I had two questions I'd like answered by people living in england, sans media talking heads filtering the data thru their biases.

1. Yesterday I heard that prince harry was going to be shipped off to irag in a few months. TODAY I heard that blair was pulling all english forces out if iraq in a few months, the media made no comment on yesterday's info re prince harry's scheduled deployment to iraq and if it had anything to do with today/s announcment that english forces were pulling out of iraq. What's the story in england.

2. I just heard that in england the police are allowed to "question" or "investigate" people IF a DNA test shows that they may be related to a suspect.

So this means if they get a dna sample at a crime scene and don't have it in their database but they have YOUR dna, and it indicates you MAY be related to whoever left the sample at the scene, you can be pulled in for questioning, investigated, etc.

Is this true? If so how does it work? I'm curious, especially since someone said that they're trying to allow this in america.

That;s all the questions, I'm asking because I think we have some englanders around here, and I'd like to get real opinions from real people in the area rather than the impressions relayed thru bir media by their talking heads.

Somebody also watches CSI.

Quote from: ZalmoxisSomebody also watches CSI.

Nope. L&O:SVU.

Quote from: Dominus NoxNope. L&O:SVU.

I always get them screwed up. I know the basic Law & Order show. I watch the others but honestly, they all blend together for me.

Quote from: ZalmoxisI always get them screwed up. I know the basic Law & Order show. I watch the others but honestly, they all blend together for me.

Maybe if you'd quit eating the mushrooms in your avatar, comprehension would come easier to you.

Quote from: Dominus NoxMaybe if you'd quit eating the mushrooms in your avatar, comprehension would come easier to you.

Well, we all have our hangups I suppose.

The BBC was saying this morning that the plan is to pull out British troops by the end of 2008.  Plenty of time for Harry to go yet if that is the case.

Edit: Oh crap -I'm in Scotland, but I'm guessing you'll take any Brit, rather than folks just in England?

Quote from: Dominus Nox1. Yesterday I heard that prince harry was going to be shipped off to irag in a few months. TODAY I heard that blair was pulling all english forces out if iraq in a few months, the media made no comment on yesterday's info re prince harry's scheduled deployment to iraq and if it had anything to do with today/s announcment that english forces were pulling out of iraq. What's the story in england.

I really, really, really doubt that the two are connected.  Harry is the "spare" (as opposed to the "heir") and Prince Andrew went to the Falklands and served in a much more dangerous role

Quote from: Dominus Nox2. I just heard that in england the police are allowed to "question" or "investigate" people IF a DNA test shows that they may be related to a suspect.

That's quite correct.  There's been several unsolved rapes that have been cleared up that way.  I'm not sure what you mean by "how does this work"?

Quote from: Dominus Nox1. Yesterday I heard that prince harry was going to be shipped off to irag in a few months. TODAY I heard that blair was pulling all english forces out if iraq in a few months, the media made no comment on yesterday's info re prince harry's scheduled deployment to iraq and if it had anything to do with today/s announcment that english forces were pulling out of iraq. What's the story in england.

Unrelated incidents, that said the timetable is such that Harry will likely be there before the pull-out.

British forces by the way, not English, not the same thing.

We wouldn't pull out to protect Royals, if that were an issue they'd just be kept away from the fighting, that said I expect he likely will be exposed to combat situations.

Quote from: Dominus Nox2. I just heard that in england the police are allowed to "question" or "investigate" people IF a DNA test shows that they may be related to a suspect.

So this means if they get a dna sample at a crime scene and don't have it in their database but they have YOUR dna, and it indicates you MAY be related to whoever left the sample at the scene, you can be pulled in for questioning, investigated, etc.

Is this true? If so how does it work? I'm curious, especially since someone said that they're trying to allow this in america.

It works like you say, if your DNA is found at the scene or related DNA is found at the scene you can be called in.

