“Ground-breaking DNA techniques have traced the geographical roots of the serial sex attacker at the centre of London’s biggest manhunt. Scientists used DNA samples found at some crime scenes in south London to prove his family is from the Caribbean. They will be compared with swabs from up to 200 police officers with Caribbean origins to try to trace the island the man or his family was from. He is suspected of at least four rapes and 27 sex assaults over 12 years. Criminal profiles say he enjoys sex with victims over 50 years old, his youngest victim was 68 and the eldest was 93… One 88-year-old woman was raped twice in August 1999 — her bowel was perforated and she almost died from her injuries. Detective Superintendent Simon Morgan said it was a miracle no-one had died from fright.” — BBC (UK)

While it’s pretty impressive what forensic scientists can do with DNA these days, you would think that criminals must be catching on. For example, suppose you want to rape an old lady. What is the first thing you should do — pick a target at the local bingo game? Break into her home? No! You should collect some random DNA samples — take half-chewed meals from restaurant trash bins, find stray hairs in public bathrooms, maybe even give five bucks to a homeless guy for some skin scrapings or a little blood.

Then when you go commit your crime, you simply strew a bit of DNA around the scene. At worst, if cops still find some of your DNA, they’ll figure you’re part of a vicious gang. At best, they might even fixate on one of the other DNA samples and arrest the homeless guy or an otherwise upright citizen whose pubic hair you stole from a toilet seat in an airport bathroom. And if enough criminals start strewing DNA around their crime scenes, it will also jam up the crime labs, overload them with work. This could have the additional benefit of impeding law enforcement’s ability to identify criminals.

VideoBox

It's like the iTunes Music Store for Porn. Download unlimited high-quality video for only $9.95/month.