AgentPalpatine wrote:
The difference here is that the searches you reference above are for the immediate safety of other individuals in custody, the individual themselves, and the staff. The DNA search is for the purpose of extracting evidence, without warrant or consent, to match against "possible" crimes.
"Probable Cause" would likely cover this in most cases (imo).
Otherwise, the same evidence that the police collect must be available to the defendant, and if the DNA evidence collected from the defendant does
not match any DNA evidence taken from the scene of the crime - such as from the body of a rape victim - the charges against the defendant could be dropped.
However, I do agree with the "immediate safety of other individuals in custody" issue. If the DNA collected from the arrestee (let's call him "Mr. Strawman") indicates that he is likely to be the same person who had committed a serious of heinous torture-mutilation-murders, then placing that person in a cell reserved for dangerous criminals would be in order, thus justifying
in this one instance the collection of an arrestee's DNA.
It will be interesting to see how this pans out in a
real arrest-trial-conviction situation. It may get challenged all over again.
My problem with automatic DNA collection for all arrested is that it seems to be a "guilty until proven innocent" situation. If someone is arrested for failure to pay debt (which happens much more frequently than you'd expect), their DNA cna be collected. That seems like an unreasonable action that does not fit the ALLEGED crime. What is to prevent the police from collecting DNA from those detained rather than arrested? What is to prevent DNA collection from those who are being tried in civil (or for that matter, small claims) court? Where does the line get drawn? Should the collection of DNA be allowed for all citizens? Is this a "if you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear" argument?
Another point to be made is that your siblings can carry extremely similar DNA to the point that in some cases the DNA can be well within the margin of error despite being DNA from a separate person. If your sibling commits a violent crime and their DNA is collected at the crime scene, you may be charged with the crime (especially if your sibling has an alibi and you do not). So you could very well be sentenced to life in prison (or death, for that matter) for a crime you did not commit if you were arrested for something like missing a couple of child support payments.
13 Jun 2013, 8:38 am
