[Chriky]

It seems like one of the least problematic ways of generating suspects to me - what's the issue compared to, say, eye witness testimony?

[arbitrage]

Whereas eye-witness testimony is incredibly unreliable, but laypersons typically believe it to be accurate, the opposite is true with DNA forensic evidence. The public generally believes it to be infallible, when in reality it's not always that clear cut.

It should be regarded as another tool in the toolbox, not the be-all and end-all of criminal forensic investigation.