Killer Convicted, Using Dog DNA Database

lee1 writes "It turns out that the UK has a DNA database — for dogs. And this database was recently used to apprehend a South London gang member who used his dog to catch a 16-year-old rival and hold him while he stabbed him to death. The dog was also accidentally stabbed, and left blood at the scene. The creation of human DNA databases has led to widespread debates on privacy; but what about the collation of DNA from dogs or other animals?"

I don't think this story is very accurate

[sunking2]

I understand British law is a bit different but in the US the blood would merely be circumstantial and wouldn't hold its own. While I do buy that it was part of the evidence that would warrant this guy as a prime suspect, there's no way you can convict on it alone. After all, the fact that the dog was stabbed could just as easily lead one to believe that this guy and his dog were actually trying to intervene in the kid being stabbed.

Dog? I raise you an oak leaf!

[Wdi]

http://www.jurablogs.com/de/wenn-ein-eichenblatt-den-moerder-ueberfuehrt (sorry, no English version, use Google Translation)

In 2004, a killer was convicted in Germany. The corpse of his wife had been found in a forest, buried beneath an oak tree. He claimed he was innocent and that had never even been in that area.

Unfortunately for him, a dried leaf of an oak tree was found in the trunk of his car - and DNA analysis proved it was from the very oak tree the corpse was buried under. Plants have DNA, too.

Oops.