Of course the two convictions on the basis of DNA forensics was good news and just one of many lines of  enquiry that can secure the evidence for conviction (Hysteria clouds database debate, comment.computing.co.uk).

When we have a DNA  profile but no culprit, we only have the means to  identify them when they are known. Consequently, there is a respectable and growing body of opinion that believes routine blood tests should populate the DNA database.

It makes perfect sense to know the "owner" of DNA  beforehand so a match can be made. I have little doubt the time is not far away when routine sampling will be used to populate DNA databases. Then we can   reflect about the benefits of a society that determines  citizenship on the premise that if someone commits a criminal act we will know about it. While I agree databases are simply a way to store information, the  people who design and use them are a different matter.

Richard Mills