Those are German soldiers as POWs in Paris ...

Another great photo by the fabulous photographer whose name escapes me. (I promise to find out.) Here is another great story. Who is looking out for you? I'm saying!

U.S. to Expand DNA Collection During Arrests, Detentions

By Ellen Nakashima and Spencer Hsu
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, April 16, 2008; 6:42 PM

The U.S. government will soon begin collecting DNA samples from all citizens arrested for any federal crime and many illegal immigrants detained by federal authorities, adding genetic identifiers from more than a million individuals a year to the swiftly growing federal law enforcement DNA database.

The new policy would substantially expand the current practice of routinely collecting DNA samples only from those convicted of federal crimes, although it would build on a growing policy of states to collect DNA from all those arrested. Thirteen states do so now, and turn their data over to the federal government.

The initiative, to be published as a proposed rule in the Federal Register in coming days, reflects a congressional directive that DNA from arrestees should be collected to help catch a range of domestic criminals. But it also requires collection for the first time of DNA samples from foreigners detained by U.S. authorities.

Although fingerprints have long been collected for virtually every arrestee, privacy advocates say that the move expands the DNA database beyond its initial aim of storing information on the perpetrators of violent crimes.

They also worry that people could be detained erroneously and swept into the DNA database without cause, and that DNA samples from those who are never convicted of any crime -- due to acquittals or a withdrawal of charges -- might nonetheless be permanently retained by the FBI.

"Innocent people don't belong in a so-called criminal database," said Tania Simoncelli, ACLU science adviser. "We're crossing a line." She said that if the samples are kept, they could one day be analyzed for such sensitive information such as diseases and ancestry.

Immigration rights advocates also note that most illegal immigrants are detained for administrative violations, not federal crimes. By adding their DNA to the database, "it casts them all as criminals," said Paromita Shah, associate director of the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild.

The database expansion was authorized by Congress as an amendment to the Violence Against Women Act of 2006, and billed primarily as a way to track down offenders. "We know for a fact that the proposed regulations will save the lives of many innocent people and will prevent devastating crimes," said Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), a sponsor of the legislation. "These regulations are long overdue -- we should have done this 10 years ago."

Government officials say that FBI rules preclude using DNA samples to determine a person's genetic traits, diseases or disorders. "The collection of DNA samples . . . will provide an additional form of biometric identification from persons who would normally be fingerprinted," said Erik Ablin, a spokesman for the Department of Justice.

The proposed rule applies to all federal agencies with authority to arrest or detain, from the FBI to The Border Patrol to the IRS. Although details of the new policy have not been announced, officials said they expected the bulk of the new samples to be collected through cheek swabs.

U.S. officials said that when the measure is fully implemented, roughly 1.2 million people a year could be added to the national database. About 140,000 of those would be people arrested for federal crimes. Many of the rest would be illegal immigrants detained in the United States.

The rule's scope is still being negotiated, officials said. But it would not cover illegal immigrants picked up at sea, people being processed for legal admission to the United States, such as asylum seekers, and people undergoing secondary screening at ports of entry. It was unclear today whether Mexican border crossers who are briefly detained and then released in Mexico would be covered. The Border Patrol made 877,000 apprehensions in 2007, most of them of Mexicans.

The move comes as 13 states -- including Virginia, and recently, Maryland -- have passed laws to enlarge their databanks to include arrestees. California, which has more than 1 million profiles, will begin next year collecting DNA data from all arrestees. These are uploaded to the national database, which today houses more than 5.8 million samples, making it the largest forensic DNA databank in the world.

The National DNA Index System or NDIS was created by the DNA Identification Act of 1994, to store profiles only for those people convicted of serious violent crimes, such as rape and murder. A 2004 amendment expanded the collection to persons convicted of any felony offense, and allowed states to upload DNA profiles from people convicted of misdemeanors and arrestees charged with a crime. In 2006, the law was changed again, enabling states to upload arrestees who had not been charged.

Over the years, NDIS has yielded 65,000 hits in 65,350 investigations, FBI officials said. "I think by any measure, the program has been a success," said Thomas Callaghan, head of the FBI's national DNA database, and the best way to increase its effectiveness is to add DNA samples from arrestees.

Jay Ann Sepich of Carlsbad, N.M., said she applauds the federal legislation. In August 2003, when Sepich's 22-year-old daughter Katie was raped and killed, investigators found her attacker's skin and blood under her fingernails. But no one in the state's database matched the crime scene evidence.

In 2006, moved by Katie's death, the New Mexico legislature passed "Katie's Law," requiring the collection of arrestees' DNA and in December 2006, authorities arrested the man who had killed her daughter. He had been arrested for aggravated burglary. Sepich is now a prominent lobbyist for similar laws in other states.

In Virginia, which adopted one of the first arrestee laws in 2003, about 51 percent of arrestee profiles are eventually removed from the state database because charges are dropped or a case is dismissed, said Pete Marone, the director of the state's department of forensic science. It is the forensic lab's duty to remove the profiles, which can take a year or two, he said. "As long as the case is in process, they're still there," he said.

Jim Harper, director of information policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, warned of mission creep. "The natural path is to move from the dangerous criminals down the chain, to anybody who has contact with law enforcement, and after that, you'll have DNA taken when people are born or first enter the country legally."

The proposed rule will be subject to a 30-day public comment period, Ablin said.