rachel jacob has a question about the death penalty. >> i was wondering if you could discuss the statute just pass d passed -- touted by law enforcement. [ inaudible ] >> do you have a point of view on this? >> this is holding the dna of everybody who has been stopped by the police or where does it draw the line? familiarize me with the case. >> i believe it's anybody. >> including marijuana arrests. >> anybody that has been convicted of a crime? >> holding it in data banks for -- >> future criminal investigations. >> yeah. that is, again -- all of these are balancing cases, but i think that the benefits to possibly being able to solve crimes either retroactively or in the future outweigh the risks to personal privacy. i think if somebody has already been convicted of a crime, their interest in the privacy of their dna has to be outweighed by the fact that there is likely to have other -- there's a possibility of involvement in other crimes as well. so, i think law enforcement is right there, that this is an extraordinarily powerful tool that can help save lives. and dna is getting to be

[laughter] rachel jacob has a question about the death penalty. >> sort of related.audible] >> heather, do you have a point of view on the dna benefit? >> this is holding dna of everybody who has been stopped by the police, or where does it draw the line? [inaudible] >> including marijuana arrests. >> someone who's been convicted of a crime? >> so holding it in databanks for future law? >> criminal investigations. >> yeah, that is again, all of these are balancing cases, but i think that the benefits to possibly being able to solve crime, either retroactively or in the future, outweigh the risks to personal privacy. i think if somebody has already been convicted of a crime, their interest in the privacy that dna has to be outweighed by the fact that there is likely to have other, or there's a possibility involvement in other crimes as well. so i think law enforcement is right there, that this is an extraordinarily powerful tool. that can help save lives. and dna is getting to be a more and more accurate science but if you say dna can't exonerate people, so i don't th

rachel jacob has a question about the death penalty. but i was wondering if you can discuss -- [unintelligible] >> do you have it. done this on the dna database? >> where does it draw the line familiarizing with the kids? >> [unintelligible] >> including marijuana arrests? >> holding it for future law investigations? what's all of these are balancing cases. i think the benefit to being able to solve crimes the director actively or in the future outweighed -- retroactively or in the future out weigh the risks to personal privacy. if somebody has already been convicted of a crime, their interests in the privacy that dna has to be outweighed by the fact, there is a possibility involvement in other crimes as well. law enforcement is right there that this is an extraordinarily powerful tool. it can help save lives. dna is getting to be a more and more accurate science. if he's a dna can exonerate people -- if you say dna can exonerate people. i do not think the downside risk is as much as the upside risk. >> i was going to sit one sentence.