” Damn, but it’s of course ! »: when DNA solves theft cases in Brest

Before the magistrate alone on Friday, December 1, 2023 in the morning, cases of theft aggravated by multiple circumstances parade. Among the most common at this hearing are the breaking of car windows to commit theft. Forgetting a bag, an item of clothing or even a cell phone on a seat arouses envy in the offender who is not bothered about how to do it. Prosecutor Isabelle Johanny emphasizes the exasperation caused by these constantly increasing misdeeds. But a blood print left by the thief increasingly helps solve an investigation. This was the case of two cases judged on Friday in Brest.

The first is judged in the absence of the 37-year-old defendant, who did not appear at the hearing. And for good reason, the individual is known to the courts under five aliases with as many criminal records. The fact remains that he can multiply pseudonyms, his DNA does not change. Very clumsy, he regularly injures himself, leaving his genetic imprint which makes the investigators’ search easier. This is the case for two thefts committed on June 4, 2022 and August 12, 2022 in Brest. For one of them, his blood was found in the trunk of the vehicle which he managed to reach. His loot is not negligible: a laptop, a games console… Not only does the victim deplore the disappearance of these goods sold as quickly as they were stolen, but he suffers the loss of use of the car for several days, a while devoted to administrative constraints. By default, the accused is sentenced to one year’s imprisonment with an arrest warrant issued by the court.

“I can’t work because of back pain!” »

The second case dealt with notably shows the surprise of a man who, returning from night work at 5 a.m., discovered his two bicycles half taken out of his car. The thief, who was unable to extract them completely, leaves significant damage and a very useful little drop of blood! She is the reason for his presence at the hearing. For these facts of June 10, 2022 in Brest, the 30-year-old defendant admits his guilt via the interpreter. In support of his defense, the argument is classic: “I was drunk,” he said before explaining his situation: “I am not working because of back pain.” A three-month suspended prison sentence was handed down against him.