Sex offender invokes 'eternal damnation' fear

A child-sex offender who believes giving a DNA sample would condemn
him to eternal damnation wants an exemption from inclusion on a national
police database.

David Hugh Chord, 37, appeared before Judge Peter Butler in
Wellington District Court on Friday for a hearing to decide whether he
will have to provide a DNA sample for a national database.

Chord is a Christian and believed that, if his DNA was taken, he
would be given the "mark of the Beast" and damned for eternity, his
lawyer, Michael Bott, said.

Chord is serving two years and nine months in prison after pleading
guilty to six counts of an indecent act on a young person, and one of an
indecent act on a child last year.

Mr Bott argued Chord's religious belief should exempt him from
having to provide a sample for the database. "Based upon his
interpretation of the Book of Revelation, that means he's effectively
damned and cut off from fellowship with his God."

The law allowed people to be exempted from inclusion in the database
if they would suffer serious harm when the sample was taken and,
according to Chord's faith, he would suffer, Mr Bott argued.

Chord believed giving a DNA sample would cut him off from his God,
and also the Christian community, which would impinge on his

"Feeling damned after you have had a lifetime of faith is in fact
serious harm ... My client will feel ostracised, he will suffer a loss
of belonging, a loss of control, a loss of self-esteem, and will no
longer have a meaningful existence."

Chord's DNA was not required to solve a specific crime, but rather to "bolster a database", Mr Bott said.

But Crown lawyer Kate Salmond said the issue was not whether there should be a database.

An objection to taking a sample had to be based on harm caused by
the actual taking of the sample, and Chord had to show he would suffer
"psychological harm resulting from fear for his mortal soul". Any
exemption of Chord would be "unintended" by the law.

Judge Butler asked Mr Bott whether Chord's belief that anything that
could identify him would inflict the mark of the Beast on him stretched
to photos and fingerprints, which would have been taken when he was

Mr Bott said it did not, but was restricted to DNA, which was the
clearest identifier of individuality. "It's accepted that DNA is the
building block, the key, that shapes human identity."

Judge Butler went on to comment that any God that would damn someone
for eternity because a DNA sample was taken against their will was a
"pretty tough God or deity or supreme being".

Mr Bott agreed, but said that was Chord's belief.

Judge Butler reserved his decision.

So his "god" doesn't mind him sexually abusing kids, but a swab of the cheek is a no-no?

Views: 35

Comment by Hillary Spencer on November 2, 2010 at 12:08am
he should be exempt for the swab, he was found guilty and he should have to do whatever the laws demand of him.....but I find it sickening that he only got 2 yrs and 9 months for 6 counts..........................................and forget about the swab he needs to be worried about what he did to the child(ren) and getting right with his "god" over that..he abusing his faith to get out of something which isnt surprising...but i think he's seriously has his priorities jackedup
Comment by Lindsey on November 2, 2010 at 12:42am
That's just fucking bullshit! He's a goddamned CHILDMOLESTER! He IS a sex offender, and he should be on the list of sex offenders. Fuck is crazy ass religious beliefs, the law should come first.
Comment by Jānis Ķimsis on November 2, 2010 at 6:41pm
So according to this guy Jesus is awwright with fucking kids, but can't stand having your DNA catalogued?
Comment by Matt Coulthurst on November 2, 2010 at 8:20pm
The guy is a wackaloon of the highest order - the whole eternal damnation thing is really just a ploy to escape potentially being identified for other crimes he may have committed. I'm not even sure what kind of harm - of any kind - could come from having a DNA sample taken.

@Hillary - yeah our "justice" system is pretty screwy sometimes. Some examples:

Young man in an overpowered car spins his wheels at a nearly deserted intersection, admits he was in the wrong: 1 year in prison.

Young man in an illegally modified overpowered car mounts the footpath and kills a 4 year old boy: 6 months community probation (a really relaxed form of house arrest).

Man performs home invasion including vandalism of property, terrorises the home owner and her 5 year old son, assaults 3 people including myself (the nature of the assault on me should really be categorised as attempted murder considering that I was stabbed): $1000 fine for assault and property damage.

Home invasion culprit from above steals a $20,000 motorcycle: 5 years in prison.

So I am totally not surprised that this scum gets less than three years in prison. And he'll probably be wrapped in cotton wool the entire sentence, and segregated 'for his own protection'. Our 'regular criminals', for all their other faults, have a harsh and violent allergic reaction to child molestors in general population.


You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service