Interestingly today it was revealed that as part of the proposed introduction of a national identity card scheme the population would be fingerprinted and police would be allowed to trawl that database of fingerprints to match them to crimes.  

In Britain increasingly the tired right wing mantra of "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" is becoming public policy.  Hopefully the US won't follow.

I don't know if we'll follow the DNA thing, but many states (ok, at least one) already have statewide fingerprint databases tied to identity cards.

Quote from: Hastur T. FannonI really, really, really doubt that the two are connected.  Harry is the "spare" (as opposed to the "heir") and Prince Andrew went to the Falklands and served in a much more dangerous role



That's quite correct.  There's been several unsolved rapes that have been cleared up that way.  I'm not sure what you mean by "how does this work"?

Well, Ok, by "how does this work" I mean, suppose you turn up dna at a scene and it doesn't match someone, but it indicates someone you have on file may be related to the perp. Now, do you have a right to basically "take this guy in" because a relative may have done something? I mean, suppose I get sick and tired of being hauled into the station for things I didn;t do, and refuse to go? Can they take someone in even if the eviudence says he's only related to the suspect? That's more or less what I was wondering. I mean, does the laws in england allow you to detain, arrest, take in or otherwise incarcerate someone you know is innocent but is simply related to some perp who left dna at a scene?

Well, would YOU like to be rousted out of bed at 3AM or maybe taken away from your workplace by police because some putz you're related to but haven't had shit to do with in a decade did something? That's what I was wondering about when I asked "How it works?"

Quote from: Hastur T. FannonI really, really, really doubt that the two are connected.  Harry is the "spare" (as opposed to the "heir") and Prince Andrew went to the Falklands and served in a much more dangerous role.

Well, so he's not the heir, he's the spare heir? Do you think they refer to him as "the toupee" in private then?

As to the rest, wouldn't keeping little lord fauntleroy nice and safe while other britts are catching shrapnal from IEDs and suicide bombers hurt morale, or are the peasants conditioned to accept that royal lives matter more than theirs do?

Brits Nox, for fuck's sake learn to spell it.

As for keeping him safe, most people view it as somewhat inevitable that the rich and powerful will be kept safer than the poor and powerless.  Don't confuse acceptance of a situation with admiration for that situation.

In practice though, I understand some royals actually participated fairly actively in their services, Prince Andrew as best I know (and that's not that well as I don't much care) was well liked by his fellow Naval personnel and took much the same risks as the others.  I would imagine anyone that used their position to conspicuously avoid risk would be unpopular.

But the thing is, the royals aren't nearly as important in Britain as Americans tend to think they are, they're celebrities essentially, not much more than that.

On your initial query, it looks like our troop reduction is smaller than was anticipated and we will have troops on the ground well into '08, so Harry should be there in time.

Quote from: Dominus NoxI mean, does the laws in england allow you to detain, arrest, take in or otherwise incarcerate someone you know is innocent but is simply related to some perp who left dna at a scene?

No.  What you'd get is a polite request for a little chat, probably over a cup of tea.  This is what we've found, this is where we've found it, you don't have a brother or a cousin who drove a red Ford Fiesta around 2001 do you?  No arrest, no caution, just a request for help.  Please

Edit: typo

Quote from: Hastur T. FannonNo.  What you'd get is a polite request for a little chat, probably over a cup of tea.  This is what we've found, this is where we've found it, you don't have a brother or a cousin who drove a red Ford Fiesta around 2001 do you?  No arrest, no caution, just a request for a help.  Please

Quite, nowadays we only incarcerate muslims without trial (or in one case after a trial in which the chap was found innocent), which presumably Nox would approve of.

We do have an appalling record currently on detention of terror suspects indefinitely without trial, in many cases where there is significant evidence of innocence or at least no real evidence of guilt.

To paraphrase the old 1970s joke:

In America you're innocent until proven guilty.
In France you're guilty until proven innocent.
In Britain, your innocent until proven Muslim.

The original was innocent until proven Irish, for the curious.