Mr. Rondinelli, we've heard the suggestion, not just today, but also in our last meeting, that DNA samples are just another form of identification, although obviously we've heard contrary evidence from the Privacy Commissioner. The suggestion has been made that it would be more efficient and better if everybody who was arrested for an indictable offence were to have their DNA sample taken at the same time as fingerprinting.
I'm not sure if other members know, but I've practised criminal law, although not as extensively as Monsieur Ménard, and I'm also aware that when we talk about indictable offences at the time of the arrest they include offences that can be prosecuted by summary or indictment. So some offences that are almost always prosecuted as summary conviction would be considered indictable offences at the time of arrest for the purpose of the Identification of Criminals Act.
This isn't a legal quiz, but are there any examples of the kind of identification that has been used in certain circumstances improperly?