Round Two of my online spat with Peter Hitchens. This time about the case for a DNA database.

1. Peter Hitchens: Round Two
“If this idea doesn’t make your blood boil, then in my view there is just
something fundamentally wrong with you, and you have no respect or
gratitude for our ancestors who squeezed Magna Carta out of King John,
forced the abolition of Star Chamber and High Commission, opposed Ship
Money, achieved the Petition of Right, established Habeas Corpus,
safeguarded jury trial and the presumption of innocence, ended the
oppressive use of criminal libel and – perhaps above all – defeated James
II’s attempts to make us into a continental despotism and secured the
1689 Bill of Rights. These are the things that make us Englishmen, and
which distinguish the English system of liberty from the rest of the
world.” Peter Hitchens, Mail On Sunday
What so upset Mr Hitchens? My suggestion that a national DNA
database would be a more effective deterrent against serious crime
than the death penalty. So here’s my second – and final installment
on the subject published in his Mail online blog:
The case for a National DNA database
Almost exactly twenty-nine years ago, Colette Aram, a16-year-old
trainee hairdresser from Keyworth in Nottinghamshire was
abducted, raped and strangled. The case was so shocking that it
featured on the first ever edition of Crimewatch. There were a few
clues and at the outset of the investigation the police must have
been confident they’d get their man. They had a stolen red Ford
Fiesta and a paper towel used by someone who had eaten a ham
sandwich in a nearby pub and was noticed to have blood under
his fingernails. But the killer was confident that he would not be
caught and – chillingly - left a handwritten message to that effect.
He was right to be confident. Despite a massive police operation
and the interviewing of twenty thousand individuals,and for
twenty-seven years, he remained free.

2. Then, in June 2008, the murderer’s 19-year-old son was arrested
for careless and inconsiderate driving. He was photographed by
the police who also took his fingerprints and a DNA sample by
swabbing his cheek.
A few months later the driver’s DNA profile was flagged as a close
but not perfect match to the profile of the probable killer of
Colette. Plainly, he wasn’t the killer;Colette had been savagely
murdered before he was born. But his father and two uncles were
arrested and had their DNA taken. And in December 1978, just six
months after his son had been stopped for careless driving, 51 year
old Paul Hutchinson, pleaded guilty to murdering Colette and was
sentenced to life imprisonment.
Detections of crime due to the presence of DNA are increasing.
Between 01 April and 30 June of this year the National DNA
Database produced 29 matches to murder, 91 to rapes and 6,094 to
other crime scenes.Since 1998, more than 300,000 crimes have been
detected with the aid of the Database
But the potential of the database is limited by the fact that it is
incomplete. Had all adults in the UK been required to provide a
DNA sample, a relatively minor inconvenience, then we would
not have had to wait for Colette’s murderer’s son to drive
inconsiderately before his father was brought to justice.
The database is not a panacea. It will not stop a large amount of
low-level crime committed generally by young people who are
reckless about the chances of getting caught. But I believe that it
will act as a deterrent to those contemplating serious offences,
including sexual offences. Some sex offending is opportunist. But
some of the gravest crimes are meticulously planned and the
victim sometimes murdered to prevent apprehension. DNA makes
that hateful ploy much less likely to be successful and, with its
help, convictions can nowadays be obtained whether or not a body
is found.
My proposal that all adults should contribute to a national DNA
database appears to enrage Mr Hitchens: “If this idea doesn’t
make your blood boil, then in my view there is just something

3. fundamentally wrong with you.” But why, when he’s aware that
DNA evidence can secure liberty as well as bring it to an end for
the guilty.DNA evidence led to the conviction of Robert Nipper
for Rachel Nickell’s murder bit simultaneously exonerated Colin
Stagg.
We live in a society where we all bear inconveniences for the
maintenance of public order. We accept curbs on our liberty in a
myriad of ways. Contributing to a national DNA database would,
by a fraction, increase those curbs. But it would also not only aid
the detection of serious crime it would deter serious crime. It
would save the lives of girls like Collette Aram.