What happens to innocent peoples' prints, DNA, etc?

Watching TV again, I see where they’re always taking DNA samples, fingerprints, etc. from people to “eliminate them as suspects”.

I’ve always wondered, in the event that I’m ever a suspect, if I should allow this.

Once they take my prints & other identifying markers, and find I’m innocent, are they discarded? Do my prints go in the big world of computerized personal data or does any law compel them to destroy them?

I don’t have plans now for a life of crime but you never know, with the rising cost of gas, it may be in my future.

FBI apologizes to lawyer held in Madrid bombings

Man wrongly linked to Madrid bombings sues

The FBI national DNA database is called CODIS (Combined DNA Index System). Currently, all 50 states (with the possible exception of Alabama) have laws determining what criterion exists for STR data to get put into its offender index. For some, it’s sexual offences only, for others, it’s all felonies, and for some it’s being arrested. If your DNA pops up in the process of an investigation, it gets put into the forensic index.

As far as I know, there is no formal mechanism for removal of data from CODIS. If it’s in there, it’s in there. (Though I’m not a forensic specialist…paging gabriela?)

I don’t see what the Mayfield case has to do with the OP. His prints were apparently on file because of a burgulary arrest from when he was a teenager – not because he was “eliminated as a suspect.”

Regardless of how his prints got into the system in the first place, they got him in trouble later, when he was an innocent party. Capiche?

That wasn’t the question, though. The OP was asking IF prints taken solely for the purpose of elimination get into the system that way. Capiche?

You missed this:

The answer is no, unless doing so actually reduces the likelihood that you’ll be hassled as a suspect or even arrested. To decide the right course of action, you have to balance your present risk against the possibility that the information will be used against you at a future time.
No matter how your prints, or DNA get into the system, they put you at risk.

Again, the question is not whether prints in the sytem put you at risk–I suspect he already knows that, the question is whether prints taken for suspect elimination purposes GET into the system in the first place. Sheesh, who are you and what have you done with Squink?

Are you clairvoyant today? He doesn’t say he knows that.
He asks about it. I answered. Why’s that got your tail in a knot?

To try to actually answer the original post:

Generally Yes, every fingerprint, DNA sample, etc. that is taken ends up in the system. Innocent or Guilty. There are more non-criminal fingerprints in the system than there are ones from criminals, for example.

Still just as useful in identifying & eliminating suspects. I.e., those fingerprints match to the wife’s brother, it’s reasonable for them to be on the furniture, lets keep looking for a suspect.

This is based on my experience in serving for several years on our State Legislative Commission on Non-Felony Enforcement Guidelines. We never asked this specific question, but it was obvious from various discussions that all such id information that police agencies gathered eventually ended up in the system.

But it’s misleading to speak of ‘the system’ as if there is a single, centralized, organized database where all this info is stored. Much of the discussion from police agencies was bemoaning the fact that there were many, overlapping, & conflicting databases at local, state, & federal level that had some of this information, and the difficulty of deciding which ones to search in a specific case. At least, that was the situation at that time, nearly 10 years ago. It may have become more centralized since then.

Wisconsin statutes:

The Wisconsin Department of Justice (PDF file) even has a form.

I am not an expert on the fingerprint system, which is run by police and by national sources, but as far as I know, every fingerprint ever entered into the system is kept within the system.

I have been very grateful for this fact on numerous occasions when we had a partly decomposed, unrecognizable, or just plain unrecognized dead body, and the prints came back with a hint: It’s Such and So! Oh, thank God. I recall one particularly grisly case - hm, it’s been adjudicated, so I can talk about it. A man and his live-in girlfriend of many years (nine) were having an argument in their house. Alcohol was involved. He killed her, then decided to hide the crime. Knowing that she had had expensive breast implants many years before that might have serial numbers, he cut off her breasts, and disposed of them.

Somehow.

He never told us how - in fact, he said at one point to the officers, “You’ll never find out where those breasts went”. Two grisly possibilities were suggested by the fact that a filleting knife was found in the sink which had a smear of blood and a streak of dried tissue on it. He might have carved the breasts into small bits and fed them down the garbage disposal. Or, hate to use the word “fed”, there were two large dogs in the house…

He then wrapped the site where the breasts had been in duct tape, removed all her clothes (not necessarily in that order), put her body in the back of his painter’s van, and drove to Washington, DC. He pulled up into the alley behind the place where she had once worked many years before, and dumped the body. He took off. It was found hours later.

Here we were with an unknown, unrecognized, naked body of a middle-aged female, who had been mutilated after death (we could tell it was after death), and who had been partially wrapped in duct tape. It was a grisly sight. We were really afraid we had a serial killer on our hands.

We printed her, and they tried the criminal database. No hits. They tried the military fingerprint database. No hits. Three days into the investigation, they finally got to the massive civilian database. A hit! We identified her! And that told us where she lived and with whom… and the police went out to the house and asked the live-in boyfriend where his girlfriend went and why he hadn’t called her in as a missing person? The lies he told eventually broke down and that’s how we knew it was a domestic violence murder and not a serial.

