To protect their privacy, victims' DNA profiles should never be entered into a national databank or searched against such a databank, with the possible exception of cases of abduction, in which it might be desirable for the victim's information to be stored and accessible to law-enforcement officials. In any exceptional case, prior permission of the victim, the victim's legal guardian, or a court should be required, and the victim's DNA should be removed from the databank when it can no longer serve the purpose for which it was entered.
This portion of the databank would contain DNA profiles from unidentified bodies, body parts, and bone fragments. These would provide the greatest benefit when DNA profiles from immediate relatives (parents) could be used to reconstruct the DNA profile of a missing person for comparison. Although there would be immediate benefits from the development of these types of data, the actual number of relevant cases would be small, compared with the number of sexual assaults by unknown persons.
DNA profile evidence found at the scene of a crime should be stored and accessible to legally authorized investigators. Such samples might be useful for recognizing serial or multiple crimes even before a perpetrator is found and will be equally useful once a perpetrator has been identified. It might be useful to have additional cross-referenced information accessible at the national level, including modus operandi or other attributes for correlation as part of an investigation.
Some observers have suggested that a DNA profile databank should not be limited to criminals, but should aim, at least in the long term, to store DNA profiles from the entire general public. It is argued that many groups in the general public are already required to be fingerprinted for various security and identification purposes and the same justification could be applied to DNA profiles; furthermore, if the databanks contained everyone, rather than just previous offenders, the chance of identifying perpetrators would be much greater.
The committee does not find those arguments persuasive. For identification and security purposes, DNA profiles would add nothing to ordinary