Quote:
Originally Posted by MothBalls
What if it is needed for the conviction?
Hypothetical situation. Woman sleeping and a masked rapist breaks into the house. She never sees his face or any identifying features. However, he leaves a "sample" behind with no other physical evidence, fingetprints, etc.
Police arrest three possible suspects. All 3 have the same blood type. Only way to screen then is via DNA.
So in my scenario above, a warrant issued by a judge and all 3 suspects are screened. One is guilty, two are innocent. The sample from the guilty party should be stored forever, available to law enforcement agencies only. The other two samples from the innocent parties should be destroyed.
|
Then they get a warrant as part of the ongoing investigation like they would for any other piece of evidence. The article referenced in the OP was talking about obtaining DNA samples without regard for their necessity to the case at hand.
Let me throw an example back at ya:
A person gets arrested for drunk driving. Should that give police the right to search his house?