So I am more often grateful for fingerprints than concerned. I have been fingerprinted myself (condition of applying for a medical examiner’s job in NYC) and my prints are out there in the great civilian database. If I ever turn up naked and mutilated, but still with my fingers on, I expect to be identified.

By the way: Fingerprint databases are searchable because of a complex computer algorithm (here I must bend my head and defer to computer colleagues) which took great efforts by many people to get working. The computer must identify hundreds of points on each fingerprint and compare them to the new fingerprint to declare a match. The new fingerprint is never exactly like the old one (same lines, but always a slightly different angle, and you can acquire scars) and it was really difficult from what I’ve been told to get a program that worked and that worked fast enough. Prior to that, all searches were done by the eyes of an experienced examiner… really slow.

My point is this. I don’t know that DNA is searchable yet. When they take your DNA they either swab the inside of your cheek or draw some blood and squirt it onto spots drawn on the filter paper edge of an identifying card. The cheek cells and/or blood are allowed to dry. Then they go into a huge evidence warehouse somewhere and wait. Your DNA isn’t run (and what would they do nowadays to profile, Antigen? We’re not sequencing people’s full genomes) until they think they need you. So right now DNA databases are not going to convict you of a crime unless they really think you’re worth suspecting in the crime. Like when they take already-run DNA profiles from convicted felons who are in jail for rape or rape-homicide, and compare them to DNA obtained from raped or murdered women.

Returned, to my legal-eagle mind, doesn’t mean purged from the system. And what if it isn’t requested? Is that a catch, since I’m sure most people don’t do so?

I was arrested in my JV days by an over-aggressive cop who wanted nothing but to “teach this punk a lesson,” as evidenced by the lack of charges filed. But I was fingerprinted and held overnight in a county jail. Were my fingerprints entered into the national system, and then purged?

And are there any privacy laws in place in the US that control such fingerprint storage?

I’m really curious about the manual process. Given the large number of records, I’m surprised that it is possible to find any matches by hand at all! Are they sorted in a particularly clever way or something? Otherwise it sounds like something that could take years!

I thought DNA analysis was a comparative system–they take your sample and see if it matches the other DNA sample; one of the early problems with DNA analysis is that the system tended to fudge things in favor of finding a match.

Has the technology changed to one where they take your DNA sample and record what it is so that in the future, they can compare your data with the data from the new sample? If so, then given the practice of keeping fingerprints in perpetuity, I’m comfortable assuming they keep DNA data. If not, then it actually does matter if they return all the unused samples to you–without a sample, they can’t compare a new sample to your DNA, because they don’t have any of it.

What I think is even more of a problem is that arrests- even those arrests which didn’t even lead to charges being filed let alone a conviction- also stay in the system forever.

Of course this depends on the particular database and your jurisdiction, but at least the German federal DNA database is searchable. e.g. a while ago there was a case similar to the scenario in the OP that got a lot of news coverage because the victim was a celebrity. It was a murder case where they had found DNA. When they checked the database, they found a match with the man who turned out to be the murderer. During the previous year the man had given a voluntary sample in an unrelated case and had been cleared. This record would have been deleted after a fixed time but that time wasn’t up yet and he was identified.

DNA analysis is a comparative system.

CODIS works like this: when a DNA sample is taken, an STR analysis is run on it. STR (Short Tandem Repeat) sequences are a set of highly-variable multi-copy sequences found at specific places in the human genome. Each STR element is a given sequence (let’s say for example ‘AAATTAAAC’) that is repeated a variable number of times. You have two sets of chromosomes, one inherited from your mother and one inherited from your father, so you have two sets of STR elements - let’s say at some particular locus, you have a 5-mer repeat and a 7-mer repeat. This is very easily detectable by standard length analysis - electrophoresis. You just cut out that locus and run it on a gel (or as it is done now, on a capillary machine). This is pretty much entirely automated now.

You run this analysis on 13 loci that the FBI has standardized on. In the end, you’ll have a string of measurements that go something like “1:5,3 2:4,7, …, 13:1,1”.

Those measurements are entered into CODIS. When someone wants to run a search for it, they do an STR analysis on the search sample and see if there’s any matching sets of measurements in CODIS. If there is, hopefully it’s in the offender index, because then you have a name attached to the data. If it’s in the forensic index, all you know is that this DNA had popped up before in the context of a particular investigation.

Should you allow this? I think the ideal thing to do would be to discuss the exact situation with your attorney and then follow his/her advice.

It does mean purged from the system. Any other interpretation of that statute would make the return of the fingerprint card meaningless. And not only is the fingerprint card purged from the Wisconsin Crime Information Bureau, it is purged from F.B.I. files.

If the fingerprint card is not requested, it stays in the Wisconsin Crime Information Bureau, and the copy stays with the F.B.I.