general public (i.e., majority of law-abiding citizens) and criminals are two clearly different groups, I strongly support the collection of criminals’ DNA into a national database.
 

DNA is like a secret encoding that carries information about a living creature. It can be found in saliva, hair, semen, and almost any part of the human body. Scientists say that only one in two hundred and sixty million people can possibly have same DNA with another person. This means that theoretically there could only be about 15 or so people who have the same DNA structure as yours in the whole world. That is why it is safe to say that each person has his/her own unique DNA. That is also why DNA is widely used for tests to determine the relationship between two people.
 

DNA is used to help crime investigation. This is called DNA fingerprinting. It was in 1985 when DNA was first accepted as evidence in court. Since then, many countries around the world have adopted the use of DNA in crime investigation and prosecution. There were many cases that have been solved with the help of DNA testing. It has played a particularly crucial role in solving rape crimes, in which a culprit’s DNA is left behind on or in the victim’s body. Rapists, more than other kinds of criminals, tend to repeat the same crime, making the evidence all the more important.
 

There are numerous cases that could not have been solved without the help of DNA. There was a case of an attempted rape a few years ago in Korea that was solved with help from DNA. A thief was caught for breaking into houses and stealing money and other valuables. When he was caught, the police got a sample of his DNA, which surprisingly matched another DNA sample collected from a different crime scene. He turned out to be rapist who escaped capture for years.

In another case more than ten years ago in New Zealand, an 83-year-old woman was raped and murdered. All police had at the crime scene was a strand of hair which was assumed to be the murderer’s and a little amount of semen collected from the dead body. Thanks to DNA, that small amount of evidence was more than enough to identify and apprehend the culprit.
 

It is understandable for human rights activists to argue that collection of DNA is a violation of human rights. It is against human rights when DNA samples are collected from the general public as Tony Blair suggested. DNA samples should be collected only from convicted criminals, and the samples should be kept secure and only used following a proper procedure. I do not think it is right not to utilize the best tool that can provide the most accurate piece of information in solving serious crimes, all in order to protect the human rights of criminals. The government can develop a means of categorizing DNA samples and candidates for sampling so that we can use this tool most effectively.

The number of horrendous crimes such as rape, child molestation, and murder are increasing year after year. The characteristics of these serious crimes are such that they occur by repeat offenders. If we cannot permanently separate these criminals from the general public, then we should at least have their information in a database so that we may identify them as necessary. Because of the unlikelihood that two people will have the same DNA, the chances of catching the wrong person with the same DNA are rare. In this way, DNA is accurate and an important element to forensic science.
 

Some people argue that collecting criminals’ DNA not only helps law enforcement but also helps crime prevention. DNA’s accuracy and reliability deters criminals from committing serious offences.
The investigation of crimes are depending more and more on DNA, and as the technology develops so too does the accuracy of DNA fingerprinting. As such, it will be difficult not to collect criminals’ DNA in a national database. Although we should protect the human rights of criminals, we need the help of DNA to solve serious crimes. Sending people to jail is a violation of criminals’ human rights also, however we accept this as a means of protecting the innocent public at large. I think collecting DNA from criminals in a national database is a comparable practice.
 

As mentioned above, a DNA database and DNA fingerprinting have more positive features than negative ones. They help forensic scientists and criminal investigators solve horrible crimes, and more importantly, they prevent crime from happening. As long as DNA is collected only from criminals and used legally and properly, its use should be encouraged.


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

Winner’s Remarks 

Thank You, CSI! Thank You, CNU!
 

I was surprised that I actually won the Grand Prize. I was not really expecting it because I did not have a chance to look over my essay thoroughly enough. I was in quite a hurry to finish and my writing was not smooth enough. I was actually kind of worried that I would not get any prize at all. But then, I guess the other participants felt the same pressure under the four hour time limit.

It was a good thing that one of the topics was about what I was really interested in. It was the topic about the collection of criminals’ DNA in the national data base. I always liked reading detective stories when I was young, and right now I really like to watch CSI (Crime Scene Investigation). On CSI, the investigators always solve cases with the help of DNA.

My mom is always telling me, “too much TV!”. But this time thanks to “too much TV,” I think I was able to write this essay with more confidence. I feel really glad that I had this opportunity, and give many thanks to CNU who offered it. I always thought I was a terrible writer, so I did not even try writing. Now, however, I have some hope that if I try I can write better.